Gunzelmann, Hans Jonas
A icle — Published Ve sion
How c i ical junc u es shape secessionis mo emen cohesion:
S a egies, aming p ocesses, and in e o ganiza ional ela ions be o e
and a e he 2017 e e endum in Ca alonia
Jou nal o Peace Resea ch Jou nal o Peace Resea ch
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Gunzelmann, Hans Jonas (2025) : How c i ical junc u es shape secessionis
mo emen cohesion: S a egies, aming p ocesses, and in e o ganiza ional ela ions be o e and
a e he 2017 e e endum in Ca alonia, Jou nal o Peace Resea ch Jou nal o Peace Resea ch, ISSN
1460-3578, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, Vol. 62, Iss. 4, pp. 961-975,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/00223433241258368
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/310917.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/00223433241258368
Jou nal o Peace Resea ch
2025, Vol. 62(4) 961 –975
© The Au ho (s) 2024
A icle euse guidelines:
sagepub.com/jou nals-pe missions
DOI: 10.1177/00223433241258368
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/jp
In oduc ion
The compa a i e li e a u e on secessionis con lic s
o en ea s p o-independence mo emen s as uni a y
ac o s (G i i hs, 2016; G i i hs and Wasse , 2019;
Si oky and Cu e, 2015; So ens, 2012), bu i has also
been acknowledged ha mo emen s in ac a e o en
comp ised o a mul i ude o collec i e ac o s, anging
om poli ical pa ies and ci ic o ganiza ions o a med
mili ias and e o is g oups (Cunningham, 2014).
Whe he hese ac o s wo k oge he in he pu sui o
independence is an impo an ques ion. P e ious
esea ch ound ha whe he a mo emen is uni ed o
di ided is decisi e o he ajec o y and ou comes o
sel -de e mina ion con lic s (Cunningham, 2011, 2014;
K ause, 2017; Pea lman and Cunningham, 2012).
Wha d i es he cohesion and agmen a ion o seces-
sionis mo emen s? Gi en he impo ance o he in e -
nal s uc u e o opposi ion mo emen s, esea ch on i s
causes has been g owing (Flie oe and Seymou , 2023:
How c i ical junc u es shape secessionis
mo emen cohesion: S a egies, aming
p ocesses, and in e o ganiza ional ela ions
be o e and a e he 2017 e e endum in
Ca alonia
Hans Jonas Gunzelmann
Cen e o Ci il Socie y Resea ch, WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Ge many
Abs ac
Wha d i es he cohesion o secessionis mo emen s? P e ious esea ch emphasized he ole o in e nal and ex e nal
ac o s bu p oduced mixed esul s ega ding hei e ec s. This a icle ad ances schola ship on his ques ion by
examining he ole o c i ical junc u es as pe iods o heigh ened con ingency ha can shi mo emen s owa ds
agmen a ion o cohesion. I ocuses on independence e e endums and how s a es espond o hem as impo an
c i ical junc u es, and on how hey shape in e o ganiza ional ela ions as a key dimension o mo emen cohesion.
Empi ically, i explo es he e ec s o he 2017 e e endum in Ca alonia using a mixed-me hods esea ch design
ha combines quali a i e inqui y wi h ne wo k analyses o p o es e en da a. The ne wo k analyses showed ha
he mo emen was no ably less cohesi e in he p o es a ena a e he e e endum han du ing he e e endum
campaign. Quali a i e ma e ials we e employed o induc i ely iden i y s a egy aming p ocesses as key mechanisms
o explain his de elopmen . F ame alignmen a ound he e e endum as a sha ed goal led o mo e cohesion du ing
he campaign. A e he e en , a ame dispu e o e he meaning o he e e endum led o di e ging s a egies
and agmen ed he mo emen , as s a e ep ession limi ed he mo emen ’s oom o maneu e . The indings
sugges ha esea ch on secessionis mo emen cohesion should pay mo e a en ion o c i ical junc u es and how
secessionis s make sense o hem.
Keywo ds
Ca alonia, agmen a ion, ame alignmen , independence e e endum, ne wo ks, secessionis mo emen s
Co esponding au ho :
Hans Jonas Gunzelmann, Cen e o Ci il Socie y Resea ch,
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Reichpie schu e 50,
10785 Be lin, Ge many.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
1258368JPR0010.1177/00223433241258368Jou nal o Peace Resea chGunzelmann
esea ch-a icle2024
Regula A icle
962 jou nal o Peace Resea ch 62(4)
168). P e ious esea ch has highligh ed ha cohesion is
he p oduc o ‘dual con es s’ wi hin he mo emen and
wi h he hos s a e (Bakke e al., 2012; Seymou e al.,
2016) bu has p oduced mixed indings on he p ecise
e ec s o hese con es s (e.g. Cunningham, 2014; Fjelde
and Nilsson, 2018; Law ence, 2010; Mosinge , 2018).
