The social construction of environment: an observation from the sociology of risk
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29092/uacm.v12i29.18Keywords:
Social and environmental risks, construction risk, Functional DifferentiationAbstract
This article is a theoretical-conceptual construction and social perception of environmental risk approach. The theming and questioning is approached from the particular perspective of the theory of social systems and the risk society, relieving the complexity and social fragmentation that has reached modern society, which has altered its ability to meet the risks and dangers plotted in manifestos latent problems and conflicts that arise around it. In this sense, it is evident construction and social perception of risk as a privileged space to observe the self- society makes the environment. Therefore, the paper proposes in its structure, a proposed conceptual framework of observation and a review of studies on risk, realizing that a modern society —functionally differentiated— hampers, stress and limits to social systems science or any other social actor that could control and govern these phenomena, since it is a highly complex society, marked by uncertainty and contingency.
Downloads
References
Arnold, M. (2003), “Autoproducción de la amenaza ambiental en la sociedad contemporánea”, en Revista Mad, no. 9, Santiago de Chile. Artículo disponible en línea: http://rehue.csociales.uchile.cl/publicaciones/mad/09/paper01.htm (consulta: 10 de enero de 2008).
____(2000), “Ambiente y Sociedad: déficit de la racionalidad ambiental”, en Revista Venezolana de Economía y Ciencias Sociales, vol. 6, no. 1, Caracas, pp. 11-37.
Bauman, Z. (2006), Vida Líquida. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.
Beck, U. (2008), La sociedad del riesgo mundial. En busca de la seguridad perdida. Barcelona: Paidós.
____(2006), La sociedad del riesgo. Hacia una nueva modernidad. Barcelona: Paidós.
____(2002), La sociedad del riesgo global. Madrid: Siglo XXI. (1998), ¿Qué es la globalización? Falacias del globalismo. Respuestas a la globalización. Barcelona: Paidós.
Dake, K. (1991), “Orienting Dispositions in the Perception of Risk. An Analysis of Contemporary Worldviews and Cultural Biases”, en Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 61-82.
Douglas, M. (1996) [1985], La aceptabilidad del riesgo según las ciencias sociales. Barcelona: Paidós.
____y A. Wildavsky (1982), Risk and Culture: an Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Espluga, J. (2004), “Conflictes Socioambientals i L’estudi de la Percepció Social del Risc”, en Papers, no. 72, Barcelona, pp. 145-162.
____(2007), “Per una Sociología dels Riscos Tecnològics”, en Ambits de Politítica i Societat, no. 36, pp. 34-38.
____y J. Ferré (2007), “Más allá de la percepción: la comunicación del riesgo”, en J. Ferre y J. Fernandea (2007), Comunicación y riesgo en Terragona. De las definiciones a las prácticas institucionales. Terragona: Publicaciones URV, pp. 23-36.
Giddens, A. (1996), Más allá de la izquierda y la derecha. Madrid: Cátedra.
____(1996a), “Modernidad y autoiedentidad”, en J. Beriain (comp), Las consecuencias perversas de la Modernidad. Barcelona: Anthropos.
____(1993) [1990], Las consecuencias de la modernidad. Madrid: Alianza.
Lezama, J. (2004), La construcción social y política del medio ambiente. México: El Colegio de México.
Luhmann, N. (2007), La sociedad de la sociedad. México: Herder/Universidad Iberoamericana.
____(1996), Introducción a la teoría de sistemas. Lecciones publicadas por Javier Torres Nafarrate. México: Universidad Iberoamericana.
____(1996b), Confianza. Barcelona: Anthropos.
____(1996a), “¿Puede la sociedad moderna evitar los peligros ecológicos?”, en Argumentos, no. 24, pp. 7-18.
____(1992), Sociología del riesgo. México: Editorial Triana/Universidad Iberoamericana.
Kasperson, R., O. Renn, P. Slovic, H. Brown, J. Emel, R. Goble, J. Kasperson y S. Ratick (1988), “The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework”, en Risk Analysis, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 177-187.
Kasperson, R. E. (1992), “The Social Amplification of Risk: Progress in Developing an Integrative Framework”, en S. Krimsky yD. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Westport y Londres: Praeger, pp. 153-177.
OLCA (Observatorio Latinoamericano de Conflictos Ambientales) (2015), sitio consultado en línea: www.olca.cl (consulta: 1 de octubre de 2015).
OCDE (2005), Evaluaciones del desempeño ambiental. Chile. Santiago: Naciones Unidas, CEPAL.
