From the Street Protests to the State Power: The Case of Bolivian Indigenous Movement

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F62690094%3A18460%2F21%3A50018212" target="_blank" >RIV/62690094:18460/21:50018212 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

španělština

Název v původním jazyce

De la protesta callejera al poder estatal: El caso del movimiento indígena boliviano

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The purpose of the book was to explain at the first glance contra-intuitive paradox, it means why Bolivian indigenous movement demobilized under indigenous MAS‘ government while its institutionalization reached its peak as indigenous representatives massively penetrated state structures. Based on the data collected in Bolivia during field research and the analysis of the Bolivian press we can observe the growing number of indigenous representatives in legislative and executive bodies during the reign of the president of indigenous origin, Evo Morales Ayma. However, the institutionalization understood as a process of approaching the sphere of formal politics by the movement, was a considerably selective, favouring representatives of some organizations of the indigenous movement (CSUTCB, Bartolina Sisa) to others (CIDOB, CONAMAQ) and thus having different implications on the mobilization activity of individual organizations. The book reacts to the existing state of research within the field of indigenous movements in general and bolivian indigenous movement in particular. The majority of existing literature on indigenous movements in Bolivia/Latin America has been concerned especially with mobilization and subsequent success/failure of the movements in the sense of its transformation into the political parties or bringing political changes (new legislation, constitutions, concessions, representation) (for example Van Cott 2005; Madrid 2012; Rice 2012; Brysk 2000; Yashar 2001; Lucero 2008; Dangl 2019; Harten 2017; Postero 2017) while neglecting their development after the movements reach their some basic goals. In other words, the majority of the existing literature on Bolivian indigenous movement ends when the book intends to start by exploring the later phases of movement’s life. In this respect this book has an ambition to fill this gap by means of exploring conditions and mechanisms that make the movements demobilized. The central thesis of the book is to answer the question what happens to the movement after its institutionalization in the form of its penetration to the state structures and implementation its basic policy demands. In this respect the book contributes to the existing knowledge about Latin American indigenous movement by exploring the strategic dilemmas emerging for movements paradoxically as a consequence of their previous success, it means as a result of their increasing representation in state power positions. With respect to the literature concerned with the movement institutionalization in general, the proposed book contributes in several respects. Although some scholars explored the effects of institutionalization on movement’s dynamics, formulating the premises of „Iron law of oligarchy“ (Piwen y Cloward 1979) or traditional strategy „divide and rule“ (Koopmans 2004; Kriesi et al. 2002), the causal mechanism and variables that might intervene in the process are left little elaborated. In this way it is not clear if the demobilization is the result of fulfilment of movement key demands or cooptation as the authors usually don’t differentiate between different types of institutionalization (descriptive versus substantive), interchanging institutionalization with cooptation. The existing conceptualizations of institutionalization and cooptation thus aren’t capable of determining if these are the programmatical or functional benefits that make the movement demobilized (Compare Tarrow 1994). Moreover, the state actors are usually perceived as a part of political opportunity structure of the movement, ignoring the fact that also these actors face dilemmas on the base of which make their decisions. This significantly limits the range of manifold trajectories’ the process of institutionalization may pass through. Thus, although these theories usually warn against so-called electoral trap, the strategies of political parties aren’t considered in their causal chain. In this regard the moderation of the movement is interpreted as a result of (naturally given/predetermined) political compromises, indirectly excluding the possibility of intentional effort of state actors to weaken the movement in an electoral competition. Finally, although the scholars think about the question of movement (in)satisfaction with the results of its institutionalization, they usually do not include the cognitive dimension in their argumentation. The second trouble of the existing literature on movement institutionalization lies in its determinism in relation to its effects. In this regard the authors identically argued that the institutionalization represents the final stage in movement’s life, disregarding the possibility of renewed radicalization of the movement after its enter to the sphere of formal politics. The book has the ambition to overcome these challenges, offering an alternative conceptualization of movement institutionalization. In this regard, firstly the institutionalization is considered a non-linear process, passing through the periods of its intensification and regression. Secondly, the alternative conceptualization differentiates between various types of institutionalization: descriptive that corresponds to cooptation and substantive which reflects fulfilment the programmatic demands of the movement. Thirdly, the cognitive dimension is included into the causal considerations about the effects of institutionalizations what enables us take into account the subsequent self-reflection by the movement about its possible costs and benefits. And finally, the institutionalization is understood as a process of mutual interactions of the state and movement.

