How critical junctures shape secessionist movement cohesion: Strategies, framing processes, and interorganizational relations before and after the 2017 referendum in Catalonia

IF 3.4 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Peace Research Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1177/00223433241258368
Hans Jonas Gunzelmann
{"title":"How critical junctures shape secessionist movement cohesion: Strategies, framing processes, and interorganizational relations before and after the 2017 referendum in Catalonia","authors":"Hans Jonas Gunzelmann","doi":"10.1177/00223433241258368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What drives the cohesion of secessionist movements? Previous research emphasized the role of internal and external factors but produced mixed results regarding their effects. This article advances scholarship on this question by examining the role of critical junctures as periods of heightened contingency that can shift movements towards fragmentation or cohesion. It focuses on independence referendums and how states respond to them as important critical junctures, and on how they shape interorganizational relations as a key dimension of movement cohesion. Empirically, it explores the effects of the 2017 referendum in Catalonia using a mixed-methods research design that combines qualitative inquiry with network analyses of protest event data. The network analyses showed that the movement was notably less cohesive in the protest arena after the referendum than during the referendum campaign. Qualitative materials were employed to inductively identify strategy framing processes as key mechanisms to explain this development. Frame alignment around the referendum as a shared goal led to more cohesion during the campaign. After the event, a frame dispute over the meaning of the referendum led to diverging strategies and fragmented the movement, as state repression limited the movement’s room for maneuver. The findings suggest that research on secessionist movement cohesion should pay more attention to critical junctures and how secessionists make sense of them.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Peace Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241258368","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What drives the cohesion of secessionist movements? Previous research emphasized the role of internal and external factors but produced mixed results regarding their effects. This article advances scholarship on this question by examining the role of critical junctures as periods of heightened contingency that can shift movements towards fragmentation or cohesion. It focuses on independence referendums and how states respond to them as important critical junctures, and on how they shape interorganizational relations as a key dimension of movement cohesion. Empirically, it explores the effects of the 2017 referendum in Catalonia using a mixed-methods research design that combines qualitative inquiry with network analyses of protest event data. The network analyses showed that the movement was notably less cohesive in the protest arena after the referendum than during the referendum campaign. Qualitative materials were employed to inductively identify strategy framing processes as key mechanisms to explain this development. Frame alignment around the referendum as a shared goal led to more cohesion during the campaign. After the event, a frame dispute over the meaning of the referendum led to diverging strategies and fragmented the movement, as state repression limited the movement’s room for maneuver. The findings suggest that research on secessionist movement cohesion should pay more attention to critical junctures and how secessionists make sense of them.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关键时刻如何塑造分离主义运动的凝聚力:2017 年加泰罗尼亚公投前后的策略、框架过程和组织间关系
是什么推动了分离主义运动的凝聚力?以往的研究强调内部和外部因素的作用,但对这些因素的影响结果不一。本文通过研究关键时刻的作用,推动了对这一问题的研究。关键时刻是突发事件的高发期,可使运动走向分裂或凝聚。文章将重点放在独立公投以及国家如何应对独立公投这一重要的关键时刻,以及独立公投如何塑造组织间关系这一运动凝聚力的关键维度。在实证研究方面,本研究采用混合方法研究设计,将定性调查与抗议活动数据的网络分析相结合,探讨了 2017 年加泰罗尼亚公投的影响。网络分析显示,与公投运动期间相比,公投后抗议运动的凝聚力明显下降。研究采用定性材料,归纳出战略框架制定过程是解释这一发展的关键机制。围绕公投这一共同目标的框架调整使运动在竞选期间更具凝聚力。公投结束后,由于国家的镇压限制了运动的活动空间,关于公投意义的框架争议导致了战略的分歧和运动的分裂。研究结果表明,有关分离主义运动凝聚力的研究应更多地关注关键时刻以及分离主义者如何理解这些关键时刻。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Journal of Peace Research is an interdisciplinary and international peer reviewed bimonthly journal of scholarly work in peace research. Edited at the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO), by an international editorial committee, Journal of Peace Research strives for a global focus on conflict and peacemaking. From its establishment in 1964, authors from over 50 countries have published in JPR. The Journal encourages a wide conception of peace, but focuses on the causes of violence and conflict resolution. Without sacrificing the requirements for theoretical rigour and methodological sophistication, articles directed towards ways and means of peace are favoured.
期刊最新文献
Friends and partners: Estimating latent affinity networks with the graphical LASSO Demographic features or spatial structures? Unpacking local variation during the 2022 Iranian protests Many hurdles to take: Explaining peacekeepers’ ability to engage in human rights activities De jure powersharing 1975–2019: Updating the Inclusion, Dispersion, and Constraints Dataset How user language affects conflict fatality estimates in ChatGPT
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1