Examining hese dual con es s du ing momen s o
c i ical con ingency p omises o shed mo e ligh on his
ques ion. While he analy ical impo ance o c i ical
junc u es and ans o ma i e e en s has long been
acknowledged in compa a i e poli ics and elsewhe e
(Capoccia and Kelemen, 2007; Collie and Collie ,
2002; Mahoney, 2002; McAdam and Sewell, 2001;
Sewell, 1996; Wagne -Paci ici, 2017), he li e a u e on
secessionis con lic s has a ely conside ed hem as an
explana o y ac o . Seymou e al. (2016), o ins ance,
ound ha he onse o ci il wa inc eased mo emen
agmen a ion. McLauchlin and Pea lman (2012)
showed ha ‘ ep ession shocks’ can bo h enhance and
dec ease mo emen cohesion, depending on he o gani-
za ions’ sa is ac ion wi h he mo emen ’s in e nal s uc-
u e. Zooming in on such c i ical junc u es has he
po en ial o e eal he mechanisms ha d i e cohesion
and agmen a ion.
This a icle ocuses on independence e e endums
and how s a es espond o hem, which a guably ep e-
sen he mos impo an c i ical junc u es in secession-
is con lic s besides he onse o ci il wa and he
decla a ion o independence. Re e endums a e a key
s a egy o secessionis mo emen s (Co és Ri e a,
2020; Sanjaume-Cal e , 2021). They open up oppo -
uni ies o ci il socie y ac o s o mobilize independ-
ence suppo e s and o ganize p o es s o pu p essu e
on he hos s a e and a ac he a en ion o he in e -
na ional communi y (Della Po a e al., 2017). As
such, hey may os e cohesion among p o es g oups.
Howe e , e e endums in libe al democ acies a ely
lead o independence (Dion, 1996). Ins ead, hey o en
p oduce a backlash om he hos s a e (Bas a, 2021;
Fe ei a, 2021). The ailu e o achie e independence
may also demobilize suppo e s (Lecou s, 2018).
Coun e -secessionis ep ession and demobiliza ion
may in u n c ea e con lic wi hin he secessionis
mo emen (Gade, 2020; Gunzelmann, 2022; K ause,
2023). Independence e e endums hus ep esen
momen s o heigh ened con ingency du ing which he
ac ions o secessionis and s a e ac o s may ha e las ing
consequences o mo emen cohesion.
Empi ically, he a icle ocuses on he 2017 inde-
pendence e e endum in Ca alonia, which was unila e -
ally called by secessionis s and me wi h se e e opposi ion
by he Spanish s a e. Al hough he e e endum was sus-
pended by he Cons i u ional Cou , wo million
Ca alans cas hei o es la gely in a o o independence
on 1 Oc obe and he Ca alan pa liamen decla ed inde-
pendence 4 weeks la e . This led o a se e e ins i u ional
c isis, which in ol ed he suspension o he egion’s
au onomy and a ial ha ended wi h long p ison sen-
ences o he mo emen leade s (Fe ei a, 2021; López
and Sanjaume-Cal e , 2020).
I de elop a no el app oach o mo emen cohesion,
which highligh s in e o ganiza ional ela ions as a key
dimension. Whe he secessionis o ganiza ions collabo-
a e in collec i e ac ions ep esen s a c ucial indica o o
he mo emen ’s in e nal s uc u e, bu i has a ely been
sc u inized (Gade e al., 2019b). Fu he mo e, esea ch
on mo emen cohesion has p edominan ly ocused on
a med g oups and iolen ac ion (Fjelde and Nilsson,
2018; Gade e al., 2019a, 2019b; Mosinge , 2018). In
con as , his a icle ocuses on collabo a ion in p ima ily
non iolen p o es , which is undamen al o mos seces-
sionis mo emen s (Chenowe h and S ephan, 2011;
G i i hs and Wasse , 2019).
I employed a mixed-me hods esea ch design ha
combined p o es e en da a wi h quali a i e ma e ials o
add ess he esea ch ques ion empi ically. I elabo a ed an
o iginal e en da a se o sel -de e mina ion p o es in
Ca alonia om 2015 o 2019. These da a allowed o a
mo e ine-g ained analysis han p e ious da a a he yea -
le el and we e used o gene a e ne wo ks o in e o ganiza-
ional collabo a ion in collec i e ac ion be o e and a e
he e e endum. Re ospec i e semi-s uc u ed in e iews
wi h key o ganize s we e used o iden i y he mechanisms
explaining he esul s o he ne wo k analyses.
I ound ha he 2017 e e endum was he co ne -
s one o how secessionis ac o s amed hei s a egies.
Be o e he e en , he e e endum as a sha ed goal p o-
ided he basis o cohesion, bu con lic s o e he mean-
ing o he e e endum led o agmen a ion a e wa ds.
While hese indings eme ged induc i ely om he
quali a i e ma e ials, hey a e bes cap u ed by he con-
cep s o ‘ ame alignmen ’ (Snow e al., 1986) and ‘ ame
dispu e’ (Ben o d, 1993). They highligh he ole o
c i ical junc u es and s a egy aming as key mecha-
nisms d i ing secessionis cohesion.
Concep ualizing cohesion: A ela ional
app oach
A cen al dimension o he s uc u e o a secessionis
mo emen is whe he i is cohesi e o agmen ed.1
F agmen a ion and cohesion can be concep ualized as
Gunzelmann 963
opposi e endpoin s o he same spec um (Bakke e al.,
2012; Pea lman, 2011: 25). The mos widesp ead
app oach is o concep ualize and measu e cohesion and
agmen a ion as he numbe o ac i e o ganiza ions
wi hin a mo emen (Flie oe and Seymou , 2023: 166).
