When do indigenous and other negatively affected populations mobilize against fossil fuel companies? We revisit social movement theory and environmental literature to identify three factors that may plausibly shape mobilization decisions of negatively affected populations—democratic institutions, community perceptions of government shaped by land tenure security, and firm attributes. Democratic institutions afford more opportunities for affected populations to air their grievances through protests than non-democratic ones. Land tenure security guaranteed by government contributes to the perception among affected populations that their objectives are better achieved through government mediation than protests. Characteristics of fossil fuel firms, such as state ownership, also shape activist perceptions of government credibility as a mediator. By analyzing fifty-seven countries over the period 1990 to 2013, we find that democracy and state ownership of fossil fuel firms are positively associated with protests, whereas land tenure security is negatively associated.

土著和其他受到不利影响的人口何时动员起来反对化石燃料公司？我们重新审视了社会运动理论和环境文献，以找出可能合理地影响受负面影响的人群的动员决策的三个因素：民主制度，由土地使用权保障形成的社区对政府的看法以及公司属性。民主机构比非民主机构有更多机会通过抗议来表达他们的不满。政府保证的土地使用权安全有助于使受影响的人们认识到，通过政府的调解，他们的目标比抗议更好地实现了他们的目标。化石燃料公司的特征，例如国有制，也形成了激进主义者对政府作为调停者的公信力的看法。