Amenta and Caren (2007) ‘The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary Consequences of State-Oriented Challengers.’
Citation: Amenta, Edwin and Caren, Neal (2007) ‘The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary Consequences of State-Oriented Challengers,’ in David A. Snow, Sarah A. Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi (Eds.) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, pp. 461-488.
Time Period Covered:
Theory, Research Question, Hypothesis:
Relationship to Other Research/Ideas Contested/Noted Gaps:
Concepts and Definitions:
Method:
Primary/Original Data:
Argument/Conclusion:
Limitations/Flaws:
Abstract:
Notes:
Amenta and Caren (2007:461): Argue that achieving consensus on success or influence may be more difficult than around other aspects of movement activity.
Amenta and Caren (2007:463): Gamson’s work identified as a major influence on determining the consequences of social movements. First type of success he identified is whether the movement was accepted as “a legitimate representative of a constituency by the target of the collective action.”
Amenta and Caren (2007:463): Multiple issues with these criteria: a movement may fail to achieve its goals but still win substantial advantages for the group it claims to represent; there may be unintended or negative consequences; acceptance may not translate into meaningful gains.
Amenta and Caren (2007:464): Three-level approach to collective benefits developed. The most extensive impact is where the movement gains continuing leverage over political processes for the group they represent (not necessarily for a specific organisation); at the mid-level, the group secures some kind of benefits that will flow towards a constituency until counteraction is taken, for example by achieving policy change or behavioural practices change; at the lowest level, the group wins a specific decision or policy action that has no long-term implications for the constituency.