The Political Consequences of the Anti-Globalization Movement.

Debates surrounding the anti-globalization movement have, by and large, been characterized by confusion about the fundamental nature and precise consequences of the movement. In order to remedy this situation, this paper will do three things. First, I will attempt to construct an appropriate definition of the movement that is broad enough to include what is colloquially referred to as the anti-globalization movement but narrow enough to provide some conceptual clarity. In this respect, I hope to show that the anti-globalization movement is best understood as the set of actors who coordinate, organize and mobilize transnationally in opposition to neoliberal globalization. Second, I will attempt to catalogue and categorize the various outcomes that have been attributed to the anti-globalization movement by reviewing the claims of pundits, activists and scholars. Here I hope to show that the movement has been more successful in achieving sensitizing victories than it has been in achieving procedural, substantive and, especially, structural change. Finally, I will attempt to provide explanations for these outcomes by incorporating the insights of social movement theory. By doing this, I hope to show that the varying levels of success across different outcome areas is the result of the fact that the unique combination of movement, target and environmental variables makes the movement more likely to succeed in the sensitizing realm than it does in the procedural, substantive and structural arenas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]