In follow-up studies of activists, activism has been observed to have long-term positive effect on political participation. However, little attention has been paid to the conditions under which the theory applies. I examine how the personal consequences of participation in three different protest movements in Sweden depended upon movement success and procedural justice. The results support previous findings suggesting that activism has positive long-term effects on individual political participation. However, several of the activists interviewed did not follow this general pattern, especially those who suffered unfair and discriminatory treatment from the authorities. The results imply that the effect of activism on political participation is determined by the perceived procedural justice, whereas reaching the preferred policy outcome is of less importance. External political efficacy is indicated to be a potential mechanism explaining the relation between activism and long-term political participation.
En estudios de seguimiento a activistas se ha observado que el activismo tiene efectos positivos a largo plazo sobre la participación política. Sin embargo, se ha prestado poca atención a las condiciones en las que se aplica esta teoría. Este artículo examina cómo las consecuencias personales de la participación dependieron del éxito del movimiento y la justicia procesal en tres movimientos diferentes de protesta en Suecia. Los resultados apoyan hallazgos previos que sugieren que el activismo afecta de manera positiva a largo plazo sobre la participación política individual. Sin embargo, varios de los activistas entrevistados no siguieron este patrón general, especialmente entre quienes sufrieron un trato injusto y discriminatorio por parte de las autoridades. Los resultados sugieren que el efecto del activismo en la participación política viene determinado por la justicia procesal percibida. Al mismo tiempo, ganar la política que perseguía la protesta resulta de menor importancia. También se muestra que la eficacia política externa es un mecanismo potencial que explica la relación entre el activismo y la participación política a largo plazo.
Equal political participation is fundamental to democracy (e.g.
Social movements have a particular potential to mobilize people across socio- economical boundaries (
However, in acknowledging the potential of social movements in mobilizing marginalized groups and triggering long-term political participation, we must also consider how this potential could be fulfilled. The literature on the biographical outcomes of social movements has paid little attention to the mechanisms through which activism inspires further political engagement and to the many obstacles that might block these mechanisms.
Through the movement, some activists have their first contact with the political authorities. And while some are positively surprised, many are gravely disappointed. Thus, the relationship between activism and further political engagement is likely to be affected by factors such as the success of the movement and whether the activist found themselves fairly responded to by public officials. While social movement studies have investigated the effects of the political context on policy outcomes and movement formation (
Thus, further work is needed in order to understand the relationship between activism and political participation found in previous research. In particular, the effect of factors such as the perceived justice of the procedure and political efficacy beliefs needs to be further examined. The aim of this study is to fill these gaps.
For this purpose, I will study and compare protests against school closure in Sweden. In Sweden, closure of local welfare facilities, such as schools or hospitals, stir up strong emotions and evoke massive protests. These types of protests, which have grown increasingly common since the 1990s (
Three cases of protests against school closure in the city of Helsingborg, during 2003 are selected. During a number of intense months, people marched the streets of the city, meetings and manifestations were held, politicians were contacted and names were collected. The political climate in Helsingborg completely changed. Hundreds of people, many of whom had never before participated in any political activity apart from voting, were mobilized and several new organizations were created.
Ten years after the protests, 80 interviews with parents and teachers protesting against the closure of three different schools in Helsingborg, and control groups of parents not taking part in the movement, were conducted. I trace the individual political consequences of activism and examine how these take shape depending on the level of individual activism, the success of the movement in reaching its policy goals, the perceived fairness of the political decision-making process, and the development of political efficacy beliefs of the participants and other potential mechanisms.
