Using negative binomial models, I analyze the effects of repressive threats and procedural concessions on Zapatista protests from 1994 to 2003. Some of the results appear consistent with previous findings in the literature. Repressive threats had a negative initial effect and a positive delayed effect on protest activity and its simultaneous location across cities. However, procedural concessions had statistically insignificant negative initial and delayed effects on protests and their simultaneous location. Also contrary to the literature, when procedural concessions and repressive threats were combined, they had statistically insignificant positive initial and delayed effects on protest activity and its simultaneous location. Finally, democratization changes decreased Zapatista protests in the short and long term and helped to focus mobilization efforts on the remaining closed environments. Thus, democratization openings and an inconsistent use of repressive threats and procedural concessions did not strengthen the development of the movement; they contributed to the movement’s relative weakness.
Almeida, Paul D.2003. Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: Protest waves in authoritarian settings. American Journal of Sociology109 (2): 345-400.
2.
Almeida, Paul D.2007. Organizational expansion, liberalization reversals, and radicalized collective action. Research in Political Sociology15:57-97.
3.
Almeida, Paul D.2008. Waves of protest: Popular struggle in El Salvador, 1925-2005 . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
4.
Beissinger, Mark R.2002. Nationalist mobilization and the collapse of the Soviet state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Bernal Gutiérrez, Marco Antonio, y Miguel ÁngelRomero Miranda.1999. Chiapas: Crónica de una negociación [Chiapas: A negotiation’s account]. Mexico City: Rayuela Editores.
6.
Brockett, Charles D.2005. Political movements and violence in Central America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Bruhn, Kathleen.2008. Urban protest in Mexico and Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Della Porta, Donatella.1995. Social movements, political violence, and the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Della Porta, Donatella, and Mario Diani.1999. Social movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
10.
Earl, Jennifer, Andrew Martin, John D. McCarthy, and Sarah A. Soule .2004. The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology30:65-80.
11.
Earl, Jennifer, Sarah A. Soule, and John D. McCarthy .2003. Protest under fire? Explaining the policing of protest. American Sociological Review68 (4): 581-606.
12.
Eisenstadt, Todd A.2008. Agrarian tenure institutions, conflict frames, and communitarian identities: The case of indigenous Southern Mexico. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association , April, in Chicago.
13.
Eisinger, Peter.1973. "The Conditions of Protest Behavior in American Cities ." American Political Science Review67 (1): 11-28.
14.
Enlace Civil.2007. Autonomía indígena en Chiapas [Indigenous autonomy in Chiapas]. http://www.enlacecivil.org.mx/lm_municipios.html (accessed July 11, 2007).
15.
Foweraker, Joe, and Ann L. Craig, eds. 1990. Popular movements and political change in Mexico. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
16.
Francisco, Ronald A.1995. The relationship between coercion and protest: An empirical evaluation in three coercive states. Journal of Conflict Resolution39:263-82.
17.
Francisco, Ronald A.2005. The dictator’s dilemma. In Repression and mobilization, ed. C. Davenport, H. Johnston, and C. Mueller , 58-81. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.
18.
Frente Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (FZLN).2003. Cronología de cuatro años del levantamiento del EZLN [Chronology of four years since the EZLN uprising]. http://www.fzln.org.mx (accessed February 6, 2003 ).
19.
Gamson, William.1990. The strategy of social protest. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
20.
Global Exchange y Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas de Acción Comunitaria.1999. Siempre cerca, siempre lejos: Las fuerzas armadas en México [Always close, always distant: The armed forces in Mexico]. Mexico City: Cencos.
21.
Goldstone, Jack A., and Charles Tilly.2001. Threat (and opportunity): Popular action and state response in the dynamics of contentious action. In Silence and voice in the study of contentious politics, ed. R. Aminzade, J. Goldstone , D. McAdam, E. Perry, W. Sewell, S. Tarrow, and C. Tilly , 179-94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Hirales, Gustavo.1998. Camino a Acteal [Road to Acteal]. Mexico: Rayuela Editores.
23.
Inclán, María de la Luz.2008. From the ¡Ya basta! to the caracoles: Zapatista mobilization under transitional conditions . American Journal of Sociology113 (5): 1316-50.
24.
Instituto Estatal Electoral de Chiapas (IEE-Chiapas).2003. Procesos electorales [Electoral processes]. http://www.iee-chiapas.org.mx (accessed October 3, 2003).
25.
Jasper, James.1997. The art of moral protest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
Jenkins, J. Craig.1983. Resource mobilization theory and the study of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology9:527-53.
27.
Jenkins, J. Craig, David Jacobs, and Jon Agnone.2003. Political opportunities and African-American protest, 1948-1997. American Journal of Sociology109 (2): 277-303.
28.
Katzenstein, Mary, and Carol Mueller.1987. The women’s movements of the United States and Western Europe. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
29.
Khawaja, Marwan.1993. Repression and popular collective action: Evidence from the West Bank. Sociological Forum8:47-71.
30.
King, Gary.1989. A seemingly unrelated Poisson regression model. Sociological Methods and Research17:235-55.
31.
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Ruud Koopmans, Jan W. Duyvendak, and Mario G. Giugni .1995. New social movements in Western Europe: A comparative analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
32.
Land, Kenneth C., Patricia L. McCall, and Daniel S. Nagin .1996. A comparison of Poisson, negative binomial, and semiparametric mixed Poisson regression models. Sociological Methods and Research24:387-442.
33.
Lichbach, Mark Irving.1987. Deterrence or escalation? The puzzle of aggregate studies of repression and dissent. Journal of Conflict Resolution31:266-97.
34.
Long, J. Scott.1997. Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
McAdam, Doug.1988. Micromobilization contexts and recruitment to activism . International Social Movement Research1:125-54.
36.
McAdam, Doug.2003. "Eehh, what’s up (with) DOC": Clarifying the program . Mobilization8 (1): 126-34.
37.
McPhail, Clark, David Schweingruber, and John D. McCarthy .1998. Protest policing in the United States, 1960-1995. In Policing protest: The control of mass demonstrations in Western democracies, ed. D. della Porta and H. Rieter, 49-69. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
38.
Melel Xojobal.2003. Síntesis informativa 1997-2003 [Information synthesis 1997-2003]. San Cristóbal de Las Casas: Melel Xojobal.
39.
Meyer, David S.2004. Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Sociology30:125-45.
40.
O’Donnell, Guillermo, and Philippe C. Schmitter .1986. Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
41.
Opp, Karl Dieter, and Wolfgang Roehl.1990. Repression, micromobilization, and political protest. Social Forces69:521-47.
42.
Rasler, Karen.1996. Concessions, repression, and political protest in the Iranian revolution. American Sociological Review61 (1): 132-52.
43.
Rootes, Chris.2003. Britain. In Environmental protest in Western Europe, ed. C. Rootes, 20-58. Oxford , UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
Taagepera, Rein, and Matthew S. Shugart .1989. Seats and votes: The effects and determinants of electoral systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45.
Tarrow, Sidney.1989. Democracy and disorder: Protest and politics in Italy 1965-1975. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
46.
Tilly, Charles.1978. From mobilization to revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
47.
Velasco, Saúl.2003. El movimiento indígena y la autonomía en México [The indigenous movement and autonomy in Mexico]. Mexico City: UNAM.
48.
Zdravomyslova,Elena.1996. "Opportunities and Framing in the Transition to Democracy: The Case of Russia" Pp. 122-137 in Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer N. Zald, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
