This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wahlström, M. Articles by Peterson, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Between the State and the Market

Expanding the Concept of ‘Political Opportunity Structure’

Department of Sociology, University of Göteborg, Göteborg, Sweden

Abby Peterson

Department of Sociology, University of Göteborg, Göteborg, Sweden

This article brings together two research traditions: social movement theory and theories of corporate social responsibility. The study is an attempt to widen the perspective on the relationship between a business/business sector and its external stakeholders in order to include social movements. We depart from a three-part model of political opportunity structures, including state, cultural and economic opportunity structures. In order to illustrate our model, the article is centred on the case of the Swedish animal rights movements’ political pressure on domestic fur-farming. The animal rights movement has had considerable success by engaging with a relatively open cultural opportunity structure, winning a framing war in regard to the moral issues raised. Despite the fur industry’s attempts to counter-mobilize, the animal rights movement has found a hearing in formal political channels and has achieved considerable success. However, since the movement is faced with an economic opportunity structure that is not vulnerable to the demands of stakeholders, and where there is great inconsistency between the interests of the industry and the demands of the stakeholders, it is not surprising that the farmers have been non-compliant.

Key Words: animal rights movement • boycott • corporate social responsibility • economic opportunity structure • fur trade • political opportunity structure • political process

References

• Brand, K. W. (1985) ‘Vergleichendes Resümee’, in K. W. Brand (ed.) Neue soziale Bewegungen in Westeuropa und den USA: Ein internationaler Vergleich. Frankfurt: Campus.
• Brottslighet kopplad till rikets inre säkerhet 2002 (2003) Stockholm: Rikspolisstyrelsen Säkerhetspolisen.
• Brottslighet kopplad till rikets inre säkerhet 2003 (2004) Stockholm: Rikspolisstyrelsen Säkerhetspolisen.
• Burstein, P. (1999) ‘Social Movements and Public Policy’, in M. Giugni, D. McAdam and C. Tilly (eds) How Social Movements Matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
• della Porta, D. and Reiter, H. (1998) ‘The Policing of Protests in Western Democracies’, in D. della Porta and H. Reiter (eds) Policing Protest. The Control of Mass Demonstrations in Western Democracies, pp. 1-32. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
• Djurens Välfärd och Pälsdjursnäringen. SOU 2003: 86. Government report. Stockholm: Fritzes Offentliga Publikationer.
• Eisinger, P. (1973) ‘The Conditions of Protest Behaviour in American Cities’, American Political Science Review 67: 11-28.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Förbundet Djurens Rätt (2006) De stängda burarna. Available at: http://www.djurensratt.se/pdf/diverse/xde_stangda_burarna.pdf. (Consulted October 2003).
• Gamson, W. and Meyer, D. (1996) ‘Framing Political Opportunity’, in D. McAdam, J. McCarthy and M. N. Zald (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hellner, J. and Johansson, S. (2000) Skadeståndsrätt, 6th edn. Stockholm: Nordstedts Juridik.
• Hilson, C. (2002) ‘New Social Movements: the Role of Legal Opportunity’, Journal of European Public Policy 9: 238-255.[CrossRef]
• Holzer, B. (2004) Corporate Social Responsibility and ‘Reflexive Governance’: Civil Regulation or Corporate Cooptation? Presented at the Workshop on ‘Corporate Social Responsibility. The Politics of Stakeholder Influence’, 18-19 April 2004, Bergen, Norway.
• Jasper, J. M. and Poulsen, J. (1993) ‘Fighting Back: Vulnerabilities, Blunders, and Countermobilization by the Targets in Three Animal Rights Campaigns’, Sociological Forum 8: 639-657.[CrossRef]
• Kitschelt, H. (1986) ‘Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies’, British Journal of Political Science 16: 57-85.
• Klein, N. (2000) No Logo. London: Flamingo.
• Lundmark, F. (2000) Människan i centrum: en studie av antropocentrisk värdegemgemskap. Stehag: Gondolin.
• McAdam, D. (1982) Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• McAdam, D. (1996) ‘Conceptual Origins, Current Problems, Future Directions’, in D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures and Cultural Framing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• McAdam, D., McCarthy, John D. and Zald, Mayer N. (1996) ‘Introduction: Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Framing Processes-Toward a Synthetic, Comparative Perspective on Social Movements’, in D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures and Cultural Framing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Micheletti, M. (1994) Det civila samhället och staten: medborgarsammanslutningarnas roll i svensk politik. Stockholm: Fritzes.
• Micheletti, M. (2003) Political Virtue and Shopping: Individuals, Consumerism and Collective Action. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Norris, P. (2002) Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Oliver, C. (1991) ‘Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes’, Academy of Management Review 16: 145-179.
• Rootes, C. (1997) ‘Shaping Collective Action: Structure, Contingency and Knowledge’, in R. Edmondson (ed.) The Political Context of Collective Action: Power, Argumentation and Democracy. London: Routledge.
• Rothstein, B. (1992) Den korporativa staten: Intresseorganisationer och statsförvaltning I svensk politik. Stockholm: Nordstedts juridik.
• Rothstein, B. (ed.) (1995) Demokrati som dialog. SNS-demokratiråds 1995 års rapport. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
• Stubbendorff, A. and Thell, U. (2002) Från båt till folkrörelse: En studie av Dagens Nyheters skildring av veganer (C-uppsats). University of Lund, Department of Media and Communication Studies.
• Suchman, M. C. (1995) ‘Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches’, Academy of Management Review 20: 571-610.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Tarrow, S. (1994) Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Terragni, L. and Kjærnes, U. (2004) Ethical Consumption in Norway: Why Is It So Low? Paper presented at the 2nd International Seminar on Political Consumerism, Oslo, Norway, 29 August.
• Vogel, D. (1996) Kindred Strangers: The Uneasy Relationship between Politics and Business in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Wijen, F. (2002) Stakeholder Influence and Organizational Learning in Environmental Management. Doctoral dissertation. Tilburg University, The Netherlands.

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wahlström, M. Articles by Peterson, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?