Research on social movements has usually addressed issues of movement emergence and mobilization, yet has paid less attention to their outcomes and consequences. Although there exists a considerable amount of work on this aspect, little systematic research has been done so far. Most existing work focuses on political and policy outcomes of movements, whereas few studies address their broader cultural and institutional effects. Furthermore, we still know little about the indirect and unintended consequences produced by movements. Early studies have dealt with the effectiveness of disruptive and violent actions and with the role of several organizational variables for movement success. More recently, scholars have begun to analyze movement outcomes in their political context by looking at the role of public opinion, allies, and state structures. A comparative perspective promises to be a fruitful avenue of research in this regard.
Cet article examine l'intervention des mouvements sociaux dans le système politique. Tout en portant l'attention sur le cas où les nouveaux mouvements sociaux sont source de blocage des politiques publiques, il tente de montrer comment cette intervention touche à l'équilibre qui s'établit dans toute société démocratique entre l'efficacité du système et sa légitimité. Les auteurs mettent en évidence que cet équilibre est affecté différemment selon le type d'intervention et, tout particulièrement, selon le type de blocage produit par les mouvements. Quatre types de blocages sont distingués, en fonction de la modalité et du résultat de l'intervention. Ces types de blocage dépendent de deux facteurs principaux, à savoir la structure et le fonctionnement de l'Etat, d'un côté, et la composition des acteurs intervenant dans le système, de l'autre. Le blocage des politiques publiques par les mouvements sociaux engendre une aporie centrale pour les démocraties occidentales, notamment pour la démocratie suisse, aporie qui a également des conséquences sur les mouvements eux-mêmes.
Dans cet article, on tente de cerner les impacts que l'utilisation des instruments de la démocratie directe en Suisse - initiative populaire et référendum - peuvent avoir sur les soi-disant nouveaux mouvements sociaux. Après avoir constaté la faible utilisation de ces opportunités par les mouvements, l'auteur la met en relation avec les coûts élevés que le choix de ces formes d'action implique. Des effets importants semblent pourtant se produire en premier lieu sur la participation dans la mobilisation, qui augmente considérablement. Ensuite, des impacts importants sont identifiés sur le plan de l'infrastructure organisationnelle et du réseau relationnel des mouvements, qui se trouvent réactivés par l'utilisation d'initiatives et de référendums. Cela montre en même temps l'imbrication des dimensions du POS. Enfin, il semble qu'il y ait également des effets sur les chances de succès des mouvements, en particulier à travers des gains substantiels limités mais réels et par le biais de l'introduction d'un nouveau thème sur l'agenda politique. Tout ceci nuance quelque peu l'hypothèse, avancée par Epple, selon laquelle les instruments de la démocratie directe ne conduisent qu'à un affaiblissement des nouveaux mouvements sociaux.
The comparison between France and Switzerland enables us to compare a country that has a strong interventionist tradition in the labour market and whose youth unemployment is endemically high with a more liberal country that is faced with a more recent increase in youth unemployment but which, nevertheless, remains relatively measured. Starting from different rules and values, the two youth unemployment systems resemble each other insofar as both exclude most unemployed youth from all available benefits. From this angle, French egalitarianism rejoins Swiss differentialism. In both cases, it is not the least of paradoxes that the system of unemployment insurance so little benefits those who are most vulnerable to the economic crisis and the present dearth of jobs.
In this article we discuss the emergence of ‘youth unemployment regimes’ in Europe, that is, a set of coherent measures and policies aimed at providing state responses to the problem of unemployment and, more specifically, youth unemployment. We classify these measures and policies along two main dimensions: unemployment regulations and labour market regulations. Using original data, we show how seven European countries locate on these two dimensions as well as within the conceptual space resulting from the combination of the two dimensions. Our findings show cross-national variations that do not fit the traditional typologies of comparative welfare studies. At the same time, however, the findings allow for reflecting upon possible patterns of convergence across European countries. In particular, we show some important similarities in terms of flexible labour market regulations. In this regard, the recent years have witnessed a trend towards a flexibilisation of the labour market, regardless of the prevailing welfare regime.
The abundant literature on welfare state policies, regimes or ‘worlds’ has been only limitedly interested in unemployment protection, and even less in youth unemployment protection. What is clearly lacking in the literature is an updated analysis of the most recent policies developed in European countries targeting youth. This mini-symposium aims to fill in this gap by presenting findings from an EU-funded research project entitled ‘Youth, Unemployment and Exclusion in Europe: A Multidimensional Approach to Understanding the Conditions and Prospects for Social and Political Integration of Young Unemployed’ (YOUNEX). The main aim of the research endeavour was to develop theory and contribute to empirical knowledge concerning the social and political exclusion of unemployed youth in Europe.
This paper examines the relationships between employment status, social capital, and the participation of young people in different kinds of political activities such as contacting, consumer, and protest activities. We focus on the role of social capital for political participation, addressing three related questions: Do unemployed and employed youth display different levels of social capital and political participation? Does social capital favor the political participation of unemployed and employed youth? Is social capital more important for unemployed youth than for employed youth? To address these questions we compare long-term unemployed youth to regularly employed youth using original survey data. Our analysis suggests that the employment status has only a limited impact on political participation, affecting only consumer actions. In contrast, the social capital resulting from associational involvement is positively correlated to political participation. However, rather than countering the effect of exclusion from the labor market, it plays a similar role for unemployed youth and employed youth.
We examine the conditions leading social movement organizations to adopt consensus in their internal decision making. To do so, we look at organizations of the Swiss global justice movement, which puts the search for consensus at center stage. Our findings show that the ways in which social movement organizations take decisions and their vision of democracy more generally are not simply a matter of free choice by their leaders and members, but depend on certain organizational characteristics. The most important one is a small organizational size, which is a crucial condition for the adoption of consensus in internal decision making. This condition combines with another one pertaining to the cultural tradition of contention represented by the social movement family to explain consensus. In addition, our findings show that small, transnational organizations following inclusive participatory practices are also more likely to adopt consensus when they make decisions.
