(in Polish) Living in the age of anxiety. Sociology of risk in catastrophic times

During the course, we will discuss the major ways in which risk has been theorized in the social sciences: psychometric approach, cultural theory, SAR Framework, theory of risk society, governmentality perspective, social systems theory, and socio-material approaches. Next, we are going to examine fundamental concepts and principles for understanding and acting under conditions of risk and uncertainty. Our topics of interests include risk assessment, risk perception, risk governance, and risk communication. Next, we will investigate three specific risk issues: a.) risk and Anthropocene, b.) risk and the vested interests of corporate bodies, c.) power, social inequality and risk. All in all, we will attempt to answer the question how, concepts, approaches and methods, can support the assessments, communication and handling of the risks, and how risks are perceived.

Risk and uncertainty have emerged as central themes in contemporary social science. Questions about the nature of risk, the social construction of risk issues, and the cultural differences in conceptualizing and understanding risk have influenced philosophical thinking and social science research. Risk has also become a key organising concept for regulatory regimes and governance systems and one of the central constructs of expert discourses. The evolution of governance structures relating to managing uncertainties in a world full of contingencies makes us selective in what we chose to be worth considering and what to ignore. Global warming, air and water pollution, processed food, alcohol drinking and other ‘lifestyle’ habits, epidemic diseases, technological innovations, bio-engineering, unexpected disasters, armed conflicts constantly make headlines in the news media. We hear about global risks, systemic risks, environmental risks and the individual ones. Indeed, not only are we living in a ‘Risk Society’, but we are now concerned with the ‘risk management of everything’.

But what risk actually is? Are risks social constructs or real phenomena? In a realist perspective, risks are primarily understood as real events or dangers which can be approached objectively. When it comes to sociological approaches, the perspective changes from objective risks to socioculturally mediated or constructed risks, as we can observe how risks are created and selected by human actors. Cultural shifts, influencing the way people think about risks at the personal level, are brought back to the political level, in the question of how regulatory frameworks should operate in this context.

A major premise of this course is that the identification of ‘risks’ takes place in the specific sociocultural and historical contexts in which we are located. During the course, we will discuss the major ways in which risk has been theorized in the social sciences: psychometric approach, cultural theory, SAR Framework, theory of risk society, governmentality perspective, social systems theory, and socio-material approaches. Next, we are going to examine fundamental concepts and principles for understanding and acting under conditions of risk and uncertainty.

Our topics of interests include risk assessment, risk perception, risk governance, and risk communication. Next, we will investigate three specific risk issues: a.) risk and Anthropocene, b.) risk and the vested interests of corporate bodies, c.) power, social inequality and risk. All in all, we will attempt to answer the question how, concepts, approaches and methods, can support the assessments, communication and handling of the risks, and how risks are perceived.

This course will be particularly useful for those who feel the lack or inadequacy of social theory in risk research and those, who seek a new perspective on contemporary social, technological and environmental problems. The knowledge gained during the course can be used to explore a range of issues, such as social attitudes towards risk, risk management and risk policies, consumption, health behaviors, innovations and technological developments, media discourse, ecology and sustainable development.

1. INTRODUCTION [1]

1.1 Essential terms, ideas and concepts [1.]

Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, London: Earthscan. Earthscan Risk in Society Series, Ch1. What is risk? Pp.1-8

Douglas, M. (1990). Risk as a forensic resource, Daedalus, 119(4), 1–16.

Further reading

Aven, T. & Thekdi, S. (2022). Risk Science: An Introduction. London: Routledge, Ch2. What is Risk, pp.9-21

Renn, O. (2008). Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges, Journal of Risk Research, 1(1), 49-71.

2. THEORIZING RISK [2-8]

2.1 Psychometric approaches to risk [2.]

Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S.& Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe

enough? A psychometric study of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits, Policy Science, 9, 127–152.

Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285.

2.2 Cultural Theory and Risk [3.]

Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and Culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press., Introduction: Can we know the risks we face, pp.1-15 & Ch2. Risks are selected, pp.29-48.

Kahan, D.N. Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk, In: Roeser, S., Hillerbrand, R., Sandin, P., Peterson, M. (Eds.) Handbook of Risk Theory. Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 725-738.

2.3 Social Amplification of Risk Framework [4.]

Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X. & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework’, Risk Analysis, 8(2), 177–187.

Rosa, E. A. (2003). The logical structure of the Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF): Metatheoretical foundations and policy implications, in: N. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson & P. Slovic (eds.) The Social Amplification of Risk, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.47–79.

2.4 Risk society [5.]

Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: towards a new modernity, Ch1. On the Logic of Wealth Distribution and Risk Distribution, London: Sage Publishing, pp. 19-50.

2.5 Governmentality and risk [6.]

O’Malley, P. (2008). Governmentality and Risk. In: J. Zinn (ed.) Social Theories of Risk and Uncertainty: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 52-75.

Castel, R. (1991). From dangerousness to risk. In: G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.) The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 281-299.

