Why mobilisation is not enough: the cost-concession threshold and digitally enabled collective action in authoritarian and semi-authoritarian contexts

Résumé

Digital mobilisation theory has made substantial advances in explaining how social movements scale in speed and scope through networked communication platforms. Yet a persistent explanatory gap remains: why does digitally enabled mobilisation produce government concession in some cases and severe repression in others, even when the mobilisation process is structurally comparable? This article introduces the Cost-Concession Threshold (CCT) framework to address this gap. The framework proposes that the probability of state concession following digital mobilisation is not primarily determined by the scale or speed of mobilisation but by three structural state-level conditions operating jointly: the ideological stakes of concession for regime legitimacy, the cohesion of the governing elite coalition under pressure, and the universality of the grievance driving protest. When all three conditions simultaneously favour a low threshold, concession is more probable. When any one is elevated, the threshold rises; when all three are high, concession becomes structurally constrained regardless of mobilisation scale. The framework is developed through a structured focused comparison of two contemporaneous cases: Nepal (September 2025) and Iran (December 2025 to present), which share digital mobilisation, leaderless coordination, and state digital restriction but produced diametrically opposite outcomes. Each case is assessed using a three-level directional scoring rubric (Low/Moderate/High) applied to observable institutional indicators for each condition. All three threshold conditions diverged completely between the cases, producing a natural analytical contrast. Four falsifiable predictions are generated, testable against Bangladesh (2024), Sri Lanka (2022), Sudan (2019), and further authoritarian contexts. The framework bridges network theory, political opportunity structure theory, the authoritarian resilience literature, and emerging scholarship on platform governance and transnational digital activism to offer a generalisable model with direct implications for movement strategy, international communication, and comparative political science.

Citer ce document

Accès au document

Texte intégral en lecture en ligne, réservé aux abonnés SPHAERO et aux membres de l'institution. Se connecter

Auteur(s)

Statistiques

Consultations : 1

Téléchargements : 0