OXFORD BIBLIOGRAPHIES IN POLITICAL SCIENCE

“OUTCOMES OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND PROTEST ACTIVITIES”

By Marco Giugni, Lorenzo Bosi, and Katrin Uba

© Oxford University Press

Not for distribution. For permissions, please email OxfordBibliographies@oup.com.

Table of Contents

Outcomes of Social Movements and Protest Activities

Introduction

General Overviews

Conceptual and Methodological Discussions

Political Outcomes

Gamson and His Critics

Political Responsiveness

Access to Policy Process

Agenda Setting

Policy Outcomes

Impact on Policy Implementation and Beneficiaries

Structural Outcomes

Biographical Outcomes

Follow-Up Studies of New Left Activists

Beyond New Left Activism

Cultural Outcomes

Social-Psychological Approach

Cultural Production and Practices

Worldviews and Communities

Economic Outcomes

Outcomes on Social Movements

Outcomes on the Movements Themselves

Outcomes on Other Movements

Outcomes of Social Movements and Protest Activities

Introduction

Scholarship has left the study of the consequences of social movements in the

background for a long time, focusing instead on movement emergence, characteristics,

and dynamics. Since the mid-1970s, however, scholars have paid an increasing interest

in how social movements and protest activities may produce change at various levels.

The existing literature can be ordered according to the kind of consequence addressed.

In this regard, one can roughly distinguish between political, biographical, and cultural

outcomes. Political consequences are those effects of movement activities that alter in

some way the movements’ political environment. Biographical consequences are

effects on the life course of individuals who have participated in movement activities,

effects that are at least in part due to involvement in those activities. Although their

contours are less easily defined, cultural outcomes can be seen as the impact that social

movements may have in altering their broader cultural environment. The bulk of the

existing works have dealt with policy outcomes, which can be considered as a

subcategory of political outcomes. Biographical outcomes are less numerous, but they

form a substantial and quite coherent body of literature. Cultural outcomes have been

studied much less often. More recently, scholars have started to investigate the effects

that social movements and protest activities may have on other aspects of society, such

as the economy and market-related institutions, or on other movements. In addition,

one should also consider the distinction between internal and external outcomes as well

as that between intended and unintended consequences. Both distinctions partly cross-

cut the typology of political, biographical, and cultural outcomes, although one might

think of political outcomes as mostly external and more intended, biographical

outcomes as mostly internal and unintended, and cultural outcomes as both internal

and external and mostly unintended.

General Overviews

A number of works have been published that provide general overviews of the

outcomes of social movements and protest activities. Most of these works focus on one

specific type of consequence, but Giugni 2008 takes a broader view and addresses

political, biographical, and cultural outcomes. Studies dealing with political outcomes

have been reviewed—first in Giugni 1998, then in Amenta and Caren 2004, and more

recently in Amenta, et al. 2010. Giugni 2004 addresses the literature on biographical

outcomes. Earl 2004 looks at works on broader cultural outcomes. Whittier 2004

examines research on the consequences of social movements for each other, or

spillover effects. Finally, King and Pearce 2010 reviews the growing literature on

economic outcomes of social movements and protest activities.

Amenta, Edwin, and Neal Caren. “The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary

Consequences of State-Oriented Challenges.” In The Blackwell Companion to Social

Movements. Edited by David A. Snow, Sarah Soule, and Hanspeter Kriesi, 462–488.

Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

A useful review of the state-oriented and legislative consequences of social

movements, with a focus on how they apply to various beneficiary groups and

movement organizations. It also addresses specific conceptual, theoretical, and

methodological issues.

Amenta, Edwin, Neal Caren, Elizabeth Chiarello, and Yang Su. “The Political

Consequences of Social Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology 36 (2010): 287–

307.

The most recent and up-to-date overview of works on the political outcomes

of social movements, focusing on movements in democratic polities and the

United States in comparative and historical perspective. Offers suggestions for

further research.

Earl, Jennifer. “The Cultural Consequences of Social Movements.” In The Blackwell

Companion to Social Movements. Edited by David A. Snow, Sarah Soule, and

Hanspeter Kriesi, 508–530. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

A laudable effort to summarize the relatively sparse literature on the cultural

outcomes of social movements. Discusses the challenges faced in defining

cultural outcomes, the kinds of cultural outcomes uncovered by scholarship,

and the explanations of cultural change suggested by research. Offers

suggestions for further research.

Giugni, Marco. “Was if Worth the Effort? The Outcomes and Consequences of Social

Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 371–393.

An early review of the existing literature, focusing on political outcomes.

Discusses the role of internal factors, such as the movements’ organization and

the use of disruptiveness, as well as of external factors, such as public opinion

and political opportunity structures in facilitating or preventing movements

from obtaining policy gains.

Giugni, Marco. “Personal and Biographical Consequences.” In The Blackwell

Companion to Social Movements. Edited by David A. Snow, Sarah Soule, and

Hanspeter Kriesi, 489–507. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

Reviews works on the biographical outcomes of social movements, from the

follow-up studies of New Left activists to more recent studies reaching beyond

that. Also discusses methodological issues relating to the study of biographical

outcomes.

Giugni, Marco. “Political, Biographical, and Cultural Consequences of Social

Movements.” Sociology Compass 2.5 (2008): 1582–1600.

A rare attempt to review relevant works on the consequences of social

movements and protest activities by addressing different types of outcomes at

the same time. Inevitably a bit cursory on each of them.

King, Brayden G., and Nicholas A. Pearce. “The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics,

Social Movements and Institutional Change in Markets.” Annual Review of Sociology

36 (2010): 249–267.

Reviews works on the economic outcomes of social movements, in particular

the role that the latter have on bringing institutional change and innovation to

markets. Examines both direct and indirect pathways through which

movements can bring about market change.

Whittier, Nancy. “The Consequences of Social Movements for Each Other.” In The

Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Edited by David A. Snow, Sarah Soule,

and Hanspeter Kriesi, 531–551. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.

Provides an overview of scholarship on the consequences of social

movements for each other. Discusses the various kinds of effects that

movements have on each other as well as the routes and determinants of such

effects.

Conceptual and Methodological Discussions

The study of the consequences of social movements has raised a number of

conceptual and methodological issues. While they are often addressed in the context of

more specific empirical studies, certain works discuss such issues at more length.

Burstein, et al. 1995 and Meyer 2005 address primarily conceptual and theoretical

issues. The former, in particular, offers a helpful typology of political outcomes

elaborating on a previous effort in Schumaker 1975 (cited under Policy Outcomes). On

the other hand, Earl 2000 offers a thoughtful overview of some major methodological

problems relating to the study of the consequences of social movements and protest

activities. Attesting to the intimate relationship between conceptual and

methodological concerns, Amenta and Young 1999 as well as Tilly 1999 deal with

both aspects.