Název v anglickém jazyce

From the Street Protests to the State Power: The Case of Bolivian Indigenous Movement

Popis výsledku anglicky

The purpose of the book was to explain at the first glance contra-intuitive paradox, it means why Bolivian indigenous movement demobilized under indigenous MAS‘ government while its institutionalization reached its peak as indigenous representatives massively penetrated state structures. Based on the data collected in Bolivia during field research and the analysis of the Bolivian press we can observe the growing number of indigenous representatives in legislative and executive bodies during the reign of the president of indigenous origin, Evo Morales Ayma. However, the institutionalization understood as a process of approaching the sphere of formal politics by the movement, was a considerably selective, favouring representatives of some organizations of the indigenous movement (CSUTCB, Bartolina Sisa) to others (CIDOB, CONAMAQ) and thus having different implications on the mobilization activity of individual organizations. The book reacts to the existing state of research within the field of indigenous movements in general and bolivian indigenous movement in particular. The majority of existing literature on indigenous movements in Bolivia/Latin America has been concerned especially with mobilization and subsequent success/failure of the movements in the sense of its transformation into the political parties or bringing political changes (new legislation, constitutions, concessions, representation) (for example Van Cott 2005; Madrid 2012; Rice 2012; Brysk 2000; Yashar 2001; Lucero 2008; Dangl 2019; Harten 2017; Postero 2017) while neglecting their development after the movements reach their some basic goals. In other words, the majority of the existing literature on Bolivian indigenous movement ends when the book intends to start by exploring the later phases of movement’s life. In this respect this book has an ambition to fill this gap by means of exploring conditions and mechanisms that make the movements demobilized. The central thesis of the book is to answer the question what happens to the movement after its institutionalization in the form of its penetration to the state structures and implementation its basic policy demands. In this respect the book contributes to the existing knowledge about Latin American indigenous movement by exploring the strategic dilemmas emerging for movements paradoxically as a consequence of their previous success, it means as a result of their increasing representation in state power positions. With respect to the literature concerned with the movement institutionalization in general, the proposed book contributes in several respects. Although some scholars explored the effects of institutionalization on movement’s dynamics, formulating the premises of „Iron law of oligarchy“ (Piwen y Cloward 1979) or traditional strategy „divide and rule“ (Koopmans 2004; Kriesi et al. 2002), the causal mechanism and variables that might intervene in the process are left little elaborated. In this way it is not clear if the demobilization is the result of fulfilment of movement key demands or cooptation as the authors usually don’t differentiate between different types of institutionalization (descriptive versus substantive), interchanging institutionalization with cooptation. The existing conceptualizations of institutionalization and cooptation thus aren’t capable of determining if these are the programmatical or functional benefits that make the movement demobilized (Compare Tarrow 1994). Moreover, the state actors are usually perceived as a part of political opportunity structure of the movement, ignoring the fact that also these actors face dilemmas on the base of which make their decisions. This significantly limits the range of manifold trajectories’ the process of institutionalization may pass through. Thus, although these theories usually warn against so-called electoral trap, the strategies of political parties aren’t considered in their causal chain. In this regard the moderation of the movement is interpreted as a result of (naturally given/predetermined) political compromises, indirectly excluding the possibility of intentional effort of state actors to weaken the movement in an electoral competition. Finally, although the scholars think about the question of movement (in)satisfaction with the results of its institutionalization, they usually do not include the cognitive dimension in their argumentation. The second trouble of the existing literature on movement institutionalization lies in its determinism in relation to its effects. In this regard the authors identically argued that the institutionalization represents the final stage in movement’s life, disregarding the possibility of renewed radicalization of the movement after its enter to the sphere of formal politics. The book has the ambition to overcome these challenges, offering an alternative conceptualization of movement institutionalization. In this regard, firstly the institutionalization is considered a non-linear process, passing through the periods of its intensification and regression. Secondly, the alternative conceptualization differentiates between various types of institutionalization: descriptive that corresponds to cooptation and substantive which reflects fulfilment the programmatic demands of the movement. Thirdly, the cognitive dimension is included into the causal considerations about the effects of institutionalizations what enables us take into account the subsequent self-reflection by the movement about its possible costs and benefits. And finally, the institutionalization is understood as a process of mutual interactions of the state and movement.

Druh

B - Odborná kniha

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50601 - Political science

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA17-21271S" target="_blank" >GA17-21271S: Výstupy sociálních hnutí a dynamika těchto hnutí</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2021

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

ISBN

978-3-631-85775-5

Počet stran knihy

290

Název nakladatele

Peter Lang

Místo vydání

Berlin

Kód UT WoS knihy

—