In o he wo ds, he mo e o ganiza ions a mo emen has,
he mo e agmen ed i is (Cunningham, 2013a, 2014;
Fjelde and Nilsson, 2018; Seymou e al., 2016).
Howe e , his app oach has been c i icized as oo
one-dimensional (K ause, 2013; Pea lman, 2011: 8). In
esponse, schola s ha e de eloped mo e complex con-
cep ualiza ions. Dowd (2015) included no only he
numbe o o ganiza ions bu also he deg ee o iolence
hey use. Bakke e al. (2012) added ins i u ions and
powe as impo an dimensions. On he o he hand,
K ause (2013, 2017) and Pea lman (2011) dismissed
he impo ance o he numbe o o ganiza ions. While
K ause emphasized he ole o powe wi hin mo emen s,
Pea lman concep ualized mo emen cohesion as he
combina ion o leade ship, ins i u ions and he cons i -
uencies’ ‘sense o collec i e pu pose’ (2011: 23).
This a icle sugges s ha he e is ano he key dimen-
sion o mo emen cohesion and agmen a ion: in e o -
ganiza ional ela ions. In e o ganiza ional ela ions may
ange om con lic o coope a ion.2 O ganiza ions
wi hin he same mo emen migh see each o he as pa -
ne s, compe i o s o e en enemies. The ela ional
dimension is dis inc om o he elemen s o cohesion
and agmen a ion. Fi s , unless a mo emen is ully
uni ied in a single o ganiza ion, in e o ganiza ional ela-
ions a e independen o he numbe o o ganiza ions. A
mo emen wi h a la ge numbe o o ganiza ions ha
ha e iendly ela ions should be conside ed mo e uni ed
han a mo emen ha is di ided in o only wo pola ized
blocks. Second, coope a i e o con lic ual ela ions a e
di e en om powe ela ions. Mo emen s wi h dis-
pe sed powe can be qui e cohesi e i o ganiza ions ha e
iendly ela ions and coope a e. Vice e sa, a mo emen
in which mos powe is concen a ed in one o ganiza-
ion may be less cohesi e i smalle o ganiza ions chal-
lenge he hegemonic o ganiza ion.
The ela ional dimension o mo emen cohesion has
bes been app oached h ough he no ion o ins i u-
ionaliza ion. Bakke e al. (2012) e en s a ed ha ‘ he
deg ee o ins i u ionaliza ion o a mo emen cha ac e -
izes he ies be ween o ganiza ions ha i comp ises’
(2012: 270) bu es ic i o ‘ o mal and in o mal
ules’ (2012: 268). Likewise, Pea lman (2011: 24)
de ined ins i u ions as ‘ he s uc u es and no ms ha
go e n social in e ac ion’. Howe e , his s uc u alis
ocus o e looks ha in e o ganiza ional ela ions can
ake a my iad o o ms. O ganiza ions may collabo a e
in he absence o ules and no ms. Also, he no ion o
ins i u ionaliza ion la gely neglec s he con lic ual side
o in e o ganiza ional ela ions.
This is why i is necessa y o concep ualize and s udy
in e o ganiza ional ela ions in secessionis mo emen s
as a key dimension o cohesion and agmen a ion. The
mos p omising s eps in his di ec ion ha e been made
by Gade e al. (2019a, 2019b) in a pai o complemen-
a y a icles. D awing on da a om he Sy ian ci il wa ,
hey use ne wo k analy ical ools o s udy collabo a ion
and con lic wi hin ebel g oups. Howe e , hei ocus
is p edominan ly on he empi ical ques ion o wi h
whom ebels coope a e o in igh a he han on con-
cep ual conce ns.
I p opose a ela ional concep ualiza ion o mo e-
men cohesion, which es s on an unde s anding o
social mo emen s as ne wo ks o collec i e and indi-
idual ac o s ha sha e a common iden i y and engage
in con lic ual ela ions wi h hei opponen s (Della
Po a and Diani, 2020). The cen al building block a
he meso le el a e collabo a i e ies. Collec i e ac o s
may exchange esou ces and knowledge o may e en
ha e o e lapping membe ship (Baldassa i and Diani,
2007). The dense hese collabo a i e ies, he mo e
cohesi e he mo emen . I is an agg ega e quali y
loca ed a he mo emen le el and should be hough o
as a spec um om 0 (absence o collabo a ion) o 1
(pe manen collabo a ion). The o m o collabo a i e
ies may a y wi h ega d o hei o ganiza ional o m
( o malized o no ), hei geog aphical scope (local,
na ional, ansna ional), and hei du abili y (single
e en s, campaigns, o long- e m alliances) (B ooke and
Meye , 2018; see McCammon and Moon, 2015; Van
Dyke and Amos, 2017).
C i ical junc u es and mo emen cohesion
P e ious esea ch on mo emen cohesion has emphasized
he impo ance o in e ac ions be ween secessionis s and
he s a e as well as among secessionis s hemsel es – wha
Cunningham e al. (2012) and Seymou e al. (2016)
called ‘dual con es s’. Wi h ega d o in e nal dynamics,
he ideological p oximi y o he o ganiza ions ma e s
(Gade e al., 2019a, 2019b), as well as he di e si y o hei
demands, and whe he hey use iolen ac ics (Seymou
e al., 2016). The e is less ag eemen on he ole o he
s a e. Seymou e al. (2016) and Fjelde and Nilsson (2018)
a gue ha accommoda ion inc eases mo emen agmen-
a ion, whe eas Cunningham (2014) ound ha i led o
cohesion in he long un. Cunningham (2014), Law ence
964 jou nal o Peace Resea ch 62(4)
(2010), and Seymou e al. (2016) sugges ha ( iolen )
ep ession leads o agmen a ion, while Fjelde and Nilsson
(2018) ound no e ec .