Amenta, Edwin, and Micheal P. Young. “Making an Impact: Conceptual and

Methodological Implications of the Collective Goods Criterion.” In How Social

Movements Matter. Edited by Marco Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles Tilly, 22–

41. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999.

A reflection about the use of terms such as success, outcomes, and impact, as

well as their conceptual and methodological implications. Makes an argument

for using the term impact.

Burstein, Paul, Rachel L. Einwohner, and Jocelyn A. Hollander. “The Success of

Political Movements: A Bargaining Perspective.” In The Politics of Social Protest:

Comparative Perspectives on States and Social Movements. Edited by J. Craig Jenkins

and Bert Klandermans, 275–295. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995.

A discussion of conceptual issues around the notion of success of social

movements, stressing definitional issues. Provides a helpful typology of

responsiveness that can be considered as types of movement outcomes.

Earl, Jennifer. “Methods, Movements and Outcomes: Methodological Difficulties in

the Study of Extra-Movement Outcomes.” In Research in Social Movements, Conflicts

and Change. Vol. 22. Edited by Patrick G. Coy, 3–25. Bingley, UK: Emerald, 2000.

Perhaps the most thorough discussion of the methodological problems relating

to the study of the consequences of social movements and protest activities to

date.

Meyer, David S. “Social Movements and Public Policy: Eggs, Chicken, and Theory.”

In Routing the Opposition: Social Movements, Public Policy, and Democracy. Edited

by David S. Meyer, Valerie Jenness, and Helen Ingram, 1–26. Minneapolis: University

of Minnesota Press, 2005.

An introduction to an edited collection on social movements, public policy,

and democracy in the United States. Emphasizes the importance of the iterative

interactions between protest and policy.

Tilly, Charles. “From Interactions to Outcomes of Social Movements.” In How Social

Movements Matter. Edited by M. Giugni, D. McAdam, and C. Tilly, 253–270.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999.

A thoughtful reflection about how we should proceed to study the

consequences of social movements and protest activities. Argues that no

explanation of movement outcomes can be provided in the absence of causal

theories of both the effects of movements and the dynamics of movement

interactions.

Political Outcomes

Political outcomes are those effects of movement activities that alter in some way

the movements’ political environment. This is the most frequently studied domain of

social movement outcomes. Research on political outcomes examines whether, how,

and in what context social movements influence changes in access to the policy

process, changes of political agenda, adoption and implementation of policies, and

changes in political institutions (e.g., political parties) and regimes. While the first

studies of the field, particularly Gamson 1990 (cited under Gamson and His Critics),

focused on correlations between movement actions and access to political process or

gaining of new benefits, more recent scholarship has been more methodologically

developed and examines also the causal mechanisms that lead to the political outcomes

of the movements. This has resulted in studies that analyze the impact of social

movements at different stages of the political process, from access and agenda setting

to the implementation of adopted policies. A few scholars have also looked beyond the

changes in policies and examined how these changes translate into collective benefits

of the beneficiary groups or the long-term structural outcomes, such as the

democratization process or the change of party system.

Gamson and His Critics

The study of the consequences of social movements and protest activities was

boosted in the mid-1970s by William Gamson’s seminal book The Strategy of Social

Protest (Gamson 1990). This piece of work remains one of the most systematic

treatments of the effects of social movements to date. Gamson 1990 was the object of

both a number of criticisms, mostly methodological, and reanalyses. Among the

criticisms, Goldstone 1980 and Zelditch 1978 must be mentioned. Frey, et al. 1992

provides an overview of these criticisms. Among the reanalyses, most have basically

supported most of Gamson’s findings, in particular about the role of movement-

controlled variables (Frey, et al. 1992; Mirowsky and Ross 1981; Steedly and Foley

1979), while others have challenged them, sometimes quite fundamentally (Goldstone

1980). Most of these reanalyses are included in the book’s second edition. In addition,

Gamson’s study has spurred a debate about the role of organization in mounting

successful challenges (Gamson and Schmeidler 1984, Cloward and Piven 1984).

Cloward, Richard A., and Frances Fox Piven. “Disruption and Organization: A

Rejoinder.” Theory and Society 13.4 (1984): 587–599.

A criticism of Gamson’s argument about the effectiveness of organized

challenges. The authors argue instead that social movements are more

successful if they avoid building strong organizational structures.

Frey, R. Scott, Thomas Dietz, and Linda Kalof. “Characteristics of Successful

American Protest Groups: Another Look at Gamson’s Strategy of Social Protest.”

American Journal of Sociology 98.2 (1992): 368–387.

Reanalyzes Gamson’s data, basically supporting most of his findings. Stresses

in particular the importance of not having displacement goals and group

factionalism to obtain new advantages. At the same time, calls for a model that

incorporates both strategy and structural constraints.

Gamson, William A. The Strategy of Social Protest. 2d ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,

1990.

Based on a random sample of challenging groups active in the United States

between 1800 and 1945, this seminal book provides evidence for the role of

organizational and movement-controlled variables for their success. Probably

the most systematic treatment of the effects of social movements to date. First

published in 1975.

Gamson, William A., and Emilie Schmeidler. “Organizing the Poor.” Theory and

Society 13.4 (1984): 567–585.

A strong statement about the effectiveness of organized challenges, which has

spurred a debate about the role of organization in mounting successful

challenges.

Goldstone, Jack A. “The Weakness of Organization: A New Look at Gamson’s The

Strategy of Social Protest.” American Journal of Sociology 85.5 (1980): 1017–1042.

Reanalyzes Gamson’s data, challenging his main conclusions and central

theoretical tenet. Suggests that the resource mobilization model be replaced by

a model that stresses the crucial role of broad, system-wide national crises for

the success of social movements.

Mirowsky, John, and Catherine Ross. “Protest Group Success: The Impact of Group

Characteristics, Social Control, and Context.” Sociological Focus 14.3 (1981): 177–

192.

Reanalyzes Gamson’s data, basically supporting most of his findings. Finds,

in particular, protester-controlled factors such as organization, beliefs, and

goals to be more important than the support of third parties or the situation for a

successful outcome.

Steedly, Homer R., and John W. Foley. “The Success of Protest Groups: Multivariate

Analyses.” Social Science Research 8.1 (1979): 1–15.

Reanalyzes Gamson’s data, basically supporting most of his findings. Finds,

in particular, group success to be related to the nondisplacement nature of the

goals, the number of alliances, the absence of factionalism, specific and limited

goals, and the willingness to use sanctions

Zelditch, Morris, Jr. “Review Essay: Outsiders’ Politics.” American Journal of

Sociology 83.6 (1978): 1514–1520.

