IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v60y2023i1p107-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A win or a flop? Measuring mass protest successfulness in authoritarian settings

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly Turner

    (Watson Institute, Brown University & Belfer Center, Harvard University)

Abstract

Previously rare events, mass protest movements have become popular vehicles for those seeking political, economic, and social change. How do we evaluate movement success? Most studies addressing movement outcomes are grounded in the goal attainment approach, where movement success is dependent upon fulfilling one’s stated demands. The models derived from this approach heavily rely on visibility and transparency in the policymaking process. These offer limited analytical utility for scholars studying movements in authoritarian states, where policymaking is shrouded and media is state-controlled. Evaluating movements solely on their fulfillment of mission goals is highly problematic, as movements produce more outcomes than their intended goals. Movements also produce unintended benefits: concessions unrelated to the movement’s mission. These include negative consequences, or societal costs. Since movements produce both positive and negative unintended outcomes, any evaluation of a movement should also incorporate the costs associated with new gains. I argue a cost–benefit approach improves scholarly conceptualization and measurement of protest success. I conceptualize protest success as multidimensional and comprised of protest gains and societal costs. I develop a 21-point scale of protest success using Mokken Scale Analysis. AISP diagnostics indicate gains and costs comprise separate subscales, which are collapsed to produce total sum scores. I score 34 nonviolent movements in authoritarian states between 2002 and 2013 on an additive scale. Protests in authoritarian settings attain considerable accomplishments; however, those gains come with significant cost. Most total success scores are negative, indicating considerable backlash is common during and immediately after the demobilization of movements in authoritarian states. Success scores improve upon the canonical binary measure by: (1) offering improved discrimination between movements, (2) identifying cases of regime ‘ignoring’, and (3) pinpointing misclassified cases. By incorporating negative consequences into our evaluations, we advance our understanding why movements deemed successful by scholars are disappointments to their home publics.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly Turner, 2023. "A win or a flop? Measuring mass protest successfulness in authoritarian settings," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(1), pages 107-123, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:107-123
    DOI: 10.1177/00223433221140434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00223433221140434
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00223433221140434?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erica Chenoweth & Margherita Belgioioso, 2019. "The physics of dissent and the effects of movement momentum," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 1088-1095, October.
    2. Sabine C. Carey, 2010. "The Use of Repression as a Response to Domestic Dissent," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 167-186, February.
    3. Sabine C. Carey, 2010. "The Use of Repression as a Response to Domestic Dissent," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 167-186, February.
    4. van Schuur, Wijbrandt H., 2003. "Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman Scale and Parametric Item Response Theory," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 139-163, April.
    5. Pape, Robert A., 2003. "The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(3), pages 343-361, August.
    6. Idean Salehyan & Cullen S. Hendrix & Jesse Hamner & Christina Case & Christopher Linebarger & Emily Stull & Jennifer Williams, 2012. "Social Conflict in Africa: A New Database," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 503-511, September.
    7. Muller, Edward N. & Opp, Karl-Dieter, 1986. "Rational Choice and Rebellious Collective Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 471-487, June.
    8. Mark I. Lichbach, 1995. "The 5% Rule," Rationality and Society, , vol. 7(1), pages 126-128, January.
    9. Thomas R. Rochon & Daniel A. Mazmanian, 1993. "Social Movements and the Policy Process," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 528(1), pages 75-87, July.
    10. Kitschelt, Herbert P., 1986. "Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 57-85, January.
    11. Aytaç, S. Erdem & Rau, Eli Gavin & Stokes, Susan, 2020. "Beyond Opportunity Costs: Campaign Messages, Anger and Turnout among the Unemployed," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 1325-1339, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erica Chenoweth & Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, 2023. "Guest Editors’ introduction: Nonviolent resistance and its discontents," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(1), pages 3-8, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brandon M. Boylan, 2016. "What drives ethnic terrorist campaigns? A view at the group level of analysis," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(3), pages 250-272, July.
    2. Jacqueline H.R. DeMeritt & Joseph K Young, 2013. "A political economy of human rights: Oil, natural gas, and state incentives to repress1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 99-120, April.
    3. Bjørnskov, Christian & Pfaff, Katharina, 2021. "Differences matter: The effect of coup types on physical integrity rights," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Timothy M. Peterson, 2017. "Export Diversity and Human Rights," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(8), pages 1740-1767, September.
    5. Sultan Juma Kakuba, 2021. "State Repression and Democratic Dispensation in Uganda 1996–2016," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    6. Amanda A Licht & Susan Hannah Allen, 2018. "Repressing for reputation," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 582-595, September.
    7. Sam R Bell & David Cingranelli & Amanda Murdie & Alper Caglayan, 2013. "Coercion, capacity, and coordination: Predictors of political violence," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 240-262, July.
    8. Nabil “Bill” Julkif, 2022. "Self and political efficacy and the justifiability of political violence and the role of state terror: A cross‐national analysis," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(1), pages 108-119, January.
    9. Edward N. Muller & Erich Weede, 1994. "Theories of Rebellion," Rationality and Society, , vol. 6(1), pages 40-57, January.
    10. Christopher M. Sullivan, 2016. "Undermining Resistance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(7), pages 1163-1190, October.
    11. Margarita Konaev & Kirstin J.H. Brathwaite, 2019. "Dangerous neighborhoods: State behavior and the spread of ethnic conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(5), pages 447-468, September.
    12. Asif Efrat, 2015. "Do human rights violations hinder counterterrorism cooperation? Evidence from the FBI’s deployment abroad," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 329-349, September.
    13. Sam R Bell & Amanda Murdie, 2018. "The apparatus for violence: Repression, violent protest, and civil war in a cross-national framework," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(4), pages 336-354, July.
    14. Sabine C Carey & Belén González, 2021. "The legacy of war: The effect of militias on postwar repression," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(3), pages 247-269, May.
    15. Noah Buckley & Ora John Reuter & Michael Rochlitz & Anton Aisin, 2020. "Staying Out of Trouble: Criminal Cases Against Russian Mayors," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2013, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    16. Jung-In Jo & Hyun Jin Choi, 2019. "Enigmas of grievances about inequality: Effects of attitudes toward inequality and government redistribution on protest participation," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 348-368, December.
    17. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Erica Chenoweth & Christopher Wiley Shay, 2022. "Updating nonviolent campaigns: Introducing NAVCO 2.1," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(6), pages 876-889, November.
    19. Huber, Christoph & Basedau, Matthias, 2018. "When Do Religious Minorities' Grievances Lead to Peaceful or Violent Protest? Evidence from Canada’s Jewish and Muslim Communities," GIGA Working Papers 313, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    20. Newton, Kenneth & Giebler, Heiko, 2008. "Patterns of participation: Political and social participation in 22 nations," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization SP IV 2008-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:107-123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.