What Drives Elite-Challenging Behaviours?

  • Reza NakhaieEmail author
Part of the zu | schriften der Zeppelin Universität. zwischen Wirtschaft, Kultur und Politik book series (zszuzwkp)


In this chapter we will evaluate the effect of post-materialist liberty aspiration, socio-economic resources, and organizational networks on elite-challenging behaviours, paying attention to economic prosperity and political opportunity structures. The data source is World Value Surveys (1981-2014). We expect that liberty aspiration and organizational networks effect elite-challenging behaviours more in prosperous countries and where there is high opportunity structures than in less prosperous and low opportunity structures. Data confirmed this expectation in that the most politically active citizens reside in countries with high prosperity and high opportunity structures. As well, among ex-communist countries, elite-challenging behaviours are most common where there is an open political structure. We also evaluated the relative strength of liberty aspiration, socio-economic resources, and organizational networks, opportunity structures, and prosperity. Evidence points to the importance of networks and political opportunities.


Social Movement Political Participation Civil Liberty Organizational Network Economic Prosperity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amenta, Edwin, and Yvonne Zylan. 1991. It Happened Here: Political Opportunity, the New Institutionalism, and the Townsend Movement. American Sociological Review 56: 250–65.Google Scholar
  2. Ansolabehere, S., de Figueiredo, J., and Snyder, J. Jr. 2003. Why Is There So Little Money in U.S. Politics? Journal of Economic Perspectives 17(1): 105–30.Google Scholar
  3. Arat, Z. F. 1988. Democracy and Economic Development: Modernization Theory Revisited. Comparative Politics 21: 21–36.Google Scholar
  4. Bernhagen, P., & Marsh, M. 2007. Voting and protesting: Explaining citizens’ participation in new and old democracies. Democratization, 14(1), 44–72.Google Scholar
  5. Boix, C. 2003. Democracy and Redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bollen, K. 1993. Liberal Democracy: Validity and Source Biases in Cross-national Measures. American Journal of Political Science 37: 1207–30.Google Scholar
  7. Burkhart, R. and Lewis-Beck, M. S. 1994. Comparative Democracy: The Economic Development Thesis. American Political Science Review 88: 903–10.Google Scholar
  8. Carden, M. L. 1978. The proliferation of a social movement : Ideology and individual incentives in the contemporary feminist movement. In L . Kriesberg, ed., Research in Social Movements, Conflict and Change, vol. 1, pp. 179–96. Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai PresGoogle Scholar
  9. Catterberg, G. 2003. Evaluations, Referents of Support, and Political Action in New Democracies. IJCS, 44(3): 173–198.Google Scholar
  10. Dahl, R. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dalton, R. J. 2002. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. 3d ed. New York/London: Chatham House/Seven Bridges Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dubrow, K., Slomczynski, K., and Tomescu-Dubrow, I. 2008. Effects of Democracy and Inequality on Soft Political Protest in Europe: Exploring the European Social Survey Data. International Journal of Sociology 38(3): 36–51.Google Scholar
  13. Fennema, M and Tillie, J. 1999. Political Participation and Political Trust in Amsterdam: Civic Communities and Ethnic Networks . Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 25(4): 703–726.Google Scholar
  14. Fireman, B. and Gamson, W. 1979. Utilitarian logic in the resource mobilization perspective. In M. N. Zald and J. D. McCarthy, eds., The Dynamics of Social Movements, pp. 8–45. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop.Google Scholar
  15. Freedom House. 2003. Freedom in the World: Aggregate Scores. Scholar
  16. Gainous, J, Marlowe, A, and Wagner, K. 2013. Traditional Cleavages or a New World: Does Online Social Networking Bridge the Political Participation Divide. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society 26(2): 145–158.Google Scholar