These mixed indings could be he p oduc o
momen s o heigh ened con ingency ha ip he mo e-
men owa ds cohesion o agmen a ion. Such c i ical
junc u es a e ai ly sho pe iods o choice du ing which
he cou se o his o y is decided (Capoccia and Kelemen,
2007; Collie and Collie , 2002; Mahoney, 2002). They
may ha e long-las ing consequences and become ‘ ans-
o ma i e e en s’ (McAdam and Sewell, 2001; Sewell,
1996). Recen s udies ha e demons a ed he conse-
quences o hese e en s o coali ion building in social
mo emen s (Cio dia, 2021; Po os and Ca alho, 2022;
Wood e al., 2017). This a icle builds heo y on how
c i ical junc u es d i e mo emen cohesion by looking
a independence e e endums.
Independence e e endums ep esen he mos
impo an c i ical junc u es in secessionis con lic s
besides he onse o ci il wa and he decla a ion o
independence (Q o up, 2014a). No all e e endums
a e ac ual decisions on independence, which ul ima ely
depends on in e na ional ecogni ion (Coggins, 2014;
G i i hs, 2017). A key ac o o ecogni ion is whe he
a e e endum is ag eed upon wi h he hos s a e o pu -
sued unila e ally by he secessionis mo emen
(Sanjaume-Cal e , 2021). Theo e ically, he e ec s o
an ag eed e e endum on mo emen cohesion a e
s aigh o wa d: i he p o-independence camp wins
he o e, secession is e y likely and he mo emen
achie es i s goal. I he o e is los , blame a ibu ion
and he lack o op ions going o wa d is likely o
inc ease mo emen agmen a ion.
The e ec s o unila e al e e endums on secessionis
mo emen s a e less clea . On he one hand, unila e al
e e endums ep esen a c ucial oppo uni y o seces-
sionis s. By se ing a da e o he e e endum, secession-
is s da e he cen al go e nmen o eac and hus
sel -c ea e a window o oppo uni y (Co és Ri e a,
2020). B inging in he popula ion o he seceding egion
can be used o le e age he legi imacy o secession
(Sanjaume-Cal e , 2021). Mos impo an ly o he
p o es a ena, e e endums can spa k he mobiliza ion o
suppo e s (Della Po a e al., 2017). Calling a e e en-
dum may also se a sho - e m goal a ound which di e -
en o ganiza ions and pa ies may ally (Della Po a
e al., 2019).
On he o he hand, unila e al e e endums also ca y
isks o secessionis mo emen s. Mos unila e al e e en-
dums do no lead o independence (Sanjaume-Cal e ,
2021). In es ablished democ acies in pa icula , secession
appea s o be i ually impossible (Dion, 1996; Q o up,
2014b). The ailu e o achie e independence may demo-
bilize and exhaus suppo e s (Lecou s, 2018). Simila o
ag eed e e endums, blame a ibu ion and he lack o
op ions going o wa d may lead o in e nal con lic s.
Finally, unila e al e e endums no mally lead o a back-
lash om he hos s a e, including iolen ep ession
(Bas a, 2021). Rep ession, in u n, has been ound o
con ibu e o in e nal con lic s wi hin he mo emen
(Gade, 2020; Law ence, 2010; Seymou e al., 2016).
The emainde o he a icle ocuses on he case o he
Oc obe 2017 e e endum in Ca alonia o explo e hese
con a y expec a ions empi ically. I induc i ely build
heo y on he mechanisms connec ing c i ical junc u es
and mo emen cohesion. The nex sec ion desc ibes he
da a and me hods ha we e used o he empi ical pa .
Me hods and da a
To s udy he impac o independence e e endums on
mo emen cohesion, I employed a mixed-me hods
esea ch design ha consis s o wo pa s. The i s pa
buil on p e ious s udies combining p o es e en and
ne wo k analyses o analyze mo emen cohesion o e
ou phases o con en ion (Bea man and E e e , 1993;
Cio dia, 2021; Pi o e al., 2021; Wang and Soule,
2012): he phase be o e he announcemen o he e e -
endum plan in Oc obe 2016, du ing he e e endum
campaign, du ing he coun e -secessionis backlash igh
a e he e e endum, and he con ac ion o he con lic
in he second yea a e he con lic (see Table 1). The
second pa d ew on quali a i e da a and in pa icula on
semi-s uc u ed in e iews wi h key o ganize s om he
independence mo emen . These ma e ials we e used o
explo e he impac o he 2017 independence e e en-
dum on mo emen cohesion.
P o es e en analysis
In his s udy, cohesion was concep ualized as he den-
si y o collabo a i e ies among collec i e ac o s in a
secessionis mo emen . Collabo a i e ies we e ope a-
ionalized as co-pa icipa ion in con en ious e en s,
ha is, when wo ac o s ake pa in he same p o es
e en (Cio dia, 2021; Wang and Soule, 2012). The
mo e o en wo ac o s p o es oge he , he s onge
he collabo a i e ie be ween hem. Ac o s a e usually
e y conscious o showing hemsel es wi h o he
ac o s in public, which is why co-pa icipa ion is a
good indica o o collabo a i e ies (Cio dia, 2020:
72; Diani, 1995: 99).
