Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing

This article traces the career of risk across prominent theoretical approaches by highlighting their key assumptions and premises, specifically the technical approach found in the physical sciences, and economics, psychology, and sociology in the social sciences. In each discipline, the strengths an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: LIM, Wee Kiat
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cmp_research/3
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=cmp_research
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.cmp_research-1002
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.cmp_research-10022020-03-27T06:20:42Z Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing LIM, Wee Kiat This article traces the career of risk across prominent theoretical approaches by highlighting their key assumptions and premises, specifically the technical approach found in the physical sciences, and economics, psychology, and sociology in the social sciences. In each discipline, the strengths and limitations of each theoretical approach are pointed out. The discussion focuses on sociology in particular because other approaches—in treating risks as dominantly technical, psychological, or economic phenomena—tend to downplay the broader historical and socio-political context that impinges on risk construction and production, and its differential impact across society. This exploration points out that institutions play an important role in creating, managing, and distributing risks in society. After highlighting the integrated risk governance framework as a nascent practice-oriented framework, the framework is examined theoretically using sociological neoinstitutionalism and Foucault’s concept of governmentality. The conclusion elaborates the challenges of using these two bodies of knowledge to study risk governance of extreme events. Although Foucault’s concept of governmentality corrects neoinstitutional theory’s ambivalence toward power, more work needs to be done in order to reconcile their divergent intellectual commitments. 2011-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cmp_research/3 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=cmp_research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CMP Research eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University governmentality risk risk governance sociological neoinstitutionalism Risk Analysis Theory, Knowledge and Science
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic governmentality
risk
risk governance
sociological neoinstitutionalism
Risk Analysis
Theory, Knowledge and Science
spellingShingle governmentality
risk
risk governance
sociological neoinstitutionalism
Risk Analysis
Theory, Knowledge and Science
LIM, Wee Kiat
Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
description This article traces the career of risk across prominent theoretical approaches by highlighting their key assumptions and premises, specifically the technical approach found in the physical sciences, and economics, psychology, and sociology in the social sciences. In each discipline, the strengths and limitations of each theoretical approach are pointed out. The discussion focuses on sociology in particular because other approaches—in treating risks as dominantly technical, psychological, or economic phenomena—tend to downplay the broader historical and socio-political context that impinges on risk construction and production, and its differential impact across society. This exploration points out that institutions play an important role in creating, managing, and distributing risks in society. After highlighting the integrated risk governance framework as a nascent practice-oriented framework, the framework is examined theoretically using sociological neoinstitutionalism and Foucault’s concept of governmentality. The conclusion elaborates the challenges of using these two bodies of knowledge to study risk governance of extreme events. Although Foucault’s concept of governmentality corrects neoinstitutional theory’s ambivalence toward power, more work needs to be done in order to reconcile their divergent intellectual commitments.
format text
author LIM, Wee Kiat
author_facet LIM, Wee Kiat
author_sort LIM, Wee Kiat
title Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
title_short Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
title_full Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
title_fullStr Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
title_full_unstemmed Understanding risk governance: Introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
title_sort understanding risk governance: introducing sociological neoinstitutionalism and foucauldian governmentality for further theorizing
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2011
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cmp_research/3
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=cmp_research
_version_ 1712300736454328320