首页> 外文期刊>Journal of risk research >Sociology, risk and the environment: a material-semiotic approach
【24h】

Sociology, risk and the environment: a material-semiotic approach

机译:社会学,风险与环境:一种物质符号方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Sociology has made significant contributions to the conceptualisation of risk and critique of technical risk analysis. It has, however, unintentionally reinforced the division of labour between the natural/technical and social sciences in risk analysis. This paper argues that the problem with conceptualisations of risk is not a misplaced emphasis on calculation. Rather, it is that we have not adequately dealt with ontological distinctions implicit in both sociological and technical work on risk between material or objective risks and our socially mediated understandings and interpretations of those risks. While acknowledging that risks are simultaneously social and technical, sociologists have not, in practice, provided the conceptual and methodological tools to apprehend risk in a less dualistic manner. This limits our ability both to analyse actors and processes outside the social domain and to explore the recursive relationships between risk calculus, social action and the material outcomes of risk. In response, this paper develops a material-semiotic conceptualisation of risk and provides an assessment of its relevance to more sociologically informed risk governance. It introduces the ideas of co-constitution, emergent entities and enactment as instruments for reconciling the material and social worlds in a sociological study of risk. It further illustrates the application of a material-semiotic approach using these concepts in the nuclear industry. In deconstructing social-material dualisms in the sociology of risk, this paper argues that a material-semiotic conceptualisation of risk enables both technical and social perspectives on risk not only to coexist but to collaborate, widening the scope for interdisciplinary research.
机译:社会学为风险的概念化和对技术风险分析的批判做出了重大贡献。但是,它无意间增强了风险分析中自然/技术与社会科学之间的分工。本文认为,风险概念化的问题并非放错了对计算的重视。恰恰是,我们没有充分地处理社会科学和技术工作所隐含的关于​​本体或客观风险与我们对这些风险的社会中介理解和解释之间的本体论区别。社会学家虽然承认风险是社会性和技术性的,但实际上并没有提供以较少二元性的方式理解风险的概念和方法论工具。这限制了我们分析社会领域之外的参与者和过程以及探索风险计算,社会行为与风险的实质结果之间的递归关系的能力。作为回应,本文提出了风险的实质符号概念,并评估了其与更社会学上已知的风险治理的相关性。它介绍了合宪,新兴实体和成文法的思想,作为在风险的社会学研究中调和物质世界和社会世界的工具。它进一步说明了使用这些概念的材料符号方法在核工业中的应用。在解构风险社会学中的社会-物质二元论时,本文认为,风险的物质-符号概念化不仅使风险的技术观点和社会观点共存,而且能够合作,从而拓宽了跨学科研究的范围。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号