4.4.1.3 Social movements as norm entrepreneurs

Socio-behavioural change has to begin somewhere. For example, actors committed to an alternative norm or behaviour may be able to seed complex contagion. Social movements and civil society groups can be such initiators, and often have been in the past. For instance, the abolitionist movement was crucial for abolishing slave trade and slavery (Oldfield, 2013). Social movements create social change by creating new norms, practices or beliefs, denormalising the status quo and bringing particular issues to the attention of the public. (Nardini et al., 2020; Pathak et al., 2022)

Such movements are particularly powerful when they can integrate their identity and the new norm, i.e. when they become the change they want to see in the world (Smith et al., 2014). Climate movements were identified as one among 10 main drivers to achieve (deep) decarbonisation by 2050 by triggering disruptive change through a range of actions, including campaigning, protest, climate litigation, boycotts and civil disobedience (Muñoz et al., 2018; Wasow, 2020; Engels et al., 2023; Nisbett and Spaiser, 2023). 

Social movements must strike a balance between publicity and alienating the public, though (Zhou, 2016), as the successful seeding of complex contagion relies on diverse allies, who can reinforce and multiply the messages of the movement, by introducing it to communities lying outside a movement’s direct spheres of social influence (Nardini et al., 2020; Nisbett and Spaiser, 2023). Together, social movements and their supportive sympathisers can reach the ‘sweet spot’ (around 10,000) in scaling social change (Bhowmik et al., 2020) through a ripple effect (Figure 4.4.2). 

Some research suggests that the threshold for social movement mobilisation necessary to achieve broader social change can range between 3.5 per cent and 25 per cent of the population (Chenoweth and Stephan, 2011; Centola et al., 2018); however, these estimates have a lot of uncertainty and are likely to be context specific. For example, the research conducted by Chenoweth and Stephan, (2011) analysed 323 country cases and found that when at least 3.5 per cent of the population actively participated in non-violent civil disobedience, their political demands were successful. However, none of these cases involved a Western liberal democracy, and all involved regime change, not system-wide transformation to a post-carbon economy. There is also evidence that mundane features of many societies, such as the diversity of preferences and beliefs, how interdependent the culture is, and whether there are in- and out-group dynamics or strong social identity groups, have implications for whether and how social change spreads through social networks (Ehret et al., 2022; Constantino et al., 2022). Relatedly, a wider, diverse network of allies is often crucial for social movements to take hold. 

Generally speaking, social movements emerge and create social change often through individuals with a strong urge to ‘change the world’, who inspire others around them, creating a vocal minority that can transcend the collective action problem (failure of a group of individuals to achieve common good), particularly when presented with a sufficiently large and certain threat requiring collective response (Ronzoni, 2019; Barrett and Dannenberg, 2014). Through traditional and new digital media, the movement spreads to other locations and communities. Grassroots groups coordinate their activities and actions, building a networked, international social movement with multiple leaders that mobilise key stakeholders and the public (Figure 4.4.2). As we will discuss in 4.4.2, once social movements have successfully mobilised a committed, well-organised minority (activists and allies/sympathisers) around a common cause they can affect political change.

Changes in social norms are often contentious. New norms challenge existing norms and behaviours and the privileges and power structures that underpin them. This inevitably provokes resistance and backlash from those benefiting from existing norms and behaviours (Bloomfield and Scott, 2017), or whose social identities and values are closely aligned with them. It is therefore not surprising that research has identified a surge in denial and climate action delay arguments as well as a backlash against climate movements that challenge business-as-usual (Lamb et al., 2020; Falkenberg et al., 2022; Vowles and Hultman 2022; Nisbett and Spaiser, 2023). As has been noted earlier in this report, forces trying to preserve the current state of the system are likely to increase as we approach a tipping point. Despite the backlash, some new norms, like the anti-fossil fuel norms, have nevertheless been able to gain increasing traction (Harvey, 2023).