Yıl: 2019 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 303 - 320 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5505/jas.2019.92053 İndeks Tarihi: 07-09-2020

Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara

Öz:
This study aims to understand how the structure of mobilization networks relates to the outcomes of collective action by using 17cases of neighborhood protests in Ankara between 2007-2011. Based on police records and on site interviews, the findings of thestudy suggest that successful outcomes depend on two mobilization structure related processes; the first one facilitates the efficientflow of information for coordination purposes, while the second increases the tendency of participants to use high-risk disruptivetactics due to the prevalence of strong ties amongst the protagonists. This paper also considers, to some extent, the antecedents ofthese structures, and shows that they originate from two sources that very much depend on each other: the spatial configuration ofthe neighborhood in question and pre-existing informal social ties.
Anahtar Kelime:

Ankara Mahallelerinde Mobilizasyon Ağları ve Protesto Sonuçları

Öz:
Çalışma, 2007-2011 arası Ankara’nın çeşitli mahallelerinde gerçekleşen 17 eylemi inceleyerek mobilizasyon ağlarının yapısının yerel protesto olaylarının sonuçlarıyla nasıl ilişkili olduğunu anlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın verileri polis kayıtları ve saha görüşmelerinden oluşmaktadır. Sonuç olarak olumlu sonuç ile ilişkili iki ayrı mekanizma belirlenmiştir. Birinci mekanizma verimli bilgi akışını sağlayarak katılımcıların koordinasyonunu kolaylaştırır. İkincisi ise katılımcıların arasındaki güçlü bağlar nedeniyle riskli taktiklerin kullanılma eğilimini artırır. Mobilizasyon ağlarının öncülleri olarak mekansal yapılar ve enformel sosyal ağlar göze çarpmaktadır
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Amenta, E. (2014). How to analyze the influence of movements. Contemporary Sociology 43(1), 16–29.
  • Amenta, E., Caren, N., Chiarello, E., and Su, Y. (2010). The political consequences of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology 36, 287-307.
  • Balta, M. O., and Eke, F. (2011). Spatial reflection of urban planning in metropolitan areas and urban rent; a case study of Çayyolu, Ankara. European Planning Studies, 19(10), 1817-1838.
  • Batuman, B. (2013). City profile: Ankara. Cities, 31, 578-590.
  • Bayraktar, S. U. (2007). Turkish municipalities: reconsidering local democracy beyond administrative autonomy. European Journal of Turkish Studies. Retrieved from https:// journals.openedition.org/ejts/1103
  • Bayraktar, U. (2018). Policy-making at local level: an analysis of Turkish municipalities. In C. Bakir and G. Ertan (Eds.) Policy analysis in Turkey (pp. 105-120). Bristol: University of Bristol.
  • Benford, R. D., and Snow, D. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
  • Biggs, M., and Andrews, K. T. (2015). Protest campaigns and movement success desegregating the US south in the early 1960s. American Sociological Review [Published online before print March 9, 2015). doi:10.1177/0003122415574328ç
  • Borgatti, S. P., Mehra,A., Brass, D. and Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892-895.
  • Bosi, L., and Uba, K. (2009). Introduction: the outcomes of social movements. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 14(4), 409-415.
  • Button, J. W. (1978). Black violence: political impact of the 1960s
  • riots. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Çarkoğlu, A., and Aytaç, E. (2016). Türkiye’de bireysel bağışçılık ve hayırseverlik. İstanbul: TÜSEV.
  • Centola, D., and Macy, M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 702-734.
  • Coşkun, M. (2003). Village associations as migrants’ formal organizations: an empirical study in Mamak Ankara. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Bilkent University, Ankara.
  • Cress, D., M., and Snow, D. A. (2000). The outcomes of homeless mobilization: the influence of organization, disruption, political mediation, and framing. American Journal of Sociology, 105 (4), 1063-1104.
  • Cronqvist, L. (2003). Using multi value logic synthesis in social science. Paper presented at 2nd General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR), Marburg.
  • Cronqvist, L., and Berg-Schlosser D. (2009). Multi-value QCA (mvQCA). In B. Rihoux, and C. C. Ragin.(Eds.). Configurational comparative methods: qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques (pp. 69- 87). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Diani, M. (2015). The cement of civil society. New York: Cambridge University.