In
The majority of the work focuses on the European and North American New Left cycle of contentions of the 1960s (
The follow-up studies of activists provide a consistent picture of the personal social movement consequences. The results indicate that former movement participants have lower income, are more likely to be divorced, more likely to have experienced episodic work history, are more educated and less likely to have children (
The effect on individual level participation is briefly examined in a few of the studies. In general, the results indicate that activists remain politically active, often in contemporary movements (
Scholars have identified a number of problems with earlier studies of the biographical outcomes of activism, which still remain, to a large extent, in later studies (
In addition to the methodological shortcomings discussed in previous work, there is one potential issue which has only been briefly touched upon: the problem of selection bias. McAdam and Brandt (
This problem remains in the majority of the studies on the biographical consequences of activism (see
The studies of the political consequences of activism have focused on whether there
Research into political participation has identified a number of factors
Political participation could be explained by several factors, summarized by Brady, Verba and Schlozman (
Participation in each mode could be explained differently.
The factors fostering political activity have been found to develop early in life and to be stocked over time. They are distributed unequally, where upper-status individuals are frequently conferred additional advantage (
While some individual resources and motivations are difficult to change, others are more easily affected. Networks of recruitment, interest and knowledge in politics, and political efficacy are mobilizing mechanisms that are also likely to be affected by activism. Consequently, these factors could be hypothesized to serve as mechanisms explaining the individual political consequences of activism.
A more limited amount of research also finds political efficacy to
In particular, experience could relate to
Sometimes, citizen demands cannot be satisfied due to reasons such as lack of resources. However, unsatisfied demands do not necessarily result in diminishing efficacy-beliefs among the active citizens, given that the process was perceived as fair (
In sum, research into political efficacy indicates that there could be a spin-off effect of participation, functioning through the mechanism of political efficacy. However, the effect of movement activism on participation may vary depending on the experience of the activism. Efficacy beliefs and, consequently, the degree of political participation, are indicated to be shaped by first-hand experiences of the system and its institution. The degree to which the preferred policy outcome is reached and the political process is considered fair (procedural justice) are indicated as factors of particular importance in determining the relation between activism and long-term political engagement.
When returning to the concepts of equal participation, these results have interesting implications. Early experiences of political mobilizations are indicated to lead to the formation of positive and negative feedback loops. When the system is experienced as responsive or fair, activism could result in increased sense of political efficacy and, thus, in continued political participation. On the contrary, unfair treatment by government officials or institutions could result in decreased political efficacy beliefs and, consequently, less political participation. At the same time, there is a risk that marginalized or socio-economically disadvantaged groups are met with less responsiveness and respect by public officials.
The study focuses on three movements protesting against school closure in Helsingborg during the year of 2003 and 2004. In contrast to the highly ideological movements that have been the focal point of previous follow-up studies of activists, movements against school closure have the ability to mobilize people on a broad scale, irrespective of previous interest in politics or attitudes towards activism. Parents, teachers and pupils are compelled into activism for their own, their children’s or their pupil’s sake. Thus, the risk of bias due to self-selection is reduced.
The specific cases of protest against school closure were selected due to their high comparability with regards to place and timing and to their differing policy outcomes, with one movement reaching their policy goal of stopping the school closure and two movements which did not.
The personal and biographical consequences of activism are studied on a micro-level through follow-up studies of activists. 80 interviews were conducted with teachers and parents of pupils at the three selected schools ten years after their participation in the movement. Within the group of parents and teachers at the three schools, a stratified sampling with respect to sex and school was made. Thirty-four of the respondents had been teachers or parents of pupils at Gustav Adfolfsskolan, 24 at Slottsvångsskolan and 30 at Norrhedskolan. Half of the respondents from each school were women. In order to ensure that the most active participants were included in the selection, protesters referred to by the first informants or mentioned in newspapers, were selected. The remaining quota from each school was drawn randomly from the list of students at each school for the relevant school year. The randomly selected respondents who did not participate in the movement were taken as a control group of non-participants. Approximately half of the respondents were active in the struggle against school closure.
Seven of the selected respondents were not interviewed, resulting in a response rate of approximately 91 per cent. Two of the respondents did not want to participate, while five could not be reached. For the sake of upholding precision, seven new respondents were selected from the relevant strata.
