Since James Scott introduced the concept of everyday resistance’ in 1985, research has grown within partly overlapping fields. Existing studies utilize very different definitions, methodologies and understandings of everyday resistance’, which makes a systematic development of the field difficult. In previous work, the authors have suggested a theoretical and definitional framework where everyday resistance is understood as a specific kind of resistance that is done routinely yet is not publicly articulated with political claims or formally organized. A more comprehensive and systematic exploration of this challenging phenomenon is possible through an analysis where: repertoires of everyday resistance are taken into account, together with relations between actors, as well as the spatialization and temporalization of resistance. These analytical dimensions are explained and motivated through illustrations from existing research. Finally, it is argued all four dimensions need to be studied in intersections.

This article applies our earlier proposed theoretical framework on everyday resistance in the case of Palestinian Sumūd (steadfastness) in relation to the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. Our original framework rests on the dimensions of: (I) repertoires of everyday resistance; (II) relationships of agents; as well as the (III) spatialization and (IV) temporalization of everyday resistance. The already existing complex theoretical debates as well as the rich body of empirical work regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict give us an opportunity to illustrate and explore the possibilities as well as the limits of the proposed framework. Our hope is that in this way, we encourage more systematic research on and a more nuanced understanding of everyday resistance.

This article discusses climate change from a critical social science perspective. Firstly, it is argued that climate change is not, in a fundamental sense, possible to understand from a natural science perspective, but demands an analysis of political power relations and our existing global political economy, capitalism. Therefore, climate change involves questions of global justice. Secondly, it is argued that the contemporary world economy, not only forcefully restructures climate, but also our societies, creating turbulent social strains, and therefore also an emerging global political reaction, one that is potentially giving hope for a solution, transnational justice and climate movements. However, thirdly, it is argued that these movements are not enough since they are still too ineffective to really challenge the basic injustices of global capitalism or its climate change effects. Social change is urgent, while solutions, strategies and mobilizations still seem too weak. Therefore, fourthly and lastly, we need a new kind of climate change panel, one that combines the theoretical-analytical skills of critical social scientists and the practical knowledge and organizational skills of movement intellectuals. A "Social Science Panel on Climate Change" is suggested in order to develop effective and realistic options and strategies.