Critical review essay of Gamson’s book, underlining its theoretical and

methodological weaknesses.

Political Responsiveness

Political outcomes are often understood in terms of the political responsiveness to

social movement demands, developed in Schumaker 1975 (cited under Policy

Outcomes). The approach looks beyond the questions of failure or success of

mobilization and examines how social movements affect different stages of the

political process: (1) Access to Policy Process refers to the changed political

procedures that open a channel of participation for the movements as legitimate

political actors; (2) Agenda Setting examines how the movements manage to increase

the salience of their issues, which can, but does not have to, guarantee the positive

outcome in terms of legislation; (3) policy responsiveness is the most frequently

examined outcome of social movements and refers to legislation that has been adopted

as a result of mobilization (see Policy Outcomes); (4) output responsiveness, or the

Impact on Policy Implementation and Beneficiaries, is rarely examined, but this impact

would be particularly important in demonstrating the substantial influence of social

movements’ mobilization on the society at large.

Access to Policy Process

The studies focusing on the ability of social movements to gain access to the policy

process often go beyond the question and examine other forms of outcomes,

particularly political outcomes, as in Gamson 1990 and Kitschelt 1986. There are still

only a few studies that demonstrate empirically how movements have affected the

change of procedures that allow movements to access policy process; Rochon and

Mazmanian 1993 is one good example. Andrews 1997 provides even more detailed

analysis of the role of different mobilization strategies for improving movements’

opportunities to participate in the policy process. Cress and Snow 2000 looks at

various forms of impacts of social movements, including representation.

Andrews, Kenneth T. “The Impacts of Social Movements on the Political Process: A

Study of the Civil Rights Movement and Black Electoral Politics in Mississippi.”

American Sociological Review 62 (1997): 800–819.

A detailed quantitative analysis of short- and long-term consequences of

different mobilizing tactics, including the violent mobilization, on black voters’

access to electoral process in the United States during the late 1960s and early

1970s.

Cress, Daniel M., and David A. Snow. “The Outcomes of Homeless Mobilization: The

Influence of Organization, Disruption, Political Mediation, and Framing.” American

Journal of Sociology 105.4 (2000): 1063–1104.

Examines the role of organizational, tactical, political, and framing variables

for different types of political outcomes of social movement organizations, and

shows that there are multiple paths for the political impact of mobilization.

Gamson, William A. The Strategy of Social Protest. 2d ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,

1990.

A seminal study of the political outcomes of social movements that shows

how various internal characteristics of challenging groups can lead them to a

greater degree of acceptance in the political system. First published in 1975.

Kitschelt, Herbert. “Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear

Movements in Four Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 16.1 (1986):

57–85.

Examines the mobilization and impact of anti-nuclear protest in a comparative

perspective, showing access to the policy process depends on political

opportunity structures.

Rochon, Thomas R., and Daniel A. Mazmanian. “Social Movements and the Policy

Process.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 528.1

(1993): 75–87.

Shows that gaining access to the policy process is the most effective path for

the nuclear freeze and control of hazardous wastes movements to have an

impact on environmental policy in the United States.

Agenda Setting

This is a growing field of research that combines methodological and theoretical

approaches of different disciplines, including political science (Burstein and

Freudenburg 1978), sociology (McAdam and Su 2002) and media research (Walgrave

and Vliegenthart 2012). While it is common to focus on only one movement,

Baumgartner and Mahoney 2005 and King, et al. 2007 examine the agenda-setting

power in comparative perspective. Costain and Majstorovic 1994 was one of the first

studies to examine the role of public opinion in this process. King, et al. 2005

compares agenda setting with political outcomes and shows that it is easier to influence

the agenda than the decision making.

Baumgartner, Frank, and Christine Mahoney. “Social Movements, the Rise of New

Issues, and the Public Agenda.” In Routing the Opposition: Social Movements, Public

Policy, and Democracy. Edited by David S. Meyer, Valerie Jennes, and Helen Ingram,

65–86. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005.

A novel study comparing the impact of movements on agenda setting across

different issues: women, environmental, elderly, civil rights, and human rights

issues. The authors show that the number of social movement organizations (in

the United States) is related to the number of congressional hearings.

Burstein, Paul, and William Freudenburg. “Changing Public Policy: The Impact of

Public Opinion, Anti-War Demonstrations and War Costs on Senate Voting on

Vietnam War Motions.” American Journal of Sociology 84.1 (1978): 99–122.

Indirect focus on agenda setting as the authors show how protests significantly

increase the salience of the issue for the US Senate.

Costain, Anne N., and Steven Majstorovic. “Congress, Social Movements and Public

Opinion: Multiple Origins of Women’s Rights Legislation.” Political Research

Quarterly 47.1 (1994): 111–135.

Shows that social movements’ impact on congressional activity on policies

addressing women’s issues depends on the support of public opinion.

King, Brayden G., Keith G. Bentele, and Sarah A. Soule. “Protest and Policymaking:

Explaining Fluctuation in Congressional Attention to Rights Issues, 1960–1986.”

Social Forces 86.1 (2007): 137–163.

Shows that protest actions influence agenda setting in terms of the number of

the hearings in the US Congress for many different kinds of rights-related

policy issues.

King, Brayden G., Marie Cornwall, and Eric C. Dahlin. “Winning Woman Suffrage

One Step at a Time: Social Movements and the Logic of the Legislative Process.”

Social Forces 83.3 (2005): 1211–1234.

An important study that shows how the women’s movement impacted the

agenda setting, via their lobbying and organizational strength, but not the

voting over the women’s suffrage legislation in the legislatures of the US

states.

McAdam, Doug, and Yang Su. “The War at Home: Antiwar Protests and

Congressional Voting, 1965 to 1973.” American Sociological Review 67.5 (2002):

396–721.

Shows that the number of participants in the antiwar protests of the Vietnam

War era significantly influenced the agenda setting, particularly the number of

war-related votes, in the US House of Representatives and Senate.

Walgrave, Stefaan, and Rens Vliegenthart. “The Complex Agenda-Setting Power of

Protest: Demonstrations, Media, Parliament, Government, and Legislation in Belgium,

1993–2000.” Mobilization 17.2 (2012): 129–156.

A time-series analysis demonstrating that larger protests correlate with the

increasing issue salience in Belgium’s political agenda, and that the effect is

mediated by media coverage.

Policy Outcomes

Since Schumaker, Paul developed different categories of responsiveness as the

outcomes of social movements (in Schumaker 1975), the policy responsiveness or

policy outcomes have been the most studied issue in this field of research. Gamson

1990 is perhaps the most well-known of such studies. The political mediation model in

Amenta, et al. 1992 suggests that the political context mediates the impact of

mobilization on policy. McCammon, et al. 2001 agrees, but it demonstrates that for the

women’s movement the gendered opportunities were important for the policy outcome.

