Screen LibraryPutting social movements in their place：explaining opposition to energy projects in the United States, 2000-2005
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | |
|---|---|
| Group Author: | |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press,
|
| Publisher Address: | Cambridge New York |
| Publication Dates: | 2012. |
| Literature type: | Book |
| Language: | English |
| Series: |
Cambridge studies in contentious politics |
| Subjects: | |
| Carrier Form: | xii, 266 p.: ill. ; 24 cm. |
| ISBN: |
9781107020665 (hardback) 1107020662 (hardback) 9781107650312 (paperback) 1107650313 (paperback) |
| Index Number: | TK01 |
| CLC: | TK01-171.2 |
| Call Number: | TK01-171.2/M134 |
| Contents: |
Includes bibliographical references (p. 241-257) and index. From Copernicus to Ptolemy and (hopefully) back again -- Comparing communities 'at risk' for mobilization -- Explaining variation in the level of opposition to energy projects -- Does opposition matter?: mobilization and project outcome -- From not in my backyard to not in anyone's backyard: the emergence of regional movements against liquefied natural gas -- Back to the future: returning to a Copernican approach to the study of contention. "This book reports the results of a comparative study of 20 communities earmarked for environmentally risky energy projects. The authors find the overall level of emergent opposition to the projects very low, and they seek to explain that variation and impact it had on the proposed projects"-- "The field of social movement studies has expanded dramatically over the past three decades. But as it has done so, its focus has become increasingly narrow and ,zmovement-centric.,Z When combined with the tendency to select successful struggles for study, the conceptual and methodological conventions of the field conduce to a decidedly Ptolemaic view of social movements: one that exaggerates the frequency and causal significance of movements as a form of politics. This book reports the results of a comparative study, not of movements, but of 20 communities earmarked for environmentally risky energy projects. In stark contrast to the central thrust of the social movement literature, the authors find that the overall level of emergent opposition to the projects to have been very low, and they seek to explain that variation and the impact, if any, it had on the ultimate fate of the proposed projects"-- |