  • Diani, M., (2003). Introduction: social movements, contentious actions, and social networks: from metaphor to substance? In M. Diani and D. McAdam (Eds.). Social movements and networks: relational approaches to collective action (pp.1- 18). Oxford: Oxford University.
  • Diani, M., and McAdam, D., (2003). Social movements and networks: relational approaches to collective action. Oxford: Oxford University.
  • Doğan, A. E. (2005). Gökçek’in Ankara’yı neo-liberal rövanşçılıkla yeniden kuruşu. Planlama Dergisi, 4, 130-138.
  • Duşa, A., and Thiem, A. (2016). Package QCA. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/QCA/QCA.pdf.
  • Earl, J. (2004). The cultural consequences of social movements. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, and H. Kriesi (Eds.). The Blackwell companion to social movements. (pp. 508-530). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Earl, J., Martin, A., McCarthy, J.D. and Soule. S. (2004). The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 65-80.
  • Erder, S. and Incioglu, N. (2008). Türkiye’de yerel politikanın yükselişi: İstanbul Büyüksehir Belediyesi örnegi, 1984-2004. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
  • Esaiasson, P. (2014). NIMBYism–A re-examination of the phenomenon. Social Science Research, 48, 185-195.
  • Futrell, R., and Simi, P. (2004). Free spaces, collective identity, and the persistence of us white power activism. Social Problems, 51(1), 16-42.
  • Gamson, W. A. (1990). The strategy of social protest. Homewood, IL: Dorsey. (Original work published 1975)
  • Gemici, K. (2003). Spontaneity in social protest: April 2001 shopkeeper protests in Turkey. Retrieved from https:// escholarship.org/uc/item/9nh9g6gt
  • Giugni, M. (Ed.). (2004). Social protest and policy change: Ecology, antinuclear, and peace movements in comparative perspective. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
  • Goodwin, J. and Jasper, J. M. (2004). Rethinking social movements: structure, culture, and emotion. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Gould, V. R. (1995). Insurgent identities: class, community, and protest in Paris from 1848 to the Commune. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Graaff, M. B. and Bröer, C. (2019). Governance and risk in everyday life: depoliticization and citizens’ experiences of cell site deployment in the Netherlands and Southern California. Journal of Risk Research. DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2018.1501596
  • Keck, M., E. and Sikkink, K. (1999). Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. International Social Science Journal, 51(1), 89-101.
  • Kitschelt, H. (1986). Political opportunity structures and political protest: anti- nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 16(1), 57–85.
  • Konda. (2013). Gezi report: public perception of the Gezi Protests. Who were the people at the Gezi Park? Retrieved from http://www.konda.com.tr/en/raporlar/KONDA_ Gezi_Report.pdf
  • Koopmans, R. and Rucht, R. (2002). Protest event analysis. In B. Klandermans and S. Staggenborgeds. Methods of social movement research. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: the importance of philos in organizations. In N. Nohria and R. G. Eccles (Eds.). Networks and organizations: structure, form and action. (pp. 216-239). Boston: Harvard Business School.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1994). Graph theoretical dimensions of informal organizations. In K. Carley, M. Prietula (Eds.). Computational organizational theory (pp. 89-111).
  • Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Kriesi, H. (2004). Political context and opportunity. In D.
  • A. Snow, S. A. Soule, and H. Kriesi (Eds.). The Blackwell Companion to social movements (pp. 67-90). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Lamertz, K. (2009). On the topography of shared organizational identity meanings in social networks. In S. Carayannopoulos: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of ASAC, 2009 (Organization Theory Division), Niagara Falls, ON.
  • Leighley, J. (1996). Group membership and the mobilization of political participation. The Journal of Politics, 58(2), 447-463.
  • Luders, J. (2006). The economics of movement success: business responses to civil rights mobilization. American Journal of Sociology, 111(4), 963-998.
  • McAdam, D. (1996). Conceptual origins, current problems, future directions. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, and M. N. Zald (Eds.). Comparative perspectives on social movements. political opportunities, mobilizing structures and cultural framing (pp. 23-40). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
  • McAdam, D. and Snow, D. (2010). Outcomes and impacts. In D. A. Snow and D. McAdam (Eds.) Readings on social movements: origins, dynamics and outcomes. New York: Oxford University.
