Search

This article is derived from my 2024 ESS presidential address. I discuss my new book and how a sociological lens helps us to understand the process through which we can save ourselves from the climate crisis. After explaining why the state and the market have struggled to implement sufficient policies to address the climate crisis, I present the AnthroShift as a theory that explains how social actors reorient after risk pivots to open windows of opportunity for social change. I discuss why civil society is most likely to mobilize after there is a generalized sense of climate risk and summarize how climate activists are currently engaging in non‐violent civil disobedience as a first step in an expanded civil society sector that is likely to put pressure on the state and the market to help us save ourselves. I conclude by presenting three steps that can be taken to help us save ourselves from the climate crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since Donald Trump's inauguration, large‐scale protest events have taken place around the United States, with many of the biggest events being held in Washington, DC. The streets of the nation's capital have been flooded with people marching about a diversity of progressive issues, including women's rights, climate change, and gun violence. Although research has found that these events have mobilized a high proportion of repeat participants who come out again and again, limited research has focused on understanding differential participation in protest, especially during one cycle of contention. This article, accordingly, explores the patterns among the protest participants to understand differential participation and what we refer to as "persistence in the Resistance." In it, we analyze a unique data set collected from surveys conducted with a field approximation of a random sample of protest participants at the largest protest events in Washington, DC, since the Resistance began at the 2017 Women's March. Our findings provide insights into repeat protesters during this cycle of contention. The article concludes by discussing how our findings contribute to the research on differential participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In her recent piece, MacKendrick (2017) asks whether we are experiencing a “new wave of science activism” and outlines various visible and vocal forms of political action taken by scientists in recent months. Coming from a slightly different perspective, this piece looks at scientists as part of the broader Resistance—people working individually and in collectivities to challenge the Trump agenda. Building on analysis of data collected from a random sample of participants from the Washington, DC, March for Science, which took place in April 2017, I explore how participants at the March for Science compare to a broader sample of participants in the Resistance. Although they have some unique characteristics, my findings show that there are few statistically significant differences between participants in the March for Science and others participating in the Resistance. I conclude this piece by discussing the implications of these findings on scientists in the Resistance and science activism more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although rural residents often expect resource extraction to lead to local prosperity, much of the recent research finds that resource extraction is associated with poverty. This paper tests these results by examining whether the findings may be due to methodological factors such as the tendency to focus on extreme cases, particular extracting sectors, and certain periods of time. By comparing two localities that have followed very different developmental trajectories--the state of Wisconsin and Hokkaido Prefecture in Japan--during the period from 1970 to 1990, this paper addresses these issues. The results do not clearly support either the expectation that resource extraction will lead to poverty or that it will lead to economic prosperity. Instead, like a handful of studies on resource dependency, the results indicate that the relationship be-tween extraction and poverty is unique to location. Despite the many differences between the United States and Japan, the strongest correlates of poverty in each country involve the proportion of land in an area that is forested. Particularly because these results mirror the findings from the one previous study that included this variable, future research must give greater attention to this explicitly environmental variable, as well as examining some of the possible reasons for the relationship.

Explaining collaboration between actors involved in policy processes is crucial for understanding these processes and their outcomes. The policy science literature has advanced several hypotheses explicating what enables or hinders collaboration. However, only a handful of studies compare these factors across different policy contexts. This paper investigates the role of beliefs and influence in shaping collaboration under conditions of high and low conflict by estimating Exponential Random Graph Models using network survey data on the climate policy domains in four countries. Results show that both beliefs and influence are associated with the formation of collaboration ties in the high conflict contexts of South Korea and the United States, whereas neither are significant in the low conflict contexts of Sweden and Switzerland. By considering the level of conflict, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of when beliefs and influence shape collaboration patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]