動員論と行為論、及び第三のアプローチ

方法論的差異と社会運動の「質」

抄録

　The purpose of this paper is two-fold. Firstly, it aims to reveal the methodological difference between Mobilization theory and Action theory (the two leading theories in international studies on social movements) through an analysis of the development process of the two. Secondly, it attempts to provide a third potential approach after making clear the problematic issues deriving from the hiatus between them: that is to say, subjects that are not addressed therein.　Specifically, after pointing in the first section to the significance of the two theories in international studies, the second section points out the current problems deriving from debates on the differences (in variables or interpretive frameworks) of the two theories in the 1980s, stressing the necessity for their careful re-examination with reference to Japanese review literature. The third section first analyzes the development process of the two theories since the 1960s, and then reveals the methodological differences between them. The author stresses that while Mobilization theory focuses on explaining the causal mechanism of the formation, development and decline of social movements, the Action theory aims at the socio-historical evaluation of the significance of various phenomena on the macro level. The fourth section makes clear the necessity for a Third approach in order to address subjects omitted in the two former. The author argues that this Third approach should focus on explaining the mechanism of the quality of social movements. The outline of the Third approach is presented by focusing on the institutional level in terms of the relationship between the welfare regime types and the conflict issues in the 1960-80s.