Who Protests and Why? The Impact of Socio-Economic Status on Protest Participation in Taiwan

Main Article Content

Jun-deh Wu
Yi-bin Chang


In recent years, protest activities happened frequently in Taiwan. These protests have had profound conseąuences and changed the landscape of Taiwanese politics. Therefore, it is important to know who protests and why these people protest. This paper aims to answer two questions. First, what kind of people (according to their Socio-Economic Status, SES) is more likely to participate in protest? Second, how does SES influence protest participation? Our hypotheses are drawn from grievance theories, resources model and cultural change theory. We hypothesize that in Taiwan, people with higher SES tend to join in protest. The mechanisms are material condition, civic skills, and the value of post- materialism. Empirically, taking advantage of the World Values Survey 2010-2012, we use confirmatory factor analysis to construct an indicator of SES including education, income, and class. Then, we conduct structural equation modeling to test the mechanisms through which SES exerts influences. We find that in Taiwan, people with higher SES are more likely to protest. Moreover, civic skills are the most important mechanisms. Material condition also has a positive effect. Although the value of post- materialism can influence protest participation, whether people hold this value is unrelated to their SES.

Article Details

How to Cite
Wu, J.- deh, & Chang, Y.- bin. (2017). Who Protests and Why? The Impact of Socio-Economic Status on Protest Participation in Taiwan. Warsaw Forum of Economic Sociology, 8(16), 47-74. Retrieved from https://econjournals.sgh.waw.pl/wfes/article/view/547


Barnes, S.H., Kaase, M. (1979), Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies, Beverly Hills: Sage
Brady, H.E., Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L. (1995), 'Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation',American Political Science Review, 89 (2): 271-294
Collier, P., Hoeffler, A. (2004),'Greed and Grievance in Civil War', Oxford Economic Papers,56 (4): 563-595
Dalton, R.J. (1996), Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Western Democracies (2nd ed.), Chatham: Chatham House
Dalton, R.J., Van Sickle, A., Weldon, S. (2010), 'The Individual-Institutional Nexus of Protest Behaviour',British Journal of Political Science, 40 (1): 51-73
Dalton, R.J., Wattenberg, M.P. (eds.) (2000), Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies,Oxford: Oxford University Press
Davies, J.C. (1962), 'Toward a Theory of Revolution', American Sociological Review, 27 (1): 5-19
Fearon, J.D., Laitin, D.D. (2003), 'Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War',American Political Science Review, 97 (1): 75-90
Gurr, T.R. (1968), 'A Causal Model of Civil Strife: A Comparative Analysis Using New Indices',American Political Science Review, 62 (4): 1104-1124
Gurr, T.R. (1970), Why Men Rebel, Princeton: Princeton University Press
Huntington, S.P. (1968), Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven: Yale University Press
Inglehart, R. (1977), The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics, Princeton: Princeton University Press
Inglehart, R. (1990), Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society, Princeton: Princeton University Press
Inglehart, R. (1997),Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press
Inglehart, R., Welzel, C. (2005), Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University Press
Jenkins, J. C., Klandermans, B. (eds.) (1995), The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives on States and Social Movements, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
Klandermans, B. (2003), 'Collective Political Action', in: Sears, D.O., Huddy, L., Robert, J. (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press
McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., Tilly, C. (2001), Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Midlarsky, M.I. (1982), 'Scarcity and Inequality: Prologue to the Onset of Mass Revolution',Journal of Conflict Resolution, 26 (1): 3-38
Midlarsky, M.I. (1988), 'Rulers and the Ruled: Patterned Inequality and the Onset of Mass Political Violence', American Political Science Review, 82 (2): 491-509
Milbrath, L.W., Goel, M.L. (1977), Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics? (2nd ed.), Chicago: Rand McNally
Muller, E.N. (1985), 'Income Inequality, Regime Repressiveness, and Political Violence', American Sociological Review, 82 (1): 47-61
Muller, E.N., Seligson, M.A. (1987), 'Inequality and Insurgency', American Political Science Review, 81 (2): 425-451
Norris, P. (2002), Democratic Phoenix: ReinventingPolitical Activism, New York: Cambridge University Press
Putnam, R.D. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon and Schuster
Russett, B.M. (1964), 'Inequality and Instability: The Relation of Land Tenure to Politics', World Politics, 16 (3): 442-454
Sambanis, N. (2002), 'A Review of Recent Advances and Future Directions in the Quantitative Literature on Civil War',Defence and Peace Economics, 13 (3): 215-243
Schattschneider, E.E. (1960), The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston
Scott, J. (1985),Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance, New Haven: Yale University Press
Seligson, M.A. (1996), 'Agrarian Inequality and the Theory of Peasant Rebellion', Latin American Research Review, 31 (2): 140-157
Verba, S., Nie, N.H. (1972), Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality, New York: Harper and Row
Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., Brady, H.E. (1995), Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics, Cambridge: Harvard
Wattenberg, M.P. (2000),The Decline of American Political Parties, 1952-1996, Cambridge: Haryard University Press