Cited by 215Social Movements and Cultural IdentityNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringSocial Capital and Networks

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Leadership, Membership, and Voice: Civic Associations That Work

Open access
Lim, Chaeyoon, Baggetta, Matthew, Han, Hahrie, Andrews, Kenneth T., Ganz, Marshall·2010·The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University Libraries

Abstract

Why are some civic associations more effective than others? The authors introduce a multidimensional framework for analyzing the effectiveness of civic associations in terms of public recognition, member engagement, and leader development. Using original surveys of local Sierra Club organizations and leaders, the authors assess prevailing explanations in organization and movement studies alongside a model highlighting leadership and internal organizational practices. Although available resources and favorable contexts matter, the core findings show that associations with more committed activists, that build organizational capacity, that carry out strong programmatic activity, and whose leaders work independently, generate greater effectiveness across outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.17615/4k9v-pr13

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 141 · Cited by 215

Metadata

Authors
Lim, C., Baggetta, M., Han, H., Andrews, K. T., & Ganz, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Wellesley College (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University Libraries
Publisher
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University Libraries
Published
2010
Volume
115
Issue
4
Pages
1191-1242
ISSN
0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1986078939
Cited by
215
References
141
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
21.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
Sierra Club Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Movements and Cultural Identity
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Capital and Networks
Keywords
civil society organizations, nonprofit effectiveness, leadership, member engagement, organizational capacity, leader development, environmental organizations, Sierra Club, organizational practices, public recognition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review