Leaders and active members of social movement organizations concerned
with the Hanford Nuclear Repository in a rural area of eastern Washing
ton State have been surveyed. To comprehend better the demographic
characteristics of the active members of environmental organizations, a
case study was developed. Hypotheses were formed and tested. The results
suggest that well-educated, low-to-middle-income marginal persons who
are underemployed and seeking meaning in their lives form the active
membership of environmental movement organizations. Further in-depth
analysis of membership characteristics is necessary to test the results
reported in this research note.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Dunlap, R.E., and M. Olson. (1984). Hard-Path Versus Soft-Path Advocates: A Study of Energy Activists. Pohcy Studies journal, 13, 413-428.
2.
Gamson, W. (1975). The Strategy of Protest. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
3.
Harry, I., R. Gale, and J. Hendee. (1968). Conservation: An Upper Middle Class Movement. Journal of Leisure Research, 1, 246-254.
4.
Hempler, C. (1984). Index of Relative Social Participation. In Delbert C. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement: A Text and Reference Book for the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York: McKay.
5.
Hoffer, E. (1951) The True Believer. New York : HarperCollins.
6.
Kaminer, W. (1984). Women Volunteering. New York : Anchor Press.
7.
Lundberg, G., M. Komarovsky, and M. Mclnerny. (1934). Leisure: A Suburban Study. New York: Columbia University Press.
8.
McAdam, D. (1986). Recruitment to High Risk Activism: The Case of Freedom Summer. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 64-90.
9.
McCarthy, J., and M. Zald. (1977). Resource Mobilization in Social Movements: A Partial Theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 1212-1241
10.
Marullo, S. (1988). Leadership and Membership in the Nuclear Freeze Movement: A Specification of Resource Mobilization Theory. Sociological Quarterly, 29, 407-427.
11.
Mohar, P. (1985). Public Concern and Elite Involvement in Environment Conservation Issues. Social Science Quarterly, 66, 820-838.
12.
Morgan, J., R. Dye, and J. Hybels. (1985) A Survey of Giving Behavior and Attitudes: A Report to Respondents. Ann Arbor, MIInstitute for Social Research.
13.
Morrison, D. (1983). Soft Tech/Hard Tech/Low Tech: A Social Movement Analysis of Appropriate Energy Technology. Sociological Inquiry , 53, 220-251.
14.
Oberschall, A. (1973). Social Conflict and Social Movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
15.
Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
Savatsky, P., and P.Jobes (1982). Citizen Participation in Selected Energy-Education Work-shops. Rural Sociologist, 1, 237-243
17.
Scaminari, J. , and R. Dunlap. (1986). No Nukes! A Comparison of Participants in Two Antinuclear Demonstrations. Sociological Inquiry, 56, 272-282.
18.
Snow, R.A., L. Zurcher, and S. Ekland-Olson . (1980). Social Networks and Social Movements: A Microstructural Approach to Differential Recruitment. American Sociological Review, 45, 787-801.
19.
Stuggenborg, S. (1987). Life-Style Preferences and Social Movement Recruitment: Illustrations from the Abortion Conflict. Social Science Quarterly , 68, 779-797.
20.
Van Liere, K.D., and R. Dunlap. (1980). The Social Bases of Environmental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Explanations and Empincal EvidencePubhc Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181-197.
21.
Walsh, E.J. , and R.H. Warland. (1983). Social Movement Involvement in the Wake of a Nuclear Accident: Activists and Free Riders in the TMI Area. American Sociological Review, 48, 764-780.