In order to achieve a high response rate, the data was collected by telephone interviews. The interview format has the advantage of allowing open, less guided questions to be asked, and preventing misunderstandings. Moreover, the discussions held during the conversations could help the respondents to gradually remember more of the story. However, the choice of interview format also increases the risk of a desirability bias affecting the respondents. This is taken into consideration in the formulation of the questions, where efforts are made to underline that non-participation is understandable and common. Moreover, the respondent’s names are only used in the study when explicit consent was given. However, desirability bias is difficult to completely avoid. This is taken into consideration when analysing the results.
The interviews are semi-structured, taking particular care to cover the full concept of political participation at each period of time. The interview length varied from approximately 10 to 30 minutes. Some of the interviews, where no political participation is observed, are very short, while others, especially those with activists reporting high levels of activity in the movement, are much longer. The interviews were centred on the respondents’ political participation, political efficacy and experience of the protests. The interview guide can be found in the appendix.
The study examines two types of hypothesis. First, I examine the
Second, I examine the
Before moving on to the analysis, I discuss the operationalization of key variables. Information on the operationalization of the more easily measured variables, such as the demographic factors and the potential mechanisms of political interests and mobilizing networks, can be found in the appendix.
Research in the area of political participation has led to insights in what constitutes political participation, as well as how it can be measured. Political participation is here defined as “…all voluntary activities by individual citizens intended to influence either directly or indirectly political choices at various levels of the political system.” (
As the study examines change in political behaviour, political participation would ideally have been measured at several points in time. As in most follow-up studies of activists, this is not possible. Instead, I rely on the respondents’ own description of their past behaviour.
The respondents are asked about their participation at three points of time: before the movement (t0), during the movement (t1), and after the movement (t2). In addition, in order to be able to study the long-term effects, the participation during the last 12 months of t2 is measured separately. No participation directly connected to the movement, such as in organisations created as a part of the movement, remains today. Consequently, the participation during the period of the last 12 months includes only activities separate from those of the movement.
In the variable of participation during the movement, only political participation in the movement is included. Only very few of the respondents participated in other forms of political activities during the period of the movement, where all of the latter had also been politically active during the period before the movement. Consequently, other participation during the time of the movement has no relevant effect on the results and is, therefore, not included in the analysis.
The period of the movement is specified as the time period from the proposed closure to the closure/decision of non-closure. The period differs somewhat for the three studied movements.
The struggle against school closure during the time period of t1 is mainly measured as a simple dummy variable: ‘participated’ or ‘did not participate’. Moreover, in order to enable studies of the threshold-value of activism necessary for the triggering of political consequences, an additional measurement of ‘high level of participation’ is added.
In order to minimize reliability problems due, for example, to the problems inherent in retrospective studies, a simple dummy variable “high level of participation” is used. Frequent participation yields the value of one and any less participation yields the value of zero. Most of the politically active respondents either participated in one event, such as a demonstration, or participated very actively and frequently. Thus, although the reliability problems are far from eliminated, making a distinction between high and low level of participation proved to be easier than expected.
As with political participation, the notion of political efficacy has developed over time. In the first studies on the subject, the notion of “sense of political efficacy” was defined as “the feeling that individual political action does have, or can have, an impact upon the political process” (
is defined as “beliefs about the responsiveness of governmental authorities and institutions to citizen demands” (
There are many legal ways for citizens to successfully influence what the government does. (agree)
In this country, a few people have all the political power and the rest of us are not given any say about how the government runs things. (disagree)
If public officials are not interested in hearing what the people think there is really no way to make them listen. (disagree)
Most public officials are truly interested in what the people think. (agree)
(Craig, Niemi and Silver 1990:307)
I consider myself to be well qualified to participate in politics
I feel that I have a pretty good understanding of the important political issues facing our country
I feel that I could do as good a job in a public office as most other people
I think that I am better informed about politics and government than most people
In measuring political efficacy among interviewed subjects, questions related to political efficacy are posed. The interviews are carried out in a freer format and open questions are posed, such as: “Do you, in general, believe that activities other than voting could affect political decisions”? When no indication statements are given in answer to the open questions, more specific questions are asked.