2.6 Social systems approach to risk [7.]

Luhmann, N. (1993). Risk. A sociological theory. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Ch1. The concept of risk, pp. 1-31, Ch. 12 Second-Order Observation, pp.219-231.

2.7 Socio-material and relational approaches to risk [8.]

Hilgartner, S. (1992). The social construction of risk objects: Or, how to pry open networks of risk. In: J.F. Short & L. Clarke (Eds.) Organizations, uncertainties, and risk, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 39–53.

Van Loon, J. (2002) Risk and technological culture. Towards a sociology of virulence, Ch.3 Enrolling risks in technocultural practices: notes on Actor Network Theory, pp. 45-63.

3. RISK CONCEPTS [9-12]

3.1 Risk assessment and risk appraisal [9.]

Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, London: Earthscan. Earthscan Risk in Society Series, Ch.3 Appraisal, pp. 67-78

Aven, T. & Thekdi, S. (2022). Risk Science: An Introduction. London: Routledge, Ch.4. Basic theory of risk assessment, pp.61-68.

3.2 Risk perception [10.]

Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, London: Earthscan. Earthscan Risk in Society Series, Ch.4 Risk Perception, pp.93-97

Aven, T. & Thekdi, S. (2022). Risk Science: An Introduction. London: Routledge, Ch.4. Risk perception, pp.129-144.

Further reading

Boholm, A. (1998): Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research, Journal of Risk Research, 1(2), 135-163.

Renn, O. (1998). The role of risk perception for risk management, Reliability Engineering and System safety, 59, 49-62.

Sjöberg, L. (2002). Factors in risk perception, Risk Analysis, 20(1), 1-12.

3.3 Risk evaluation and risk governance [11.]

Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, London: Earthscan. Earthscan Risk in Society Series, Ch. 5 Risk Evaluation, pp. 149-156.

Rosa, E.A. Renn, O. & McCright, A.M. (2014). The Risk Society Revisited, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, Ch. 8 The Three Companions of Risk Complexity, Uncertainty, and Ambiguity, , pp. 130-149.

Further reading

Rothstein, H., Huber, M., & Gaskell, G. (2006). A Theory of Risk Colonisation: The spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk, Economy and Society, 25(1), 91-112.

Crawford R. (2004). Risk ritual and the management of control and anxiety in medical culture. Health, 8(4), 505–528.

3.4 Risk communication [12.]

Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, London: Earthscan. Earthscan Risk in Society Series, Ch. 7 Risk Communication, pp.201-204.

Aven, T. & Thekdi, S. (2022). Risk Science: An Introduction. London: Ch. 7, Risk Communicatio, pp.165 -181.

Further reading

Wardmann, J.,K. (2008). The Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies, Risk Analysis, 28(6), 1619-1637.

4. RISK ISSUES [13-15]

4.1 Risk and Anthropocene [13.]

David Chandler (2018). Ontopolitics in the Anthropocene. An Introduction to Mapping, Sensing and Hacking. London: Routledge, Introduction: Affirming the Anthropocene, pp. 3-29.

Isabelle Stengers (2015). In catastrophic times: Resisting the Coming Barbarism. Paris: Open Humanities Press, Ch1-6, pp. 17-67.

Further reading

Hillerbrand R. (2012). Climate Change as Risk? In: Roeser, S., Hillerbrand, R., Sandin, P., Peterson, M. (Eds.) Handbook of Risk Theory. Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk. Dodrecht: Springer, pp. 319-339.

4.2 Risk and the vested interests of corporate bodies [14.]

Oreskes, N. & Conway, EM (2010). Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. New York: Bloomsbury Press, Ch1. Doubt is our product, pp.10-35; Ch6. The denial of global warming pp. 169-329.

Miller, D., & Dinan, W. (2010). Corporate strategy, corporate capture: Food and alcohol industry lobbying and public health, Critical Social Policy, 30(4): 1 –26.

Further reading

Miller, D., & Dinan, W. (2015). Resisting meaningful action on climate change: Think tanks, 'merchants of doubt' and the 'corporate capture' of sustainable development. In: A. Hansen, & R. Cox (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication. London: Routledge. Pp. 96-110.

McGoey, L. (2012). The Logic of strategic ignorance, The British Journal of Sociology, 63(3), 553-576.

4.3 Power, social inequality and risk [15.]

Nygren, K.G., Olofsson, A., Ohman, S. (2020). A Framework of Intersectional Risk Theory in the Age of Ambivalence. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Ch2.Risk and intersectionality pp. 19-36

Lupton, D. (1993) Risk As Moral Danger: The Social and Political Functions of Risk Discourse in Public Health, International Journal of Health Services, 23(3), 425-435.

Further reading

Nygren, K.G., Ohman, S. Olofsson, A., (2017) Doing and undoing risk: the mutual constitution of risk and heteronormativity in contemporary society, Journal of Risk Research, 20(3), 418-432.