Voluntas 1996;Meyer 2004;Meyer and Minkoff 2001;McCarthy and Zald 1977;McAdam 1999).This indigenous organization serves to mobilize resources and supplies leaders to direct their use(McAdam and Snow 1997,p.340),and is situated within a mobilizing structure of social actors,composed of networks,infrastructures and organizations-formal and informal-through which people and resources are engaged in collective action (McAdam et al.1996).This structure includes pre- existing (professional)groups,movement organizations,and formal and informal networks among potential activists(Caren 2007).The indigenous organization is thus situated in a structure within which tactics and tactical innovations are devised and carried out (McAdam 1997,p.340).Tactics only become important when external and internal factors are conducive to mobilization. The significance of tactics for mobilization of social actors rests on social actors' positions in the political system.Social actors are challengers or outsiders of the polity,and as such must devise ways to overcome their relative institutional powerlessness.Polity outsiders aim at bypassing routine decision-making channels and seek,often by applying non-institutionalized tactics,to force their opponents to deal with them in spaces within which they are more powerful-often outside of traditional arenas.Scholars argue that challenging social actors gain influence when they break out of routine decision-making channels,disrupting the social order and applying pressure to the established polity to make concessions (Gamson 1975; Piven and Cloward 1979).They achieve this through strategically framing their issue to create common understandings of the world and themselves that legitimate and motivate their actions (McAdam 1996;Benford and Snow 2000).Strategic framing is thus the means by which actors sell their activities,their claims,and their right to existence to non-activists.In this sense,they form an integral part of the tactical repertoire of(collective)social actors. In the PRC,due to the political environment,(collective)social actors initially have to choose a general tactical approach:are they aiming to set up legal operations and hence officially register or are they remaining in legal limbo (Yang and Alpermann 2014)?Both approaches entail possibilities and limitations.Social actors working under an official legal registration,a tactical orientation considered in this article,largely adopt either a corporatist or a challenging approach toward the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).Especially with regard to the adaption of a challenging orientation,the application of one tactic for a long time allows activists' opponents-party-state actors-to devise effective counter-measures,forcing social actors to consistently add innovative tactics to their repertoire if they want to gain or maintain influence (McAdam and Snow 1997).It is within this context that tactical innovation-the creativity of insurgents to devise new tactical forms-gains crucial importance (McAdam 1997).The performance art advocacy applied by Beijing ADV activists can be understood as such a tactical innovation.It consists of live performances in public places which,by disturbing the social order,aim at stirring up bystanders and gaining media attention-and,through the latter,the support of the general public (Wang 2012;Guo et al.2013).It is an inexpensive advocacy strategy dependent on creativity and individual dedication rather than the employment of expensive experts and materials typical of traditional strategies.It is also an inclusive strategy,which allows diverse activists to join forces ②Springer1996; Meyer 2004; Meyer and Minkoff 2001; McCarthy and Zald 1977; McAdam 1999). This indigenous organization serves to mobilize resources and supplies leaders to direct their use (McAdam and Snow 1997, p. 340), and is situated within a mobilizing structure of social actors, composed of networks, infrastructures and organizations—formal and informal—through which people and resources are engaged in collective action (McAdam et al. 1996). This structure includes pre￾existing (professional) groups, movement organizations, and formal and informal networks among potential activists (Caren 2007). The indigenous organization is thus situated in a structure within which tactics and tactical innovations are devised and carried out (McAdam 1997, p. 340). Tactics only become important when external and internal factors are conducive to mobilization. The significance of tactics for mobilization of social actors rests on social actors’ positions in the political system. Social actors are challengers or outsiders of the polity, and as such must devise ways to overcome their relative institutional powerlessness. Polity outsiders aim at bypassing routine decision-making channels and seek, often by applying non-institutionalized tactics, to force their opponents to deal with them in spaces within which they are more powerful—often outside of traditional arenas. Scholars argue that challenging social actors gain influence when they break out of routine decision-making channels, disrupting the social order and applying pressure to the established polity to make concessions (Gamson 1975; Piven and Cloward 1979). They achieve this through strategically framing their issue to create common understandings of the world and themselves that legitimate and motivate their actions (McAdam 1996; Benford and Snow 2000). Strategic framing is thus the means by which actors sell their activities, their claims, and their right to existence to non-activists. In this sense, they form an integral part of the tactical repertoire of (collective) social actors. In the PRC, due to the political environment, (collective) social actors initially have to choose a general tactical approach: are they aiming to set up legal operations and hence officially register or are they remaining in legal limbo (Yang and Alpermann 2014)? Both approaches entail possibilities and limitations. Social actors working under an official legal registration, a tactical orientation considered in this article, largely adopt either a corporatist or a challenging approach toward the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Especially with regard to the adaption of a challenging orientation, the application of one tactic for a long time allows activists’ opponents—party-state actors—to devise effective counter-measures, forcing social actors to consistently add innovative tactics to their repertoire if they want to gain or maintain influence (McAdam and Snow 1997). It is within this context that tactical innovation—the creativity of insurgents to devise new tactical forms—gains crucial importance (McAdam 1997). The performance art advocacy applied by Beijing ADV activists can be understood as such a tactical innovation. It consists of live performances in public places which, by disturbing the social order, aim at stirring up bystanders and gaining media attention—and, through the latter, the support of the general public (Wang 2012; Guo et al. 2013). It is an inexpensive advocacy strategy dependent on creativity and individual dedication rather than the employment of expensive experts and materials typical of traditional strategies. It is also an inclusive strategy, which allows diverse activists to join forces. Voluntas 123