Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
- The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Rational Choice Theory and Methodological Individualism
- 2 Network Theories
- 3 Cultural Sociology
- 4 Identity
- 5 Emotions Theory
- 6 Theorizing Sex/Gender: Feminist Social Theory
- 7 Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory
- 8 Modernity
- 9 Realism
- 10 Globalization: Not Good, Bad, or Over
- 11 Time/Space
- 12 Social Theory in the Anthropocene: Ecological Crisis and Renewal
- 13 Embodiment
- 14 Sexualities
- 15 Multiculturalism
- 16 Risk
- 17 Trust and the Variety of Its Bases
- 18 Unities Within Conflict: Mapping Biology’s Relevance to Sociological Theory
- 19 Civil Society
- 20 Social Movements: Sequences vs Fuzzy Temporality
- 21 Immigration
- Index
- References
16 - Risk
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 December 2020
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
- The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Rational Choice Theory and Methodological Individualism
- 2 Network Theories
- 3 Cultural Sociology
- 4 Identity
- 5 Emotions Theory
- 6 Theorizing Sex/Gender: Feminist Social Theory
- 7 Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory
- 8 Modernity
- 9 Realism
- 10 Globalization: Not Good, Bad, or Over
- 11 Time/Space
- 12 Social Theory in the Anthropocene: Ecological Crisis and Renewal
- 13 Embodiment
- 14 Sexualities
- 15 Multiculturalism
- 16 Risk
- 17 Trust and the Variety of Its Bases
- 18 Unities Within Conflict: Mapping Biology’s Relevance to Sociological Theory
- 19 Civil Society
- 20 Social Movements: Sequences vs Fuzzy Temporality
- 21 Immigration
- Index
- References
Summary
Based on an overview of the history of risk from ancient Greece to the modern era, the chapter discusses some of the most influential perspectives on risk in contemporary social theory.This includes the (world) risk society perspective, the governmentality perspective, and the systems theoretical perspective.A claim is advanced that each of these perspectives highlights key aspects of risk and thus can be seen as contributing, when connected to other perspectives, a coherent understanding of the role risk plays in contemporary societies.
Danger, governmentality, insurance, risk, second-order observation, systems theory
Klaus Rasborg is Associate Professor in the Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University.He is the Danish translator of Ulrich Beck’s Risikogesellschaft (1986), and has published several contributions to the discussion of modernity, risk, individualization, and inequality and class.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory , pp. 313 - 332Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
References
Bang, Henrik, and Dyrberg, Torben Bech. 2011. Michel Foucault. Copenhagen: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1970 [1789/1823]. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Edited by Burns, J. H. and Hart, H. L. A.. London: The Athlone Press, University of London.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich. 1994. “Self-Dissolution and Self-Endangerment of Industrial Society: What Does This Mean?” In Beck, Ulrich, Giddens, Anthony and Lash, Scott (eds.), Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order (pp. 174–183). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich.1995 [1988]. Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich 1996. “World Risk Society as a Cosmopolitan Society. Ecological Questions in a Framework of Manufactured Uncertainties.” Theory, Culture and Society 13(4): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Ulrich. 1997 [1993]. The Reinvention of Politics. Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich. 1999. “Risk Society Revisited: Theory, Politics, Critiques and Research Programmes.” In World Risk Society (pp. 133–152). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich.2002. “The Cosmopolitan Society and Its Enemies.” Theory, Culture and Society 19 (1–2): 17–44.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich.2009b. “Critical Theory of World Risk Society: A Cosmopolitan Vision.” Constellations 16(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich.2009c. “World Risk Society and Manufactured Uncertainties.” Iris: European Journal of Philosophy and Public Debate 1(2): 291–299.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich, and Grande, Edgar. 2010. “Varieties of Second Modernity: The Cosmopolitan Turn in Social and Political Theory and Research.” The British Journal of Sociology 61(3): 409–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, Ulrich, and Levy, Daniel. 2013. “Cosmopolitanized Nations: Re-imagining Collectivity in a World Risk Society.” Theory, Culture & Society 30(2): 3–31.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich, and Sznaider, Natan. 2006. “Unpacking Cosmopolitanism for the Social Sciences: A Research Agenda.” The British Journal of Sociology 57(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Peter L. 1996. Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Breck, Thomas. 2001. Dialog om det usikre – nye veje i risikokommunikation. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Dean, Mitchell. 1999. Governmentality. Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary. 1986. Risk Acceptability According to the Social Sciences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary, and Wildavsky., Aaron 1983. Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericson, Richard V., and Doyle, Aaron. 2004. “Catastrophe Risk, Insurance and Terrorism.” Economy and Society 33(2): 135–173.Google Scholar
Ewald, François. 1991. “Insurance and Risk.” In Burchell, Graham, Gordon, Colin, and Miller, Peter (eds.), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (pp. 197–210). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1991 [1978].“Governmentality.” In Burchell, Graham, Gordon, Colin, and Miller, Peter (eds.), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (pp. 87–104). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony.1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony.1994. Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony.1998a. “Risk Society: The Context of British Politics.” In Franklin, Jane (ed.), The Politics of Risk Society (pp. 23–34). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony.1998b. The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony.1999. Runaway World. How Globalization is Reshaping our Lives. Cambridge, UK: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 2006 [1975]. The Emergence of Probability: A Philosophical Study of Early Ideas about Probability, Induction and Statistical Inference, 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keynes, John M. 1948 [1921]. A Treatise on Probability. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited.Google Scholar
Keynes, John M. 1949 [1936]. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited.Google Scholar
Kneer, Georg, and Nassehi, Armin, 1997 [1993]. Niklas Luhmann – introduktion til teorien om sociale systemer. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
Knight, Frank H. 2006 [1921]. Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 1990. “Risiko und Gefahr.” In Luhmann, Niklas (ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung 5. Konstruktivistische Perspektiven (pp. 131–169). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas.1993 [1991]. Risk: A Sociological Theory. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mythen, Gabe. 2004. Ulrich Beck: A Critical Introduction to Risk Society. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
O’Malley, Pat. 2003. “Governable Catastrophes: A Comment on Bougen.” Economy and Society 32(2): 275–279.Google Scholar
Rasborg, Klaus. 2012. “‘(World) Risk Society’ or ‘New Rationalities of Risk’? A Critical Discussion of Ulrich Beck’s Theory of Reflexive Modernity.” Thesis Eleven 10(1): 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasborg, Klaus.2014. “Risiko- og frygtsamfund.” In Larsen, Jørgen Elm, Greve, Bent, and Jørgensen, Anja (eds.), Det danske samfund (pp. 175–200). Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
Sennett, Richard. 1998. The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consequences of Work in the New Capitalism. New York-London: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Slovic, Paul.2000 [1997]. “Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics and Science: Surveying the Risk-assessment Battlefield.” In The Perception of Risk (pp. 390–412). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Starr, Chaunsey. 1969. “Social Benefit versus Technological Risk.” Science, New Series 165(3899): 1232–1238.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1992 [1904–1905]. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Internet Sources
Den Store Danske. Gyldendals Åbne Encyklopædi 2016: “Pest.” www.denstoredanske.dk/Krop,_psyke_og_sundhed/Sundhedsvidenskab/Infektions-_og_tropesygdomme/pest?highlight=pest.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by