Abstract
Recently, Belgium has seen an increase in disruptive climate activism, ranging from roadblocks to activists occupying airstrips. Disruptive activism can be effective in increasing media attention for a movement's aims, but could also risk of scaring off external audiences such as politicians and ordinary citizens, reducing overall support. How do climate action groups legitimate the choice between for disruptive but potentially alienating protest? And how do these legitimising claims influence the media, general public and politicians' response to disruptive climate activism? Which legitimising claims gain media exposure, and which are persuasive enough to change the minds of citizens and politicians? To answer these questions, this project follows a two-step approach. It explores the legitimising claims activists make for the inclusion of disruptive protest as part of their action repertoires through a series of interviews with key climate movement actors and the analysis of movements' press releases. It also uses a content analysis and two vignette experiments to test the effect of disruptive activism in gaining media attention and public/political support. The project has two aims: it tests the validity of existing disruptive activism theories on the climate case, whilst also contrasting activists' own legitimising claims for disruptive action with their effectiveness in gaining public/political support.
Researcher(s)
Research team(s)
Project type(s)