In this article, we focus on two demonstrations against climate change that took place in Portugal on the 12th of November 2016 and the 29th of April 2017. Two separate studies were conducted on the same protests. In Study 1, we conducted a quantitative study (N = 259), to examine the role of socio-demographics and socio-psychological predictors in predicting the actual protest. Participants were demonstrators (N = 158), as well as non-demonstrators (N = 101). Results indicated that moral motivation and identification as an environmentalist were the key variables in explaining actual protest. In Study 2, we conducted a framing analysis of the written manifestos (N = 2), to identify the core framing tasks which were used to inspire and legitimize the protests. The framing analysis suggests that the problems and paths for action were described by appealing to the interlinkage between the global and local dimensions of climate change, and that arguments of severity and urgency of the problem were the most salient. The implications of this research are discussed in relation to possible pathways for a more comprehensive understanding of the reasons why people engage in collective action in climate change related issues, and how these motives may relate to how social movements mobilize people for action.
The recent school strikes for climate and the emergence of new climate movements worldwide, have shown that more and more people are willing to fight for the planet (
Previous studies have shown that models and variables explaining pro-environmental behavior were relatively poor predictors of collective action in environmental issues (e.g.,
Although social-psychological dimensions are crucial to comprehend why and how people engage in collective action, when an individual participates in a social protest it is also a result of a process of mobilization undertaken by the Social Movement Organizations (hereafter SMOs) (
From sociological theories to psychological models, there have been many approaches to the examination of collective action (
Some have argued that there is a need to look at the role of socio-demographics when studying collective action (e.g.,
In the last few decades, the socio-psychological approach has become a central theory in the collective action field (
The second dimension is collective efficacy and refers to the belief that it is possible to achieve change through collective action (
The third dimension is identity, which is supported by several studies that consistently showed the predictive power of group identification (
By applying these variables to the environmental and climate domains,
A more recent trend in studies of collective action proposes the introduction of a moral path, with several authors arguing that it could help in achieving a more comprehensive understanding of collective action (
The literature on environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior also supports the inclusion of a moral pathway, as previous studies shows that moral norms might predict pro-environmental behavior (e.g.,
Given the dynamic nature of social movements it is fundamental to look at collective action from diverse angles. Apart from the role of demographic and socio-psychological variables, the decision to participate in collective action is also influenced by the process of mobilization (
Benford and Snow (e.g.,
Under particular circumstances, a specific frame may expand in such an inclusive and ideational way that it becomes a master frame (
Overall, questions related to the representation and empowerment of vulnerable and marginalized people raise several moral and ethical issues (
Protests and demonstrations on climate change issues used to be considered to be rare in Portugal, although there are many examples of conflicts and mobilizations around the construction of nuclear plants, dams, waste incinerators or river pollution (
In this research, we examine two climate demonstrations. The first demonstration took place on the 12th of November 2016 and it was first called by international SMOs to coincide with the 2016 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP22). The second demonstration, internationally called by the American movement “People’s Climate March”, took place on the 29th of April 2017. In Portugal, both demonstrations were called and supported by an extensive list of organizations. The first demonstration was supported by 25 organizations and groups and the second by 27. With few exceptions, the list of signatories was the same in both events and included grassroots movements focusing on climate change issues, energy cooperatives, local groups acting against oil and gas drilling in Portugal, Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGOs), and human rights organizations (e.g., International Amnesty). Additionally, five political parties subscribed to the manifestos: Left Bloc (Bloco de Esquerda), the Free Party (Partido Livre), the Ecologist Party "The Greens" (Partido Ecológico os Verdes) and People, Animals and Nature – PAN (Pessoas, Animais e Natureza); the Socialist Alternative Movement (MAS - Movimento Alternativo Socialista). The Left Bloc, Livre, MAS and Green Party regard themselves left-wing. In turn, PAN (People, Animals and Nature) is a political party that claims not fit into the traditional left-right wing political spectrum, presenting itself as a party of “causes” (
Study 1 was designed to examine the predictors of participation in climate change demonstrations. For that, we conducted a survey to test the role of socio-demographics, and socio-psychological dimensions, including identification as an environmentalist, identification with the movement, self-focused anger; perceived effectiveness of demonstrations, and moral motivation (e.g.,
In Study 2, we conducted a framing analysis (
The sample was composed of 259 people (58% female; 97% Portuguese nationality) aged 18 to 71 (
Participants were recruited in two demonstrations. In the first demonstration we collected data in Lisbon, where around 700 people participated in the demonstration. Five months, in the second demonstration we approached participants in Oporto, where around 300 people participated in the demonstration. Inspired by the recommendations for data collection during protests (
The questionnaire used for data collection contained three sections (i.e., introductory letter, questions for variables, and queries for socio-demographics). Multi-item measures were assessed mostly on a Likert seven-point scale. Two similar questionnaires (see supplementary materials for the questionnaire items) were prepared, but some questions had to be adapted to the non-demonstrator group. Multi-item measures were created based on the mean scores.
A range of information was collected, including sex (female, male, other), age and level of education. The level of education was measured by an ordinal variable (nine categories of responses, ranging from primary education to PhD), where participants had to select their highest qualification obtained (higher scores represent higher-level qualifications).
Inspired by
Participants were asked if they had been involved in any environmental organization in the past 12 months. If a member, participants had to place themselves as a passive or active member.
A single item was used to ask participants how they self-define in political terms (1 was extremely left and 7 extremely right).
From a list of all the national political parties (11), participants were invited to report with which political party they identified the most. A new variable was then created, where 1 corresponded to identification with a political party supporting the demonstration, 2 to identification with a political party not supporting the demonstration and 3 to no identification with any political party.
Adapted from the
Four items were adapted from
We follow the
Adapted from
Inspired by the scale of moral conviction (
Descriptive analysis (see
Variable | Demonstrators (%) |
Non-Demonstrators (%) |
Total (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Previous demonstrations | |||
Yes | 32.9 | 1.0 | 20.5 |
No | 61.1 | 99.0 | 79.5 |
Action in last 12 months | |||
Yes | 43.7 | 9.9 | 30.5 |
No | 56.3 | 90.1 | 69.5 |
Number demonstrations lifetime | |||
Never | 8.2 | 18.8 | 12.3 |
One to five | 20.9 | 48.5 | 31.7 |
Six to ten | 17.7 | 8.9 | 14.3 |
Between 11 to 20 | 10.1 | 12.9 | 11.2 |
More than 20 | 43.0 | 10.9 | 30.5 |
Membership | |||
Non-member | 48.1 | 63.4 | 54.1 |
Passive member | 19.0 | 27.7 | 22.4 |
Active member | 32.9 | 8.9 | 23.6 |
Political party identification | |||
Demonstration’s supporters | 70.5 | 40.0 | 60.1 |
Non-demonstration’s supporters | 6.4 | 10.0 | 14.1 |
None identification | 18.6 | 37.0 | 25.8 |
Variable | Sample / groups | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Political orientation | D | 2.89 | 1.30 | – | |||||
ND | 3.77 | 1.33 | – | ||||||
Total | 3.23 | 1.38 | – | ||||||
2. Identification as an environmentalist | D | 5.45 | 1.06 | -.016 | – | ||||
ND | 4.11 | 1.38 | -.127 | – | |||||
Total | 4.93 | 1.36 | -.208** | – | |||||
3. Identification with the movement | D | 5.50 | 1.16 | -.046 | .443** | – | |||
ND | 4.89 | 1.24 | .162 | .613** | – | ||||
Total | 5.26 | 1.23 | -.041 | .559** | – | ||||
4. Self-focused anger | D | 4.20 | 1.74 | -.061 | .144 | .144 | – | ||
ND | 3.56 | 1.69 | -.059 | .345** | .146 | – | |||
Total | 3.95 | 1.74 | -.113 | .285** | .181** | – | |||
5. Perceived effectiveness of demonstrations | D | 3.97 | 1.24 | -.024 | .255** | .364** | .164* | – | |
ND | 3.72 | 1.46 | .231* | .379** | .451** | .133 | – | ||
Total | 3.88 | 1.33 | .057 | .320** | .411** | .164** | – | ||
6. Moral motivation | D | 5.98 | 0.81 | .132 | .343** | .244** | -.010 | .071 | – |
ND | 4.99 | 1.18 | .061 | .495** | .482** | .248* | .420** | – | |
Total | 5.59 | 1.08 | -.057 | .547** | .418** | .176** | .265** | – |
*
A two-step logistic regression analysis was conducted to test the probability of belonging to the demonstrator or non-demonstrator group (binary variable). Model 1 included sex, age, level of education, and political orientation. In Model 2 the socio-psychological variables were introduced: identification as an environmentalist, identification with the movement, perceived effectiveness of demonstrations, self-focused anger, and moral motivation.
Variable | Model 1a |
Model 2b |
AUCc | Cohen’s |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wald | Exp ( |
Wald | Exp ( |
|||||||
Constant | 3.574** | 0.971 | 13.537 | 35.654 | -4.519* | 1.675 | 7.280 | 0.011 | ||
Sex (dummy) | 0.217 | 0.292 | 0.554 | 1.242 | 0.348 | 0.351 | 0.983 | 1.417 | .559 | 0.210 |
Age | -0.006 | 0.010 | 0.337 | 0.994 | -0.003 | 0.012 | 0.085 | 0.997 | .508 | 0.002 |
Education | -0.172* | 0.081 | 4.550 | 0.842 | -0.042 | 0.098 | 0.188 | 0.959 | .407 | 0.000 |
Political orientation | -0.501** | 0.109 | 21.123 | 0.606 | -0.480* | 0.131 | 13.357 | 0.619 | .679 | 0.657 |
Identification as an environmentalist | 0.675** | 0.172 | 15.410 | 1.964 | .779 | 1.087 | ||||
Identification with the movement | -0.096 | 0.174 | 0.307 | 0.908 | .643 | 0.518 | ||||
Self-focused anger | 0.078 | 0.098 | 0.634 | 1.081 | .604 | 0.372 | ||||
Perceived effectiveness of demonstrations | -0.167 | 0.137 | 1.496 | 0.846 | .546 | 0.119 | ||||
Moral motivation | 0.804* | 0.200 | 16.224 | 2.234 | .751 | 0.958 |
a% cases = 65.3. Model fit: -2
b% cases = 77.3. Model fit: -2
cAUC = Area Under Curve.
*
Overall, the results of our analysis suggested that identification as an environmentalism and moral motivation were the two most important variables differentiating demonstrators and non-demonstrators. Therefore, participation in actual protest behavior seems to be, at least partially, explained by people’s need to act consistently with their identities, principles, values and moral convictions.
As manifestos are often collectively produced texts, created to represent the position and rationale of the movement for mobilization, they are the perfect sources to reach the frames of the movement, including its master frame (
The analysis was conducted by the first author, but every step was discussed with both co-authors, who served as peer examiners (
The material examined (see supplementary materials for the full manifestos) was organized with the support of the software NVIVO 12. In total, four first-level categories were created. The “diagnostic framing” included all the references related with the identification of the problem and attributions of blame and responsibility. The “prognostic framing” included all the mentions to solutions and plans of action. The “motivational framing”, included references to the severity and urgency of the problem; the need for social change and the efficacy of collective action; as well as expressions related to the necessity and propriety of acting (e.g., who should act). The fourth category named “climate justice as a master frame”, integrated all the references to human rights, social vulnerabilities and justice issues in climate change. The non-presence of elements of the mentioned frames was also considered a relevant finding. In order to ensure that our findings were trustworthy (
The presentation of the findings is organized as follows: first, we present how the SMOs diagnosed the problems (causes and enemies); secondly, we focus on the solutions and the paths of action proposed in the manifestos; thirdly, we report the vocabularies of motives for the protests, as highlighted by the SMOs; fourthly, we illustrate how climate justice is integrated in the frames used by the Portuguese climate movement.
International and national motives were used to justify the need for protest, under the umbrella argument that effective policies to address climate change were not compatible with the fossil fuel paradigm. In both manifestos climate change and global warming are explicitly mentioned as the problems leading to the demonstrations: “Since then, 2015 was the warmest year on the record and 2016 will be even worse”. (Manifesto 1). The broad economic model is considered responsible for climate change and global warming: “an economic addicted to emissions and unregulated pollution” (Manifesto 1). Within the economic system the fossil fuel industry and related activities are seen as the primary source of climate change: “Anthropogenic global warming is being caused by the high greenhouse gases emissions, whose main source is the hydrocarbon combustion processes associated with the production and consumption of energy” (Manifesto 2). International and national political players were presented as the ones to blame for the current state of the climate, as they keep allowing fossil fuel extraction: “Trump is a public advocate of fracking and coal (...) Trump’s oil agenda has led to the “People’s Climate Movement in the USA”, the ones making the plea for the international demonstration on the 29th of April” (Manifesto 2). At a national level, political leaders and the current national government are considered responsible for perpetuating the conditions for “business as usual” and there is a perceived lack of climate action:
In Portugal, besides the action plans and strategies, concrete changes aiming to save the climate are still missing. To do so, one of the priorities must be to cancel all 15 concessions to exploit gas and oil along the Portuguese coast, from Algarve to Beira, from West to the Alentejo Coast (Manifesto 1).
In turn, the Portuguese government is accused of sending “mixed messages” (Manifesto 1) and “contradicting the spirit of the Paris Agreement” (Manifesto 2), as on the one hand “(...) declared that Portugal would be carbon-neutral by 2050. [Yet,] two months later, the government gave GALP/ENI a license to proceed with an offshore gas and oil prospection next to Aljezur” (Manifesto 2). From the perspective of the SMOs a “coherent climate policy cannot coexist with these oil and shale gas contracts” (Manifesto 1). Despite the importance of local problems, the transnational nature of the protests appears to have a strong influence in diagnosing the problem, as can be seen in the interlink between climate change and the possibility of extracting oil and shale gas in the Portuguese territory:
These concessions are an aberrant signal that there is a future for fossil fuel exploitation, contradicting the spirit of the Paris Agreement, which only a year ago had 191 countries agreeing to contain the rise in temperatures, which means stopping the exploitation of fossil fuels (Manifesto 1).
In this regard, we found similarities between the climate movement and the anti-austerity movement. As found by
As the connection between global concerns and local problems was strongly established in the process of diagnosing the problem (e.g., the threat of fossil fuel exploitation), the path of action presented also involved a national and global plan of action. At a broader level, there were several references to a need for a complete societal change:
As citizens and collectives, we want a country and planet in progress towards a new energetic paradigm, in compliance with human rights, that puts the interests of people and nature before the oil industry. We want another economy, free of concepts and practices that lead us to catastrophe (Manifesto 1).
In both manifestos, the SMOs demanded an energy transition, and explicitly proposed the cancellation of all contracts for oil and gas prospection and drilling along the Portuguese Coast. Furthermore, these solutions were always placed within the need for a broad and wider energy transition, as can be seen in the following quotation: “To fight climate change, it is necessary to have a change that has a just energy transition as the ultimate goal (…)” (Manifesto 2).
Comparing both manifestos, it seems that diagnostic and prognostic framing showed high correspondence (
There is no space for a coherent climatic politics with these contracts. It would be even harder to end these contracts if the government accept the free trade agreements with Canada (CETA - Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, to be signed on the 27th) and the U.S.A (TTIP - Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), which will involve an increase in the level of greenhouses emissions, as well as the privileges of big corporations (Manifesto 1).
In terms of motivational framing, SMOs seemed to have constructed the manifestos by empathizing the severity of the problem and the urgency of action. The description of the climate change impacts and consequences is strongly emphasized in the diagnostic framing problem. Sentences and expressions indicating the gravity of problem were essentially related to global warming: “the planet is boiling” (Manifesto 1), “2015 was the warmest year on record” (Manifesto 1), and “the magnitude of greenhouse gases emissions has exceeded the planet’s natural capacity to remove those gases from the atmosphere” (Manifesto 2). Considering that despite its global dimensions, climate change is experienced locally (
A look at the number and scope of the organizations involved in the organization of the marches revealed forthwith that the climate movement in Portugal is concerned with human rights, climate vulnerability, climate jobs, transition to renewable energies, and new forms of economy. The introduction of such concerns is a clear sign that the climate movement in Portugal is establishing a link between climate change and other social and political concerns, as a form of frame bridging (
Therefore, based on the definition of climate justice (
This article presents the results of two studies, focusing on the same two climate demonstrations. Taken together these studies give us a better understanding of the climate movement in Portugal, on the role of socio-demographic and socio-psychological predictors of collective action, and the frames used by the SMOs to promote the demonstrations. Overall, our analysis revealed a stable and continuous pattern of participation (
Instead, moral motivation and identification as an environmentalist are the two most important variables explaining the participation of individuals in demonstrations. Specifically, the role of moral motivation, as a set of personal conceptions of what is right gives us interesting insights on the importance creating and developing an idea of what is “right or wrong” for the planet, ourselves, other people, and other species. If we believe that protecting the planet is the right thing to do, the probability of behaving in accordance with that may increase. However, to act as an effective driver, moral motivation may need to be complemented with a sense of moral obligation to intervene through collective action (
Regarding the non-significant role of perceived effectiveness of demonstrations and self-focused anger, we argued that such dimensions can be useful to predict collective action intentions as previous studies have shown (e.g.,
Furthermore, as expected, the Portuguese climate movement seems to be using climate justice as a master frame (
Our results are based on a case study of Portuguese climate change protests in two particular demonstrations. These have been some clear limitations in terms of the ability to help to understand other movements in other contexts. Future research should examine whether these results can be applied to other contexts and other forms of collective action in climate change issues.
Regarding the quantitative study, at least four major limitations can be identified in our instrument. First, the role of efficacy could have been influenced by the fact that we measure the perceived effectiveness of demonstrations and not the group’s efficacy. The same argument could be used to the variable anger. Secondly, measures of moral motivation should differentiate between moral obligation and moral convictions, as recent studies have shown (
It is also possible that a self-selection bias (
Another potential limitation is that we did not properly explore the mobilization side of protest in Study 2. Although we have partially looked at this by analyzing the manifestos, the documents analyzed were relatively short and provided limited information. Additionally, a complementary analysis, with participation-observation and interviews with leaders and activists within the movement, would improve the ability to explain the protests. Further studies should also look at the process of framing construction through political ethnography. Such methodological approach could also help to understand the process of framing construction and development and distinguish the framings of SMOs from those of activists and participants with no organizational affiliation (
Furthermore, our studies would achieve a higher potential if we had linked Studies 1 and 2 better, for example, by including in Study 1 questions related to the manifestos. Additionally, further research should look at how dimensions of place attachment and place identity (
Although we were still very exploratory in this research, we believe that our findings support the need for research integrating structural and motivational approaches (
The supplemental materials files contain the questionnaire items used in Study 1, the materials analyzed in Study 2 (Manifesto 1 and 2), and the triangulation findings and materials (Manifesto 3 and 4) (for access see Index of
The supplementary files are:
S1. Questionnaire items
S2. Full manifestos
S3. Triangulation findings and materials
This work was supported by a postdoctoral research fellowship [grant number SFRH/BPD/103371/2014] and by funds of the Center for Psychological Research and Social Intervention (Cis-IUL, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL) – Ref. UID/PSI/03125/2013), both funded by the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia).
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
We would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their thoughtful contributions and efforts towards improving our manuscript. A special thanks to Aline Flor, Carla Malafaia, Carla Sousa, Daniela F. de Freitas, Daniela Subtil, Diogo Nunes, Patrícia Aprijo, Pedro D. Ferreira, Sofia Barrocas, Sofia Santos, and Tânia R. Santos for collaborating in data collection in Study 1. Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to the participants in our study, for their time and patience in completing the questionnaire.