Abstract

Activists in seven US cities were interviewed about why they thought people in their communities mobilized against alcohol-related problems. The data were analyzed in light of the focus on resource mobilization theory in the social movement literature. In contrast with claims that resources are the primary catalyst for change, informants emphasized the role of grievances, and to a lesser extent, bridging factors that caused residents to be more aware of or frustrated by problems, and thus ready for change. Resources seemed to provide necessary but insufficient conditions for explaining movement participation, suggesting that, to be effective, resources must be channeled to address and be linked to the grievous social conditions of inner city communities.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call