IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v41y2021i3p533-543.html

The Critical Theory of World Risk Society: A Retrospective Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Gabe Mythen

Abstract

In terms of the evolution of sociological theory, it is difficult to overstate the impact of Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Aside from achieving voluminous sales and mass citations, the book is one of few academic monographs that can lay claim to transforming the ways in which people understand the world and their own experiences within it. The major hypothesis of author Ulrich Beck is that a fundamental shift has occurred in capitalist economies from a focus on the material production of goods to avoidance of “bads.” Crucially, while social science thinkers had previously sought to understand the foundational dynamics of society with recourse to established categories—such as class, gender, economy, and power—Beck postulated that the key contours of the modern age were best understood through the prism of risk. Despite revolving around the concept of risk, Beck's work has not influenced the field of risk research as heavily as one might expect. In line with the ambitions of this special issue, this article contextualizes and situates the contribution made by Beck and connects his thesis to the broader evolution of risk theory over the last four decades. In documenting both catalytic effects and elisions, an appeal is made for reconsideration of the utility of the risk society perspective for future work in risk studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabe Mythen, 2021. "The Critical Theory of World Risk Society: A Retrospective Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 533-543, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:41:y:2021:i:3:p:533-543
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13159
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13159
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13159?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Sarewitz & Roger Pielke & Mojdeh Keykhah, 2003. "Vulnerability and Risk: Some Thoughts from a Political and Policy Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 805-810, August.
    2. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521759199 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    4. Lucas Bergkamp, 2017. "The concept of as a model for risk regulation – its hidden and not so hidden ambitions, side effects, and risks," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(10), pages 1275-1291, October.
    5. Catherine E. Althaus, 2005. "A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 567-588, June.
    6. Gabe Mythen & Adam Burgess & Jamie K. Wardman, 2018. "The prophecy of Ulrich Beck: signposts for the social sciences," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 96-100, January.
    7. Randall,Alan, 2011. "Risk and Precaution," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766159.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Andre Lee Ludvigsen, 2026. "Towards a Beckian Approach to Social Movements: Between Surveillance and Subpolitical Counter-Power," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 31(1), pages 3-20, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Anne Marike Lokhorst, 2016. "The Key Role of Experiential Uncertainty when Dealing with Risks: Its Relationships with Demand for Regulation and Institutional Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1615-1629, August.
    2. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Giovanni Gull?, 2018. "La comunicazione del rischio e la percezione pubblica dei disastri: il caso studio della frana di Maierato (Calabria, Italia)," PRISMA Economia - Societ? - Lavoro, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 9-29.
    3. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    5. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Sara E. Kuhar & Kate Nierenberg & Barbara Kirkpatrick & Graham A. Tobin, 2009. "Public Perceptions of Florida Red Tide Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7), pages 963-969, July.
    7. Mengying Cui & David Levinson, 2018. "Accessibility analysis of risk severity," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1029-1050, July.
    8. Ruth E Alcock & Jerry Busby, 2006. "Risk Migration and Scientific Advance: The Case of Flame‐Retardant Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 369-381, April.
    9. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    10. Gianluca Fulli & Marcelo Masera & Catalin Felix Covrig & Francesco Profumo & Ettore Bompard & Tao Huang, 2017. "The EU Electricity Security Decision-Analytic Framework: Status and Perspective Developments," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Rob Goble, 2021. "Through a Glass Darkly: How Natural Science and Technical Communities Looked at Social Science Advances in Understanding Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 414-428, March.
    12. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Evangelos Grigoroudis & Spyridon Galatsidas & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2023. "Satisfaction with Media Information about Renewable Energy Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Paul Slovic & James Flynn & Robin Gregory, 1994. "Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 773-777, October.
    15. Susan Mello & Robert C. Hornik, 2016. "Media Coverage of Pediatric Environmental Health Risks and its Effects on Mothers’ Protective Behaviors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 605-622, March.
    16. Yu‐Ru Lin & Drew Margolin & Xidao Wen, 2017. "Tracking and Analyzing Individual Distress Following Terrorist Attacks Using Social Media Streams," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1580-1605, August.
    17. Asim Zia & Katherine Lacasse & Nina H. Fefferman & Louis J. Gross & Brian Beckage, 2024. "Machine Learning a Probabilistic Structural Equation Model to Explain the Impact of Climate Risk Perceptions on Policy Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-25, November.
    18. Pieter van Gelder & Pim Klaassen & Behnam Taebi & Bart Walhout & Ruud van Ommen & Ibo van de Poel & Zoe Robaey & Lotte Asveld & Ruud Balkenende & Frank Hollmann & Erik Jan van Kampen & Nima Khakzad & , 2021. "Safe-by-Design in Engineering: An Overview and Comparative Analysis of Engineering Disciplines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-28, June.
    19. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2018. "Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 947-961, May.
    20. Chang Liu & Lorraine Eden & Dan Li, 2024. "Violent conflict and multinational enterprises: identifying key frontiers in international business policy research," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(3), pages 260-275, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:41:y:2021:i:3:p:533-543. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.