Using Social Network Analysis to study the Modularity of Protest FormsThe evolution of the Basque Repertoire of Contention (1980- 2014)

  1. Ciordia, Alejandro
  2. Letamendia, Arkaitz
Journal:
Empiria: Revista de metodología de ciencias sociales

ISSN: 1139-5737

Year of publication: 2021

Issue Title: Movimientos sociales

Issue: 52

Pages: 53-95

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/EMPIRIA.52.2021.31365 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Empiria: Revista de metodología de ciencias sociales

Abstract

Demonstrations, strikes, direct actions, and acts of civil disobedience are just a few examples of the broad set of protest tactics potentially available to citizens in order to raise their demands and call the public’s attention to unjust situations. Each of these forms of claim-making can be more or less modular. Modularity, a concept originally introduced by Sidney Tarrow (1993) and popularized by Charles Tilly (1993, 1995), refers to the adaptability or degree of transferability of protest forms to different circumstances of contention. A protest form is strongly modular when it belongs to the regular repertoire of diverse actors and is employed for the defense of varied issues, against distinct targets, and in different places. Nonetheless, despite the considerable popularity of the concept for theoretical elaboration, its empirical operationalization has so far remained underdeveloped. In this article, building upon the conceptual bases set up by Wada (2012), we lay out a new perspective for the evaluation of the modularity of protest forms. Drawing upon social network analysis, we propose to analyze contingency tables generated from protest event catalogs as two-mode networks, measuring tactical transferability as weighted degree centrality (Opsahl et al. 2010). To demonstrate the usefulness of our proposed operationalization, we examine a large original dataset of protest events, applying our measure in order to evaluate repertoire change in the Basque Country over the last four decades, tracing the evolution of ten different protest forms in terms of actor transferability. Results show a relatively rigid repertoire in which demonstrations appear as dominant, at the same time that symbolic protests have gradually increased its modularity in recent years, at the expense of civil disobedience and violent direct action, which used to be significantly more relevant during the 80s and 90s. In comparison with Wada’s original proposal, the new measure of modularity proposed in this article derives from a more intuitive operationalization and offers an easily interpretable visual representation of the data. These advantages could eventually encourage more empirical research comparing the varying modularity of forms of contention across diverse contexts and periods.

