Jens O. Zinn

Current Directions in Risk Research: New Developments in Psychology and Sociology

This article reviews the main approaches to risk in psychology and sociology and considers recent developments. It shows that research continues from a wide range of perspectives. Some developments in psychological thinking have recently acknowledged the importance of the cultural framing of risk perceptions and responses and the positive power of emotions to manage uncertainties, while some streams of work in sociology have moved toward more individualist approaches. These converging processes open opportunities for cross-fertilization and for using insights from both disciplines in the development of research.

The biographical approach: A better way to understand behaviour in health and illness

In research on health and illness, studies using a narrative approach are gaining ground in a context where a statistical quantitative approach as well as an ‘objective’ approach to illness have dominated for decades. This can be interpreted as a shift from an objective to a subjective and social concept of risk. Against this background, this editorial argues that the biographical approach provides important opportunities to enhance understanding of the individuals management of risk and uncertainty in health and illness.

Vocational Training and Career Development in Germany: Results from a Longitudinal Study

The present paper presents empirical results from a German panel study which collected longitudinal data regarding the job entry of young adults in six of the top training occupations in the service and technical-industrial sectors. The data clearly demonstrate the influence of gender and social origin on the access to training in particular occupations. Furthermore, the existence of gender and occupation-specific patterns of career development is demonstrated. However, the apprenticeship system also provides mobility opportunities which depend on the specific training occupation. Moving along a certain occupational pathway results in an interplay between the structural opportunities and constraints of occupational contexts, on the one hand, and the young workers’ aspirations and orientations, on the other. These orientations and aspirations were investigated with qualitative methods which helped to identify different modes of biographical action orientations of young workers.

The sociology of risk and uncertainty: A response to Judith Green's 'Is it time for the sociology of health to abandon risk ?'

This article responds to Judith Greens (2009, p. 493–508, this issue) contribution ‘Is it time for the sociology of health to abandon “risk”?’ It agrees with some of Greens criticisms of risk studies, but argues that rather than abandoning the concept of risk it should be refined and developed. Even though Green is right to have concerns about narrow approaches to social reality she follows a narrow perspective herself, which is atypical for sociological approaches to risk. She starts with criticism of the overemphasis on risk in research on the sociology of health but seem to shift to a general critique of risk research and focuses on one particular approach. Sociological risk research, I would argue, provides a critique of precisely those reductionist approaches to risk which Green sees as narrowing the focus of risk to concepts of rational decision making, technical calculation and risk assessment. Her examples, however, indicate a range of problems, but less with the concept of risk but rather methodological weaknesses, issues of operationalisation of macro theory and a technical understanding of risk which are altogether problematic not only in the realm of risk but for sociological approach to social reality in general. Instead of questioning risk I point to ways in which sociological risk research can be systematised. I show that Greens analysis has weaknesses that are conceptually important. In particular, she does not clearly distinguish between several levels of analysis such as institutional self representation and everyday practice, the risk society as a specific theory and the sociology of risk and uncertainty as an area of research and risk as an analytical approach and a research object. I argue that sociological approaches to risk already work with other distinctions than rational/subjective and some research even shows how such distinctions can be overcome to open further perspectives for risk research.

Towards a better understanding of risk-taking: key concepts, dimensions and perspectives

The current study of risk is dominated by the risk minimisation approach that frames risk and risk-taking as something undesirable that should be avoided as much as possible. However, this approach to risk often fails to consider the broader conditions and motivations of risk-taking and to examine why people expose themselves to danger. In this editorial, I explore two key concepts – voluntary risk-taking and risk behaviour – considering the ways in which they represent opposing views in risk studies. I make the case for a broader approach to ‘risk-taking’ that addresses the complex tensions between risk-taking and risk aversion in the social, natural and material contexts of everyday life. I examine how risk-taking is characterised by varying degrees of control over decision-making, different mixes of motives, the impact of socio-structural factors, forms of routinisation and habitual risk-taking, how power is involved in risk-taking and how identity is used to challenge experts’ views. I discuss the role of stigma in risk-taking and how general societal contexts and organisational cultures influence the risk-taking. While there is increasing research on risk-taking, there is still scope for further publications that will advance our understanding of risk-taking in its social contexts, and in this editorial, I address issues that will form the basis of a forthcoming special issue of Health, Risk & Society.

