Constructing “Social Change” through Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation*

Silver, Ira

doi:10.1111/j.1475-682x.1997.tb00449.x

Cited by 45 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Collectiveaction frames denote how social movements articulate issues, values, and concerns in ways that foster collective identity and activism (Snow et al 1986;Snow and Benford 1992;Benford 1993Benford , 1997Hunt, Benford, and Snow 1994;Silver 1997). Broadly speaking, ''frames'' -or ''framing''-is a term that refers to how individuals organize experiences or make sense of events (Goffman 1974).…”

Section: Collective-action Framingmentioning

confidence: 98%

“Place-Framing” as Place-Making: Constituting a Neighborhood for Organizing and Activism

Martin

2003

Annals of the Association of American Geographers

354

283

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article uses social-movement theory to analyze how neighborhood organizations portray activism as grounded in a particular place and scale. I apply the concept of collective-action frames to a case study of four organizations in a single neighborhood in St. Paul, Minnesota. Using organizational documents such as annual reports, comprehensive plans, and flyers, I present a discourse analysis of the ways that organizations describe their goals and agenda. In particular, I assess the extent to which the organizations characterize the neighborhood in their justifications of organizational goals and actions. In order to legitimate their own agendas and empower community activism, neighborhood organizations foster a neighborhood identity that obscures social differences, such as ethnicity and class, among residents. They do so by describing the physical condition of the neighborhood and the daily life experiences of its residents. These ''place-frames'' constitute a motivating discourse for organizations seeking to unite residents for a neighborhood-oriented agenda, despite very different substantive issues, from crime to land-use planning. This perspective allows for a more effective understanding of how place informs activism at a variety of spatial scales. Further, by inserting place into theories of collective-action framing, this research helps to introduce a new research agenda that addresses the gap between geographical analyses of territorial identities and activism and other scholarly literatures on contentious politics.

show abstract

Section: Collective-action Framingmentioning

confidence: 98%

“Place-Framing” as Place-Making: Constituting a Neighborhood for Organizing and Activism

Martin

2003

Annals of the Association of American Geographers

354

283

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Diagnostic frames involve social movement actors defining the issue of concern in ways that fit with what they are trying to accomplish. This is often done through construction of boundaries (Hunt et al, 1994;Silver, 1997), for example, by delineating heroes (protagonists) and villains (antagonists). Once a problem has been diagnosed, the prognoses or solutions to that problem are framed in ways that link to the diagnosis.…”

Section: Indigenous Peoples and Strategic Framing 395mentioning

confidence: 99%

Framed Encounters with Conservation and Mining Development: Indigenous Peoples' use of Strategic Framing in Suriname

Haalboom¹

2011

Social Movement Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While studies on the use of framing as a strategy for social movements have proliferated in the past 20 years, little is still known about how and why the frames vary across social movement actors and/or events. This article addresses this knowledge lacuna by comparing and contrasting Indigenous peoples' use of rights and identity frames in response to conservation and development events in Suriname. The variation in frames, and possible reasons for these variations, was compared across actors and events by considering (1) alignments of the global Indigenous rights movement with different movements and organizations over time, and (2) participants' level of involvement with national and global Indigenous rights movements. Evidence of strategic frame variation in this study demonstrated Indigenous peoples' ability to creatively and strategically pursue their interests by asserting their collective identity and rights in encounters with conservation and development projects. They accomplished this through the presentation of frames that called into question the logic and fairness of protected areas, their innate capacity to protect the environment, as well as their rights to land, and economic interests in mining. The greater use of rights frames by participants reflected networks generated with human rights organizations. Frame inconsistencies were apparent across conservation and development events that indicated uneven levels of involvement with Indigenous rights movements, which may yet produce unintended consequences for Indigenous communities. However, this case could also signal new possibilities for Indigenous peoples in terms of greater maneuverability in being able to assert their rights and negotiate their identities in relation to conservation and development, and ultimately to gain more power and autonomy over their own affairs.

show abstract

“…The question is not if elite funding can support contentious actions, it is in what context and in what types of relationships elite funding can play this role. This perspective argues that the relationship between social movement organizations and funders is mediated by a variety of elements, such as the size, political orientation, and history of both the funder and the funded (Ostrander 1999, 1997, 1995; Ostrander and Schervish ; Ostrander et al ; Proietto ; Silver 1998, 1997).…”

Section: Understanding Funding Over Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Funding for Social Movements

Corrigall‐Brown

2016

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Funding is critical for social movements. Our understanding of the relationship between social movements and funders has been shaped by broader theories used to understand movement dynamics. This review examines our changing understanding of the role of funding for movements, paying particular attention to the relative costs and benefits of funding from different groups of actors, such as constituents, foundations, governments, and corporations. While these groups provide critical resources to movements, they can also potentially alter movements by channeling them into less contentious actions and more bureaucratized forms. I explore three current debates in the area of social movement funding. First, current work assesses the relationships of funding, particularly how the interactions between funders and funded groups shape the types of actions in which social movements can engage. Second, social movement funding is embedded within a larger context, and current work is attempting to better understand the role of this context by engaging in comparative research. Finally, debates surrounding the rising importance of corporate funding for movements focus on how these new streams of revenue could help (or hinder) social movement activities.

show abstract

Constructing “Social Change” through Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation*

Cited by 45 publications

References 24 publications

“Place-Framing” as Place-Making: Constituting a Neighborhood for Organizing and Activism

“Place-Framing” as Place-Making: Constituting a Neighborhood for Organizing and Activism

Framed Encounters with Conservation and Mining Development: Indigenous Peoples' use of Strategic Framing in Suriname

Funding for Social Movements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About