Corporations in the resource extraction industry are frequently criticized and their operations opposed by local communities demanding more benefits, compensation for negative consecuences or oppose resource extraction altogether. Research has focused extensively on nonviolent and violent resistance campaigns that target state and quasi-state actors attempting regime change or self-determination. However, campaigns targeting corporations have received little attention so far. This thesis addresses this gap. I argue that nonviolent campaigns have a strategic advantage over violent campaigns in building leverage and forcing corporations to fulfill their demands because they are able to mobilize more numerous and diverse support and have a higher tactical diversity. I test the hypothesis that nonviolent campaigns are more likely to succeed in achieving their objectives and the expected causal mechanism in a qualitative comparative case study using the structured focused comparison method and aspects of process tracing. Applying a most- similar case selection, I select nonviolent and violent resistance campaigns targeting (multinational) corporations in Nigeria and Colombia. I find partial support for the hypothesis. However, limited data availability does not allow for a conclusive evaluation of the theorized causal mechanism. Findings indicate the value of studying resistance campaigns targeting corporations. In particular, future research should use a more fine-grained analysis of causal mechanisms linking the type and outcome of campaigns in this context. Additionally, applying large-n research designs allowing for greater generalizability of findings would be a valuable contribution in the future.