Research on the actions of anti-extraction movements has primarily comprised single-case studies in developing countries. Despite increasing mobilization and policy objectives to increase mineral extraction in the EU, we have little systematic knowledge of forms of resistance in a European setting. This paper exhaustively and comparatively maps anti-extraction movements in Sweden and investigates how movements' actions relate to their socio-political contexts. Sixteen place-specific movements are identified and studied using frame analysis and political process theory. The results suggest that anti-extraction movements occur across Sweden and that their socio-political contexts differ in access to indigenous rights institutions, project owner engagement, and support/opposition from host municipalities and national interest groups. The frame analysis indicates that movements share several goals, sometimes interpret similar contexts differently, and that differences in actions reflect differences in interpretations of contextual opportunities. Our results show that anti-extraction movements in Sweden involve diverse actors, including environmental interest groups, new networks mobilizing against extraction projects, indigenous Sami organizations, farmers' organizations, and landowners. Broad repertoires of actions, including civil disobedience, are used to influence the public, permitting processes, political actors at various scales, and project owners. Differences in socio-political contexts often align with movements’ interpretations of opportunities and relate with differences in action choices.

Social movements and interest groups in Europe are increasingly using litigation as a form of legal mobilization in their campaigns. Current literature often depicts this as a result of favourable opportunities in movements’ legal contexts, with activists responding to rising prospects of legal success. This comparative study of fifteen cases of mobilizations against mineral exploration projects in Sweden explores a puzzle in relation to this view: Why do movements frequently litigate even when the prospects of legal success seem non-existent? Using frame analysis within a multi-institutional politics (MIP) approach, this study explores how movements interpret opportunities in appeal processes linked to mineral exploration projects. While confirming that the prospect of legal success is a relevant motivator in several cases, the results also indicate that some movements interpret the court as a democratic arena, presenting opportunities to mobilize adherents and signal popular resistance to policy makers and extractive companies. These diverging interpretations of the court are tentatively connected to organizational needs for mobilizing adherents, previous experiences of litigating and available institutional logics in society. Building upon the MIP approach, this study introduces the idea that the democratic understanding of the appeal process signifies a ‘creative infringement’. A democratic institutional logic is imported into the court, an arena typically dominated by an institutional legal-bureaucratic logic. Movements’ increasing use of litigation may thus be driven not only by goals of legal success, but also by creative reinterpretations of legal processes as arenas in which goals of popular participation and democracy may be achieved.

Europe is witnessing increasing protests against mining. Social movements mobilizing against mining, (i.e. anti-extraction movements) are typically heterogeneous actor networks using diverse actions to stop projects and promote alternative visions for societal development. I investigate two prominent anti-extraction movements in Sweden and explore how movement actors’ goals and interpretations of contextual opportunities shape their strategies and actions. I study actions over eleven years and use frame analysis to explore actors’ goals, interpretations, and strategies. Results show how diverse goals lead to action diversification in movements by prompting actors to relate to different policy areas, that is, issue-specific contexts. Actors’ previous experiences, informing retrospective reasoning, increased variation in their opportunity assessments. The study contributes to social movement theory by explicating how the content of goals shape strategies and actions, adding to such alternative explanations as traditions, diffusion, and resources. Understanding action diversification is important for handling increasing mining conflicts. 

More knowledge is needed about how the design and implementation of legal processes shape the strategies and actions of social movements. We explore how movement actors’ interpretations of opportunities and constraints within legal processes shape their choices of strategies and actions. We particularly investigate how actors’ interpretations relate to their access to legal processes (i.e. legal standing) and to their understanding of opportunities in alternative action arenas in society, such as policy-making processes and street protests. We investigate an anti-extraction movement and its mobilization against a mining project in northern Sweden over eleven years. Using social movement theory and frame analysis, we explore the interpretations, strategies, and actions of movement actors who have or lack legal standing within the project’s permit process (i.e. legal insiders or outsiders). Key results indicate that action choices are shaped by how movement actors understand their opportunities in different societal arenas and by their traditions and interpretations of appropriate roles amongst other actors in the movement. To understand how legal standing shapes actions, we must acknowledge that actions are shaped by both a logic of consequences and a logic of appropriateness. Results also indicate that insiders’ legal engagement did not diminish outsiders’ use of public protests. On the contrary, outsiders’ motivation to use protests increased via a division of labour emerging in the movement, with actors specializing into either legal mobilization or protests. Integration of some movement actors into legal processes may not lead to a phasing out of protests in the growing resistance against mining in Europe.