The mutual constitution of risk and inequalities: intersectional risk theory

In this article, we examine the conceptual importance of integrating risk and intersectionality theory for the study of how risk and various forms of inequality intersect and are mutually constitutive. We argue that an intersectional perspective can advance risk research by incorporating more effectively the role of such social categories as gender and race into the analysis of ‘risk’ as an empirical phenomenon. In doing so, the intersectional perspective articulates more clearly the connection between the social construction of risk and, on the one hand, the reproduction of new and complex social inequalities and, on the other, intersections of social class, gender, ethnicity and other social categorisations. We trace the intellectual division between risk and feminist-inspired intersectionality research, showing how these approaches can be aligned to study, for example, risk-based welfare and social policy. We use a discussion of general directions within welfare policy to illustrate how an intersectional perspective can be used to show the ways in which new governance strategies create new divisions and reproduce existing forms of social inequality. We conclude the article with a call for a new research agenda to integrate intersectional frameworks with risk theory in order to provide a more nuanced analysis of the relationship between social inequality and risk.

Understanding risk and old age in western society

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of “risk” in relation to old age. Ideas are explored linked with what has been termed as the “risk society” and the extent to which it has become part of the organizing ground of how we define and organise the “personal” and “social spaces” in which to grow old in western modernity.Design/methodology/approach – A theoretical paper in three parts, including: an introduction to the relevance and breakdown in trust relations; a mapping out of the key assumptions of risk society; and examples drawn from social welfarism to consolidate an understanding of the contructedness of old age in late modernity.Findings – Part of this reflexive response to understanding risk and old age is the importance of recognising self‐subjective dimensions of emotions, trust, biographical knowledge and resources.Originality/value – This discussion provides a critical narrative to the importance and interrelatedness of the sociology of risk to the study of old age.

Survey Research and the Production of Evidence for Social Policy

Large representative surveys have become a valuable resource to inform public policy in an increasingly complex modern world. They provide authority to policy since they are considered objective, neutral and scientific. In contrast, this article conceives the production of knowledge as an interactive process. We argue that the conduct of large social surveys tends to reinforce existing world views, power relations and a narrow construction of social issues. To illustrate this, we draw on a small exploratory study which examined the experience of responding to selected survey questions of the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia study (HILDA). We suggest that while more open approaches are required to capture the complexities of everyday life, these are unlikely to be implemented given the dominance of particular forms of knowledge.

Living in the Anthropocene: towards a risk-taking society

Social debates about nature are changing. Understandings of nature as largely independent of human activity and available for exploitation have given way to concerns about its protection, and have further shifted towards strategies focused on actively managing and producing nature. This article aims to make sense of this shift using a risk framework. Originating from the modern notion of risk that amalgamates risk minimisation and risk-taking, it suggests that environmental decision-making is shifting from an emphasis on the prevention and minimisation of risk towards a focus on risk management and risk-taking. The article revisits debates about the Anthropocene as well as trends in environmental sociology and developments in economics to illustrate how the notion of ‘nature’ has changed. It reflects a growing trend of debates considering humans’ responsibility for their natural environment, as well as the need to shape it actively and see it as a problem of market design. In conclusion, it argues that these changes characterise the sprawl of social risk-taking into the natural environment. Still considered complex, dynamic and difficult to understand, the notion of ‘nature’ as increasingly shaped and produced by humanity is pushing humanity into an age of environmental risk-taking or a risk-taking society.

Gender inequalities and risk during the 'Rush Hour' of life

Increasingly, social policies combine to intensify old risks and create new social risks with unequal consequences for men and women. These risks include those created by changing normative expectations and the resulting tensions between social policy, paid employment and family life. Policy reliance on highly aggregated standardised outcome data and generalised models of autonomous rational action result in policies that lack an understanding of the rationales that structure everyday life. Drawing on two Australian studies, we illustrate the importance of attending to the intersections and collisions of social change and normative policy frameworks from the perspective of individual ‘lived lives’.