Endre Borbáth

Despite growing attention to the resurgence of environmental, and especially climate-related mobilisation in Europe, comparative assessments across countries and over time are lacking. Using classic social movement theories (grievances, opportunities, resources), we examine the frequency, profile, and drivers of environmental protest. We conduct a two-step analysis based on the updated PolDem protest event dataset covering 27 European countries from 2000 to 2021. We move from descriptive accounts to dynamic regressions, modelling the cross-national and temporal variation in the number of environmental protests, the participants involved, and their share of all events. The results highlight 2019 as pivotal for environmental protests, with a peak in participants and heightened salience in Europe’s protest landscape. Typical environmental protests are well-attended, symbolic, and confrontational actions, exclusively focussed on the issue, and draw support from both professional and non-professional organisations. Temporal variation in the number and share of environmental protests is related to proxy measures for resources in the environmental field, while participation rates correlate with political opportunities as measured by governments’ positions on environmental protection. Thus, the simultaneous presence of opportunities and resources tends to create an ‘explosive mix’, fuelling environmental protest dynamics.

Recent changes in European politics—such as the rise of so-called movement parties on both the left and the right—call for a rethinking of the links between protest dynamics and party system transformation. In this paper, we contribute to the theoretical and empirical understanding of the mechanisms that unfold in periods of intensified interactions between protest and electoral politics through a case study of the transformation of the Hungarian party system. We ask what mechanisms drive parties’ involvement in protests before and after entering parliament. We focus on two competitors: the radical right Movement for a Better Hungary (Jobbik) and the green party Politics Can Be Different (LMP). Using a dataset of protest events compiled from Hungarian news agency reports and official police records, we map the protest network mobilized by the two parties between 2002 and 2022. We analytically distinguish and empirically identify three different mobilization mechanisms: strengthening the party’s profile by protesting its own issue, using protest mobilization to build alliances with other parties and actors, or relying on protest to establish a presence at the local level. The empirical results show that Jobbik relies on protest through a combination of different mechanisms, while LMP uses protest to broaden its issue profile and build alliances with other political parties. Over time, both parties increasingly rely on protest to establish a local presence outside of Budapest.

Wie sind Konflikte um die Themen Klimawandel und Covid-19 in den politischen Raum eingebettet? Verstärken sie die Polarisierung entlang der kulturellen Konfliktdimension oder liegen sie quer zu den herkömmlichen Konfliktdimensionen? Im Buchkapitel werden die beiden Themen als Risikokonflikte konzeptualisiert und im Kontext der langfristigen Restrukturierung des Parteienwettbewerbs analysiert. Die politische Angebots- und Nachfrageseite wird anhand des Politbarometers, der Nachwahlbefragungen der GLES und Daten zu Wahlkämpfen von 1976 und von 1994 bis 2021 untersucht. Die Ergebnisse bestätigen die Bedeutung des Klimawandels und der Covid-19-Pandemie für die Bundestagswahl 2021. Die langfristige Restrukturierung des politischen Raums in Deutschland folgt Trends in anderen westeuropäischen Ländern. Zudem sind Klimawandel und Covid-19 als Risikokonflikte zumindest bis 2021 im zweidimensionalen Raum verankert und verstärken die Polarisierung entlang der kulturellen Dimension

The political participation literature has documented a long-term trend of the normalization of noninstitutional participation that is often equated with the conventionalization of engagement in protest politics. Less is known on the extent to which noninstitutional forms are differentiated by their mobilization context. Population surveys find it difficult to contextualize individual engagement, and on-site surveys point to effects that are hard to generalize. This study fills this gap by emphasizing differentiation and distinguishing participation according to the issue of engagement. It introduces a conceptual distinction between political insiders and outsiders, defined based on the extent to which they are embedded in the organizational landscape of the dominant cleavage dimension. Using an original survey conducted in Germany during the Covid-19 crisis, the analysis demonstrates that general-population surveys are fit to examine issue-specific participation patterns. The results expose an insider and outsider divide, captured by the effect of attitudinal and behavioral indicators, and demonstrates that the two groups are equally likely to participate in noninstitutional forms. However, insiders engage on the established issues of climate and anti-racism, whereas outsiders engage on the new issues of Covid-19 related economic assistance and civil liberties restrictions. In addition, dynamic models reveal that noninstitutional participation is rooted in volatile issue preferences. Overall, the paper argues that participation during the Covid-19 crisis has furthered the trend towards a differentiated protest arena.