Abstract

Resource Mobilization Theory (RMT) posits that the key to social movement organizations’ (SMOs’) success is their ability to mobilize resources. Yet there has been little research verifying this claim. This study uses the case of post-Soviet rural Lithuania to test the link between human, social, material, and organizational resources of SMOs and three types of organizational impacts: issue awareness, local support, and media coverage. Using original data from 165 rural advocacy organizations that spans the period of 2004 to 2006, we demonstrate that the effects of different resources vary in significance and strength for differentoutcomes. Furthermore, no single resource type consistently predicts all impacts. This research contributes to RMT by (1) identifying which resource types predict specific organizational impacts, (2) extending RMT to the unique context of post-Soviet Lithuania, and (3) illuminating the relationship between resources and impacts for an understudied unit of analysis (small, newly founded nonprofessionalized organizations).

摘要

资源动员理论（RMT）认为，社会运动组织（SMO）成功的关键在于其动员资源的能力。然而，很少有研究证实这一说法。本研究以后苏联立陶宛农村为例，测试了SMO的人力，社会，物质和组织资源与三种组织影响之间的联系：问题意识，当地支持和媒体报道。利用2004年至2006年间165个农村倡导组织的原始数据，我们证明了不同资源的效果在不同结果的重要性和强度上各不相同。此外，没有任何一种资源类型能够一致地预测所有影响。这项研究通过（1）确定哪些资源类型可预测特定的组织影响，从而为RMT做出贡献，