Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables and Figures
- Author Notes
- Abbreviations
- Introduction: Sociology, Society and the Environment
- PART I SOCIAL PERSPECTIVES
- 1 Old Traditions and New Ages: Religions and Environments
- 2 Social Nature
- 3 Gender, Eco-Feminism and the Environment
- 4 Animals, ‘Nature’ and Human Interests
- 5 Governing Environmental Harms in a Risk Society
- PART II SOCIAL TRENDS
- PART III SOCIAL ISSUES
- Index
- References
5 - Governing Environmental Harms in a Risk Society
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Edited by
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Tables and Figures
- Author Notes
- Abbreviations
- Introduction: Sociology, Society and the Environment
- PART I SOCIAL PERSPECTIVES
- 1 Old Traditions and New Ages: Religions and Environments
- 2 Social Nature
- 3 Gender, Eco-Feminism and the Environment
- 4 Animals, ‘Nature’ and Human Interests
- 5 Governing Environmental Harms in a Risk Society
- PART II SOCIAL TRENDS
- PART III SOCIAL ISSUES
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter critically examines the ‘risk society’ thesis and the questions it raises concerning the definition and governing of environmental harms. We first outline the main features of Beck's approach to risk. The limitations of this work are then discussed drawing on social constructionist concepts to highlight the main areas of debate. Finally, we provide a critique of both realist and social constructionist perspectives on risk using the post-structuralist analytical frameworks of governmentality and actor-network theory. We argue that these two latter frameworks represent a coherent way of 1) moving beyond the dualistic objectivist/subjectivist thinking that characterises both realism and social constructionism, and 2) demonstrating the complex ways in which environmental harms are co-constructed as risks.
BACKGROUND TO THE ISSUES
To understand how environmental harms assume prominence as risks it is useful to consider first Ulrich Beck's seminal work, Risk Society: Towards a new modernity (1992). While Beck was by no means the first sociologist to write about the nature and management of risk, his work has had a major influence in environmental sociology and therefore provides a starting point in exploring the sociological literature on the production, definition and responses to ecological harms.
Emergence of the risk society
Beck's Risk Society is a theory of modernisation. It describes a shift from classical to reflexive modernisation. For Beck, classical modernisation is characterised by a politics centred on material progress and the distribution of wealth and prosperity (‘goods’).
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Controversies in Environmental Sociology , pp. 77 - 91Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004
References
Adam, B., and J. Van Loon 2000, ‘Introduction: repositioning risk: the challenge for social theory’. In B. Adam, U. Beck and J. Van Loon (eds) The Risk Society and Beyond: Critical issues for social theory, London: Sage, pp. 1–31
Barry, J. 1999, Environment and Social Theory, London: Routledge
Beck, U. 1992, Risk Society: Towards a new modernity, transl. M. Ritter, London: Sage
Benton, T. 1994, ‘Biology and social theory in the environmental debate’. In M. Redclift and T. Benton (eds) Social Theory and the Global Environment, London: Routledge, pp. 28–50
2001, ‘Cosmopolis and risk. A conversation with Ulrich Beck’, Theory, Culture and Society 18: 47–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1999, ‘Being constructive: social constructionism and the environment’, Sociology 33(2): 297–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. 1986, ‘Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay’. In Law, Power, Action and Belief, pp. 196–233
1993, ‘The “environmental justice” frame: a conceptual discussion and an application’, Social Problems 40: 5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1997, ‘Local knowledge and the precarious extension of scientific networks: a reflection on three case studies’, Sociologia Ruralis 37(1): 38–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crook, S. 1999, ‘Ordering risks’. In Lupton, Risk and Sociocultural Theory, pp. 160–85
Dean, M. 1999, ‘Risk, calculable and incalculable’. In Lupton, Risk and Sociocultural Theory, pp. 131–59
Dunlap, R., and W. R. Catton 1994, ‘Struggling with human exceptionalism: the rise, decline and revitalisation of environmental sociology’, American Sociologist Spring: 5–30
2002, ‘Beck's sociology of risk: a critical assessment’, Sociology 36(2): 293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. 1990, The Consequences of Modernity, Stanford University Press
Hannigan, J. A. 1995, Environmental Sociology: A social constructionist perspective, London: Routledge
Irwin, A. 2001, Sociology and the Environment, Cambridge: Polity Press
Latour, B. 1986, ‘The powers of association’. In Law, Power, Action and Belief, pp. 264–80
Latour, B. 1987, Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press
Latour, B. 1993, We Have Never Been Modern, transl. Catherine Porter, London: Harvester Wheatsheaf
Law, J. (ed.) 1986, Power, Action and Belief: A new sociology of knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
Lupton, D. (ed.) 1999, Risk and Sociocultural Theory: New directions and perspectives, Cambridge University Press
Martell, L. 1994, Ecology and Society: An introduction, Cambridge: Polity Press
1997, ‘Inhuman/nonhuman/human: actor-network theory and the prospects for a nondualistic and symmetrical perspective on nature and society’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 15: 731–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000, ‘Ecologising sociology: actor-network theory, co-constructionism and the problem of human exemptionalism’, Sociology 35(1): 111–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. 1999, Powers of Freedom: Reframing political thought, Cambridge University Press
, and 1992, ‘Political power beyond the state: problematics of government’, British Journal of Sociology 43(2): 173–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1993, ‘Actor-networks and ambivalence: general practitioners in the UK Cervical Screening Programme’, Social Studies of Science 23: 227–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Star, S. L. 1991, ‘Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: on being allergic to onions’. In J. Law (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination, London: Routledge, pp. 26–56
Wynne, B. 1996, ‘May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert/lay knowledge divide’. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski and B. Wynne (eds), Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a new ecology, London: Sage, pp. 44–88
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 3
- Cited by