Recombination and Novelty in Social Protest: Insights and Implications
Exploring the concept of tactical innovation in social movements, this material delves into the dynamics of actors forging new relationships and transforming resources into novel ideas. It examines past explanations of tactical innovation and poses open empirical questions about novelty and tipping points in protest events.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Recombination and Novelty in Social Protest Dan J. Wang Assistant Professor Columbia Business School The Emergence of Organizations and Markets Conference Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University June 29-July 1
The Autocatalysis Recipe Ingredient List: Disparate actors/resources/social domains Relationships between previously separate social domains Directions: Stir? (and hope that new actors bump into one another?)
Action-oriented autocatalysis Not a theory based on Brownian motion Actors are purposive and reactive New relationships forged in response to changes to external environment
Open empirical questions What is novelty? How do we measure novelty? When does tipping occur?
Tactical innovation in social movements: The coevolution of the tools and content of protest
Tactical innovation Where do innovations in protest tactics come from? In what kinds of protest events can we observe tactical innovation?
Tactical innovation as autocatalytic inputs and outputs 1. Actors cross boundaries to forge new relationships 2. New relationships leads to interactions that transform resources into novel ideas, tools, organizational forms 3. Actors realign themselves based on these new resources 4. External changes prompts actor boundary-crossing again
Past explanations of tactical innovation Historical changes in political authority and technology (Tilly 1976, 1986, Tarrow 1995) Introduction of new cultural frames (Snow and Benford 1992) Necessity due to movement-opponent dynamics (McAdam 1983) Professionalization of movements through SMOs and other formal organizations (McCammon 2003, Taylor and Van Dyke 2008)
Our perspective Tactical innovation as both premeditated and endogenously emergent The protest event as crucible of tactical innovation New tactics (or the novel repurposing of tactics) are realized at protest events In what types of protest events is tactical innovation more likely to occur?
Tactical innovation as an autocatalytic process External Shock Different movement sectors protest together Knowledge sharing at protest staging and planning Recombination of tactics fashions new weapons for protest Realignment of movement sectors New movement identities forged around new tools of protest
Tactical innovation as an autocatalytic process Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955), Memphis Sanitation Strike (1968) Labor Movement and Civil Rights Movement brought together Vietnam War Peace movement and Civil rights movement brought together Development of Sit- In from Sit-Down Strike ; used alongside boycotts, demonstrations Non-violent Civil Rights movement allies with peace movement Civil rights movement split between violent and non-violent factions
2102 2101 2105 1323 Civil Rights movement 2100 2106 2900 Women s movement 1995 1332 1333 1507 606 611 607 1500 1606 1331 2202 1318 1609 603 1608 1324 608 610 740 1328 1302 1336 16031604 1329 2004 1353 2000 1311 1506 1605 1612 1809 601 1600 1325 1501 2400 2300 1602 1517 1505 2022 2007 1610 2525 1611 1804 2001 600 1800 1903 1502 2021 1805 604 1808 1509 1810 1351 2500 2104 1518 1341 2006 1326 1710 1337 723 1342 609 728 2510 1344 1519 1520 300 1006 1335 711 1907 1334 709 2504 2503 2020 741 1300 1327 1352 1807 710 700 2508 2003 722 1345 1900 726 500 1343 727 2517 2502 721 2505 1806 729 1000 1908 1330 1340 704 1912 2507 1305 503 705 502 1504 1709 712 1306 400 713 702 2002 1803 Peace movement 1515 1400 501 1700 1711 703 1350 1338 1712 708 1386 2200 2506 200 2600 1713 2005 1701 1902 1705 1100 1114 1708 1720 1103 1109 1106 1113 1111 Environmental movement 1107 1116 1110 1115 1108
