This article tests the general explanatory power of political opportunity theory for cross-national variations in protest throughout the world, and considers how opportunities influence individual-level characteristics crucial for coalition-formation and campaigns. This study constructs a multilevel model of protest potential, using survey data from individuals across 43 countries, drawn from the fifth and sixth waves of the World Values Survey, combined with political, economic, and cultural factors measured for each country. While many individual factors predicted individuals’ protest potential, a mixture of country-level factors—including select political opportunities—are of general importance. Country-level regime durability and empowerment rights moderated the effect of organization membership, social trust, and political ideology on protest, demonstrating how political opportunity interacts to enhance the impact of individual characteristics relevant to coalition-building and campaigns.
AlmeidaPD (2003) Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: Protest waves in authoritarian settings. American Journal of Sociology109(2): 345–400.
2.
AlmeidaPD (2007) Defensive mobilization: Popular movements against economic adjustment policies in Latin America. Latin American Perspectives34(3): 123–139.
3.
AndersonCJMendesSM (2005) Learning to lose: Election outcomes, democratic experience and political protest potential. British Journal of Political Science36: 91–111.
4.
AuvinenJY (1996) IMF intervention and political protest in the third world: A conventional wisdom refined. Third World Quarterly17(3): 377–400.
5.
AuvinenJY (1997) Political conflict in less developed countries 1981-89. Journal of Peace Research34(2): 177–195.
6.
AyresJM (1999) From the streets to the Internet: The cyber-diffusion of contention. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science566: 132–143.
7.
BensonMRochonTR (2004) Interpersonal trust and the magnitude of protest: A micro and macro level approach. Comparative Political Studies37(4): 435–457.
BrykASRaudenbushSW (1992) Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
10.
CareySC (2006) The dynamic relationship between protest and repression. Political Research Quarterly59(1): 1–11.
11.
CatterbergG (2003) Evaluations, Referents of Support, and Political Action in New Democracies. International Journal of Comparative Sociology44: 173–198.
12.
CingranelliDLRichardsDL (1999) Measuring the level, pattern, and sequence of government respect for physical integrity rights. International Studies Quarterly43: 407–417.
13.
CIRI Human Rights Database (2015) The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) human rights dataset. Available at: http://www.humanrightsdata.org
14.
Cohen-ChenSLangORanS, et al (2020) The prevalence of despair in intractable conflicts: Direct messages of hope and despair affect leftists, but not rightists. Journal of Applied Social Psychology50: 588–598.
15.
DaltonRJVan SickleA (2005) The Resource, Structural, and Cultural Bases of Protest. Irvine, CA: Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD), University of California, Irvine, pp. 1–22.
16.
DauphinaisPDBarkanSECohnSF (1992) Predictors of Rank-and-File Feminist Activism: Evidence From the 1983 General Social Survey. Social Problems39(4): 332–344.
17.
DiGraziaJ (2014) Individual Protest Participation in the United States: Conventional and Unconventional Activism. Social Science Quarterly95(1): 111–131.
18.
DodsonK (2015) Globalization and protest expansion. Social Problems62: 15–39.
19.
DodsonK (2016) TSMOs and protest participation. Socius2: 1–14.
20.
EdwardsBMcCarthyJD (2004) Resources and social movement mobilization. In: SnowDASouleSAKriesiH (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 116–152.
21.
EisingerPK (1973) The conditions of protest behavior in American cities. American Political Science Review67(1): 11–28.
22.
EnriquezLE (2014) ‘Undocumented and citizen students unite’: Building a cross-status coalition through shared ideology. Social Problems61(2): 155–174.
23.
EpsteinEC (2009) Perpetuating social movements amid declining opportunity: The survival strategies of two Argentine piquetero groups. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies86: 3–19.
24.
FranklinJC (2002) Political party opposition to noncompetitive regimes: A cross-national analysis. Political Research Quarterly55(3): 521–546.
25.
GattinaraPCFroioCPirroALP (2021) Far-right protest mobilisation in Europe: Grievances, opportunities and resources. European Journal of Political Research. Epub ahead of print 4 October. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.12484.
26.
GiugniM (2008) Welfare states, political opportunities, and the mobilization of the unemployed: A cross-national analysis. Mobilization13(3): 297–310.
27.
GiugniMGrassoMT (2017) Blame and contention: How perceptions of the government’s role in the economic crisis shape patterns of political action. Acta Politica54: 346–370.
28.
GiugniMGrassoMT (2018) Alternative action organizations: Social solidarity or political advocacy?American Behavioral Scientist62(6): 778–795.
29.
GiugniMGrassoMT (2019) Blame and Contention: How Perceptions of the Government’s Role in the Economic Crisis Shape Patterns of Political Action. Acta Politica54: 346–370.
30.
GiugniMGrassoMT (2021) Party membership and social movement activism: A macro-micro analysis. Party Politics27(1): 92–102.
31.