Gunzelmann 965
The da a collec ion co e ed sel -de e mina ion (SD)
p o es e en s and hei pa icipa ing ac o s in Ca alonia
om Oc obe 2015 h ough Sep embe 2019. I ollow
Tilly and o he s in de ining p o es as he collec i e,
non- ou ine ac o public claims-making (McAdam
e al., 2001; Tilly, 2008; Tilly and Ta ow, 2015). P o es
e en s a e claims-making ac s ha a e bounded in ime
and space. The da a collec ion included he la ge ca e-
go y o SD p o es s a he han jus secessionis con en-
ion. SD p o es e e s o all public ac s making claims
abou a g oup’s con ol o e i s own a ai s in ela ion o
he s a e (Cunningham, 2014). These demands can be
de ensi e ones, such as he p o ec ion o mino i y igh s,
bu mos will be expansi e ones such as g ea e iscal o
ins i u ional au onomy, as well as calls o ou igh inde-
pendence. The eason o including a b oade se o
claims was ha SD p o es s beyond independence
claims p o ide impo an oppo uni ies o secessionis
ac o s o collabo a e.
Da a we e collec ed om wo Ca alan newspape s: El
Pe iódico and El Pun A ui. The selec ion is jus i ied by
wo c i e ia. The i s is geog aphical p oximi y, which
has been ound o inc ease he p opensi y o co e p o-
es s (Danzge , 1975; Fillieule and Jiménez, 2003; O iz
e al., 2006). El Pe iódico is a na ional newspape based
in Ba celona, while El Pun A ui, is a egional newspape
based in Gi ona. Being based in Ca alonia and ha ing
an explici ly egional ocus, he wo newspape s we e
p e e able o e Mad id-based newspape s such as El País
o El Mundo. The second c i e ion is ideological balance
wi h ega d o he secessionis con lic in Ca alonia. El
Pun A ui openly suppo s Ca alan secession om
Spain, while El Pe iódico is known o be opposed o
Ca alan independence. I sugges ha hei selec ion
biases should be complemen a y. Whe eas El Pun A ui
should be mo e likely o co e peace ul e en s, especially
in esponse o coun e -secessionis ep ession, El
Pe iódico can be expec ed o ocus on iolen and dis up-
i e ac ions.
The s a ing poin o he ime ame is jus i ied wi h
he egional elec ions in Sep embe 2015, which esul ed
in a clea p o-independence majo i y in he Ca alan pa -
liamen and led o a new phase in he e i o ial con lic
(Ma í and Ce à, 2016; O iols and Rodon, 2016). A
he hea o his phase is he e e endum on independ-
ence on 1 Oc obe 2017. The end o he ial o he
Ca alan leade s in Oc obe 2019 ep esen s he end-
poin o he s udy. Geog aphically, he p ojec ocuses
on p o es s in he ou p o inces (Ba celona, Gi ona,
Lleida and Ta agona) o he Au onomous Communi y
o Ca alonia.
I used a combina ion o ac ion o ms and SD claims
as keywo ds o sea ch he a chi es o he wo newspape s
h ough he online pla o m Fac i a (see Online
Appendix 3). I ollowed Cio dia’s (2020, 2021) s a egy
o coding he a icles. This s a egy in ol es wo sepa-
a e codebooks: one o e en s and one o e en pa ici-
pan s (see Online Appendix 2). I used he Discou se
Ne wo k Analyze so wa e de eloped by Lei eld (2016)
o pe o m hese codings.
The main pa o he da a analysis was de o ed o
econs uc ing ne wo k pa e ns among secessionis col-
lec i e ac o s be o e and a e he 1 Oc obe e e endum.
This equi ed mo ing om p o es e en and pa ici-
pan da a o ne wo k da a, o which I c ea ed a end-
ance lis s o each o he ou ime pe iods. Only
secessionis ac o s ha a ended a leas wo p o es
e en s we e included in he ne wo k analyses o each
pe iod. To con ol o he ac ha some o ganiza ions
pa icipa e in many mo e e en s han o he s, I ollowed
Cio dia (2020, 2021) in using Jacca d coe icien s as a
no malized indica o o co-pa icipa ion. Raw and
Jacca d ma ices we e expo ed o all ou pe iods sepa-
a ely. Ne wo k s a is ics we e calcula ed in Excel and
Visone and a e displayed in Table 3 in he ollowing sec-
ion. Ne wo ks we e isualized wi h he basic Visone
algo i hm, which uses me ic mul idimensional scaling
and s ess minimiza ion. Ne wo k g aphs a e a ailable in
Online Appendix 4.
Quali a i e analysis
The quali a i e pa o he esea ch design is based on 10
mon hs o ieldwo k in Ca alonia be ween May 2018
and Ma ch 2019 (see Online Appendix 5). The p ima y
da abase consis s o 30 in e iews wi h key o ganize s
Table 1. Phases o con en ion in he secessionis cycle o con en ion in Ca alonia.