Otway, H. y J. Cohen (1975), “Revealed Preferences: Comments on the Starr Benefit-Risk Relationships”, en International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Research Memorandum, pp. 75-80.
____y M. Fischbein (1976), “The Determinants of Attitude Formation: An Aplication to Nuclear Power”, en International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Research Memorandum, pp. 76-80.
____y D. Von Winterfeldt (1982), “Beyond Acceptable Risk: On the Social Acceptability of Technologies”, en Policy Sciences, no. 14, pp. 247-256.
Paulus, N. (2004), “Del concepto de riesgo: Conceptualización del riesgo en Luhmann y Beck”, en Revista Mad, no. 10, Santiago. Artículo en línea disponible en: http://csociales.uchile.cl/publicaciones/mad/10/paper07.pdf (consulta: 15 de abril de 2008).
Pidgeon, N., C. Hood, D. Jones, B. Turner y R. Gibson (1992), “Risk Perception”, en The Royal Society (eds.), Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management. Report of a Royal Society Study Group, The Royal Society, Londres.
Prades V. A., N. Gamero, R. Solá (2009), “El papel de la ‘confianza’ en los conflictos socioambientales”, en Política y sociedad, 46 (1), pp. 255-273.
Rayner, S. (1990), Risk in Cultural Perspective: Acting Under Uncertainty. Norwell: Kluver.
Renn, O. (1991), “Risk Communication and the Social Amplification of Risk”, en R. Kasperson y P. Stallen, Communicating Risks to the Public: International Perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 287-324.
Rodríguez, H. (2009) “La confianza pública en las instituciones reguladoras del riesgo: Tres modelos de confianza para tres desafíos del análisis del riesgo”, en Revista Argumentos de Razón Técnica, no. 12, pp. 125-153.
Sabatini, F y C. Sepúlveda (1997), Conflictos ambientales: entre la globalización y la sociedad civil. Santiago de Chile: CIPMA.
Slovic, P., B. Fischhoff y S. Lichtenstein (1984), “Behavioural Decision Theory Perspectives on Risk and Safety”, en Acta Psychologica, no. 56, pp. 183-203.
Starr, C. (1969), “Social Benefit versus Technological Risk”, en Science, no. 165, pp. 1.232-1.238.
Solá, R., A. Prades, J. Espluga y M. Real (2009), “Confianza, incertidumbre y percepción social de las tecnologías avanzadas. Un estudio de caso”, en Revista Internacional de Sociología, vol. 67, enero-abril, Madrid, pp. 161-175.
Turner, G. y B. Wynne (1992), “Risk Communication: a Literature Review and Some Implications for Biotechnology”, en J. Durant (ed.), Biotechnology in Public. A Review of Recent Research.Londres: Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, pp. 109-141.
Wynne, B. (1980), “Technology, Risk and Participation: on the Social Treatment of Uncertainty”, en J. Conrad (ed.), Society, Technology and Risk, Londres, Nueva York: Academic Press, pp. 87-103.
____(1982), Rationality and Ritual: The Windscale Inquiry and Nuclear Decisions in Britain. Chalfont St. Gilles: British Society for the History of Science.
____(1989), “Frameworks of Rationality in Risk Management: Towards the Testing of Naive Sociology”, en J. Brown (comp.), Environmental Threats: Perception, Analysis and Management. Londres, Nueva York: Belhaven Press, pp. 33-47.
____(1992a), “Risk and Social Learning: Reification to Engagement”, en
S. Krimsky y D. Golding (eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Westport, Londres: Praeger, pp. 275-299.
____(1996), “Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science”, en S. Lash, B. Szerszynski y B. Wynne, Risk, Environment and Modernity. Londres: Sage, pp. 44-83.
Published
Issue
Section
License
This Journal is licensed under Creative Commons Mexico 2.5. It is allowed to reproduce and disseminate the contents of the Journal for educational or research purposes, not for profit, as long as they are not mutilated and cite the source (Andamios, Revista de Investigación Social) and the author.
The copyright of the articles published in Andamios, Revista de Investigación Social are transferred by the author(s) to Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México when the originals have been accepted, so that they are published and distributed both in the printed and electronic versions of the Journal. However, as established by law, the author(s) retains their moral rights. The author(s) will receive a form of assignment of copyright that they must to sign when their original has been accepted. In the case of collective articles, the signature of one of the authors will suffice, provided that the latter has obtained the consent of the others.
Authors may use the material of their article in other works or books published by themselves, with the condition of quoting Andamios as the original source of the texts.
The articles contained in this publication are the responsibility of their authors and do not compromise the official position of Andamios, Revista de Investigación Social of the Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México.