  17. Gamson, W. A. 1990. The Strategy of Social Protest. Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  18. Gamson, W, and Meyer, D. S. 1996. Framing Political Opportunity. Pp. 275–90 in Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, edited by Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer Zald. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gaventa, J. 1980. Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goldstone, J. A., and Tilly, C. 2001. Threat (and Opportunity). Pp. 179–94 in Silence and Voice in the Study of Contentious Politics, edited by Ronald Aminzade, Jack Goldstone, Doug McAdam, Elizabeth Perry, William Sewell, Sidney Tarrow, and Charles Tilly. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gonick, L. S. and Rosh, R. 1988. The Structural Constraints of World Economy. Comparative Political Studies. 21: 171–99.Google Scholar
  22. Granovetter, M. 1983. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 9 (3), 481–510.Google Scholar
  23. Hetherington, M., & Nugent, J. D. 1998. Explaining public support for devolution: The role of political trust. Paper presented at the 1998 Hendricks Symposium on Public Dissatisfaction with Government, University of Nebraska, Lincoln.Google Scholar
  24. Inglehart, R. 1971. The Silent Revolution in Europe: Intergenerational Change in Post-Industrial Societies. American Political Science Review 65: 991–1017.Google Scholar
  25. Inglehart, R. 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Inglehart, R. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  27. Inglehart, R. 1997. Modernization and Postmodernization. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  28. Inglehart, R. and Catterberg, G. 2002. Trends in Political Action: The Developmental Trend and the Post-honeymoon Decline. IJCS 43(3–5): 300–316.Google Scholar
  29. Jenkins, J. C. and Klandermans, B. 1995. The Politics of Social Protest, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  30. Jenkins, J. C., Jacobs, D. and Agnone, J. 2003. Political opportunities and African American Protest, 1948–1997. American Journal of Sociology, 109(2): 277–303.Google Scholar
  31. Jenkins. J. C. and Perrow, C. 1977. Insurgency of the Powerless: Farm Worker Movement (1946–1972). American Sociological Review, 42(2): 249–268.Google Scholar
  32. Joppke, C. 1993. Mobilizing against Nuclear Energy. University of California Press.Google Scholar
  33. Kitschelt, H. 1986. Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest. British Journal of Political Science 16: 57–85.Google Scholar
  34. Klandermans, B. and Tarrow, S. 1988 Mobilization into social movement: Synthesizing European and American approaches. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi, and S. Tarrow, International Social Movement Research, vol. 1, pp. 1–40. London: Jai Press Inc.Google Scholar
  35. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology o f protest. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Lipset, M. S. 1959. Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. American Political Science Review 53: 69–105.Google Scholar
  37. Lipset, S. M. 1960. Political Man: The Social Basis of Politics. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  38. Maslow, A. H. 1943. A theory of human personality. Psychological Review 50(4): 370–396.Google Scholar
  39. Maslow, A. H. 1954. Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  40. McAdam, D. 1996. Political Opportunities: Conceptual Origins, Current Problems, Future Directions. Pp. 23–40 in Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, edited by Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer Zald. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. McAdam, D. 1999. Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970, 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  42. McAadam, D., McCarthy, J. and Zald M. 1988. Social Movements. Pp. 695–738 in Handbook of Sociology, edited by Neil Smelser. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. McAdam, D. Tarrow, S, and Tilly, C. 2001. Dynamic and Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. McCarthy, J.,Mayer, D. and Zald, N. 1977. Resource Mobilization and Social Movements. American Journal of Sociology 82: 1212–41.Google Scholar
  45. Messner, S., Baumer, E., & Rosenfeld, R. 2006. Distrust of government, the vigilante tradition and support for capital punishment. Law & Society Review, 40, 559–590.Google Scholar
  46. Meyer, D. S. 2004. Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Political Science, 30(1), 125–145.Google Scholar
  47. Monforti, J. 2009. Protest and Women’s Political Participation: Results from the 2004 March for Women’s Lives in Washington, D. C. Theory in Action 2(3): 31–57.Google Scholar
  48. Morris, A. D. 1999. A Retrospective on the Civil Rights Movement. Annual Review of Sociology 25: 517–39.Google Scholar