The use of interview material rather than survey data means a higher risk of reliability problems. A simple distinction of
Due to the intrinsic problem in measuring attitude variables in retrospective studies, political efficacy, as well as the other mechanism variables, is solely measured at the present period of time, t2.
The focus is on the subjective experiences of the movement participants. As a result, there is no need to determine whether policy success or failure depended upon the protests or if the process objectively could be considered fair. The variable of reaching preferred policy outcome is operationalized as movement success or failure, where school closure is categorized as failure, and no closure as success. Consequently, the movement at Slottsvångsskolan is considered as a successful movement, while the movement at Gustav Adolfsskolan and Norrehedskolan are categorized as unsuccessful.
Perceived procedural justice is operationalized as the protesters’ subjective experiences of the process and whether the response of government officials was considered fair. Consequently, the indicators concern the
Respondents are indicated to have experienced high procedural justice if they describe that they were given a fair chance by public officials, that their demands were considered seriously, and that reasonable explanations were given to them by public officials. In contrast, statements pointing at a perceived lack of fairness such as “they just closed the school, we were given no explanations” or “the politicians only listened to ‘Swedish’ people and not to us” indicate low procedural justice.
There is a large variation in the degree to which a procedure may be considered as just among those respondents who were categorized as having generally experienced the procedure as
The interview material provides comprehensive information on how the participation patterns among the selected parents and teachers have changed over time. The results are shown in
Two main conclusions could be drawn. Firstly, in line with the results of previous studies, participation in the movement is found to have a long-term effect on political participation (cf.
Secondly, the conditions necessary in order to trigger the effect are studied. Movement success is not found to be a condition of the effect. When adding the outcome variable, a significant effect of movement participation on participation today can still be observed. The successful outcome variable has no significant effect on participation today. Consequently, it is indicated that the effect of activism on political participation could take place irrespective of movement success.
However, there is indication of a threshold-value of the level of activism necessary in order for the effect to be triggered. In Model 4, high level of political participation is the dependent variable. The coefficient is significant at the 1 per cent level and the coefficient is 2.06, which is an odds ratio of 7.8. The effect of movement participation on future participation is shown to increase with the time spent in activism. This point is further illustrated in
Among the high level movement activists, 43.5 per cent of the respondents participate today. This is clearly higher than the corresponding sample population proportions among the non-participants (8%) and the low-level participants (5%). Consequently, it is implied that there is a threshold-value of participation needed in order to trigger the political consequences of activism, where the effect is triggered only at more regular participation of at least one hour per week on average.
Four variables are hypothesized to work as mechanisms explaining the relation between social movement participation and continued long-term political participation: internal political efficacy, external political efficacy, political interest and mobilizing networks. In the following analysis, I take steps towards examining whether these variables have a mediating effect on the relationship. In order for a variable to be considered a mechanism, it has to both be affected by activism at t1 and affect participation at t2. However, it should be noted that it cannot be fully established whether a mediating effect is in place. To enable this, it should also be confirmed that the effect of activism on long-term political participation is reduced. In this case, as we shall see, this relationship is further complicated by the interacting effects of movement success on the relationship.
Participation in the movement is found to have a significant effect on external efficacy, political interest and mobilizing networks. There was no significant effect of movement participation on internal political efficacy. It should be noted that causal relations can be particularly difficult to observe when including an interaction variable. Consequently, significant results are in this case more reliable indicators of causal relations than non-significant results are of non-correlation.
Participation in the movement is found to have a significant positive effect on political interest and mobilizing networks, indicating that social movement activism can result in increased networks and interest.