Other scholars, such as Katrin Uba, have focused more on the contentious actions

themselves and show how different strategies or the size of the protest matter for the

policy outcomes (see Uba 2005). All these studies are contrasted in Giugni 2004 and

Burstein and Linton 2002, which, despite using different empirical data and different

methods of analysis, show that social movements only seldom affect public policy. The

number of contradictory empirical results would probably decrease if there was more

focus on the causal mechanisms of policy impacts, as suggested in Kolb 2007.

Amenta, Edwin, Bruce G. Carruthers, and Yvonne Zylan. “A Hero for the Aged? The

Townsend Movement, the Political Mediation Model, and U.S. Old-Age Policy, 1934–

1950.” American Journal of Sociology 98.2 (1992): 308–339.

Presents a political mediation model for the study of the policy outcomes of

social movements, arguing that political outcomes of social movements are

context dependent. Shows that democratic rights and a party system that is not

dominated by patronage are favorable conditions that increase the likelihood of

achieving policy outcomes.

Burstein, Paul, and April Linton. “The Impact of Political Parties, Interest Groups, and

Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy: Some Recent Evidence and

Theoretical Concerns.” Social Forces 81.2 (2002): 380–408.

An important meta-analysis of articles on public policy change. Shows how

policy outcomes are seldom affected by social movements and more often by

the public opinion and political parties.

Gamson, William A. The Strategy of Social Protest. 2d ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,

1990.

A seminal study of the political outcomes of social movements that shows

how various internal characteristics of challenging groups can lead them to

obtain new advantages. First published in 1975.

Giugni, Marco. Social Protest and Policy Change: Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace

Movements in Comparative Perspective. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

A comparative study showing that social movements seldom affect political

outcomes directly, and that the joint effect of protest, public opinion, and

favorable political opportunities are more likely to lead to policy outcomes.

Kolb, Felix. Protest and Opportunities: The Political Outcomes of Social Movements.

Frankfurt and New York: Campus Verlag, 2007

A rare discussion of which kind of causal mechanisms explain how social

movements achieve political outcomes. Emphasizes the importance of a

movement’s strength, strategies, goals, as well as the domestic and

international contexts.

McCammon, Holly J., Karen E. Campbell, Ellen M. Granberg, and Christine Mowery.

“How Movements Win: Gendered Opportunity Structures and U.S. Women’s

Movements, 1866 to 1919.” American Sociological Review 66.1 (2001): 49–70.

Explains the variation of the adoption of women’s suffrage by the US states

and shows that social movements play a significant role for policy outcomes.

Schumaker, Paul D. “Policy Responsiveness to Protest-Group Demands.” Journal of

Politics 37.2 (1975): 488–521.

Develops a model of policy responsiveness and provides one of the first

systematic analyses of the policy outcomes of urban riots.

Uba, Katrin. “Political Protest and Policy Change: The Direct Impacts of Indian Anti-

Privatization Mobilizations, 1990–2003.” Mobilization 10.3 (2005): 383–396.

One of the rare studies on social movement policy outcomes in developing

countries. Shows that the degree of disruption is important for achieving

movement goals.

Impact on Policy Implementation and Beneficiaries

There are only a few studies in this category, as the analysis requires long-term

data accumulation and different methods of analysis. Piven and Cloward 1979 and

Piven and Cloward 1993 provide important discussions about the role of disruption for

achieving tangible outcomes for the activists and the society at large. In more recent

works, Andrews 2001 and Andrews and Edwards 2004 show how more peaceful

strategies of different movements and organizations affect not only the making of

public policies but also their implementation. The impact on beneficiaries—that is, the

change of the situation of those whom the movement aims to protect, however rare—is

as shown in Rucht 1999.

Andrews, Kenneth T. “Social Movements and Policy Implementation: The Mississippi

Civil Rights Movement and the War on Poverty, 1965 to 1971.” American

Sociological Review 66.1 (2001): 71–95.

A unique study that uses both quantitative and qualitative methods for

demonstrating how social movements affect the implementation of poverty

programs.

Andrews, Kenneth, and Bob Edwards. “Advocacy Organizations in the U.S. Political

Process.” Annual Review of Sociology 30 (2004): 479–506.

Review study of organizational influence, or the impact of social movements

and interest groups on different political outcomes, including the rarely studied

question of policy implementation.

Piven, Frances Fox, and Richard A. Cloward. Poor People’s Movements: Why They

Succeed, How They Fail. New York: Vintage, 1979.

A classical study that shows how disruption is an important factors explaining

the outcomes of social movements. Argues that movement success is only

temporary, since it results from the willingness of the political authorities to

make concessions in order to abate the protest. Once the protest abates,

concessions are withdrawn.

Piven, Frances Fox, and Richard A. Cloward. Regulating the Poor: The Functions of

Public Welfare. 2d ed. New York: Vintage, 1993.

An important book advancing a provocative thesis about the regulating

functions of public welfare, which would be used to maintain a supply of low-

wage labor and to restore order in periods of civil turmoil. Therefore, turmoil

and disruption do provoke policy change, but such concessions are usually

withdrawn once the turmoil subsides. First published in 1971.

Rucht, Dieter. “The Impact of Environmental Movements in Western Societies?” In

How Social Movements Matter. Edited by Marco Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles

Tilly, 204–224. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999.

An essay that shows that despite the policy outcomes, movements’

beneficiaries, in this case the environment, might still not win as a result of

mobilization.

Structural Outcomes

Scholars have sometimes dealt with the broader structural outcomes of social

movements, such as regime change and the democratization, as shown in Kriesi and

Wisler 1999 and Glenn 2003; the change of institutions as rules of the game, studied in

Moore 1999; or the change in the access to democratic channels, examined in

Banaszak 1996. Works on structural outcomes often follow a comparative perspective

and focus on Western countries, as in Kitschelt 1986. Less frequent studies, such as

Schock 2005, show that social movements can also affect regime change in developing

countries.

Banaszak, Lee Ann. Why Movements Succeed or Fail. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press, 1996.

Argues that movement tactics, beliefs, and values are critical in understanding

why political movements succeed or fail. By looking at the cultural

determinants of the varying success of pro-suffrage activists in Switzerland and

the United States, Banaszak addresses both policy adoption and broader

structural outcomes.

Glenn, John K. “Contentious Politics and Democratization: Comparing the Impact of

Social Movements on the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe.” Political Studies 51

(2003): 103–120.

Relates the variation of the democratization process and different forms of

mobilization of the social movements.

Kitschelt, Herbert. “Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear

Movements in Four Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 16.1 (1986):

57–85.

