The study of “Risk Society” is not as risky as we think, but the word “risk” needs to be evaluated a little carefully. Risk generally denotes the possibility of something bad happening as a consequence of a certain action, and the term risk society is no different. It is just a mere extension of this idea of risk where society encounters various unintended negative consequences inherent in its path towards modernity and globalization.
The concept of a “risk society” is closely associated with the works of Ulrich Beck, a famous sociologist and a profound thinker of globalization who explored the theme of how modernity and globalization shape our world.
Beck, in his influential essays “On the Way Towards an Industrial Society of Risk” (1990) and “Living in the World Risk Society” (2006), attempts to explain this idea in great detail by examining his theories along with other important contributions from sociologists like Anthony Giddens and David Harvey. He postulated that risk is a byproduct of the contemporary globalizing, modernizing world.
Simply put, a risk society is characterized by the recognition of radical uncertainty that the changes in the modern world have brought in. Unlike normal disasters and catastrophes, risk refers to anticipating potential disasters that globalization and rapid technological advancements might bring in. For instance, consider nuclear disasters. While nuclear technology symbolizes scientific progress, it also indicates the possibility of catastrophic events, symbolizing the unintended consequences of the dynamic process of globalization.
The Radicalization of Modernity
Beck, Giddens, and Harvey argue that we are witnessing not postmodernity but a more radical form of modernity. The very success of modern advancements has led to the emergence of radical risks. Fundamental institutions of early modernity such as —science, expert systems, the state, commerce, and international systems—have all contributed to this manufactured uncertainty. This radical modernisation has paradoxically produced counterproductive outcomes, leading to new forms of risk.
The Nature of Risks in Modern Society
Risks are often invisible and beyond the perception of ordinary individuals. They must be identified and communicated by experts. This reliance on external authorities alienates common people from the discourse on risk. Moreover, this knowledge is scientific and carries significant economic, ethical, and political implications.
Risks in the modern world are even more complex. They can be further exacerbated because traditional class distinctions become less relevant in a risk society, as everyone can be equally vulnerable to risks. For example, the Bhopal gas tragedy affected people regardless of their social class. This shift replaces a community of need “I am hungry” with a community of anxiety “I am afraid”, leading to new social inequalities and alienation.
Furthermore, not everybody wants to eliminate risks in society because there are certain businesses and individuals who thrive because of the persistence of risks. For instance, insurance companies benefit from the fear of financial fraud. This creates a scenario where some entities are vested in the persistence of risks rather than in solving their root causes.
In addition to this, it is critical to understand that risk management requires distinguishing between value and fact. Risk mitigation involves raising ethical and normative questions beyond the scope of conventional natural sciences as merely knowing facts without critically evaluating their normative aspect is insufficient. The scientific monopoly on truth and objectivity must be questioned, as other forms of rationality also hold equal importance. This critique of industrial systems emphasizes the need for a broader understanding of rationality.
Lastly, the omnipresence of risk can lead to a dirigiste policy, where the state takes on an overarching role to mitigate the underlying risks. This was evident during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic, where emergency actions can endanger democratic frameworks. Beck argues that this ever-present risk could eventually lead to a cosmopolitan state where global cooperation is necessary.
The Silver Lining: Optimistic Visions
Despite the catastrophic potential of a society at risk, there are certain underlying optimistic perspectives because acknowledging catastrophes enables us to be prepared. When catastrophes occur, they trigger widespread recognition and response, leading to greater awareness and preventive measures. Moreover, the prevalence of risk calls for alternative governance that is more dynamic, holistic, and robust enough to mitigate global risk, as collective efforts are necessary to solve transnational issues.
In addition, globalization also enforces communication across borders, fostering a form of forced cosmopolitanism. This awareness that we are part of the same world, even if driven by circumstances rather than generosity, can be unifying and critical in eliminating the risks. The shared experience of fear and vulnerability of global risk can lead to political renewal and a reevaluation of government effectiveness.
In conclusion, the concept of a risk society highlights the complex relationship between modernity, globalization, and risk. It challenges us to rethink our approach to knowledge, governance, and societal structures. Understanding and addressing these risks enables us to build a more resilient and cooperative global society.
Edited by Yatin Satish
Article 19 