Abstract
The risk assessment fraternity is well aware by now of the limited role played by various “technical”, “rational”, or “analytical” approaches to risks in real decision making contexts*. Reactions to this news vary from the familiar technocratic lament about the irrational ways of the world outside their rational bastions, to the vigorous celebration of the political and psychological “underworlds” which impose those limits on the technocratic perspective. Eschewing these polarized extremes, however, most people in the field are still working out their responses, as are those like myself who are really marginal to it, and who came with an already well developed experience of the sociological dimensions and instrumental limitations of scientific rationality. Given that reactions are still in the formulative stage; given the centrality of the idea of scientific rationality in risk assessment philosophies and methodologies (and in modern policy making generally); and given that appropriate responses are of practical importance in policy making; I shall attempt in this paper to outline some reasons why the sociological analysis of scientific rationality that has developed to some maturity in the last few years is directly relevant to the kinds of questions now facing risk assessment when it attempts to define where it should be heading next. In the process I shall outline some areas of research under the general area of risk assessment of technology politics that this different perspective suggests. There is a potentially important though as yet unrealized correspondence between many of the insights from the psychological research which has influenced risk analysis and the sociological analysis of scientific rationality. In presenting the latter my aim is not to upstage the former but to point out how the naturally individualistic learnings of psychology can and must be developed into sociological and anthropological frameworks for formulating questions and possibilities. If there is one central concern of this paper it is the following.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnes S B., (1972) Sociological explanation and natural science: A Kuhnian reappraisal. European Journal of Sociology 13:273–93.
Barnes, S.B., and Shapin, S.A. (Eds.) (1979) Natural Order. London: Sage.
Boguslaw, R. (1972) The New Utopians. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Burn, D. (1979) Nuclear Power and the Energy Crisis. London: MacMillan.
Cameron, I., and Edge D O., (1977) Images of Science. London: Butterworth.
Collins, H.M, (Ed.) (1981) Knowledge and controversy: Studies of modern natural science. Social Studies of Science 11:February.
Conrad, J. (Ed.) (1980) Society, Technology and Risk Assessment. London; Academic Press.
Doty, P. (1972) Can investigations improve scientific advice? The case of the ABM. Minerva 10;280–94.
Douglas, M. (1970) Natural Symbols, Hardmonsworth; Penguin.
Douglas, M. (1975) Implicit Meanings. London: Routledge.
Edeiman, M. (1966) The Symbolic Uses of Politics, Illinois; University of Illinois Press.
Edeiman, M. (1971) Politics as Symbolic Action. New York: Academic Press.
Edeiman, M. (1977) Political Language: Words that Succeed and Policies that Fail. New York: Academic Press.
Ezrahi, Y. (1974) The authority of science in politics, in Science and Values edited by A. Thackray and E. Mendelsohn. New York; Humanities Press.
Firth, R. (1973) Symbols: Public and Private. London: Allen and Unwin.
Forman P., (1971) Weimar culture: Causality and Quantum Physics. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3:1–115.
Gellner, E. (1974) The Legitimation of Belief. London: Cambridge University Press
Habermas, J. (1975) Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press
Hesse, M.B. (1974) The Structure of Scientific Inference. London: MacMillan.
Hoos, I. (1969) Systems Analysis and Public Policy. California; University of California Press.
Kemeny, J.G. (Chairman) (1979) The President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island. Washington, D.C.
Kemeny, J.G. (1980) Saving the American democracy: The lessons of Three Mile Island. Technology Review, June/July:65–75.
LaPorte, T. (1980) Design and management of nearly error free safety, in Social Science Aspects of the Accident at Three Mile Island, edited by D. Sills. Colorado: Westview Press.
Lathrop, J. (1980) The Role of Risk Assessment in Facility Siting: A Case Study from California. WP-80–150. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Latour, B., and Woolgar, S. (1980) Laboratory Life: A Study in the Social Construction of Scientific Facts. London: Sage.