GoodwinJ (2012) Are Protesters Opportunists? Fifty Tests. in Contention. In: Goodwin J and Jasper JM (eds) Context: Political Opportunities and the Emergence of Protest. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 277–300
32.
GrassoMT (2014) Age, period and cohort analysis in a comparative context: Political generations and political participation repertoires in Western Europe. Electoral Studies33: 63–76.
33.
GrassoMTGiugniM (2016) Protest participation and economic crisis: The conditioning role of political opportunities. European Journal of Political Research55: 663–680.
34.
GurrTR (1970) Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
HutterSKriesiH (2013) Movements of the left, movements of the right reconsidered. In: Van StekelenburgJRoggebandCKlandermansB (eds) The Future of Social Movement Research: Dynamics, Mechanisms, and Processes. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 281–298.
36.
JalaliR (2013) Financing empowerment? How foreign aid to Southern NGOs and social movements undermines grass-roots mobilization. Sociology Compass7(1): 55–73.
37.
JenkinsJCSchockK (2004) Political process, international dependence, and mass political conflict. International Journal of Sociology33(4): 41–63.
38.
JenkinsJCWallaceM (1996) The generalized action potential of protest movements: The new class, social trends, and political exclusion explanations. Sociological Forum11(2): 183–207.
39.
JenkinsJCJacobsDAgnoneJ (2003) Political opportunities and African-American protest, 1948–1997. American Journal of Sociology109(2): 277–303.
40.
JenkinsJCWallaceMFullertonAS (2008) A social movement society? A cross-national analysis of protest potential. International Journal of Sociology38(3): 12–35.
41.
JoJ-IChoiHJ (2019) Enigmas of grievances about inequality: Effects of attitudes toward inequality and government redistribution on protest participation. International Area Studies Review22(4): 348–368.
42.
KalaycioğluE (1994) Unconventional political participation in Turkey and Europe: Comparative perspectives. Il Politico59(3): 503–524.
43.
KitscheltHP (1986) Political opportunity structures and political protest: Anti-nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science16(1): 57–85.
44.
Klainot-HessE (2020) When mobilization is not enough: Political mediation, framing, and the use of direct democracy devices by the labor movement in response to anti-union legislation. Sociological Focus53(2): 177–189.
45.
KoopmansR (1999) Political. Opportunity. Structure. Some splitting to balance the lumping. Sociological Forum14(1): 93–105.
46.
KoosS (2012) What drives political consumption in Europe? A multi-level analysis on individual characteristics, opportunity structures and globalization. Acta Sociologica55(1): 37–57.
47.
KriesiHKoopmansRDuyvendakJW, et al (1992) New social movements and political opportunities in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research22(2): 219–244.
48.
KurerTHäusermannSWüestB, et al. (2019) Economic Grievances and Political Protest. European Journal of Political Research58: 866–892.
49.
KurzmanC (1996) Structural opportunity and perceived opportunity in social-movement theory: The Iranian revolution of 1979. American Sociological Review61(1): 153–170.
50.
KwakJ (2022) Measuring and analyzing protest potential from a survey data recycling framework. American Behavioral Scientist66(4): 434–458.
51.
LavrinenkoO (2021) Exploring protest in Europe with a multi-level cross-national test of the structural cognitive model. International Journal of Sociology51(4): 321–335.
52.
LavrinenkoO (2022) Cognition and protest in democratic and authoritarian regimes, 1981–2020. International Sociology37(3): 355–372.
53.
LeeA-R (2003) Down and down we go: Trust and compliance in South Korea. Social Science Quarterly84(2): 329–343.
54.
LeeA-RNorrisJA (2000) Attitudes towards environmental issues in Eastern Europe. International Journal of Public Opinion Research12(2): 372–397.
55.
LeviMStokerL (2000) Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science3: 475–507.
56.
LeysensAJ (2006) Social forces in Southern Africa: Transformation from below?Journal of Modern African Studies44(1): 31–58.
57.
LorenziniJ (2015) Subjective well-being and political participation: A comparison of unemployed and employed youth. Journal of Happiness Studies16: 381–404.
58.
McAdamD (1996) Conceptual origins, current problems, future directions. In: McAdamDMcCarthyJDZaldMN (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–40.
59.
McAdamDTarrowSTillyC (2001) Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60.
McVeighRSmithC (1999) Who protests in America: An analysis of three political alternatives—Inaction, institutionalized politics, or protest. Sociological Forum14(4): 685–702.
61.
ManwellerM (2005) Coalition building in direct democracy campaigns. American Politics Research33(2): 246–282.
62.
MarshAKaaseM (1979) Measuring political action. In: BarnesSHKaaseM (eds) Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE, pp. 57–96.
63.
MarshallMGJaggersK (2015) Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2014. Arlington, VA: Center for Global Policy, George Mason University.
64.