Bibliographic References

  • ALONSO, C., BARCENA, I. and GOROSTIDI, I. (2014): “Repression and Criminalization of the Ecologist Movement in the Basque Country: The Case of the High Speed Train Project”, Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 4(1), pp. 13–34.
  • BARCENA, I. and AJANGIZ, R. (2011): “Basque Social Movements”, in Basque Political Systems, Reno, NV, University of Nevada Press, pp. 219-34.
  • BARCENA, I., IBARRA, P., GUARROTXENA, E. and TORRE, J. (2003): “The Basque Country”, in Environmental Protest in Western Europe, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 200–215.
  • BARRAT, A., BARTHÉLEMY, M., PASTOR-SATORRAS, R. and VESPIGNANI, A. (2004): “The Architecture of Complex Weighted Networks”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(11), pp. 3747–52.
  • BIGGS, M. (2013): “How Repertoires Evolve: The Diffusion of Suicide Protest in the Twentieth Century”, Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 18(4), pp. 407–28.
  • BONACICH, P. (1987): “Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures”, American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), pp. 1170–82.
  • BORGATTI, S. P., EVERETT, M. G. and JOHNSON, J. C. (2013): Analyzing Social Networks, London, SAGE.
  • CASADO DA ROCHA, A. and J. A. PÉREZ (1996): Itoiz: del Deber de la Desobediencia Civil al Ecosabotaje, Pamplona-Iruña, Pamiela.
  • CASQUETE, J. (2001): “Accion Colectiva y Sociedad de Movimientos: el Movimiento Antimilitarista Contemporáneo en el País Vasco-Navarro”, Cuadernos Sociológicos Vascos, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Gobierno Vasco.
  • CASQUETE, J. (2006): “The Power of Demonstrations”, Social Movement Studies, 5(1), pp. 45–60.
  • CASTELLS, M. (2009): The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age (2nd ed.), Oxford, Wiley.
  • CIORDIA, A. (2021). Less Divided after ETA? The evolution of ideological cleavages in the Basque environmental field, 2007-2017, Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 26(2), pp. 217-236.
  • CRUZ, R. (2008): Repertorios: La Política de Enfrentamiento en el Siglo XX, Madrid, CIS.
  • CRUZ, R. (2015): Protestar en España 1900-2013, Madrid, Alianza.
  • DÍEZ MEDRANO, J. (1995): Divided Nations: Class, Politics, and Nationalism in the Basque Country and Catalonia, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press.
  • DOHERTY, B. and G. HAYES (2019): “Tactics and Strategic Action”, in The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (2nd ed.), Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, pp. 271–88.
  • EARL, J., MARTIN, A., McCARTHY, J. and SOULE, S. (2004): “The Use of Newspaper Data in the Study of Collective Action”, Annual Review of Sociology, 30(1), pp. 65–80.
  • EVERETT, K. D. (1992). Professionalization and Protest: Changes in the Social Movement Sector, 1961–1983, Social Forces, 70(4), 957–975.
  • FREEMAN, L. C. (1978): “Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification”, Social Networks, 1(3), pp. 215–39.
  • HARVEY, D. (1989): The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change, Oxford, Blackwell.
  • HUTTER, S. (2014): “Protest Event Analysis and Its Offspring”, in Methodological Practices in Social Movement Research, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 335–67.
  • IBARRA, P., & AHEDO, I. (2004). The Political Systems of the Basque Country: Is a Non-Polarized Scenario Possible in the Future?, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 10(3), 355–386.
  • IBARRA, P. and DE LA PEÑA, A. (2004): De la confrontación militante a la cooperación pragmática: Nuevas formas de acción colectiva en Euskadi, Madrid, Catarata.
  • ITÇAINA, X. (2017): “Conclusion: Popular Culture, Folk Traditions and Protest—A Research Agenda”, in Protest, Popular Culture and Tradition in Modern and Contemporary Western Europe, London, Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 229–48.
  • KOOPMANS, R., and RUCHT, D. (2002): “Protest Event Analysis”, in Methods of Social Movement Research, Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota Press, pp. 231–59.
  • KRIESI, H., KOOPMANS, R., DUYVENDAK, J. W., & GIUGNI, M. G. (Eds.). (1995), New Social Movements in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis, London, UCL Press.
  • LETAMENDIA, A. (2011): “Represión Legal y Vínculos Organizacionales: el caso del Conflicto Vasco”, in Recuperando la Radicalidad. Un encuentro en torno al análisis político crítico, Barcelona, Hacer, pp. 149–69.
  • LETAMENDIA, A. (2015): La Forma Social de la Protesta en Euskal Herria 1980-2013. Doctoral thesis, Leioa, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU).
  • LETAMENDIA, A. (2017): “Towards the Aestheticisation of the Resistances in the Digital Age? A Critical Approach”, in Precarity within the Digital Age, Wiesbaden, Springer, pp. 135–49.
  • LETAMENDIA, A. (2018): “Acciones simbólicas, conflictos materiales: la evolución contemporánea de la Forma Social de la Protesta vasca”, Athenea Digital. Revista de pensamiento e investigación social, 18(3), e2052.
  • LETAMENDIA, A. (2019): “Las transformaciones de la movilización social en Euskal Herria: del posfranquismo a la década de 2010”, Anuario de Movimientos Sociales 2018, Fundación Betiko.
