A relational theory of risk

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 175-190

  Boholm, Åsa ^a   Corvellec, Hervé ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

culture; risk theory; social practice; value

Indexed keywords

BOUNDED RATIONALITY; CULTURE; RELATIONAL THEORIES; RISK COMMUNICATION; RISK GOVERNANCE; RISK THEORY; SITUATED COGNITION; SOCIAL PRACTICES; VALUE;

RISK ANALYSIS;

RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 79551567323     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2010.515313     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Arendt, H. 1958. The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Aven, T., and O. Renn. 2009. On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain. Journal of Risk Research 12, no. 1: 1-12.
3. Bauman, Z. 2005. Liquid life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
4. Bernstein, P.L. 1996. Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk. New York: Wiley.
5. Boholm, Å. 2003. The cultural nature of risk: Can there be an anthropology of uncertainty? Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology 68, no. 2: 159-79.
6. Boholm, Å. 2005. 'Greater good' in transit: The unwieldy career of a Swedish rail tunnel project. FOCAAL: The European Journal of Anthropology 46: 21-36.
7. Boholm, Å. 2008. The public meeting as a theatre of dissent: Risk and hazard in land use and environmental planning. Journal of Risk Research 11, no. 1-2: 119-40.
8. Boholm, Å. 2009. Speaking of risk: Matters of context. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture 3, no. 2: 335-54.
9. Boholm, Å., and R. Löfstedt. 1999. Issues of risk, trust and knowledge: The Hallandsas tunnel case. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 28, no. 6: 556-61.
10. Boholm, M. 2009. Risk and causality in newspaper reporting. Risk Analysis 29, no. 11: 1566-77.
11. Bourdieu, P. 1992. The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
12. Bourdieu, P. 2003. Firing back: Against the tyranny of the market 2. London: Verso.
13. Bowker, G.C., and S. Leigh Star. 1999. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences inside technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Bradbury, J.A. 1989. The policy implications of differing concepts of risk. Science, Technology, and Human Values 14, no. 4: 380-99.
15. Caplan, P. 2000. Risk revisited. London: Pluto Press.
16. Clarke, L.B. 1989. Acceptable risk? Making decisions in a toxic environment. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
17. Corvellec, H. 2010a. Organizational risk as it derives from what managers value: A practicebased approach to risk assessment. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 18, no. 3: 145-54.
18. Corvellec, H. 2010b. The narrative structure of risk accounts. Paper presented at the SRAEurope 2010 Annual Meeting, June 21-23, in London, UK.
19. Cujo. Directed by L. Teague. USA: Sunn Classic Pictures, 1984.
20. David, F.N. 1962. Games, gods and gambling: The origins and history of probability and statistical ideas from the earliest times to the Newtonianera. London: Charles Griffin.
21. Dean, M. 2010. Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. de Certeau, M. 2002. The practice of everyday life. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
23. Defoe, D. 1998. A journal of the plague year: Being observations or memorials of the most remarkable occurrences as well publick as private, which happened in London during the last great visitation in 1665. Ed. L. Louis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Douglas, M. 1985. Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
25. Douglas, M. 1992. Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. London: Routledge.
26. Douglas, M., and A. Wildavsky. 1982. Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27. Ewald, F. 1991. Insurance and risk. In The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, ed. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, 197-210. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Fillmore, C.J., and B.T. Atkins. 1992. Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of risk and its neighbors. In Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization, ed. A. Lehrer and E. Feder Kittay, 75-102. Hillsdale, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Foucault, M. 1991. Governmentality. In The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, ed. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, 87-104. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Geertz, C. 1973. The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
31. Gigerenzer, G. 1989. The empire of chance: How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Goffman, E. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.
33. Grätz, T. 2003. Gold-mining and risk management: A case study from northern Benin. Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology 68, no. 2: 192-208.
34. Gregersen, N.H. 2003. Risk and religion: Toward a theology of risk taking. Zygon 38, no. 2: 355-76.
35. Hacking, I. 1999. The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36. Hanson, N.R. 2000. Observation. In Readings in the philosophy of science: From positivism to postmodernism, ed. T. Schick, 175-82. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
37. Hansson S., O. 2010. Risk: Objective or subjective, facts or values. Journal of Risk Research 13, no. 2: 231-8.
