2. Literature Review
2.5 Developing an analytical framework
2.5.2 Social context
It is widely accepted in the literature that collective processes are fundamental in supporting the development of an individual’s political voice (Craig and Mayo, 2004;
Diani, 2000; Freire, 1970, 1983, 1992; Milan, 2013; Summers-‐Effler, 2002). Freire (1970,
1983, 1992), for instance recognizes that a marginalised individual is usually inspired by collective processes, or engaging in collective action and reflection (see reflective dialogue, under section 2.5.5, below). Individuals need each other to discover; and discovery is a social process (Gadotti, 1994).51
The importance of collective processes is frequently highlighted in the participation and empowerment literature. Through a collective effort, marginalised individuals can achieve meaningful and empowering change (Alinsky, 1946; Craig and Mayo, 2004;
Freire, 1972). Serrano-‐García (1994) states that true empowerment that will foster resistance to social change, depends on collaboration and participation. Whereas Craig and Mayo (2004) claim that the marginalised, with their limited power, can only
challenge the powerful through uniting forces into a critical mass – an empowered collective.
Social movements are known to create a social context with a variety of opportunities to engage in collective processes (Castells, 1997; Diani, 2003; Haug, 2013; Mische, 2003). In the absence of social movements these opportunities and the context would not be so readily available to an individual.
The basis of collective processes consist of communication processes, including
opportunities and frequency of interactions, sharing and respecting views, feelings and emotions (Lawler and Thye, 1999; Lucio-‐Villegas, 2009), which influence the
development of an individual’s political voice. Through interactions in a social movement, members might share knowledge, develop capabilities and self-‐
determination (Gamson, 1991). The greater the frequency of interactions, the greater potential of individuals to develop interdependence between each other, leading to long-‐term group cohesion and stability (Lawler and Thye, 1999). Sharing grievances can foster a sense of collective identity (Garrett, 2006), as well as being a source of
emotional energy and solidarity (Summers-‐Effler, 2002). Participants of social movements describe experiencing trust, a sense of belonging, and commitment
51 Although discovery might be done in reflection, Freire (1985b) argues that discovery cannot be purely intellectual, and it must involve collective action, action is dependent of the reflection and vice-‐versa.
through sharing views and learning about other people’s conditions (Polletta, 2002).
This may inspire people to take risks to create change (McAdam, 1986; Polletta, 2002).52
Social movements are shaped by the power relations within and surrounding them (Gaventa, 2002; Polletta, 2002). As a result, some communication processes may be embedded in conflict and competition (Diani, 1992, 2003; Hafer and Bègue, 2005;
Ronfeldt et al., 1998). Even among individuals who share similar interests, or with shared identities, there may be different conceptions of what should be done, what action should be taken, as well as problems of accountability53 and leadership (Polletta, 2002). Moreover, participants of social movements may have different status and/or resources, which may range from poor marginalised individuals to highly
professionalized non-‐governmental / non-‐profit organisations (NGOs). This is a
competitive environment with a diverse set of actors with varying levels of power and skills, which may pose a challenge for marginalised individuals to navigate (Cornwall, 2004; Gaventa, 2006; Mitlin and Bebbington, 2006).
Such a competitive social environment of social movements is often mirrored by disparate access to ICTs (Brodock, 2010; Morozov, 2011; Schlozman et al., 2012) and attitudes toward technology (Kavada, 2010) by its members. Beyond the limited availability and use of ICTs, evidence suggests that face-‐to-‐face interaction within social movements is favoured and accompanied by higher levels of trust and reciprocity among participants (Hale et al., 1999; Molony, 2006).54
As suggested previously in this Chapter, communication processes within social movements need to be contextualized and analysed beyond their mere channels of transmission – i.e. whether mediated through technology or face-‐to-‐face – in which
52 See further discussion on sense of agency, section 6.4, below.
53 See Fisher (1993) for a more complete definition and study on accountability.
54 However, there is a growing potential for mobile phones, as a communication tool for personal networks. For instance, a recipient of a message from a known source is more likely to react, by forwarding the message, joining a demonstration, etc. (Hermanns, 2008).
the communication takes place. According to Coyne and Parker, “[t]he medium is incidental. What counts are the meanings that are conveyed”(2006, p.171). Meaning and information, for instance, “can only be understood in the context of the social relationships in which information and communication are processed” (Castells, 2009, p. 140 – citing the work of Chiller, 2007). Analysis, thus, should include bonds,
relationships, interactions, and transactions (van Dijk, 2005) between participants and external supporters of social movements.
Moreover, the social context of social movements can influence the process of developing a political voice through a number of ways. For instance, the ability to self-‐
organise (i.e. the act and process of getting together and organise towards a common goal) has the potential to improve understanding of individuals’ mutual realities. It enables people to construct their own knowledge (Alinsky, 1946; Gaventa and Cornwall, 2008), and increase the ability of individuals to dictate their own agenda without the interference of outsiders who do not experience the same reality (Phillips, 2003). Phillips explain this ideas as:
“Self-‐organisation emerges as a central theme – people shaking off external perceptions of what they are or ought to be and establishing their right to define themselves – and the major claim throughout is that neither the injustices they experience nor their most likely solutions can be adequately grasped without the group's full involvement. This is partly a practical claim: that those who have not experienced an oppression will misread the problems and come up with inadequate solutions. It is also a statement about what it means to participate as equals.
Oppressed or subordinated groups have to be able to find their own voice, to speak for themselves, to be recognized as active participants” (2003, p.265).
Lucio-‐Villegas (2009) introduces the concept of localized context. The localized context suggests that individuals’ actions should be inspired by context and experiences that are meaningful to them. The word meaningful is particular important as it directly relates to what individuals understand and give meaning to. In the participation literature, Gaventa argues that “it is in the arenas of everyday life in which people are able to resist power and to construct their own voice” (2006, p.28). But voice must not be constrained at the local level. For marginalised individuals to develop a political voice, they need to feel empowered to operate outside of their traditional spheres of
activity, to challenge systems and foresee opportunities that they were previously unaware of (Slater and Tacchi, 2004).