Examines the mobilization and impact of anti-nuclear protest in a comparative

perspective, showing access to the policy process depends on political

opportunity structures.

Kriesi, Hanspeter, and Dominique Wisler. “The Impact of Social Movements on

Political Institutions: A Comparison of the Introduction of Direct Legislation in

Switzerland and the United States.” In How Social Movements Matter. Edited by

Marco Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles Tilly, 42–65. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press, 1999.

Examines how movements achieve the paradigmatic shift of the political

system. Shows that federalism, the lack of the institutionalization of the state,

and the division of political elites are important factors facilitating structural

change.

Moore, Kelly. “Political Protest and Institutional Change: The Anti-Vietnam War

Movement and American Science.” In How Social Movements Matter. Edited by

Marco Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles Tilly, 97–118. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press, 1999.

Defines institutions as rules of the game and demonstrates how social

movements affect the change of rules guiding the activities of different

scientific communities.

Schock, Kurt. Unarmed Insurrections: People Power Movements in Nondemocracies.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005.

One of the rare studies examining how and in what contexts nonviolent

strategies of social movements affects regime change. Provides a detailed

analysis of social movement outcomes in South Africa, Philippines, China, and

Burma.

Biographical Outcomes

Biographical consequences are effects on the life course of individuals who have

participated in movement activities, effects that are at least in part due to involvement

in those activities. They refer not to the impact of movements as a whole, but to the

effect of individual involvement in movement activities on the life course of

participants. Their analysis lies at the crossroad of two major fields in the social

sciences: studies of life course and the life cycle, and work on processes of political

socialization and participation. Works on the biographical consequences of individual

activism are much less numerous than the now quite substantial body of studies of the

political and, more specifically, policy outcomes of social movements. In addition, a

great deal of these studies has dealt with former activists of movements of the New

Left in the United States, including participants in the civil rights movement. However,

more recent scholarship looks beyond New Left activism to examine biographical

outcomes of activism in other movements, as well as of not-so-committed movement

participants, and at the aggregate-level impact of activism and participation in social

movements.

Follow-Up Studies of New Left Activists

In general, these follow-up studies of New Left activists quite consistently point to

a strong and durable impact on the political and personal lives of activists. Specifically,

they show that former activists continued to espouse leftist political attitudes

(Demerath, et al. 1971; Fendrich and Tarleau 1973; Marwel, et al. 1987; McAdam

1989; Whalen and Flacks 1980); continued to define themselves as “liberal” or

“radical” in political orientation (Fendrich and Tarleau 1973); and remained active in

contemporary movements or other forms of political activity (Fendrich and Lovoy

1988, Jennings and Niemi 1981, McAdam 1989). In addition, they show that former

activists were concentrated in teaching or other “helping” professions (Fendrich 1974,

McAdam 1989); had lower incomes than their age peers; were more likely than their

age peers to have divorced, married later, or remained single (McAdam 1989); and

were more likely than their age peers to have experienced an episodic or nontraditional

work history (McAdam 1989).

Demerath, N. J., Gerald Marwell, and Michael Aiken. Dynamics of Idealism: White

Activists in a Black Movement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1971.

The first major follow-up study of New Left activists. Shows that volunteers

to a voter registration effort surveyed four years earlier continued to espouse

leftist political attitudes. Part of the volunteers were surveyed once again years

later (see Marwel, et al. 1987).

Fendrich, James M. “Activists Ten Years Later: A Test of Generational Unit

Continuity.” Journal of Social Issues 30.3 (1974): 95–118.

One of several publications from a study by one of the most prominent

students of biographical outcomes. Shows that former civil rights activists were

concentrated in teaching or other “helping” professions. Some of the subjects

were interviewed once again at a later stage (Fendrich and Lovoy 1988).

Fendrich, James M., and Kenneth L. Lovoy. “Back to the Future: Adult Political

Behavior of Former Political Activists.” American Sociological Review 53.5 (1988):

780–784.

Based on Fendrich’s study of former civil rights activists, some of whom were

interviewed once again at a later stage in order to assess the impact of their

involvement in the long run. Shows that they remained active in contemporary

movements or other forms of political activity.

Fendrich, James M., and A. T. Tarleau. “Marching to a Different Drummer:

Occupational and Political Correlates of Former Student Activists.” Social Forces 52.2

(1973): 245–253.

Based on Fendrich’s study of former civil rights activists. Shows that they

continued to define themselves as “liberal” or “radical” in political orientation.

Jennings, M. Kent, and Richard G. Niemi. Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of

Young Adults and Their Parents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981.

One of the most thorough and methodologically sound follow-up studies of

New Left activists. It deals with subjects whose involvement in movement

activities varied much in extent and spanned over a longer time frame. Shows

that former activists remained active in contemporary movements or other

forms of political activity.

Marwel, Gerald, Michael T. Aiken, and N. J. Demerath. “The Persistence of Political

Attitudes among 1960s Civil Rights Activists.” Public Opinion Quarterly 51.3 (1987):

359–375.

Based on Demerath, et al.’s study of volunteers to a voter registration effort

(Demerath, et al. 1971), part of whom were surveyed once again years later in

order to gauge the long-term effects of their participation. Shows that they

continued to espouse leftist political attitudes.

McAdam, Doug. “The Biographical Consequences of Activism.” American

Sociological Review 54.5 (1989): 744–760.

A study of biographical outcomes based on important research on participants

in the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer project. Finds support for many of

the findings of previous studies and shows that participants were more likely

than their age peers to have experienced an episodic or nontraditional work

history.

Whalen, Jack, and Richard Flacks. “The Isla Vista ‘Bank Burners’ Ten Years Later:

Notes on the Fate of Student Activists.” Sociological Focus 13.3 (1980): 215–236.

One of the publications from a study on a small sample of student radicals

arrested in relation to the burning of a bank and interviewed ten years later.

Shows that they continued to espouse leftist political attitudes.

Beyond New Left Activism

Scholarship on biographical outcomes has tried to go beyond follow-up studies of

New Left activists. This has been done basically in three ways. First, by looking at the

biographical consequences of activism in movements other than the American New

Left of the late 1960s and early 1970s (Klatch 1999, Nagel 1985, Taylor and Raeburn

1995, Whittier 1995). Second, by examining the biographical impact of not-so-

committed movement participants (McAdam 1999; Sherkat and Blocker 1997; van

Dyke, et al. 2000; Wilhelm 1998). Third, by investigating the broader, aggregate-level

effects of activism and participation in social movements (McAdam 1999; van Dyke,

et al. 2000; Wilhelm 1998).

Klatch, Rebecca E. A Generation Divided: The New Left, the New Right, and the

1960s. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999.

Analyzes the longstanding biographical consequences of both people on the

left and people on the right of the political spectrum. Examines the generation

that came into political consciousness during the 1960s in the United States and

the impact of their activism on their life course.

