From ‘Goods’ to ‘Bads’? Revisiting the Political Economy of Risk

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabe Mythen

German social theorist Ulrich Beck has consistently maintained that the logic of social distribution in western cultures has been reconfigured over the last three decades. Beck believes that, in the first industrial modernity, political and economic energies were directed toward the dissemination of ‘social goods’, such as healthcare, employment and wealth. By contrast, in the second modernity - or risk society - the positive logic of goods distribution is displaced by a negative logic of ‘social bads’, exemplified by environmental despoliation, terrorism and nuclear accidents. Critically, whilst the logic of goods is sectoral - some win and some lose, some are protected, some exposed - social bads follow a universalising logic which threatens rich and poor alike. This article interrogates and challenges these core claims by fusing together and developing empirical and theoretical criticisms of the theory of distributional logic. Empirically, it is demonstrated that Beck draws upon a narrow range of examples, is insensitive to continuities in social reproduction and glosses over the intensification of traditional inequalities. Theoretically, the paper asserts that the risk society perspective constructs an unsustainable divide between interconnected modes of distribution, neglects the way in which political discourses can be used to reinforce hegemonic interests and overlooks uneven patterns of risk distribution.

2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabe Mythen

German sociologist Ulrich Beck maintains that economic, technological and environmental transitions have radically reshaped employment relations in Western Europe. Whilst theories of employment transformation are historically ubiquitous, Beck's contribution is rather unique. Utilising risk as a lens through which subterranean shifts in employment, the economy and society can be visualised, Beck's work has been heralded as a significant theoretical landmark. The risk society perspective emphasizes the diffusion of two interlinked macro-social processes. Firstly, Beck identifies a sweeping process of individualization which recursively generates personal insecurity and reflexive decision-making. Secondly, changes in the relationship between capital and labour are said to have facilitated an underlying shift in the pattern of social distribution. This paper scrutinises Beck's understanding of these two processes, as a means of developing a broader critique of the risk society perspective. Theoretically, it will be argued that Beck deploys unsophisticated and artificial categories, amalgamates disparate forms of risk and compacts together diverse employment experiences. Empirically, the paper demonstrates that – far from being directed by a universal axis of risk – labour market inequalities follow the grooves etched by traditional forms of stratification.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-212
Author(s):  
Adam Burgess

Twenty five years on from Chernobyl, the tragic events in Japan of March 2011 seem to reaffirm the ‘risk society’ perspective which the 1986 nuclear accident in the former Soviet Union did so much to popularise. It was amidst widespread predictions of mass harm – projected both across Europe and into the future – that German sociologist Ulrich Beck’s book of the same name found such a receptive audience. Beck wrote of a new era defined by the greater risk posed by ‘manufactured’, technological risk than natural, ‘external’ ones. The way in which the possible, nuclear threat from the damaged Fukushima nuclear plant looms larger than the devastation and the thousands actually killed by the ‘natural’ earthquake and tsunami reminds us of Beck's distinction.


Author(s):  
Mika Markus Merviö

In terms of risk society, Japan is following the rest of its peers in entering the world risk society, but in a selective way of ignoring some parts of the discourse. This chapter will show how long of a process it was for the concepts of risk society, reflexivity, and individualization to enter Japanese social and political discourses. As a result, the public policies in many areas have lacked in direction and coordination. In Japan, the risk discourses have often failed to go much beyond the security risks and natural hazards. However, there has also been new research on social risks, such as on so-called new risks-associated individualization and with family and work. The common theme is that traditional social institutions are eroding while both individualization and traditional (family-based) values coexist. However, the enormous significance of environmental risks for the future has, unfortunately, not been taken seriously enough in social and political discourses in Japan and, consequently, the public policy responses reflect these weaknesses.


Author(s):  
Stephen J. Ball

We live, as some theorists put it, in a 'risk society'. Risks are diverse and new forms are constantly arising. There is an 'over-production' of risk. We face the brittle uncertainties of individual self-management, as Beck sees it, alone and 'fragmented across (life) phases, space and time' (1997, p. 26). This is a bleak and elemental social world. This paper takes a rather different view of risk, as having both collective and divisive dynamics and effects. It offers not so much an alternative view as one that is re-socialised. Focusing on middle class families and the 'risks' of school choice some key features of the 'prudentialist' risk management regime extant in the UK are examined. That is, those 'definite social exertions' that middle class families must make on their own part or face the very real prospect of generational decline are considered. Risks are perceived to arise from the engagements between the family and the education marketplace, and are embedded in the paradox wherein society becomes structurally more meritocratic but processually less so, as the middle class work harder to maintain their advantages in the new conditions of choice and competition in education. The paper is peppered with extracts from interviews with middle-class parents. These serve for illustration and discussion.


1996 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey C. Alexander ◽  
Philip Smith

SummaryDominant perspectives on science and technology fail to come to terms with the continuing role of culture and mythology in mediating perceptions and moral evaluations of technology and its impacts. The need for such an understanding is demonstrated in a critique of Ulrich Beck’s important „ Risk Society“ thesis. Failure to acknowledge a mediating cultural variable influencing the time-lag in risk perception leads Beck to theorizing which deconstructs on close inspection. A similar flaw leaves the contending theory of Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky unable to explain the social distribution of risk consciousness except through recourse to residual and ad hoc explanations. As a solution to these problems the paper proposes a late-Durkheimian theory of discourses on technology and risk. This argues that technology is coded as sacred or profane and is narrated as bringing salvation or damnation. This theory is then applied in a rereading of Beck’s Risk Society as an environmentalist manifesto replete with apocalyptic imagery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document