In previous research, political efficacy has been suggested to be affected by the success of the political activity in terms of reaching preferred policy outcome (e.g.
It should be noted that the value of these variables before the movement is not controlled for and that the respondents could have had the same attitudes before the movement. However, given that several potential confounders are controlled for and that a large share of the respondents expressed that their attitudes and beliefs had changed as a result of their experience of participating in the movement; it is less likely that the entire observed effect is spurious. The effect of movement activism on political efficacy and mobilizing networks is supported by further interview material, while the causality with regards to political interest is more difficult to determine. When analysing the answers of individual respondents, the causality of the relationship between movement participation and the mechanisms of mobilizing networks is further reinforced. Respondents were asked at what point they received the request to participate in an activity and by whom. Movement participants also described whether they had any contact or collaboration with other movement participants today. Many of the requests to participate after the movement were posed by other movement participants.
The effect of movement participation on external efficacy varied with the movement’s outcome, indicating a clear relation between external efficacy and engagement in the movement. Moreover, the similarities in wordings when describing external efficacy beliefs among participants in unsuccessful movements imply that respondents formed their efficacy beliefs from similar experiences. Strikingly similar wordings were used by movement participants, in particular from those who had protested against the closure of Gustav Adolfsskolan. When the respondents were first asked about their general view on politics, more than 50 per cent of the activists from Gustav Adolfsskolan answered along the lines: “When politicians have decided something, they never change their mind, no matter what the people do.” In addition, several of the activists from the other unsuccessful movement used the same formulation. However, none of the activists from the successful movement at Slottsvångsskolan or the non-activists expressed themselves in similar ways. Thus, there are some indications that movement participation did have an effect on external efficacy.
Having examined the first part of the causal chain, we move on to the second: the effect of the four potential mechanisms on political participation today. These relations have been established in previous research (see
External and internal political efficacies are indicated to have significant positive effects on political participation today. These results are in line with those of previous studies (e.g.
In sum, it is indicated that participation in the movement could have affected external political efficacy, political interest and mobilizing networks. However, out of these, only external political efficacy was indicated to affect long term political participation. Consequently, only external political efficacy fulfils the two criteria necessary to be considered as a potential mechanism explaining the relationship. Moreover, in line with previous research, political efficacy is found to be sensitive to the success of the movement. Participation in a successful activity is implied to have a positive effect on efficacy, while participation in an unsuccessful activity could have a negative effect on efficacy. However, variations in external efficacy are far from explaining the entire spin-off effect of movement participation. In particular, the analysis lacks explanation of the positive effects of activism in unsuccessful movements on political participation. Thus, further studies into other mechanisms would be needed, not only in order to determine whether there is a mediating effect of political efficacy, but also in order to find more mechanisms that could explain the relationship.
Even though an effect of movement participation on long-term political participation is observed among high-level participants, far from all of the respondents who were very active in the movement are politically active today. Perceived procedural justice and outcome satisfaction is, in previous research, suggested to be of importance when explaining variations in the effect of political engagement on future political attitudes and participation (e.g.
Comments: The numbers in the table refer to the percentage of the high-level movement activists in each category participating today. The result could be compared to the average proportion of high-level activists participating today - 43.5%.
Below minimum level of procedural justice signifies that the treatment by the authorities was experienced as very unfair.
The findings imply that participation today varies within the group of high-level participants depending on perceived procedural justice and external efficacy. In contrast, there are no differences in participation patterns between the high-level activists who reached the preferred policy outcome and those who did not. Reaching preferred outcome is thus not a factor found to affect long-term participation.
Within the group of high-level participants who perceived themselves as fairly treated during the movement, 67 per cent participates today. This is a larger proportion than the average proportion of high-level movement activists participating today, 43.5 per cent, and considerably larger than the proportion of 29 per cent participating today among the group perceiving themselves as having been unfairly treated.