McAdam, Doug. “The Biographical Impact of Activism.” In How Social Movements

Matter. Edited by Marco Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles Tilly, 119–146.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999.

A thought-provoking discussion of the biographical impact of activism.

Makes a case for the aggregate-level effects of activism by showing evidence

supporting the argument that many of the demographic changes associated with

the “baby boomer” may in part be a result of the political and cultural

movements of the 1960s.

Nagel, Joane. “American Indian Ethnic Renewal: Politics and the Resurgence of

Identity.” American Sociological Review 60.6 (1985): 947–965.

A study of the American Indian Movement arguing that Indian activism in the

1960s and 1970s led to an increased tendency of Indians to self-identify as

such.

Sherkat, Darren E., and T. Jean Blocker. “Explaining the Political and Personal

Consequences of Protest.” Social Forces 75.3 (1997): 1049–1070.

Examines the political and personal consequences of more routine, low-risk

forms of participation in antiwar and student protests of the late 1960s, using

survey data. Shows that ordinary involvement in these movements had an

impact on the lives of those who participated.

Taylor, Verta, and Nicole C. Raeburn. “Identity Politics as High-Risk Activism: Career

Consequences for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Sociologists.” Social Problems 42.2

(1995): 252–273.

Argues that identity politics is a high-risk form of activism, showing how

lesbian, gay, and bisexual sociologists’ activism and political consciousness

contributed to promoting equal treatment of gay and lesbians.

van Dyke, Nella, Doug McAdam, and Brenda Wilhelm. “Gendered Outcomes: Gender

Differences in the Biographical Consequences of Activism.” Mobilization 5.2 (2000):

161–177.

Based on the research by McAdam and collaborators on the aggregate-level

effects of activism. Examines the gendered effects of movement participation

on the subsequent lives of activists. Shows that movement participation will

have a differential effect on the lives of men and women.

Whittier, Nancy. Feminist Generations: The Persistence of the Radical Women’s

Movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995.

A study of a radical women’s movement showing that social movements may

alter their social context, leading successive generations of participants to

develop new perspectives.

Wilhelm, Brenda. “Changes in Cohabitation across Cohorts: The Influence of Political

Activism.” Social Forces 77.1 (1998): 289–310.

Based on the research by McAdam and collaborators on the aggregate-level

effects of activism. Uses cohort analysis to investigate the broader impact of

activism on social change, linking New Left social movements of the 1960s

and 1970s to the diffusion of new life-course patterns.

Cultural Outcomes

Cultural outcomes can be seen as the impact that social movements may have in

altering their broader cultural environment. New social movement scholars, without

systematically arguing that their research is a study of cultural outcomes, already from

the late 1970s have recognized that social movements, in their struggle for social

change, are involved in debates and conflicts on meanings, values, information, social

norms, attitudes, opinions, everyday behavior, beliefs among the wider population, and

collective identities, as well as institutional cultures and practices. However, such early

recognition has not signified the development of any extensive share of research

attention to how social movements influence cultural outcomes. Political outcomes,

due in part to the hegemony of political process theory as well as to the difficulty in

conceptualizing what we mean by “culture,” have dominated this literature. So far the

unique review of the heterogeneous and tiny literature on cultural outcomes, produced

by Jennifer Earl in 2004, seems to help in systematically individualizing at least three

major perspectives under which we can divide those academic works that have

researched how social movements effect culture: (1) the Social-Psychological

Approach, interested in looking at the incorporation of new values, beliefs, life

practices, discourses, and alternative opinions; (2) Cultural Production and Practices,

such as literature, media coverage, visual culture, music, fashion, science and scientific

practice, language, and discourse; and (3) Worldviews and Communities, including

collective identity creation, subculture formation, and the reinforcement of existing

solidarities.

Social-Psychological Approach

This approach looks at how social movements generate new meanings, mostly over

the long term (D’Anjou 1996; Gusfield 1981; Melucci 1989), and alternative opinions

(Gamson and Modigliani 1989,) as well as spreading new ideas (Rochon 1998). How

is this possible? Through reframing, the abolitionist movement was able to win its

campaign in Britain (D’Anjou 1996). By adovocating specific frames, the anti-nuclear

movement was able to change public opinion (Gamson and Modigliani 1989). For

Rochon 1998, social movements need to reframe the work done by “critical

communities” for larger audiences.

D’Anjou, Leo. Social Movements and Cultural Change: The First Abolition Campaign

Revisited. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1996.

Studying the mobilization of the Abolition Committee in Great Britain in the

half-decade between 1787 and 1792, the author shows how social movements

produce and alter meanings. In this case, the cultural change consisted in the

eradication of the slavery and the slave trade, which were previously accepted

as necessary among British people.

Gamson, William, and Andre Modigliani. 1989. “Media Discourse and Public Opinion

of Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach.” American Journal of Sociology 95.1

(1989): 1–37.

A pioneering article that proposes a multidimensional view of culture.

Analyzes the discourse on nuclear power from 1945 to the end of the 1980s by

looking at the media discourse and public opinion.

Gusfield, Joseph. “Social Movements and Social Change: Perspective of Linearity and

Fluidity.” In Research in Social Movements, Conflict and Change. Vol. 4. Edited by

Louis Kriesberg, 317–339. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1981.

The author proposes a fluid perspective, in opposition to the linear one, in

order to study how social movements effect social change. This perspective

addresses the long-term impact in which social movements construct new

social meanings. It is an early recognition of the role of unintended outcomes.

Melucci, Alberto. Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in

Contemporary Society. Edited by John Keane and Paul Mier. London: Hutchinson

Radius, 1989.

A collection of the most important essays of one of the most distinguished

new social movement theorists up to the late 1980s. Collective action is

conceived as a process through which actors produce meanings, communicate,

negotiate, and make decisions.

Rochon, Thomas. Culture Moves: Ideas, Activism, and Changing Values. Princeton,

NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998.

This important work looks at social movements as a primary way to transmit

new ideas and alter culture. It develops an analytical approach to explain how

the role of small communities of critical thinkers is determinant to generating

new ideas, which are then spread through larger social movements.

Cultural Production and Practices

Social movements may affect cultural production in terms of music (Eyerman and

Jamison 1988), magazines (Farrell 1995), media (Gamson 1998), books (Pescosolido,

et al. 1997), and practices (Katzenstein 1995).

Eyerman, Ron, and Andrew Jamison. Music and Social Movements: Mobilizing

Traditions in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,

1988.

Shows how social movements and music influence each other through cultural

change. The 1960s music of American activists is analyzed to understand how

it has transferred to Europe and been reinterpreted there. Social movements are

presented as knowledge producers and challengers of existing forms of

knowledge.