  49. Muller, E. 1995. Economic determinants of democracy. American Sociological Review 60: 805–821.Google Scholar
  50. Olson, M. 1968. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Opp, K. 1988. Community integration and incentives for political protest. In Bert Klandermans et al., eds., International Social Movement Research, pp. 83–102. London: Jai Press Inc.Google Scholar
  52. Parry, G, Moyser, G. and Day, N. 1992. Political Participation and Democracy in Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Passy, F., Monsch, G. 2014. Do Social Networks Really Matter in Contentious Politics? Social Movement Studies 13(1): 22–47.Google Scholar
  54. Passy, F., & Giugni, M. (2001). Social networks and individual perceptions: Explaining differential participation in social movements. Sociological Forum, 16(1), 123–153.Google Scholar
  55. Putnam, R. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Ross, M. L. 2001. Does Oil Hinder Democracy? World Politics, 53(3): 325–361.Google Scholar
  57. Scholz, J. T., & Lubell, M. 1998. Trust and tax paying: Testing the heuristic approach to collective action. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 398–417.Google Scholar
  58. Sarkissian, A. 2012. Religion and Civic Engagement in Muslim Countries. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 51(4): 607–622.Google Scholar
  59. Solt, F. 2008. Economic Inequality and Democratic Political Engagement. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1): 48–60.Google Scholar
  60. Soroka, S., Helliwell, J., & Johnston, R. (2007). Measuring and modeling interpersonal trust. In F. Kay & R. Johnston (Eds.). Social Capital, Diversity, and Welfare Sstate. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  61. Stockemer , D. 2014. What drives unconventional political participation? A two level study. The Social Science Journal 51 (2014) 201–211.Google Scholar
  62. Tam W. K. and Rudolph, T. J. 2008. Emanating Political Participation: Untangling the Spatial Structure behind Participation. British Journal of Political Science, 38(2): 273–289.Google Scholar
  63. Tarrow, S. 1996. “States and Opportunities.” Pp. 41–61 in Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, edited by Doug McAdam, John McCarthy, and Mayer Zald. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Tilly, C. 2004a. Social Movements, 1968–2004. London: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  65. Tilly, C. 2004b. Trust and Rule. Theory and Society, 33, 1–30.Google Scholar
  66. Tilly, C. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  67. Tocqueville, A. de. 2000 [1835–1840]. Democracy in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  68. Tyler, T. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  69. UN. 2013. Statistical Annex. Development Policy and Analysis Division (DPAD), United Nations.Google Scholar
  70. Van Dyke, N. and Soule, S. A. 2002. Structural Social Change and the Mobilizing Effect of Threat: Explaining Levels of Patriot and Militia Organizing in the United States. Social Problems, 49(4): 497–520.Google Scholar
  71. Verba, S. 1996. The Citizen as Respondent: Sample Surveys and American Democracy Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1995. American Political Science Review 90, no. 1: 1–7.Google Scholar
  72. Verba, S. 2004. Would the Dream of Political Equality Turn Out to be a Nightmare? Perspectives on Politics 1(4): 663–79.Google Scholar
  73. Verba, S., Nie, N. H. and Kim, J. 1978. Participation and Political Equality: A Seven Nation Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., and Brady, H. E. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism inA merican Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World System I. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  76. Welzel, C. and Inglehart, R. 2005a. Liberalism, Postmaterialism, and the Growth of Freedom. International Review of Sociology 15(1): 81–108.Google Scholar
  77. Welzel, C. and Inglehart, R. 2005b. Democratization as the Growth of Freedom: The Human Development Perspective. Japanese Journal of Political Science 6(3): 313–343.Google Scholar
  78. Michel, L. and Bivens, J. 2011. Occupay Wall Streeters are right about skewed economic rewards in the United States. Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved July 27, 2015.
  79. Zald, M. N. and McCarthy, J. D. 1977. The Dynamic of Social Movements: Mobilization, Social Control and Tactics. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WindsorKanada

Personalised recommendations