The differences in participation patterns are similar when comparing respondents with high and low levels of perceived external efficacy. Sixty-seven per cent of the high-level activists with
In addition, it is indicated that a basic amount of perceived procedural justice is a condition that has to be fulfilled in order for
The in-depth interview material supports the findings. When explaining their lack of participation today, several of the respondents in this group express exhaustion, negative emotions and lack of trust in the political system. A respondent from Gustav Afolfsskolan said: “The whole process was a great sadness and a disappointment. After the closure (of the school) I gave up everything. I did not participate again. I would not let myself be treated and humiliated in that way”. Most of the respondents experiencing very unfair treatment describe their lack of participation today as a consequence of their previous experiences in the protests. As another respondent said: “I saw things in a different light before. I lived in a dream world and thought we had a real democracy, where the people could influence politics. I lost that naivety on the way”. Consequently, the respondent’s descriptions indicate that a part of the variation in participation today among high-level activists depends on their experience of the movement.
In addition, it should be noted that the answers of the respondents imply a great variation within the group who perceived the process as unfair. The strong statements quoted above could be compared to the descriptions by respondents who perceived the process as unfair, but who do not express the aspect of being personally discriminated against. One respondent from Norrehedskolan compares protesting to running into a padded wall: “you do not hurt yourself, but neither do you get anywhere”. He describes that the politicians were “polite but did not take arguments or new information into fair consideration”.
Similar variations could be found in political efficacy-beliefs, where the respondents expressing great disappointment with the fairness of the procedure also often expressed stronger negative emotions in relation to external efficacy. However, since efficacy is only measured dichotomously, this difference is not encompassed in the statistical analysis of efficacy. Overall, experience of the procedures as unfair largely corresponds with low efficacy beliefs. Among the very engaged protesters experiencing the procedure as fair, 89% have high external efficacy beliefs. The corresponding percentage among those experiencing the procedure as unfair is 7%.
Not surprisingly, only a few of the respondents who reached the preferred outcome perceived the process as unfair. However, the experience of fairness was not perfectly predicted by outcome. Several of the participants in unsuccessful movements still perceived the process as fair.
In sum, perceived fairness of the process is indicated to be connected to both levels of external efficacy and participation patterns among the high-level participants. At the same time, the level of perceived fairness could be unevenly distributed, where some groups are more at risk at being unfairly treated by authorities. Given that there is an effect of procedural justice, this would also have implications on participation patterns.
Among the 23 very active movement participants, eight are born in non-western countries. In this group, only 12.5 per cent perceived the process as fair. The corresponding percentage in the group of western-born high-level activists is 53.3 per cent. Similarly, procedural justice is perceived as higher among the group of high-level participants who had attended higher education, with 50 per cent perceiving the process as fair, than in the group that had not completed a year of higher education, where 22.2 per cent perceive the process as fair.
The differences in perceived procedural justice depending on demographic characteristics are implied to be connected to the observed effects of demographic variables on participation in the different time periods. The analysis finds a negative effect significant at the 10 % level of non-western background on participation today, and a positive significant effect of higher education on participation today. These effects were not present before the period of movement activism. Consequently, the differences in participation patterns emerging after the movement could possibly be explained by different experiences of fairness in treatment by the authorities depending on immigration background and education.
In sum, it is implied that participation takes place only given that two conditions are fulfilled. Firstly, the level of participation has to be on a higher, more regular, basis. Secondly, there has to be a minimum level of perceived fairness reached in the response of the authorities to the activism.
The analysis does not support the assumption, often indirectly made in previous research (Cf.
None of the high-level activists who perceived the process as very unfair participate politically today. Since the perception of procedural justice varied depending on education and immigrant background, it is indicated that participation triggered positive effect on long-term political participation mainly among those demographic groups that are less exposed to the risk of discrimination.
We have followed activists in their life-course ten years after their participation in the movement protesting against school closure. The personal commitment to the problem and acuteness of the situation mobilized people from all positions in society. Most of the activists had no previous participation in any political activity except for voting before. In this broad mobilization, we found it would be unlikely that people participated because they had a “taste” for activism.