Farrell, Amy. 1995. “‘Like a Tarantula on a Banana Boat’: Ms. Magazine, 1972–

1989”. In Feminist Organizations: Harvest of the New Women’s Movement. Edited by

Myra Marx Ferree and Patricia Yancey Martin, 53–68. Philadelphia: Temple

University Press, 1995.

Analyzes the struggle between cultural production and the market by looking

at a US feminist magazine’s history. Focuses on the struggle between the

staff’s attempt to construct a popular feminist periodical and the advertisement

system.

Gamson, William. “Social Movements and Cultural Change.” In From Contention to

Democracy. Edited by Marco G. Giugni, Doug McAdam, and Charles Tilly, 57–77.

Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998.

Argues how the cultural outcomes of social movements are influenced by

media coverage and representations of the movements. The author proposes an

approach, drawing on Gamson 1975, which looks at cultural acceptance and

new cultural advantages.

Katzenstein, Mary Fainsod. “Discursive Politics and Feminist Activism in the Catholic

Church”. In Feminist Organizations: Harvest of the New Women’s Movement. Edited

by Myra Marx Ferree and Patricia Yancey Martin, 35–52. Philadelphia: Temple

University Press, 1995.

Proposes an innovative empirical analysis by looking at the way in which

women activists have challenged religious discourse within the American

Catholic Church. The author shows how religious women have been able to

force the Catholic Church into discussions about feminist issues.

Pescosolido, Bernice A., Elizabeth Grauerholz, and Melissa A. Milkie. “Culture and

Conflict: The Portrayal of Blacks in U.S. Children’s Picture Books through the Mid-

and Late-Twentieth Century.” American Sociological Review 62.3 (1997): 443–464.

Examines the cultural production of social movements by looking at the

portrayal of blacks in US children’s books. The major finding is that when

African Americans mobilize, their negative portrayals mainly disappear from

children’s literature. This comes from the publishers’ fear of touching a

sensitive issue on both sides.

Worldviews and Communities

Social movements may generate new subcultures (Diani 1997, Isaac 2008, Taylor

and Whittier 1992), as well as transform and/or strengthen old ones (Casquete 2006,

Fantasia 1988).

Casquete, Jesus. “The Power of Demonstrations.” Social Movement Studies 5.1 (2006):

45–60.

Shows how solidarity is constructed and maintained during protest, through an

analysis of the case of the Basque Country. Demonstrations not only have

external targets, but also an internal form of communication among the

activists’ social milieu. Through determinate rituals, social movements

construct solidarity among the participants, strengthening the group identity as

a form of survival strategy.

Diani, Mario. “Social Movements and Social Capital: A Network Perspective on

Movement Outcomes.” Mobilization 2.2 (1997): 129–147.

Suggests a mesolevel complementary perspective focusing on social

movements’ capacity to generate new solidarities among activists. An increase

and broadening of social capital ties signifies that a given movement or

movement sector has produced a strong impact. The author relies on previous

studies to support the strength of his approach.

Fantasia, Rick. Cultures of Solidarity: Consciousness, Action and Contemporary

American Workers. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.

An empirically rich manuscript on the American working class, exploring

how the level of mobilization of workers effects their own consciousness. High

levels of mobilization help raising solidarity in working-class communities,

where a new sense of “us” and “them” tends to emerge.

Isaac, Larry. “Movements of Movements: Culture Moves in the Long Civil Rights

Struggle.” Social Forces 87.1 (2008): 33–63.

Looks at movements as agents of cultural production by focusing on the

impact of the US civil rights movement. Movements are here interpreted as

catalysts for cultural change moving across space, moving emotions, moving

sociocultural conditions, and moving through memory.

Taylor, Verta, and Nancy E. Whittier. “Collective Identity in Social Movement

Communities: Lesbian Feminist Mobilization.” In Frontiers in Social Movement

Theory. Edited by Aldon D. Morris and Carol McClurg Mueller, 104–129. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.

This empirically grounded exploratory research on the US lesbian feminist

movement suggests how collective identity is a constructed process. Shows that

collective identity is not structurally determined, but it is an outcome of the

mobilization of all social movements.

Economic Outcomes

Economic outcomes can be seen as the impact that social movements may have in

altering the behavior of economic actors and market structures. Social movement

outcomes have been primarily studied with the assumption that collective action is

exclusively oriented to nation-states. However, they also target private enterprises.

Only recently have social movements scholars started to bring economic actors back

into the equation and started to look at the economic effects of collective action. Social

movement theory and organizational theory have been merged in order to analyze the

corporate response toward boycotts (Bartley and Child 2011, King 2008, King and

Soule 2007). Luders 2006 and Luders 2010, meanwhile, look at social movements

targets, both economic and political. While the latter have been frequently studied in

connection to social movement outcomes, the former have been considered only rarely.

Bartley, Tim, and Curtis Child. “Movements, Markets and Fields: The Effects of Anti-

Sweatshop Campaigns on U.S. Firms, 1993–2000.” Social Forces 90.2 (2011): 425–

451.

Looks at how protest campaigns influence firms, which are not considered as

passive targets, by borrowing from social movements and organizational

theory. Shows what type of effects anti-sweatshop campaigns have had on their

US-based targets. Among certain types of firms there have been negative

effects on sales. In addition, the stock prices of implicated firms have been

suppressed and corporate reputations have been diminished.

King, Brayden G. “A Political Mediation Model of Corporate Response to Social

Movement Activism.” Administrative Science Quarterly 53.3 (2008): 395–421.

Looks at how US corporations, between 1990 and 2005, behaved when they

were confronted with boycotters who were threatening the company’s public

image. It uses the political mediation model. Innovative by its focus on the

determinants of the outcomes of a specific movement tactic, the boycott. The

media are central to the impact of the boycott.

King, Brayden, and Sarah Soule. “Social Movements as Extra-Institutional

Entrepreneurs: The Effect of Protest on Stock Price Returns.” Administrative Science

Quarterly 52.3 (2007): 413–442.

Examines the effects of social movement protests on firms’ stock prices by

drawing on a data set of all protests reported by the New York Times from 1962

to 1990 on activist protests of US corporations. Looks at which kinds of

repertoires have an effect and what makes some corporations more vulnerable

to protests. The main result is that the more information content generated by

social movement protest, the bigger the disruption this causes on the stock

price.

Luders, Joseph E. “The Economics of Movement Success: Business Responses to Civil

Rights Mobilization.” American Journal of Sociology 111.4 (2006): 963–998.

Analyzes economic actors in their response toward social movement

mobilization. The author introduces the concept of “economic opportunity

structure” in order to discover when movements’ demands are accepted.

