Citation

Buechler SM. Sociol. Compass 2008; 2(3): 1031-1044.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00109.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Sociology traditionally identified social strain and structural breakdown as causes of collective action. Such explanations were widely interpreted as endorsing social order and viewing its breakdown and the resulting collective action in a negative light. In the 1970s, advocates of the resource mobilization perspective criticized strain and breakdown explanations and this negative connotation of collective action. Rather than strain or breakdown, these theorists explained collective action in terms of solidarity, interests, and resources. Despite these criticisms, strain and breakdown explanations persisted at the margins of mainstream social movement theory. Moreover, the resource mobilization approach invoked ‘opportunity’ to explain collective action. There is a strong resemblance between ‘strain and breakdown’ and ‘opportunity’. Both explain collective action in terms of external, facilitating conditions, but opportunity explanations connote a more favorable evaluation of the resulting collective action. Such resemblances suggest the viability of a synthesis between older and newer explanations of collective action.