ID Time pe iod Phase o con en ion
1 Oc obe 2015–Sep embe 2016 P e-campaign
2 Oc obe 2016–1 Oc obe 2017 Re e endum campaign
3 2 Oc obe 2017–Sep embe 2018 Pos - e e endum I
4 Oc obe 2018–Sep embe 2019 Pos - e e endum II
966 jou nal o Peace Resea ch 62(4)
om he mos impo an o ganiza ions om all sec o s
o he Ca alan independence mo emen : Assemblea
Nacional Ca alana (ANC), Òmnium Cul u al,
Commi ees o he De ense o he Republic (CDR),
and Uni e si a s pe la República (UxR). To inc ease he
di e si y o o ganiza ional backg ounds, he in e iew-
ees a ied wi h ega d o o ganiza ional le el (local and
egional), ac i is expe ience ( om se e al yea s o a ew
mon hs), and geog aphical loca ion ( u al a eas, small
owns, and se e al neighbo hoods o Ba celona). The
names o he in e iewees we e pseudonymized. All
in e iews excep one we e ansc ibed o analysis,
which p oduced 555 pages o aw da a. These ma e ials
we e supplemen ed by ield no es, se en expe in e -
iews (ac i is -schola s and jou nalis s), and documen s
p oduced by social mo emen o ganiza ions. The addi-
ional ma e ials we e used o in e p e he con ex and
iming o in e o ganiza ional ela ions.
Pa o he in e iew guide comp ised ques ions
abou he changing ela ions wi h o he majo mo e-
men o ganiza ions as well as wi h poli ical pa ies. The
analysis o hei answe s ollowed he logic o g ounded
heo y (Cha maz, 2006; Glase and S auss, 1967;
Ma oni, 2014), ying o iden i y changing pa e ns in
he ela ionships as well as how hey we e connec ed o
he 1 Oc obe e e endum. Fou analy ical phases we e
pe o med in MaxQDA. Fi s , he in e iewees’ s a e-
men s we e coded in o h ee ca ego ies: ela ions wi hin
umb ella o ganiza ions, among o ganiza ions, and
be ween o ganiza ions and o he ac o s. Second, I con-
s uc ed summa y g ids and ables om which o
abs ac indi idual s a emen s and p o ide an o e iew
o each o ganiza ion. Thi d, using he summa y ables,
I iden i ied pa e ns o each o ganiza ion as well as
o e a ching hemes. Fou h, I selec ed ep esen a i e
quo es o each o he hemes, which s uc u e he na -
a i e in he empi ical sec ion o his a icle.
Secessionis p o es and he Oc obe 2017
e e endum
The 2015 egional elec ions ma ked he beginning o a
new phase in he secessionis con lic . I was p oclaimed
a ‘ e e endum on independence’ by he secessionis pa -
ies Con e gència Democ à ica de Ca alunya and
Esque a Republicana de Ca alaunya (ERC), which an
on a single pla o m called Jun s pel Sí (Toge he o Yes)
(Ma í and Ce à, 2016). Du ing he campaign, he new
coali ion commi ed o an 18-mon h p ocess o unila -
e al secession om he Spanish s a e in he case o elec-
o al success, bu ailed o ob ain a majo i y o sea s in
he Ca alan pa liamen (O iols and Rodon, 2016).
A mo ion o s a secession om Spain sho ly a e
he elec ion was quickly suspended by he Spanish
Cons i u ional Cou , which mean ha he unila e al
s a egy p omised be o e he elec ions had eached an
impasse. I conside he yea a e he egional elec ion o
be he i s phase unde s udy (p e-campaign, see Table 1
in he p e ious sec ion).
A e su i ing a o e o con idence in he Ca alan
pa liamen on 28 Sep embe 2016, Puigdemon changed
cou se and owed o call a binding e e endum on inde-
pendence. This can be conside ed he beginning o he
ex ended e e endum campaign, which ep esen s he
second phase o he la e secessionis con lic . On 6 June
2017, he e e endum was o icially announced o 1
Oc obe o he same yea . The Ca alan go e nmen ied
o achie e an ag eemen wi h he Spanish go e nmen ,
which ejec ed he e e endum a guing ha i was
agains he Spanish cons i u ion. A he beginning o
Sep embe 2017, he p o-independence majo i y in he
Ca alan pa liamen passed he ‘Law on he Re e endum
on Sel -De e mina ion o Ca alonia’ in a con o e sial
session boyco ed by he unionis pa ies. The Spanish
Cons i u ional Cou immedia ely suspended he law
a e an appeal om he Spanish go e nmen and
decla ed he e e endum illegal. On 1 Oc obe , io
squads o he Spanish Na ional Police and he Ci il
Gua d a emp ed o p e en he e e endum by en e ing
o ing s a ions and con isca ing ballo boxes. The c ack-
down esul ed in mo e han 900 people being inju ed
and some o ing s a ions had o be closed because o
police in e en ion (Ba celó, 2018; Della Po a e al.,
2021). Mo e han wo million Ca alans (abou 43% o
he elec o a e) u ned ou o o e o e whelmingly in
a o o independence (mo e han 90%), while he
unionis camp did no pa icipa e in he e e endum.
The i s yea a e he e e endum can be conside ed
he hi d phase o he la e secessionis con lic . On 10
Oc obe , Puigdemon s ood be o e he Ca alan pa lia-
men o decla e independence – only o suspend his dec-
la a ion a minu e la e . A ew days la e , he leade s o
ANC and Òmnium Cul u al we e a es ed o hei ole
in o ganizing a p o es agains he police aids p io o 1
Oc obe . On 27 Oc obe , he p o-independence majo -
i y in he Ca alan pa liamen o ed o decla e independ-
ence. Tha same day, he Spanish Sena e o ed in a o
o applying A icle 155 o he Spanish Cons i u ion,
which imposed he empo a y suspension o Ca alonia’s
au onomy and snap egional elec ions. In he ollowing
days, Puigdemon and o he membe s o he Ca alan
go e nmen le Spain o a oid legal p osecu ion, while
o he s, including Vice P esiden O iol Junque as, we e
a es ed. Ne e heless, he secessionis pa ies de ended
Gunzelmann 967
hei pa liamen a y majo i y in he elec ions on 21
Decembe . A he end o Ma ch 2018, se e al o me
membe s o he Ca alan go e nmen we e a es ed,
while Puigdemon was b ie ly de ained in Ge many.
The ou h phase o he la e secessionis con lic
began in Oc obe 2018 and was less e en ul. I was
ma ked by he judicial ial o 10 Ca alan poli icians,
including o me Vice P esiden O iol Junque as and
he ac i is leade s Jo di Sànchez and Jo di Cuixa .
The ial s a ed in Feb ua y 2019 and ended wi h
leng hy p ison sen ences o nine o he accused in
Oc obe 2019, which is also conside ed he endpoin
o his s udy.
The p o es e en da a e ealed he ajec o y o SD
p o es s du ing he ou phases o con lic . Figu e 1 shows
how he numbe o SD p o es s e ol ed o e ime. In he
i s phase, he e we e ewe SD p o es s and ewe ac o s
engaging in hese p o es s in compa ison o he ollowing
phases. The secessionis con lic un olded mainly in he
ins i u ional ealm and less so in he p o es a ena. Du ing
he e e endum campaign (Phase 2), mo emen ac o s
o ganized abou a hund ed e en s mo e han in he p e i-
ous phase. Mos o hem ook place in Sep embe 2017,
igh be o e he e e endum. This included he p o es s
agains he police aids immedia ely be o e he e e en-
dum, bu also he massi e mobiliza ion o occupy o ing
s a ions and ‘de end’ hem agains police in e en ion on
he day o he e e endum.
The i s yea a e he e e endum (Phase 3) ep e-
sen ed he peak in he numbe o e en s. I accoun s
o abou hal o he e en s o he whole pe iod unde
s udy. Mos o hese e en s ook place in he mos
con en ious phase igh a e he e e endum. Fo
ins ance, he gene al s ike on 3 Oc obe u ned in o a
massi e p o es e en agains he police iolence on
he day o he e e endum. A e he ine ec i e decla-
a ion o independence on 27 Oc obe , he le el o
mobiliza ion d opped un il he end o Ma ch 2018
when Puigdemon was b ie ly a es ed in Ge many.
Less han a hi d o he e en s in his phase we e col-
labo a i e (see Table 2). Du ing he second yea a e
he e e endum (Phase 4), he le el o mobiliza ion
ose ini ially bu d opped a e he onse o he ial o
he Ca alan leade s in Feb ua y 2019. Only when he
end o he e dic came close in Sep embe 2019 did
he ac i is s ini ia e a new wa e o p o es . Howe e , he
numbe o collabo a i e e en s d opped ema kably in
compa ison o p e ious phases.
Figu e 1. T ajec o y o sel -de e mina ion p o es in Ca alonia 2015–2019 (N = 1,043).
Table 2. Types o SD p o es e en s.
Phase 1 2 3 4
Time Oc 2015–Sep 2016 Oc 2016–1 Oc 2017 2 Oc 2017–Sep 2018 Oc 2018–Sep 2019
To al e en s 80 180 506 277
E en ypes
0 o g. e en s 13 76 199 97
1 o g. e en s 31 37 163 135
Collab. e en s 36 67 144 45
O g.: o ganiza ion(s), collab.: collabo a i e e en wi h wo o mo e o ganiza ions p esen .
968 jou nal o Peace Resea ch 62(4)
The da a illus a ed how SD p o es mobiliza ion was
closely connec ed o he 2017 e e endum and he
dynamics o con lic in he ins i u ional a ena. While
he le el o mobiliza ion was a he low o he i s wo
yea s a e he egional elec ions, he e e endum ig-
ge ed a wa e o p o es ha las ed o almos one and a
hal yea s. P o es e s also esponded o coun e -seces-
sionis ac ions by he Spanish s a e, such as he nume -
ous a es s o Ca alan poli icians and ac i is s. The nex
sec ion u ns o he ne wo ks o collabo a ion in he
p o es a ena o show how mo emen cohesion e ol ed
o e he ou phases.
Ne wo ks o p o es collabo a ion o e
ime
The secessionis push o a binding e e endum and
he esponse by he Spanish s a e igge ed an episode
o in ense con en ion in Ca alonia. This sec ion ocuses
on he ne wo ks o collec i e ac o s in he p o es a ena
be o e and a e he e e endum. Ne wo k analyses
showed ha he e was less collabo a ion in he p o es
a ena a e he e e endum despi e his massi e
mobiliza ion.
