Risk Society and Systematic Social Theory

Abstract

Despite the analytical insight that Ulrich Beck’s theory of risk society provides into key aspects of contemporary social life, the theory of risk society has been subject to important criticisms. One of the most powerful criticisms of Beck’s theorization of risk society is that Beck ‘totalizes’ risk, treating risk as if it is the ‘centre’ of contemporary social and material life, thus neglecting other important factors (Dean 1999: 181–2; Rasborg 2012: 10). This criticism creates a particularly important challenge for this study. Conceiving of risk as the sole ‘centre’ of social relations precludes the exploration of other key structuring factors, such as class relations or the interrelations between risk and class. Another aspect of Beck’s theory of risk society that has received extensive critical attention is his understanding of risk society as an epoch fundamentally different than previous epochs based on the qualitatively different roles of risk in the emerging risk society (Scott 2000; see also Lupton 1999; Mythen 2004: 39; Savage 2009b). Given these two fundamental criticisms it is necessary to ask: is the theory of risk society the appropriate basis for developing an understanding of contemporary risk?