The reduced risk of self-selection is one of the many ways in which the case of the movements against school closure differed from social movements previously examined in follow-up studies of activists. However, even in this context, so different from the American leftist movements in the 60s and 70s, a relationship between activism and long-term political participation was found. Activism changed the life-course of the protesters and empowered them into a more active citizenship.
The support of the spin-off effects of activism and the causality of the relation are further strengthened by the indications that external political efficacy could be one of the mechanisms explaining some of the relation. Movement participation could come to be an empowering force, strengthening the “beliefs about the responsiveness of governmental authorities and institutions to citizen demands” and thereby stimulating further participation.
However, these positive effects of activism did not occur among all protestors, and they were not evenly distributed with regards to demographical factors. Even though the movements mobilized many parents and teachers from marginalized groups, where political participation has been found to be lower than average, the activism did not positively affect the equality of participation. In fact, after the movement, the equality in participation, with respect to non-western immigrant background and education, decreased. In examining the conditions necessary to be fulfilled in order for the positive effect of activism on long-term political participation to be triggered, we found that the participation had to be at a higher level with regards to time spent. Moreover, none of the positive effect of activism was observed among the former protesters who had perceived treatment by the authorities as very unfair. Some of the activists, mostly from marginalized groups, told stories of degrading and discriminatory treatment from politicians and civil servants. This resulted in both decreased external efficacy and the elimination of the positive effects of activism on participation.
These results are in line with more recent studies within micro-democracy and political participation finding that that procedural justice was of greater importance in deciding future levels of participation than reaching the preferred policy outcome. Failure was not disempowering as long as the process was regarded as fair and democratic.
Even if the amount of people interviewed has been insufficient in order to draw wider and firm conclusions, the study illustrates what a process of political mobilization could look like. Provided that citizen engagement is met with respect by the authorities and that the demands of the activists are seriously taken into consideration, social movements have the possibility to not only change policies, but also to energize democracies, increasing the strength and equality of participation. In contrast, unfair treatment by authorities could have more wide-spread consequences than expected, eliminating positive spin-off effects of activism on further political participation. The marginalized groups, among which political participation is already lower, are exposed to a larger risk of experiencing an unfair process, which in turn eliminates the positive effects of activism
The results leave us with a warning regarding the generalizability of results of studies where procedural justice is not taken into consideration. The relationships found in previous follow up-studies of activism might not be applicable to all possible movements and activists – there are both thresholds of participation necessary to cross and conditions to fulfil in order for the effect to be triggered. Simply saying that social movement participation triggers future participation could, therefore, be a one-sided, and in some cases even false, statement. This calls for further studies into the complexities of biographical outcomes of activism and of how the interactions with the political authorities not only affect the policy consequences of the movement, but also the strong, personal and political effects of it.
It should be noted that neither Westhom et al. nor Frey et al. refer directly to
Craig, Niemi and Silver (1990) divide these into regime-based external efficacy and incumbent-based external efficacy. See Craig et al (
In the Swedish system: Kommunalval, landstingsval, and riskdagsval.
The period of movement activity at Slottsvångsskolan, t1, did not last a full six months.
Apart from voting, have you ever participated politically? What did you do? Elaborate!
In talking to people about elections, we find that they are sometimes not able to vote because they don’t have time, or they have difficulty getting to the polls. Think about the national, regional and local elections
Have you ever participated in media or social media for any political cause, such as writing debate articles, being interviewed, had a political blog etc.?
When?
What activity?
How much time was spent?
Have you gotten together or worked with others in your community or neighbourhood to try to deal with some community issue or problem?
If yes:
Type of activity: formal (any official local governmental board or council that deals with community problems and issues. i.e. local council, school board etc.) /informal?
Specify activity and frequency (e.g.: hours per week).
