Abstract
This paper investigates family risks from the perspective of risk society. Conceptual distinction is made between the first modern and the second modern type of family risk as well as between its objective and subjective dimensions. The major finding in terms of variation of family risks is that the second-modern type of risks is more conspicuous than the first-modern one in Seoul and Tokyo whereas the reverse is the case in Beijing. Yet these two types of risk coexist in all three cities. The contextualized relationship between the objective and subjective dimensions shows the tendency that the risk perception moves up or down in a way reflecting the official statistics of family risks. We argue that this pattern of contextualization can be explained by social construction of risks.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