  • McCarthy, J. D. and Zald., M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: a partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212-1241.
  • Önge, S. T. (2007). Spatial representation of power: making the urban space of Ankara in the early republican period. Politica, 306, 21.
  • Passy, F. (2003). Social networks matter but how? In M. Diani and D. McAdam (Eds.). Social movements and networks: relational approaches to collective action (pp. 21-48). Oxford: Oxford University.
  • Passy, F. and Giugni, M. (2001). Social networks and individual perceptions: explaining differential participation in social movements. Sociological Forum, 16(1), 123-153.
  • Polletta, F. and Jasper, J. (2001). Collective identity and social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 283-305.
  • Provan, K., Fish, A., and Joerg, S. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: a review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479-516.
  • Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
  • Ragin, C., C. and Sedziaka, A. (2013). QCA and Fuzzy Set applications to social movement research. In D. A. Snow, D. Della Porta, B. Klandermans and D. McAdam (Eds.). The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Rihoux, B. and Lobe, B. (2009). The case of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): adding leverage for cross-case comparison. In D. Byrne and C. C. Ragin (Eds.). The Sage handbook of case-based methods (pp. 222-242). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Rojas, F. (2006). Social movement tactics, organizational change and the spread of African-American studies. Social Forces, 84(4), 2147-2166.
  • Rosenthal, N. and Schwartz, M. (1989). Spontaneity and democracy in social movements. International social movement research, 2, 33-59.
  • Şahin, S. Z. (2019). The urbanization policy of Turkey: an uneasy symbiosis of unimplemented policy with centralized pragmatic interventions. Turkish Studies, 20(4), 599-618.
  • Schively, C. (2007). Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. Journal of planning literature, 21(3), 255- 266.
  • Şeker, M., Bakış, Ç. and Dizeci, B. (2018). İnsani gelişme indeksi: ilçeler. İstanbul: INGEV.
  • Sewell, W. H. (2001). Space in contentious politics. In R. Aminzade, J. Goldstone, D. McAdam, E. Perry, W. Sewell,
  • S. Tarrow, et al. (Authors), Silence and voice in the study of contentious politics (pp. 51-88). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
  • Siegel, D. A. (2009). Social networks and collective action. American Journal of Political Science 53(1), 122-138.
  • Snow, D., A., and Moss, D. M. (2014). Protest on the fly: toward a theory of spontaneity in the dynamics of protest and social movements. American Sociological Review, 79(6), 1122–1143.
  • Tankut, G. (1993). Bir başkentin imarı: Ankara, 1929-1939. İstanbul: Anahtar Kitaplar.
  • Tekeli, İ. (1982). Başkent Ankara’nın öyküsü. Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi.
  • Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • World Values Survey.(2012). http://www.worldvaluessurvey. org/WVSOnline.jsp adresinden erişildi.
  • Zhao, D. (1998). Ecologies of social movements: student mobilization during the 1989 prodemocracy movement in Beijing. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 1493–1529.
APA Ertan G (2019). Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. , 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
Chicago Ertan Gunes Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. (2019): 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
MLA Ertan Gunes Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. , 2019, ss.303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
AMA Ertan G Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. . 2019; 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
Vancouver Ertan G Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. . 2019; 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
IEEE Ertan G "Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara." , ss.303 - 320, 2019. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
ISNAD Ertan, Gunes. "Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara". (2019), 303-320. https://doi.org/10.5505/jas.2019.92053
APA Ertan G (2019). Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(2), 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
Chicago Ertan Gunes Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi 7, no.2 (2019): 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
MLA Ertan Gunes Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol.7, no.2, 2019, ss.303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
AMA Ertan G Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2019; 7(2): 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
Vancouver Ertan G Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara. Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2019; 7(2): 303 - 320. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
IEEE Ertan G "Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara." Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7, ss.303 - 320, 2019. 10.5505/jas.2019.92053
ISNAD Ertan, Gunes. "Mobilization Networks and the Outcomes of Neighborhood Protests in Ankara". Ankara Araştırmaları Dergisi 7/2 (2019), 303-320. https://doi.org/10.5505/jas.2019.92053