Berkeley in the Sixties

Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements Author(s): J. Craig Jenkins Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 9 (1983), pp. 527-553 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2946077 Accessed: 07-02-2020 05:11 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual

Review of Sociology

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Ann. Rev. Sociol. 1983. 9:527-53

Copyright ? 1983 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved

RESOURCE MOBILIZATION

THEORY AND THE STUDY OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

J. Craig Jenkins

Department of Sociology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211

Abstract

Resource mobilization theory has recently presented an alternative interpreta tion of social movements. The review traces the emergence and recent con troversies generated by this new perspective. A multifactored model of social movement formation is advanced, emphasizing resources, organization, and political opportunities in addition to traditional discontent hypotheses. The McCarthy-Zald (1973) theory of entrepreneurial mobilization is critically assessed as an interpretation of the social movements of the 1960s-1970s, and the relevance of the Olson (1968) theory of collective action is specified. Group organization is argued to be the major determinant of mobilization potential and patterns. The debate between the Gerlach-Hine (1970) and entrepreneurial theories of social movement organization is traced in terms of historical changes in the social movement sector and the persistence of organizational diversity. A model of social movement politics is outlined, building on Gam son's (1975) theory of strategy and Tilly's (1978) polity theory by emphasizing political alliances and processes shaping success and failure. Piven & Cloward (1977) are correct that disruptiveness leads to success and that disruptions can be mobilized without formal organization; they are wrong in asserting that formal organization is necessarily incompatible with mobilization. The future development of resource mobilization theory lies in two directions: extending the polity theory to deal with different states and regimes, including the development of neo-corporatism, and providing a more sophisticated social psychology of mobilization.

527

0360-0572/83/0815-0527$02.00

534 JENKINS

"participation revolution" in American politics but merely reflected improved

facilitative conditions for professionalized mobilization. Professionals and

college students with discretionary time schedules and income, liberal institu-

tions with "slack" resources, and pervasive mass media that could be coopted

by enterprising movement entrepreneurs were the major factors behind the

stormy 1960s. Evidence on political trends, however, indicates a virtual

explosion of unconventional mass political participation between 1960 and

1974. Figure 1 shows that the number of protest demonstrations and riots

escalated dramatically, peaking in the 1967-1972 period. This "participation

revolution" was, in turn, undergirded by a general increase in the mobilization

for unconventional politics as the number of political ideologues increased

from 1% of the citizenry in the 1950s to 19% in 1972, then declining to 7% in

1976 (Nie, Verba & Petrocik 1980:367), membership in political organizations

expanded from 2.8% in 1956 to a peak of 4.4% in 1974 (Survey Research

Center & Davis et al 1981), and political activists involved in nonelectoral

activity rose from 5-12% in the 1950s to 15-20% in the late 1960s and early

1970s (Campbell et al 1960:51-2; Converse 1972:332-6; Rosenau 1974:44-

86; Milbrath & Goel 1977:18-19). Simultaneously, mobilization for routine

politics declined as voter turnout slowly declined, partisan independence

rose, and general distrust of elected officials and major institutions

260

240

220

200

180

160

140

1 20

1 00 Demonstrat ions-:

80

60 -Riots

40

20

.

kD tD tD s tD tD s s~D ~

a an m in th ts,

Figure I Demonstrations a

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms