What is a boycott? A boycott is an organized effort in which people voluntarily stop or reduce purchasing, using, or otherwise economically supporting a product, business, organization, or other target in order to express a concern and seek a specific change. Boycotts may address issues involving: Working conditions Civil or human rights Environmental practices Discrimination Consumer protection Animal welfare Corporate or institutional policies Other community concerns A boycott generally works by showing that a meaningful number of people are willing to change their economic behavior because of a particular concern. Depending on the circumstances, the resulting effects may include: Reduced sales or participation Increased public attention Greater scrutiny of a policy or practice Dialogue with the organization involved Changes in organizational policy or practice The goal should be clearly identified before the boycott begins. Boycotts have played important roles in social movements Boycotts have been used in movements for civil rights, worker rights, consumer protection, environmental protection, and other forms of social change. For example, the Montgomery Bus Boycott began after Rosa Parks was arrested in 1955 for refusing to give up her seat under Montgomery's segregated bus system. Parks was not simply a tired passenger who made a spontaneous decision. She was an experienced civil-rights activist and NAACP member, and Black organizers in Montgomery had been challenging segregation before her arrest. The boycott lasted 381 days and accompanied the legal challenge that ultimately resulted in the desegregation of Montgomery's buses. Different forms of boycott Consumer boycott A consumer boycott asks people not to purchase particular goods or services. For example, consumers might decide not to purchase products from a company until it changes a labor, environmental, or business practice. Targeted product boycott Sometimes the boycott focuses on a particular product rather than every activity of the organization that produces it. A narrower boycott may make sense when the concern applies only to: One product One supplier One location One practice Secondary or third-party boycott A boycott may sometimes ask people to stop doing business with another organization because that organization buys from, sells for, or otherwise maintains a relationship with the primary target. The legal rules governing this type of activity can be complicated. In the United States, federal labor law restricts certain secondary conduct by labor organizations in labor disputes. That does not mean that every consumer campaign involving a third party is automatically illegal. If a proposed boycott involves: A labor organization Picketing a neutral employer Encouraging employees of another employer to stop working Coordinated commercial restraints Other legally complicated conduct obtain qualified legal advice about the specific activity rather than relying on a general statement that secondary boycotts are either always legal or always illegal. A strike is different from a consumer boycott A strike generally involves employees collectively withholding their labor. Strikes and consumer boycotts may sometimes occur together, but they involve different rights, participants, laws, and procedures. Why organize a boycott? A boycott may be useful when people want to use voluntary economic choices to communicate a concern and seek a specific response. To seek a change in policy or practice A boycott may ask an organization to: Change a workplace practice Correct discriminatory conduct Improve environmental practices Change sourcing or supply-chain practices Improve consumer protections Meet a previously stated commitment Take another specific corrective action To express values through economic choices People may decide that they do not want their spending to support a particular product, practice, or organization. A boycott can give people an organized way to act on that decision together. To increase public understanding of an issue A boycott may draw attention to a concern that has received limited public attention. Publicity should support understanding of: What the problem is What evidence supports the concern What change is being requested What would cause the boycott to end Generating negative publicity should not itself be the goal. Do not make destruction the objective A boycott may create serious financial consequences. Those consequences should be considered carefully, particularly when they may affect: Workers Franchisees Small suppliers Contractors Local communities Other people who were not responsible for the disputed practice Do not treat forcing an organization out of business as the ordinary purpose of a boycott. Define the corrective action you are seeking and consider whether the boycott is proportionate to that goal. When should you consider a boycott? There is no universal rule that a boycott must always be the last possible advocacy tactic. Whether it is appropriate depends on: The seriousness of the problem Whether harm is ongoing Whether the organization has been informed of the concern Whether meaningful corrective action is occurring Whether other processes are available The likely effectiveness of a boycott Possible unintended consequences Legal considerations Direct communication may be useful first In many situations, it may be useful to contact the organization before beginning a boycott. Explain: The concern The evidence The requested change A reasonable opportunity to respond when circumstances allow Direct engagement is not always required. Immediate public action may be appropriate when serious harm is occurring, previous engagement has failed, or delay would create significant risks. Consider other people who may be affected Ask: Could workers lose income? Could locally owned franchises be affected differently from corporate headquarters? Could small suppliers or community organizations experience unintended harm? Are the people most affected by the disputed practice involved in deciding whether a boycott is appropriate? Consider organizational capacity A boycott may require substantial: Research Communication Coalition coordination Public education Monitoring Negotiation Determine whether your organization can sustain the effort without neglecting other important work. Understand the legal environment Peaceful political boycotts can involve protected speech, association, assembly, and petition. At the same time, particular boycott tactics may be governed by: Labor law Antitrust law Contract law Defamation law Trespass and property rules Picketing regulations Other federal, state, or local law Do not assume that every tactic described as a boycott has the same legal status. Obtain qualified legal advice when the campaign involves significant legal or financial risk. How do you organize a boycott? Set a clear and realistic goal Define exactly what you want the target organization to do. A good demand is specific enough that both organizers and the organization can determine whether it has been met. For example: We are asking the company to publish a corrective-action plan, adopt the identified workplace-safety standards, and begin independent compliance reporting by January 1. is clearer than: Treat workers better. Decide what would end or modify the boycott Determine in advance: Which changes are essential Which changes are negotiable What evidence of compliance would be sufficient Whether partial progress would justify narrowing or suspending the boycott Who has authority to make those decisions for the campaign Do not rely on unsupported rules claiming that a fixed percentage of consumers must participate for a boycott to succeed. Economic impact varies by industry, target, market share, customer behavior, duration, and many other factors. Do the research Before asking other people to change their purchasing behavior, understand: What the organization is alleged to have done What evidence supports the claim Whether the practice is ongoing What the organization says in response Which products, brands, subsidiaries, or locations are actually connected to the issue What corrective action is possible What alternatives consumers have Use reliable sources Evaluate sources according to: Evidence Expertise Transparency Methodology Currency Independence or relevant conflicts of interest Do not decide whether a source is credible merely from whether it is commonly associated with a particular political ideology. Correct mistakes promptly If an important claim turns out to be inaccurate: Correct it publicly Update campaign materials Reconsider the boycott if the correction changes the underlying case Build meaningful collaboration Other organizations may bring: Direct experience with the issue Technical expertise Community relationships Language access Worker or consumer perspectives Communications capacity Collaborate because participants share a genuine concern, not simply because another organization has a large membership that can increase economic pressure. Center people directly affected When a boycott concerns working conditions, discrimination, environmental harm, or another impact on a particular community, involve people directly affected in decisions about: The goals The demands The target The timing The acceptable resolution Do not organize economic pressure supposedly on behalf of a community while excluding that community from the strategy. Notify the organization when appropriate If advance notice is appropriate, communicate clearly and professionally. The communication may explain: Who is raising the concern What conduct or policy is at issue What evidence supports the concern What corrective action is requested When the boycott is expected to begin What would cause organizers to suspend or end it Use the appropriate contact Send the communication to the office with authority to address the issue. Depending on the situation, this may be: Executive leadership Customer relations Human resources Compliance Sustainability staff A board Another responsible department Do not assume that the most senior executive must always be the sole or primary recipient. Do not use prestige as leverage The communication should come from the person or organization actually responsible for the campaign. Do not place the letter on the stationery of a more famous or powerful supporter merely to create an impression of greater influence. Explain the boycott publicly People deciding whether to participate should be able to understand: What happened What evidence is available What organization or product is being boycotted What change is requested What participation involves What would cause the boycott to end Communication methods may include: Websites Social media Email Community meetings News organizations Public statements Flyers or posters Lawful demonstrations or picketing Use channels appropriate to the community and the campaign. Keep public claims accurate Strong criticism can be appropriate. However, distinguish: Documented facts Allegations Interpretations Predictions Values or policy judgments Do not exaggerate allegations because stronger language may generate more attention. Offer practical alternatives Participation is easier when people know what they can do instead. Depending on the boycott, alternatives may include: Comparable products Other stores or service providers Reusable alternatives Community-based options Doing without a nonessential product Research alternatives too Do not recommend an alternative organization simply because it is not the boycott target. Determine whether the alternative has similar problems relevant to the boycott's goals. Be transparent when no clearly preferable alternative exists. Participation should be voluntary Ask people to participate based on the evidence and goals of the boycott. Do not: Harass people who continue purchasing from the target Threaten participants or nonparticipants Shame individuals publicly Misrepresent who supports the boycott Interfere unlawfully with access to a business People should remain free to evaluate the issue and make their own purchasing choices. Monitor the boycott Establish measures that help determine whether the strategy is useful. These may include: Whether the organization has responded Whether policy or practice has changed Whether agreed corrective steps have been completed Participation levels Economic effects where reliable data are available Unintended effects on workers or communities Whether public understanding has improved Do not assume that criticism or resistance from the target proves that the boycott is working. Evaluate actual evidence of progress. Respond to meaningful change If the organization takes corrective action: Verify what changed Compare the change with the campaign's stated goals Communicate the development accurately Decide whether to narrow, suspend, or end the boycott Acknowledge genuine progress when it occurs. Do not describe an organization as having “caved in” simply because it negotiated or changed course. Likewise, do not declare the problem solved solely for favorable publicity if important commitments remain unmet. Know when to reassess or end the boycott Persistence may be necessary, but “be relentless” should not mean continuing indefinitely regardless of evidence. Periodically ask: Is the underlying problem still occurring? Is the boycott producing meaningful progress? Has new information changed our understanding? Are unintended harms outweighing likely benefits? Are the people directly affected still supportive of the strategy? Would another advocacy method now be more effective? Ending an ineffective boycott is not necessarily a failure. It may reflect responsible reassessment of strategy and resources. Another option: Supporting organizations whose practices you value People may also choose to direct their spending toward organizations whose practices they support. This is sometimes called a “buycott.” Supportive purchasing may help: Reward improved practices Strengthen local or mission-aligned businesses Demonstrate consumer demand for particular standards Apply the same research standards used for a boycott. Do not recommend a company solely because of one favorable policy without considering whether claims about its practices are accurate. In Summary A boycott is a form of voluntary collective economic action in which people withhold purchases or other support to express a concern and seek change. Boycotts have played important roles in civil-rights, labor, consumer, environmental, and other movements. They should not be framed primarily as economic warfare, punishment, or an effort to destroy the target. Begin by identifying the problem, the responsible organization or product, and the specific change you are requesting. Research the issue carefully and distinguish verified facts from allegations, interpretations, and predictions. Involve people directly affected by the disputed policy or practice. Consider possible unintended effects on workers, suppliers, franchisees, and communities. Understand the legal rules that apply to the particular type of boycott. In the United States, labor-law restrictions on some secondary boycott activity should not be confused with a blanket prohibition on every boycott involving a third party. When appropriate, communicate the concern and requested corrective action to the organization before the boycott begins. Explain the campaign publicly in clear, accurate language and give people enough information to decide for themselves whether to participate. Offer practical alternatives when possible. Participation should remain voluntary and nonviolent. Monitor actual results instead of assuming that publicity, controversy, or resistance proves success. When meaningful corrective action occurs, acknowledge it and reassess whether the boycott should continue. Periodically reconsider the strategy if progress is limited or unintended harm develops. Finally, the purpose of a boycott is not simply to damage an organization financially. It is to use coordinated, voluntary economic choices to communicate values, seek accountable change, and give people another way to participate in collective civic action. Resources Online Resource Boycott Organizer's Guide is an excellent resource for planning a boycott and deciding who to target with the boycott. The Quick Start Guide to boycotts provides information specific to starting a consumer boycott. On Boycotts Organized through the Internet is a study published by Paul Sergius Koku. In the article, he analyzes use of the internet in boycott organization. Print Resources Altman, D., Balcazar, F., Fawcett, S., Seekins, T., & Young, J. (1994). Public health advocacy: Creating community change to improve health. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Center for Research in Disease Prevention. Avner, M., & Smucker, B. (2002). The lobbying and advocacy handbook for nonprofit organizations: Shaping public policy at the state and local level. Amherst H. Wilder Foundation. This book offers a clear step-by-step guide to implementing a successful advocacy program at both the state and local levels. Biklen, D. (1983). Community organizing: Theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bobo, K., Kendall, J., Max, S.(1996). Organizing for social change: A manual for activists in the 1990s. Minneapolis, MN: Seven Locks Press. Kahn, S. (1982). Organizing. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Miller, A. (1992, July). Do Boycotts Work? Newsweek, 58-61. Shragge, E. (2013). Activism and Social Change: Lessons for Community Organizing. University of Toronto Press, Higher Education Division; 2nd Edition. This book discusses community organizing in a post-9/11 context, and includes a discussion of national and transnational organizing efforts. Sen, R. (2003). Stir it up: Lessons in community organizing and advocacy. Jossey-Bass; 1st Edition. In this book, Sen goes step-by-step through the process of building and mobilizing a community and implementing key strategies to affect social change. Using case studies to illustrate advocacy practices, Sen provides tools to help groups tailor his model for their own organizational needs. Milkman, R. J., & Narro, V. (2010). Working for Justice: The L.A. Model of Organizing and Advocacy. ILR Press. Working for Justice provides eleven case studies of recent low-wage worker organizing campaigns in Los Angeles. This information was acquired through interviews, access to documents, and participant observation.