McDermott, J. (1977) Technology: Opiate of the intellectuals, in Technology and Man’s Future, edited by A. Teich. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
McKenzie, D. (1981) Statistics and Society, 1850–1920. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press.
Majone, G., and Quade, E.S. (1980) (Eds.) Pitfalls of Analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
March, J.G., and Simon, H.A. (1979) Organisations.
Mayer, M.W, (Ed.) (1971) Structure, Systems and Symbols: Readings in Organizational Behavior. Boston: Little Brown.
Mazur, A. (1977) Science courts. Minerva 15:1–13.
Merton, R.K. (1975) Sociology of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mitroff, I. (1974) The Subjective Side of Science. Elsevier.
Mulkay, M.J. (1980) Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Allen and Unwin.
Nelkin, D. (1971) Nuclear Power and Its Critics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Nelkin, D. (1981) Some social and political dimensions for nuclear power: Examples from TMI. American Political Science Review 75:April.
Niblett, C. (1979) Episodes in the History of Industrial Science: Three Case Studies. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester.
Okrent, D. (1980) Comment on societal risk. Science 207:372–5.
Otway, H., and von Winterfeldt, D. (1980) Beyond Acceptable Risk: On the Social Acceptability of Technology. London: Academic Press.
Pearce, D. (1979) Social cost-benefit analysis and nuclear future. Energy Economics 1:66–71.
Pinch T J., (1981) The sun-set: The presentation of certainty in scientific life. Social Studies of Science 11:131–58.
Ravetz, J.R. (1974) Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Robbins, D., and Johnson, R. (1976) The role of cognitive and occupational differentiation in scientific controversies. Social Studies of Science 6:165–87.
Scheffler, I, (1967) Science and Subjectivity. New York: Bobbs Merrill.
Slovic, P., and Fischoff, B. (1980) How safe is safe enough? Pages 121–47 in Risk and Chance, edited by J. Dowie. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B., and Lichtenstein, S. (1976) Cognitive processes and societal risk-taking. Pages 165–84 in Cognition and Social Behaviour, edited by J.S. Carroll and J.W Payne. New York: Wiley and Halstead Press.
Sperber, D. (1975) Rethinking Symbolism. London: Cambridge University Press.
Starr, C., and Whipple, C. (1980) Risks of risk decisions. Science 208:1114–29.
Tversky A., and Kahnemann D. (1974) Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–31.
Weinberg, A. (1972) Science and trans-science. Minerva 10; 209–22.
Weizenbaum, J. (1980) Computer Power and Human Reason. Boston: MIT Press.
Welsh, I., and Wynne, B. (1981) Nuclear power and political control—The Windscale fire as a case study in symbolic uses of science. Paper presented at the British Society for the History of Science Conference on New Perspectives in the History of Technology, Machester, April.
Williams, R. (1980) The Nuclear Power Decisions. London: Croom Helm.
Winner, L. (1978) Autonomous Technology. Boston: MIT Press.
Winner, L. (1980) Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109: 121–35.
Wynne B., (1975) The rhetoric of consensus politics: A critique of technology assessment. Research Policy 4:1–51.
Wynne, B. (1980) Technology, risk and participation, in Society, Technology and Risk Assessment, edited by J. Conrad. London: Academic Press.
Wynne, B. (1981a) Nuclear Decision Making—Rationality or Ritual? Ch.7. London: British Society for the History of Science.
Wynne, B. (1981b) Decision Making, Risk, and Information Technology—An Outline for Research. University of Lancaster.
Wynne, B. (1981c) Redefining the question of risk and public acceptability—the social viability of technology. Paper presented at the EEC FAST Programme, February.
Zebraski, E. (1980) Lessons learned and lessons not yet learned in nuclear safety. Paper presented at AAAS Meeting, San Francisco, January, p8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1982 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg/Austria
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wynne, B. (1982). Institutional Mythologies and Dual Societies in the Management of Risk. In: Kunreuther, H.C., Ley, E.V. (eds) The Risk Analysis Controversy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-81940-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-81940-7_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-81942-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-81940-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive