ABSTRACT
This and the next chapter focus on two perspectives that are distinct from the perspectives addressed so far. One basic thrust of the new perspectives is a critique of the collective action, resource mobilization and political opportunity structure perspectives. It is not claimed that their substantive propositions are wrong but that something is missing: the actor is ignored. This means that the actors’ definition, understanding, and interpretation of the situation and their construction of meaning must be considered in a full explanation of social movement phenomena. The identity and framing perspectives thus build on qualitative traditions, based on the work of authors like George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer. This implies a specific theoretical as well as methodological approach. In regard to the first, proponents of the perspective reject “rationalistic” theories or assumptions advanced by the collective action, resource mobilization, and political opportunity structure perspectives. In regard to methodology, a constructivist approach is accepted (see the brief discussion in chapter 12).