2102 Civil Rights movement 2101 2105 1323 2100 2106 2900 1966 1332 1333 1507 606 611 607 1500 1606 1331 2202 1318 1609 603 1608 1324 608 610 740 1328 1302 1336 16031604 1329 2004 1353 2000 1311 1506 1605 1612 1809 601 1600 1325 1501 2400 2300 1602 1517 1505 2022 2007 1610 2525 1611 1804 2001 600 1800 1903 1502 2021 1805 604 1808 1509 1810 1351 2500 2104 1518 1341 2006 1326 1710 1337 723 1342 609 728 2510 1344 1519 1520 300 1006 1335 711 1907 1334 709 2504 2503 2020 741 1300 1327 1352 1807 710 700 2508 2003 722 1345 1900 726 500 1343 727 2517 2502 721 2505 1806 729 1000 1908 1330 1340 704 1912 2507 1305 503 705 502 1504 1709 712 1306 400 713 702 2002 1803 1515 1400 501 1700 1711 703 Peace movement 1350 1338 1712 708 1386 2200 2506 200 2600 1713 2005 1701 1902 1705 1100 1114 1708 1720 1103 1109 1106 1113 1111 1107 1116 1110 1115 1108
2102 2101 Civil Rights movement 2105 1323 2100 2106 2900 1976 1332 1333 1507 606 611 607 1500 1606 1331 2202 1318 1609 603 1608 1324 608 610 740 1328 1302 1336 16031604 1329 2004 1353 2000 1311 1506 1605 1612 1809 601 1600 1325 1501 2400 2300 1602 1517 1505 2022 2007 1610 2525 1611 1804 2001 600 1800 1903 1502 2021 1805 604 1808 1509 1810 1351 2500 2104 1518 1341 2006 1326 1710 1337 723 1342 609 728 2510 1344 1519 1520 300 1006 1335 711 1907 1334 709 2504 2503 2020 741 1300 1327 1352 1807 710 700 2508 2003 722 1345 1900 726 500 1343 727 2517 2502 721 2505 1806 729 1000 1908 1330 1340 704 1912 2507 1305 503 705 502 1504 1709 712 1306 400 713 702 2002 1803 1515 1400 501 1700 1711 703 Peace movement 1350 1338 1712 708 1386 2200 2506 200 2600 1713 2005 1701 1902 1705 1100 1114 1708 1720 1103 1109 1106 1113 1111 Environmental movement 1107 1116 1110 1115 1108
2102 2101 Civil Rights movement 2105 1323 2100 Women s movement 2106 2900 1986 1332 1333 1507 606 611 607 1500 1606 1331 2202 1318 1609 603 1608 1324 608 610 740 1328 1302 1336 16031604 1329 2004 1353 2000 1311 1506 1605 1612 1809 601 1600 1325 1501 2400 2300 1602 1517 1505 2022 2007 1610 2525 1611 1804 2001 600 1800 1903 1502 2021 1805 604 1808 1509 1810 1351 2500 2104 1518 1341 2006 1326 1710 1337 723 1342 609 728 2510 1344 1519 1520 300 1006 1335 711 1907 1334 709 2504 2503 2020 741 1300 1327 1352 1807 710 700 2508 2003 722 1345 1900 726 500 1343 727 2517 2502 721 2505 1806 729 1000 1908 1330 1340 704 1912 2507 1305 503 705 502 1504 1709 712 1306 400 713 702 2002 1803 Peace movement 1515 1400 501 1700 1711 703 1350 1338 1712 708 1386 2200 2506 200 2600 1713 2005 1701 1902 1705 1100 1114 1708 1720 1103 1109 1106 1113 Environmental movement 1111 1107 1116 1110 1115 1108
Novel recombinations as tactical innovation Intermingling of older tactics with newer tactics (Tarrow 2011: 41) Creatively using familiar tactics by combining them in new ways (Morris 1993: 634) Boycotts, sit-ins, strikes, marches contemporaneously deployed in Birmingham 1963
Novel recombination of tactics The greater the dissimilarity between the claims of a protest event, the more likely the event will exhibit a novel recombination of tactics. Dissimilarity in claims = (movement) boundary-spanning protest event Creativity and innovation is more likely when diverse resources are accessible (Ahuja 2000, Powell, et al 1996, Padgett and McLean 2006, Fleming, et al 2007, Benet-Martinez, et al 2008, Burt 2004) Certain tactics associated with certain movements (Tilly 1997) Overlap in movements creates overlap in tactical repertoires
Peace Movement Women s Movement Labor Movement Protest Event
Linkages within one set of domains (claims the content of protest) creates innovation in another (tactics the tools of protest)
Dynamics of Collective Action Dataset 23,000 protest events gathered from The New York Times between 1960 and 1995 For each event, coders identified tactics (up to 4) used and claims made (up to 4) Size of protest, violence, report-specific features, presence of police, counterdemonstrators, social movement organizations (www.dynamicsofcollectiveaction.com)
Finding 1: New tactics are more likely to appear in the peripheral protest events