  • LETAMENDIA, F. (2000): Game of Mirrors: Centre-Periphery National Conflicts, London, Ashgate.
  • LETAMENDIA, F. (2006). Acción colectiva Hegoalde-Iparralde, Madrid, Editorial Fundamentos.
  • LÓPEZ-MAYA, M. (2002): “Venezuela after the Caracazo: Forms of Protest in a Deinstitutionalized Context”, Bulletin of Latin American Research, 21(2), pp. 199–218.
  • McADAM, D. (1995): “‘Initiator’ and ‘Spin-off’ Movements: Diffusion Processes in Protest Cycles”, in Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action, Durham, NC, Duke University Press, pp. 217–40.
  • McCARTHY, J. and ZALD, M. (1977): “Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory”, American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), pp. 1212–41.
  • McPHAIL, C. (2013): “Modular Protest Forms”, in The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, Malden, MA, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 757–62
  • McPHAIL, C. and SCHWEINGRUBER, D. (1999): “Unpacking Protest Events: A Description Bias Analysis of Media Records with Systematic Direct Observations of Collective Action The 1995 March for Life in Washington, D.C.”, in Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 164–95.
  • MEYER D. and TARROW, S. (1998): “A Movement Society: Contentious Politics for a New Century”, in The Social Movement Society, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 1–28.
  • NEWMAN, M. E. J. (2004): “Analysis of Weighted Networks”, Physical Review E, 70 (5), ref. 056131.
  • OPSAHL, T. (2011): “Degree Centrality and Variation in Tie Weights”. Available at: https://toreopsahl.com/2011/08/08/degree-centrality-and-variation-in-tie-weights/ (last accessed: 25/05/2021).
  • OPSAHL, T., AGNEESSENS, F. and SKVORETZ, J. (2010): “Node Centrality in Weighted Networks: Generalizing Degree and Shortest Paths”, Social Networks, 32(3), pp. 245–51.
  • OPSAHL, T., COLIZZA, V., PANZARASA, P. and RAMASCO, J. J. (2008): “Prominence and Control: The Weighted Rich-Club Effect” Physical Review Letters, 101(16), ref. 168702.
  • RING-RAMIREZ, M., REYNOLDS-STENSON, H. and EARL, J. (2014): “Culturally Constrained Contention: Mapping the Meaning Structure of the Repertoire of Contention”, Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 19 (4), pp. 405–19.
  • RUCHT, D. and OHLEMACHER, T. (1992): “Protest Event Data: Collection, Uses and Perspectives”, in Studying Collective Action, London, SAGE Publications, pp. 76– 106.
  • SAMPSON, R., McADAM, D., MacINDOE, H. and WEFFER-ELIZONDO, S. (2005): “Civil Society Reconsidered: The Durable Nature and Community Structure of Collective Civic Action”, American Journal of Sociology, 111(3), pp. 673–714.
  • SOULE, S. (2004): “Diffusion Processes within and across Movements”, in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (1st ed.), Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing, pp. 294–310.
  • SOULE, S. and DAVENPORT, C. (2009): “Velvet Glove, Iron Fist, or Even Hand? Protest Policing in the United States, 1960-1990”, Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 14(1), pp. 1–22.
  • TARROW, S. (1993): “Modular Collective Action and the Rise of the Social Movement: Why the French Revolution Was Not Enough”, Politics & Society, 21(1), pp. 69–90.
  • TARROW, S. (1995): “Cycles of Collective Action: Between Moments of Madness and the Repertoire of Contention”, in Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action, Durham, NC, Duke University Press, pp. 89-116.
  • TARROW, S. (1998): Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics (2nd ed.), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  • TEJERINA, B. (2001): “Protest Cycle, Political Violence and Social Movements in the Basque Country”, Nations and Nationalism, 7(1), pp. 39–57.
  • TILLY, C. (1979): “Repertoires of Contention in America and Britain, 1750-1820”, in The Dynamics of Social Movements, Cambridge, MA, Winthrop, pp. 126–55.
  • TILLY, C. (1993): “Contentious Repertoires in Great Britain, 1758–1834”, Social Science History, 17(2), pp. 253–80.
  • TILLY, C. (1995): Popular Contention in Great Britain, 1758-1834, London, Routledge.
  • TILLY, C. (2008): Contentious Performances, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  • TORCAL, M., J. R. MONTERO and J. TEORELL (2006): “La Participación Política en España: Modos y Niveles en Perspectiva Comparada”, in Ciudadanos, Asociaciones y Participación en España, Madrid, CIS, pp. 47–76.
  • TUCHMAN, G. (1973): “Making News by Doing Work: Routinizing the Unexpected”, American Journal of Sociology, 79(1), pp. 110–31.
  • WADA, T. (2012): “Modularity and Transferability of Repertoires of Contention”, Social Problems, 59(4), pp. 544–71.
  • WADA, T. (2016): “Rigidity and Flexibility of Repertoires of Contention”, Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 21(4), pp. 449–68.
  • ZUBIAGA, M., and J. AZKUNE. (2018): “Sobre los Límites del Populismo: Gestión de la Excepcionalidad Política y Democratización en España y Euskal Herria”, in Respuestas y Propuestas de Regeneración Frente a la Crisis de la Democracia, Madrid, Tecnos, pp. 51–79.
  • DANZGER, M. H (1975): “Validating Conflict Data”, American Sociological Review, 40(5), pp. 570–84.
  • TILLY, C. (2006): Regimes and Repertoires, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Data source: Dialnet