SOCIAL-MOVEMENTS AND INSTITUTIONAL SELECTIVITY

Contrary to what is usually implied by work on the relationship betwee n political opportunity structures and social movements, political ins titutions are not a general setting offering or denying formal access and political opportunities to every challenge, but rather favor certa in types of movements and constrain others. This process of institutio nal selectivity depends on the relationship between the structure of a given political institution and the movement type and defines social movements as pro-institutional, counter-institutional, or neutral. Acc ordingly, variation in the movements' action repertoire and degree of success can be observed. Yet, political institutions leave the door op en to different interpretations by social actors so that a framing str uggle takes place; at stake is the fit between movement demands and th e structure of political institutions. The argument is developed throu gh the example of federalism and its impact on two types of movements- namely, regionalist and squatters' movements-and illustrated by discus sing their fate in France, the Netherlands and Switzerland Empirical d ata suggest that institutional selectivity is to be taken into account to reach a better understanding of the relationship between social mo vements and their political context.