Page 107 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

Social Movements 93

movement involves achieving routine access to the political process. This
premise is also problematized, however, by the incorporation of concerns
with subjectivity and culture into the theory. If participation in a social
movement depends on how individuals understand themselves and their
situation, there seems to be no good reason for ignoring the contestation
of perspectives and the transformation of identities in civil society as if
this were not itself an aspect of politics. The extension of RMT to include
such issues, however, again points beyond the liberal paradigm, and is,

therefore, somewhat difficult for its adherents to accept.

R esource M obilization T heory: the p remises

The contribution to rational choice theory that has been most infl uential
in RMT is The Logic of Collective Action (1968) by Mancur Olson.
As Scott points out, the theory of social behavior outlined in this book is
established on the basis of two premises drawn from neo - classical eco-
nomics: fi rst, that social choices are to be explained with reference to
individual preferences; and, second, that individuals act rationally to
maximize their interests and minimize their costs (Scott, 1990 : 10). Olson
is interested by the idea that there is no necessary connection between
collective interests and collective action. On the contrary:

If the members of a large group rationally seek to maximize their personal
welfare, they will not act to advance their common or group objectives
unless there is coercion to force them to do so, or unless some separate
incentive, distinct from the achievement of the common or group interest,
is offered to the members of the group individually on the condition
that they help bear the costs or burdens of the group objectives. (Olson,
1968 : 2)

This is the famous “ free - rider ” problem of rational choice theorists. It is
in the very nature of a public good that no individual in a particular group
can feasibly be prevented from benefi ting from it if it is enjoyed by others
in that group. Because the participation of a single individual makes so
little difference to the achievement of a public good, it is more rational
to gain it without participating in collective action, unless the group can
somehow reward or punish particular individuals in direct proportion to

their degree of participation. This is very difficult to do, impossible even,
for a social movement intent on changing the very rules and structures
by which a category of persons is systematically disadvantaged in relation
to others.