MarshallMGGurrTRDavenportC, et al (2002) Polity IV, 1800-1999: Comments on Munck and Verkuilen. Comparative Political Studies35(1): 40–45.
65.
MeyerDS (2004) Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Sociology30: 125–145.
66.
MorrisonLM (1998) Protest potential in the European republics of the former Soviet Union. International Journal of Sociology28(2): 12–35.
67.
MorselliDPassiniS (2012) Disobedience and support for democracy: Evidences from the World Values Survey. The Social Science Journal49: 284–294.
68.
MuliavkaV (2021) Bringing grievances back into social movement research: the conceptual and empirical case. Social Movement Studies20(6): 686–704.
69.
NorrisPWalgraveSVan AelstP (2005) Who demonstrates? Antistate rebels, conventional participants, or everyone?Comparative Politics37(2): 189–205.
70.
OlzakSOlivierJL (1998) Racial conflict and protest in South Africa and the United States. European Sociological Review14(3): 255–278.
71.
OsaMCorduneanu-HuciC (2003) Running uphill: Political opportunity in non-democracies. Comparative Sociology2(4): 605–629.
72.
OserJHoogheM (2018) Democratic ideals and levels of political participation: The role of political and social conceptualisations of democracy. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations20(3): 711–730.
73.
PaulsenR (1994) Status and action: How stratification affects the protest participation of young adults. Sociological Perspectives37(4): 635–649.
74.
PilatiK (2011) Political context, organizational engagement, and protest in African countries. Mobilization16(3): 351–368.
75.
RobisonKKCrenshawEMJenkinsJC (2006) Ideologies of violence: The social origins of Islamist and leftist transnational terrorism. Social Forces84(4): 2009–2026.
76.
RoßteutscherS (2010) Social capital worldwide: Potential for democratization or stabilizer of authoritarian rule?American Behavioral Scientist53(5): 737–757.
77.
RonJ (2001) Ideology in context: Explaining Sendero Luminoso’s tactical escalation. Journal of Peace Research38(5): 569–592.
78.
RuchtD (1996) The impact of national contexts on social movement structures: A cross-movement and cross-national comparison. In: McAdamDMcCarthyJDZaldMN (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 185–204.
79.
SaundersCGrassoMOlceseC, et al (2012) Explaining differential protest participation: Novices, returners, repeaters, and stalwarts. Mobilization17(3): 263–280.
80.
SchockK (1996) A conjunctural model of political conflict: The impact of political opportunities on the relationship between economic inequality and violent political conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution40(1): 98–133.
81.
SchockK (1999) People power and political opportunities: Social movement mobilization and outcomes in the Philippines and Burma. Social Problems46(3): 355–375.
82.
SchussmanASouleSA (2005) Process and protest: Accounting for individual protest participation. Social Forces84(2): 1083–1108.
83.
ShawkiN (2010) Political opportunity structures and the outcomes of transnational campaigns: A comparison of two transnational advocacy networks. Peace & Change35(3): 381–411.
84.
ShriverTESzaboAMBrayLA (2020) Opportunity and threat behind the Iron curtain: The failed diffusion of human rights activism in Romania. International Sociology35(5): 739–757.
SnowDASouleSACressDM (2005) Identifying the precipitants of homeless protest across 17 U.S. cities, 1980 to 1990. Social Forces83(3): 1183–1210.
87.
SpehrSDuttN (2004) Exploring protest participation in India: Evidence from the 1996 world values survey. African and Asian Studies3(3–4): 185–218.
88.
StaggenborgSLecomteJ (2009) Social movement campaigns: Mobilization and outcomes in the Montreal Women’s movement community. Mobilization14(2): 163–180.
89.
StockemerD (2014) What drives unconventional political participation? A two level study. The Social Science Journal51: 201–211.
90.
TarrowS (1998) Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Action and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
91.
TillyCWoodLJ (2009) Social Movements, 1768-2008. New York: Routledge.
92.
United Nations (UN) (2015) United Nations development report. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en
93.
UrdalH (2006) A clash of generations? Youth bulges and political violence. International Studies Quarterly50: 607–629.
94.
ValocchiS (2001) Individual Identities, Collective Identities, and Organizational Structure: The Relationship of the Political Left and Gay Liberation in the United States. Sociological Perspectives44(4): 445–467.
95.
Van DykeNAmosB (2017) Social movement coalitions: Formation, longevity, and success. Sociology Compass11(7): e12489.
96.
WeinerEFedericoCM (2017) Authoritarianism, institutional confidence, and willingness to engage in collective action: A multinational analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin43(3): 392–406.
97.
WilliamsDM (2020) Relationships of horizontalism and hierarchy: Exploring divergent forms of sociopolitical trust. Social Science Quarterly101(3): 1150–1164.
98.
WoodLJ (2005) Bridging the chasms: The case of people’s global action. In: BrandyJSmithJ (eds) Coalitions across Borders: Transnational Protest and the Neoliberal Order. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 95–120.