The p o es e en da a showed ha he wo la ges
social mo emen o ganiza ions, ANC and Òmnium
Cul u al, played a signi ican ole in he i s phase a e
2015 bu we e a om being he only ones (pa icipa -
ing ac o s a e displayed in he ne wo k g aphs in Online
Appendix 4). In e es g oups such as he Associació de
Municipis pe la Independència (AMI) o he Associació
Ca alana de Municipis (ACM), p o-independence
ade unions such as Coo dinado a Ob e a Sindical
(COS) and CSC-In e sindical, and smalle o ganiza-
ions such as ERC’s you h o ganiza ion Jo en u s’
Esque a Republicana (JERC) also collabo a ed in he
p o es a ena. Ins i u ional ac o s engaged in he p o es
a ena, oo. The p o-independence pa ies equen ly
pa icipa ed in p o es s as well as he hen P esiden o
he Gene ali a , A u Mas, and he hen P esiden o
he Ca alan Pa liamen , Ca me Fo cadell. These ac o s
o med a ne wo k o 17 nodes (see Table 3).
This ne wo k changed sligh ly du ing he second
phase. The ne wo k g ew om 17 o 20 nodes. The
main new ac o was he pla o m UxR, which was
o med by he you h o ganiza ions A an, JERC,
Jo en u Nacionalis a de Ca alunya, and Sindica
d’Es udian s dels Països Ca alans (SEPC), and eme ged
speci ically o mobilize s uden s o he e e endum.
These g oups had pa icula ly igh ela ions h ough
hei pa icipa ion in UxR. Despi e he la ge size, he
mo emen was be e connec ed han be o e, as he den-
si y alue had isen om .57 in he p e ious phase o
.70. Collec i e ac o s also collabo a ed mo e o en han
be o e: he a e age Jacca d coe icien inc eased sligh ly
om .11 o .12. This shows ha he secessionis mo e-
men became mo e cohesi e du ing he e e endum
campaign.
The da a indica ed ha he e e endum ma ked a
u ning poin o he cohesion o he independence
mo emen . In he hi d phase, he ne wo k g ew sub-
s an i ely o 31 nodes. Howe e , he p o es a ena was
di ided in o ou key g oups. Fi s , mos poli ical pa -
ies, ins i u ions, as well as ACM and AMI o med one
g oup (on he igh side in he ne wo k g aph in Online
Appendix 4). Second, he le -wing ac o s COS, Ale a
Solidà ia and Enda an aligned wi h he s uden o gani-
za ions h ough A an and SEPC as b oke s. Thi d,
ANC and Òmnium con inued o ha e igh ela ions
wi h each o he and we e a he cen e o he ne wo k,
keeping some ela ions wi h mos o he ac o s in he
ne wo k. Fou h, he CDR eme ged as he mos
Table 3. Desc ip i e ne wo k s a is ics.
Phase 1 2 3 4
Time Oc 2015–Sep 2016 Oc 2016–1 Oc 2017 2 Oc 2017–Sep 2018 Oc 2018–Sep 2019
To al e en s 80 180 506 277
Ne wo k s a is ics
Nodes 17 20 31 25
Isola es 0 0 1 2
Edges 680 1,246 1,760 1,098
A e age deg ee 9.18 13.20 11.87 12.88
Densi y 0.57 0.70 0.40 0.54
Jacca d coe .
Range 0–1 0–1 0–0.89 0–0.75
A e age 0.11 0.12 0.05 0.07
Gunzelmann 975
Social Mo emen Theo y. New Ha en, CN: Yale Uni e si y
P ess, 133–155.
Snow DA, Roch o d EB, Wo den SK, e al. (1986) F ame
alignmen p ocesses, Mic omobiliza ion, and Mo e-
men Pa icipa ion. Ame ican Sociological Re iew 51(4):
464.
So ens J (2012) Secessionism: Iden i y, In e es , and S a egy.
Mon eal, Canada: McGill-Queen’s Uni e si y P ess.
S aniland P (2014) Ne wo ks o Rebellion: Explaining Insu gen
Cohesion and Collapse. I haca, NY: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Tilly C (2008) Con en ious Pe o mances. Camb idge:
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Tilly C and Ta ow SG (2015) Con en ious Poli ics. 2nd
e ised edn. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Van Dyke N and Amos B (2017) Social mo emen coali-
ions: Fo ma ion, longe i y, and success. Sociology Compass
11(7): e12489.
Wagne -Paci ici R (2017) Wha Is an E en ? Chicago: The
Uni e si y o Chicago P ess.
Wang DJ and Soule SA (2012) Social mo emen o ganiza-
ional collabo a ion: Ne wo ks o lea ning and he di u-
sion o p o es ac ics, 1960–1995. Ame ican Jou nal o
Sociology 117(6): 1674–1722.
Woldema iam M (2018) Insu gen F agmen a ion in he
Ho n o A ica: Rebellion and I s Discon en s. Camb idge:
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Wood LJ, S aggenbo g S, S alke GJ, e al. (2017) E en ul
e en s: Local ou comes o G20 summi p o es s in
Pi sbu gh and To on o. Social Mo emen S udies 16(5):
595–609.
HANS JONAS GUNZELMANN, b. 1990, PhD in
Poli ical Science and Sociology (Scuola No male Supe io e,
2021); Pos doc o al Resea che a he Cen e o Ci il
Socie y Resea ch, WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
(2023–p esen ); esea ch in e es s: poli ical sociology, p o es ,
social mo emen s, na ionalism.