2102 2101 2105 1323 2100 Drunk Driving 2106 2900 1332 1333 1507 606 611 607 1500 1606 1331 2202 1318 1609 603 1608 1324 608 610 740 1328 1302 1336 16031604 1329 2004 1353 2000 1311 1506 1605 1612 1809 601 1600 1325 1501 2400 2300 1602 1517 1505 2022 2007 1610 2525 1611 1804 2001 600 1800 1903 1502 2021 1805 604 1808 1509 1810 1351 2500 2104 1518 1341 2006 1326 1710 1337 723 1342 609 728 2510 1344 1519 1520 300 1006 1335 711 1907 1334 709 2504 2503 2020 741 1300 1327 1352 1807 710 700 2508 2003 722 1345 1900 726 500 1343 727 2517 2502 721 2505 1806 729 1000 1908 1330 1340 704 1912 2507 1305 503 705 502 1504 1709 712 1306 400 713 702 2002 1803 1515 1400 501 1700 1711 703 1350 1338 1712 708 1386 2200 2506 200 2600 1713 2005 Anti- 1701 1902 1705 1100 1114 Afghanistan War (1979) 1708 1720 1103 1109 1106 1113 1111 Anti-Police Brutality against Native Americans 1107 1116 1110 1115 1108
New tactics appear in protest events with more peripheral claims. 0.025 Pr(New Tactic at Protest Event) 0.015 0.005 0 5 10 15 20 Aggregate Claim Centrality
Finding 2: Novel tactical recombination is more likely to occur in protest events that combine dissimilar claims
Outcome Variable: New Recombinations of Tactics Measurement: Protest event contained new recombination of tactics not observed previously in data = 1
Independent Variable: Claim Dissimilarity Assumption: Claims are more similar to one another if they have been often paired together in past protest events Protest events with claims that have never been paired together in the past represent (movement) boundary-spanning, truly multi-issue protests
Independent Variable: Boundary- Spanning Protest Event Average shortest path length among each pair of claims in a protest event For each protest event, collect path lengths between claims in each possible pairing Based on claim pairing network up to time of protest event Claims in different components coded as length of geodesic + 1 [i.e., longest shortest path length]
1992 2100: Civil Rights for Disabled 1344: Prisoner s Rights 1600: Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights 1604: Same-Sex Domestic Partnership Legislation
Peace and Womens movement collaboration Civil Rights and Peace Movement collaboration Emergence of identity movements Novel tactical recombinations 0.12 Proportion of events with novel recombination 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Year Novel tactical emergence 0.020 Proportion of events with novel tactic 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.000 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Year
Protest events with higher dissimilarity among their claims (spanning movements) are more likely to have novel recombinations of tactics. 0.035 Pr(Novel Recombination at Protest Event) 0.030 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.010 0 5 10 15 Avg. Shortest Path Length between Claims at Protest Event
What do novel recombinations of tactics look like? Normalized difference in popularity scores of two tactics in novel pairing Few novel pairings contain one popular and one unpopular tactic. Difference in popularity between two 5 tactics in novel pairing (normalized) 4 3 2 Most novel pairings of tactics consist of two unpopular tactics. 1 0 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 Mean of popularity score of two tactics in novel pairing Avg. popularity of two tactics in novel pairing
What is the mechanism? How do disparate claims bring forth novel recombinations of tactics? Do multiple groups from different movements come together at protest events? Compare single-actor protest events and multi-actor protest events Finding: Multi-issue events more likely to result in novel recombinations of tactics if only one organizational actor is involved
Lessons for Emergence Innovation = Novel recombination of tactics (observed) Invention = Realignment of movement alliances (implicitly observed) Spillovers in one domain leads to innovation in another Domains can be conceptually discrete, but in analytically, they do not have to be Autocatalysis explains the persistence of tactical innovation