38. Hilgartner, S. 1992. The social construction of risk objects: Or, how to pry open networks of risk. In Organizations, uncertainties, and risk, ed. J.F. Short and L. Clarke, 39-53. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
39. Hohenemser, C., R.W. Kates, and P. Slovic. 1985. A causal taxonomy. In Perilous progress: Managing the hazards of technology, ed. R.W. Kates, C. Hohenemser, and J.X. Kasperson, 67-125. Boulder, CO/London: Westview Press.
40. Horlick-Jones, T., and J. Sime. 2004. Living on the border: Knowledge, risk and transdisciplinarity. Futures 36, no. 4: 441-56.
41. Ingold, T. 2000. The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.
42. Kaplan, S., and B.J. Garrick. 1981. On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis 1, no. 1: 11-27.
43. Kavanagh, T.M. 1993. Enlightenment and the shadows of chance: The novel and the culture of gambling in eighteenth-century France. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
44. Kendra, J. 2007. The reconstitution of risk objects. Journal of Risk Research 10, no. 1: 29-49.
45. Klinke, A., and O. Renn. 2002. A new approach to risk evaluation and management: Risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis 22, no. 6: 1071-94.
46. Kristeva, J. 1986. Word, dialogue and novel. In The Kristeva reader, ed. T. Moi, 34-61. New York: Columbia University Press.
47. Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
48. Latour, B. 1996. Aramis or the love of technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49. Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50. Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory life : The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51. Lave, J. 1988. Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52. Lodge, M., and C. Hood. 2002. Pavlovian policy responses to media feeding frenzies? Dangerous dogs regulation in comparative perspective. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 10, no. 1: 1-13.
53. Löfstedt, R., and Å. Boholm. 1999. Off track in Sweden. Environment 41, no. 4: 16-26.
54. Luhmann, N. 1993. Risk: A sociological theory. New York: de Gruyter.
55. Mairal, G. 2003. A risk shadow in Spain. Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology 68, no. 2: 179-91.
56. Mairal, G. 2008. Narratives of risk. Journal of Risk Research 11, no. 1-2: 41-54.
57. Mol, A. 2002. The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
58. Nicolini, D., S. Gherardi, and D. Yanow. 2003. Knowing in organizations: A practice-based approach. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
59. Peirce, C.S. 1998. The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings. Vol. 2, 1893-1913. ed. C.J.W. Kloesel and N. Houser. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
60. Power, M. 2007. Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61. Quine, W.V. 1951. Main trends in recent philosophy: Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review 60, no. 1: 20-43.
62. Rappaport, R.A. 1996. Risk and the human environment. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 545, May: 64-74.
63. Ravetz, J.R. 1997. The science of 'what-if?'. Futures 29, no. 6: 533-9.
64. Rescher, N. 1983. Risk: A philosophical introduction to the theory of risk evaluation and management. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
65. Rosa, E. 1998. Metatheoretical foundations for post-normal risk. Journal of Risk Research 1, no. 1: 15-44.
66. Royal Society. 1992. Risk: Analysis, perception and management. London: Royal Society.
67. Saussure, F.D. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale [Course in general linguistics]. Lausanne: Payot.
68. Schatzki, T.R., K. Knorr-Cetina, and E.V. Savigny. 2001. The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge.
69. Shaw, A. 2000. 'Conflicting models of risk': Clinical genetics and British Pakistanis. In Risk revisited, ed. P. Caplan, 85-107. London: Pluto Press.
70. Sjölander-Lindqvist, A. 2004. Local environment at stake: The Hallandsås railway tunnel in a social and cultural context. Lund: Lund University Press.
71. Sjölander-Lindqvist, A. 2005. Conflicting perspectives on water in a Swedish railway tunnel project. Environmental Values 14, no. 2: 221-39.
72. Slovic, P. 2000. The perception of risk (Risk, society, and policy series). London: Earthscan.
73. Society for Risk Analysis. 2008. Risk analysis glossary (P-R). http://www.sra.org/ resources-glossary-p-r.php (accessed March 20, 2010).
74. Stoffle, R., and J. Minnis. 2008. Resilience at risk: Epistemological and social construction barriers to risk communication. Journal of Risk Research 11, no. 1-2: 55-68.
75. Stoffle, R.W., and R. Arnold. 2003. Confronting the angry rock: American Indians' situated risks from radioactivity. Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology 68, no. 2: 230-48.
76. Stoffle, R.W., M.N. Zedeno, A. Eisenberg, R. Toupal, and A. Caroll. 2004. Shifting risks: Hoover Dam bridge impacts on American Indian sacred landscapes. In Facility siting: Risk, power and identity in land use planning, ed. Å. Boholm, and R. Löfstedt, 127-43. London: Earthscan.
77. Stratman, J.F., C. Boykin, M.C. Holmes, M.J. Laufer, and M. Breen. 1995. Risk communication, metacommunication, and rhetorical stases in the Aspen-EPA superfund controversy. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 9, no. 5: 5-41.
78. Van Loon, J. 2002. Risk and technological culture: Towards a sociology of virulence. London: Routledge.
79. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.