The field of social movement studies has expanded dramatically over the past three decades. But as it has done so, its focus has become increasingly narrow and 'movement-centric'. When combined with the tendency to select successful struggles for study, the conceptual and methodological conventions of the field conduce to a decidedly Ptolemaic view of social movements: one that exaggerates the frequency and causal significance of movements as a form of politics. This book reports the results of a comparative study, not of movements, but of communities earmarked for environmentally risky energy projects. In stark contrast to the central thrust of the social movement literature, the authors find that the overall level of emergent opposition to the projects has been very low, and they seek to explain that variation and the impact, if any, it had on the ultimate fate of the proposed projects.
• Instead of studying social movements, studies communities 'at risk' for a movement, seeking to explain the factors that account for whether or not the community mobilized in the face of the environmental threat posed by the project • Makes use of a highly innovative set of qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze twenty cases • Includes a critical 'sociology of knowledge' analysis of the origin, development and current state of the field of social movement studies
Contents
1. From Copernicus to Ptolemy and (hopefully) back again; 2. Comparing communities 'at risk' for mobilization; 3. Explaining variation in the level of opposition to energy projects; 4. Does opposition matter?: Mobilization and project outcome; 5. From not my back yard to not in anyone's back yard: the emergence of regional movements against liquefied natural gas; 6. Back to the future: returning to a Copernican approach to the study of contention.
Printer friendly version