Mancur Olson (1965) The Logic of Collective Action
It is often taken for granted that groups of individuals with common interests usually attempt to further those common interests. Groups of individuals with common interests are expected to act on behalf of their common interests much as single individuals are often expected to act on behalf of their personal interests.引自第55页Albert Hirschman (1970)
He who says public goods says public evils. What is a public good for some may well judged a public evil by others in the same community.引自第56页
Except under special conditions, the self-interested individuals will not act to achieve their common interests -> Even if the common interests speak to him, the self-interested individuals might still choose to free-ride the protest.
Mobilization method:
1. constraint: sanction
2. inducement: positive incentives, psychological rewards of commitment, sacrifice yourself to gain satisfaction. Enlarged notion of self -- an identification of self and group interest
3. persuasion
Albert Hirschman, 1970, pp. 79 and 81
Loyalty is at its most functional when it looks most irrational, when loyalty means strong attachment.
Why is such loyalty so important? Because it can neutralize within certain limits the tendency of the most quality conscious members to be the first to exit. Thus, loyalty, far from being irrational, can serve the socially useful purpose of preventing deterioration from becoming cumulative, as it so often does when there is no barrier to exit.引自第60页
# Universalistic Goals
Universalistic groups: disparity between their constituency and beneficiary. For most of the challenging group, the consituency is either exclusively or especially affected by the changes that the group seeks. Thus the major beneficiary and the constituency are identical. Yet, for universalistic groups, either everyone will be affected by the changes, the constituency no more or less than others, or some group other than the constituency (e.g. the victims of special injustice) will benefit more than the constituency.
Within Olson's theory, the narrower appeals (to small group loyalties) are equally effective as the broader universalistic appeals.
Gamson's result supports this argument -> Universalistic or nonuniversalistic goals make no difference in success rate.