Luders, Joseph E. The Civil Rights Movement and the Logic of Social Change.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

A useful addition to the literaturethat brings an analysis of targets’ responses

to movement mobilization. Provides a general explanation of movement

success by examining the responses of targets and third parties to the

mobilization of the American civil rights movement.

Outcomes on Social Movements

Outcomes on social movements are effects on the same movements as well as on

other movements, either at the same time or in the future. Their analysis has not always

been associated with “mainstream” work on social movements’ outcomes, since they

are not expressly articulated as goals of social movements. It is true that they are much

less numerous than the studies on political outcomes, but there are many works that

deal somehow with the outcomes on social movements that are not framed within this

subfield of research.

Outcomes on the Movements Themselves

Protest has effects that are internal to the movement or to particular movement

organization, effects that are often unintended. This topic invests and builds over three

important areas of social movement studies: social movement strategy, social

movement development, and social movement outcomes. Internal movement outcomes

may refer to changes in the tactical repertoires (McAdam 1983), changes in the

movement’s internal composition (Bosi 2006), changes in the subsequent mobilization

after a movement victory (Kane 2010, Linders 2004, Snyder and Kelly 1979), or how

the incremental gains and losses affect social movements and social movement

organizations (Gupta 2009, Mueller 1987).

Bosi, Lorenzo. “The Dynamics of Social Movement Development: Northern Ireland’s

Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s.” Mobilization 11.1 (2006): 81–100.

Investigates how the changes brought by Northern Ireland’s civil rights

movement influenced the movement’s development. Shows how such

movement development is led by the congruence of the mobilizing messages

that best align with the dominant representation of the political environment

present at a given stage, and which is subject to the impact of social movement

mobilization.

Gupta, Devashree. “The Power of Incremental Outcomes: How Small Victories and

Defeats Affect Social Movement Organizations.” Mobilization 14.4 (2009): 417–432.

Examines, by means of a dynamic view of movement outcomes, how

incremental outcomes influence social movement organizations’ activities and

development. Shows how the victory of the US anti–death penalty movement at

an early stage increased the financial contributions and programmatic spending,

while being reversed at a later stage.

Kane, Melinda. “You’ve Won, Now What? The Influence of Legal Change on Gay and

Lesbian Mobilization, 1974–1999.” Sociological Quarterly 51.2 (2010): 255–277.

Looks at the influence that legal change achieved by gay and lesbian

movements through their mobilization in the United States has had on the

movements themselves. Argues that the outcomes achieved by social

movements might affect their subsequent development, depending on the type

of achievement and on the cultural context surrounding the decision to

mobilize.

Linders, Annulla. “Victory and Beyond: A Historical Comparative Analysis of the

Outcomes of the Abortion Movements in Sweden and the United States.” Sociological

Forum 19.3 (2004): 371–404.

Looks at how the achievements of the abortion movements in these two

countries during the 1970s had an effect on their subsequent developments.

Shows that political opportunities and constraints seem to shape the

movements’ internal developments differently, despite both having succeeded.

McAdam, Doug. “Tactical Innovation and the Pace of Insurgency.” American

Sociological Review 48.6 (1983): 735–754.

Analyzes the tactical interaction between the American civil rights movement

and the changing political and organizational context. Shows how the first

successes of the movement led it to institutionalize or to changes its tactics.

Mueller, Carol McClurg. “Collective Consciousness, Identity Transformation, and the

Rise of Women in Public Office in the United States.” In The Women’s Movements of

the United States and Western Europe. Edited by Mary Fainsod Katzenstein and Carol

McClurg Mueller, 89–110. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987.

Argues that a key aspect of movement success lies in its impact on resources

for subsequent mobilization. Among such resources, the author stresses the

importance of collective consciousness.

Snyder, David, and William Kelly. “Strategies for Investigating Violence and Social

Change: Illustrations from Analyses of Racial Disorders and Implications for

Mobilization Research.” In The Dynamics of Social Movements: Resource

Mobilization, Social Control, and Tactics. Edited by Mayer N. Zald and John D.

McCarthy, 212–237. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop, 1979.

An early work on how social movements may bring about change in the

resources of a movement’s organization and environment. The authors

hypothesize about how the early achievement of movement goals may affect

the level of resources mobilized by collectivity, the forms of collective action,

and the relationship between them.

Outcomes on Other Movements

Social movement scholars have long recognized that social movements are not

isolated actors. However, they have spent little research investigating how movements

influence each other. Social movements can influence each other directly or indirectly

across time, space, and issue, and over their frames, discourses, identities, repertoires,

goals, and organizational structures. The literature on social movements has addressed

the consequences of social movements by looking at social movement spillover

(Meyer and Boutcher 2007, Meyer and Whittier 1994) abeyance (Taylor 1989),

countermovements (Meyer and Staggenborg 1996), and spin-off movements (McAdam

1995). These types of effects go beyond the expressly articulated goals of social

movements.

McAdam, Doug. “‘Initiator’ and ‘Spin-off’ Movements: Diffusion Processes in Protest

Cycles.” In Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action. Edited by Mark Traugott,

217–239. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1995.

Explains how social movements generate other movements. This can happen

through initiator movements, which set in motion protest cycles, and spin-off

movements, which take inspiration from the initiator ones. Structural ties are

seen as determinant to the attribution of similarity, which is necessary to

diffusion processes.

Meyer, David, and Steven A. Boutcher. “Signals and Spillover: Brown v. Board of

Education and Other Social Movements.” Perspectives on Politics 5.1 (2007): 81–93.

Looks at how a positive US Supreme Court decision on a social movement’s

mobilization encouraged further mobilization, across time, for other social

movements. Based on the concept of signals as a component of the

sociopolitical context and spillover of one movement on another one.

Meyer, David, and Suzanne Staggenborg. “Movements, Countermovements, and the

Structure of Political Opportunity.” American Journal of Sociology 101.6 (1996):

1628–1660.

An important work in social movement theory that is seldom associated with

the literature on social movements outcomes. Looks at an important impact of

social movement outcomes, namely the emergence of countermovements. It is

a programmatic work, widely used in the literature.

Meyer, David, and Nancy Whittier. “Social Movement Spillover.” Social Problems

41.2 (1994): 277–298.

Perhaps the first article mentioning the spillover effect in the social movement

literature. Looks at how movements influence each other, using the women’s

movement’s impact on US peace movement activity in the 1980s as an

example. Combines the political process and collective identity perspectives.

Taylor, Verta. “Sources of Continuity in Social Movements: The Women’s Movement

in Abeyance.” American Sociological Review 54.5 (1989): 761–775.

Combines resource mobilization theory and the collective identity perspective

to explain how social movements continue around the same grievances or by

the same constituency despite the absence of visible mobilization. Based on an

analysis of US women’s movement activists.