Have you ever initiated any contacts with an elected official (at local, regional or national level) or a member of staff related to such an official? (Please don’t count any contacts you have made as a regular part of your job)
If yes: Describe!
Possibly elaborate on:
On what type of issue?
When/how long ago (time periods)?
Frequency (how many times?)
Have you ever taken part in a protest, march, or demonstration on some national or local issue?
If yes:
On what issues?
When (time periods)?
How many times/frequency (for every time period)?
Are you/have you been a member of a political organization? Have you attended any meetings of a political organization?
If yes:
Does this organization take stands on any public issues- either locally or nationally?
Which organization/type of organization?
When (time periods)?
Type of activity and frequency? (attended meetings, been an active member, served on a board?)
Would you always have answered like that or did you ever change your view?
(How would you have previously answered?)
When did you change your view/opinion?
What made you change your view/opinion?
Did you participate in any activities to protest against the proposed closure of Norrehedskolan/Slottsvångsskolan/Gustav Adlofsskolan?
What do you remember from this period? (What did you do? How much time did you spend?)
(Examples of activities: Did you participate in demonstrations, write debate articles, or collect signatures? Did you contact public officials or members of a board? Did you attended meetings, join or work through a political party, attend meetings with the parent association, attend meetings with Helsingborgs skolförening or with Nätverket mot skolnedläggelser? etc.)
When you first heard of the proposal to close the school, did you believe it would be possible to make the politicians change their decision?
How did the politicians/public officials react to your activities?
How did you feel when you heard about the decision to finally close/not close the school?
Did your learn anything from this period? What? Do you believe that the struggle against school closure has affected your views and opinions today and your level of participation? How? Why?
Would you have done it again?
Have you had any contact with anyone from the time of the protests? Have you received any request directed at you personally to take part in a political activity?
Political Participation, t0 and t1
Participation in any of the following modes of participation (participation =1; no participation =0):
Voting
Participation in the Movement, t1
Participated in the movement against school closure in any of the following modes of participation (participation =1; no participation =0):
High Level of Participation in the Movement, t1
Immigrants born in “the South or “the East” and not in “the West”. The categories of the South, the East and the West are constructed according to the risk of being subjected to prejudice and discrimination, rather than the geographical boundaries. The South and the East refer to people born in: Africa, Asia (including the Middle East), South America and southern and eastern Europe (including the Balkans). Immigrants born in the South and the East do
High internal political efficacy: Believes in one’s own competence to understand and to participate effectively in politics=1, otherwise=0
High external efficacy: Believes in the responsiveness of governmental authorities and institutions to citizen demands =1, otherwise=0
Examples of statements indicating high/low internal/external efficacy may be found in the section “Political Efficacy” above.
Received request during t2 directed at respondent personally to take part in a political activity =1, otherwise=0
Factors solely related to the perception of the movement against school closure and its outcome. The factors only concern people engaged in a movement.
Policy Outcome
Preferred policy outcome reached: No closure. Involvement in movement against closure of Slottsvångsskolan =1
Preferred policy outcome not reached: Closure. Involved in movement against closure of Gustav Adolfsskolan or Norrehedsskolan =0
Perceived Procedural Justice
Subjective perception of the fairness/justice of the political decision making process. The indicators concern the
Treatment perceived as fair (reasonable explanation given) =1, unfair=0
Basic level of fairness=1, treatment of public officials during the process perceived as very unfair (such as personally humiliating, degrading, or discriminating due to, for example, ethnicity, immigrant background, educational background or social status) =0
Sofia Helander, MA, is a doctoral candidate at the Department of Government, Uppsala University, Sweden. Her research areas include democratic theory, political engagement and social movements. Empirically, she has studied protest movements in Sweden and Kerala, India. Her work has appeared in Journal of Developing Societies. Her PhD project is focused on problems of political apathy and antagonism in radical democratic theory. She can be contacted at: