International Peace Protest Survey (IPPS)
On February 15 2003, mass protests against an imminent war on Iraq mobilized millions of people throughout the world. More than seven million people took to the streets, in more than 300 cities throughout the world. These were the largest peace protests since the Vietnam War, and that on one single day. In the run-up to the February 15 events an international team of social movement scholars co-ordinated by the Belgian team of Stefaan Walgrave initiated probably the largest international cooperative cross-national protest survey ever. Over 10,000 questionnaires were distributed in eight countries on the same day and on the same kind of protest events: demonstrations in the U.K., Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, U.S.A., Spain, Germany and Belgium were covered.
Important remarks:
About 6,000 completed questionnaires have been send back, with a successful response rate of well above 50% . All teams used almost identical questionnaires with only minor national adaptations; the questionnaires were handed out following the same field survey method. The questionnaires and the field method had been explored and developed in earlier Belgian research on protest demonstrations by Walgrave & Van Aelst (2001) (cf. also Norris, Walgrave & Van Aelst (2003)). Both field research method as well as the identitical questionnaires can be found underneath. There is no doubt that this innovative survey will deliver unique comparative research material. We sum up just some of the potential research questions:
All these questions belong to the core subject matter of contemporary social movement research. More generally, these questions are very relevant in the light of the recent rise in protest politics and unconventional political participation in most Western democracies. Until now, only a limited number of comparative social movement studies have been carried out. Even fewer of these comparative social movement studies have relied on survey material, let alone that they have been based on identical questionnaires, methods and timing in a real comparative design. We do believe that these data could yield an important contribution to comparative social movement research. Comparison not only has evident empirical advantages, it also allows a more far-reaching, thematic and thus theory-building approach. In short: these innovative data will provide insights that were unable to be explored in the past, on the micro level of individuals' features as well as on the meso organizational and on the macro societal level.
The composition of the international research team will secure to fully exploit the richness of the dataset. Besides country-specific knowledge in the field of social movement and protest, the different teams have different yet compatible and complementary research interests rooted in their own specific research traditions. The Italian team, for example, has a reputation in the field of protest, violence, repression and protest policing. The UK team has an interest in the relationship between the concurring emergence and evolution of new social movements and green parties. The Dutch team has a firm research programme in the micro-level social psychology of protest. The US team has an interest in the role of the new media in the social movements' communication. The Swiss team is focused on the antiglobalization movement, and its links with antiwar protests. The German team has a large scope of themes and has been active in many different subfields of social movement research, especially theoretical and transnational movement issues. The Spanish team's research activity focuses on the relationship between social protests, movement's organisations, public opinion and public policy, especially in the field of environmental politics, as well as on innovative forms of participatory democracy. The Belgian team has done research in the domain of specific mobilization, and the role of the media therein.
Ultimately, the data provide an opportunity to explore the timely and highly debated question of the existence of transnational social movements, which is a research interest of all project participants. It is exactly this thematic compatibility of the different participating groups, that warrants an intense and stimulating collaboration and the production of a landmark in the field of protest and social movement.
Important remarks:
- All data of the IPPS project are available (see below) and free to use with appropriate reference: International Peace Protest Survey (IPPS) 2003, with Stefaan Walgrave (coordinator), Joris Verhulst (Belgium), Bert Klandermans (Netherlands), Dieter Rucht (Germany), Michelle Beyeler (Switzerland), Donatella della Porta and Mario Diani (Italy), Lance W. Bennett (US), Wolfgang Rüdig (UK) and Manuel Jiménez (Spain). Available online at www.m2p.be/IPPS.
- All participating countries in this project used the same field survey method, except for the Italian team. They distributed surveys on trains travelling from different regions in the country towards Rome. The fact that the Italian team used a different method, should be systematically taken into account when interpreting the data!
About 6,000 completed questionnaires have been send back, with a successful response rate of well above 50% . All teams used almost identical questionnaires with only minor national adaptations; the questionnaires were handed out following the same field survey method. The questionnaires and the field method had been explored and developed in earlier Belgian research on protest demonstrations by Walgrave & Van Aelst (2001) (cf. also Norris, Walgrave & Van Aelst (2003)). Both field research method as well as the identitical questionnaires can be found underneath. There is no doubt that this innovative survey will deliver unique comparative research material. We sum up just some of the potential research questions:
- Who demonstrates? Is it the 'typical' protester, or can we establish a variety of demonstrators' profiles?
- Who mobilized? Are the demonstrators mobilized through existing social movement networks, or do we find many who do not belong to any social movement constituency? Have the peace protests mobilized people who have never took part in a protest before (first timers)? What is the role of new and old media in the mobilization?
- Why do people demonstrate? And what do they expect from their participation? Do their discontentment and protest activism has consequences for their conventional political participation?
- What are the differences and similarities between the protesters in the different countries? Are the protests only a temporary compilation of different protests, or can we speak of a true transnational movement which would suppose that the international similarities are more important than the mutual differences?
- How can one account for the differences between the countries? Is it a matter of the respective national opportunity structures, e.g. national governments supporting (USA, UK, Spain, Italy) or opposing (Germany, Belgium) the war? Or must differences in turnout and the protesters' features be attributed to diverging national protest repertoires, protest cultures or available social movement networks?
All these questions belong to the core subject matter of contemporary social movement research. More generally, these questions are very relevant in the light of the recent rise in protest politics and unconventional political participation in most Western democracies. Until now, only a limited number of comparative social movement studies have been carried out. Even fewer of these comparative social movement studies have relied on survey material, let alone that they have been based on identical questionnaires, methods and timing in a real comparative design. We do believe that these data could yield an important contribution to comparative social movement research. Comparison not only has evident empirical advantages, it also allows a more far-reaching, thematic and thus theory-building approach. In short: these innovative data will provide insights that were unable to be explored in the past, on the micro level of individuals' features as well as on the meso organizational and on the macro societal level.
The composition of the international research team will secure to fully exploit the richness of the dataset. Besides country-specific knowledge in the field of social movement and protest, the different teams have different yet compatible and complementary research interests rooted in their own specific research traditions. The Italian team, for example, has a reputation in the field of protest, violence, repression and protest policing. The UK team has an interest in the relationship between the concurring emergence and evolution of new social movements and green parties. The Dutch team has a firm research programme in the micro-level social psychology of protest. The US team has an interest in the role of the new media in the social movements' communication. The Swiss team is focused on the antiglobalization movement, and its links with antiwar protests. The German team has a large scope of themes and has been active in many different subfields of social movement research, especially theoretical and transnational movement issues. The Spanish team's research activity focuses on the relationship between social protests, movement's organisations, public opinion and public policy, especially in the field of environmental politics, as well as on innovative forms of participatory democracy. The Belgian team has done research in the domain of specific mobilization, and the role of the media therein.
Ultimately, the data provide an opportunity to explore the timely and highly debated question of the existence of transnational social movements, which is a research interest of all project participants. It is exactly this thematic compatibility of the different participating groups, that warrants an intense and stimulating collaboration and the production of a landmark in the field of protest and social movement.