Author:
Florea Ioana,Gagyi Agnes,Jacobsson Kerstin
Abstract
AbstractThe chapter presents the analytical approach developed in this book, conceptualized as a ‘structural field of contention approach.’ We first discuss the benefits of existing field approaches in the study of social mobilization, as well as their limitations. Deriving inspiration from Nick Crossley’s notion of social movements as ‘fields of contention,’ we then elaborate our own analytical approach, which, more than Crossley’s, stresses the structural factors that formulate the conditions of group formation and struggle. Structural factors are conceived as elements of the field of contention which both produce the conflicts around which contention arises and influence relationship-making among actors. The chapter proposes an approach which can conceptualize both the antagonisms and solidarities in housing mobilization, as well as the parallel but ideologically polarized mobilizations of different groups in the same social-structural context. The approach developed is intended to capture and theorize such complexity of contemporary housing mobilizations.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference61 articles.
1. Ancelovici, M. (2021). Bourdieu in Movement: Toward a Field Theory of Contentious Politics. Social Movement Studies, 20(2), 155–173.
2. Barman, E. (2016). Varieties of Field Theory and the Sociology of the Non-profit Sector. Sociology Compass, 10(6), 442–458.
3. Beamish, T. D., & Luebbers, A. J. (2009). Alliance Building Across Social Movements: Bridging Difference in a Peace and Justice Coalition Source. Social Problems, 56(4), 647–676.
4. Borland, E. (2010). Crisis as Catalyst for Cooperation? Women’s Organizing in Buenos Aires. In N. Van Dyke & H. McCammon (Eds.), Strategic Alliances. Coalition Building and Social Movements (pp. 241–265). University of Minnesota Press.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature [edited and introduced by Randal Johnson]. Polity.