A theory of risk colonization: The spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk. Rothstein, H., Huber, M., & Gaskell, G. Economy and Society, 35(1):91–112, February, 2006. Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865![A theory of risk colonization: The spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex Explanations of the growing importance of risk to regulation identify three processes; the need to respond to newly created and discovered risks; the growth of regulatory frameworks; and the use of the risk instrument as an organizing idea for decision-making in modernity. Synthesizing these explanations, we propose a theory of risk colonization. We introduce a distinction between societal and institutional risks, the former referring to threats to members of society and their environment, and the latter referring to threats to regulatory organizations and/or the legitimacy of rules and methods of regulation. We argue that pressures towards greater coherence, transparency, and accountability of the regulation of societal risks can create institutional risks by exposing the inevitable limitations of regulation. In the first stage of risk colonization, framing the objects of regulation as ‘risks’ serves as a useful instrument for reflexively managing the associated institutional threats. This can be followed, in a second stage, by a dynamic tension between the management of societal and institutional risks that results in spiralling feedback loops. The very process of regulating societal risks gives rise to institutional risks, the management of which sensitizes regulators to take account of societal risks in different ways. We discuss links between this theory and the concept of governmentality and conclude with some speculations about the possible positive and negative consequences of risk colonization.
@article{rothstein_theory_2006,
title = {A theory of risk colonization: {The} spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk},
volume = {35},
issn = {0308-5147},
shorttitle = {A theory of risk colonization},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865},
doi = {10.1080/03085140500465865},
abstract = {Explanations of the growing importance of risk to regulation identify three processes; the need to respond to newly created and discovered risks; the growth of regulatory frameworks; and the use of the risk instrument as an organizing idea for decision-making in modernity. Synthesizing these explanations, we propose a theory of risk colonization. We introduce a distinction between societal and institutional risks, the former referring to threats to members of society and their environment, and the latter referring to threats to regulatory organizations and/or the legitimacy of rules and methods of regulation. We argue that pressures towards greater coherence, transparency, and accountability of the regulation of societal risks can create institutional risks by exposing the inevitable limitations of regulation. In the first stage of risk colonization, framing the objects of regulation as ‘risks’ serves as a useful instrument for reflexively managing the associated institutional threats. This can be followed, in a second stage, by a dynamic tension between the management of societal and institutional risks that results in spiralling feedback loops. The very process of regulating societal risks gives rise to institutional risks, the management of which sensitizes regulators to take account of societal risks in different ways. We discuss links between this theory and the concept of governmentality and conclude with some speculations about the possible positive and negative consequences of risk colonization.},
number = {1},
urldate = {2021-07-04},
journal = {Economy and Society},
author = {Rothstein, Henry and Huber, Michael and Gaskell, George},
month = feb,
year = {2006},
note = {Publisher: Routledge
\_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865},
keywords = {governance, governmentality, regulation, risk colonization, societal and institutional risk},
pages = {91--112},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"Nnzkrvsy2MvwziNFy","bibbaseid":"rothstein-huber-gaskell-atheoryofriskcolonizationthespirallingregulatorylogicsofsocietalandinstitutionalrisk-2006","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-09-09T06:27:29.594Z","title":"A theory of risk colonization: The spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk","author_short":["Rothstein, H.","Huber, M.","Gaskell, G."],"year":2006,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/fareedkaviani","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"A theory of risk colonization: The spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk","volume":"35","issn":"0308-5147","shorttitle":"A theory of risk colonization","url":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865","doi":"10.1080/03085140500465865","abstract":"Explanations of the growing importance of risk to regulation identify three processes; the need to respond to newly created and discovered risks; the growth of regulatory frameworks; and the use of the risk instrument as an organizing idea for decision-making in modernity. Synthesizing these explanations, we propose a theory of risk colonization. We introduce a distinction between societal and institutional risks, the former referring to threats to members of society and their environment, and the latter referring to threats to regulatory organizations and/or the legitimacy of rules and methods of regulation. We argue that pressures towards greater coherence, transparency, and accountability of the regulation of societal risks can create institutional risks by exposing the inevitable limitations of regulation. In the first stage of risk colonization, framing the objects of regulation as ‘risks’ serves as a useful instrument for reflexively managing the associated institutional threats. This can be followed, in a second stage, by a dynamic tension between the management of societal and institutional risks that results in spiralling feedback loops. The very process of regulating societal risks gives rise to institutional risks, the management of which sensitizes regulators to take account of societal risks in different ways. We discuss links between this theory and the concept of governmentality and conclude with some speculations about the possible positive and negative consequences of risk colonization.","number":"1","urldate":"2021-07-04","journal":"Economy and Society","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rothstein"],"firstnames":["Henry"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Huber"],"firstnames":["Michael"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Gaskell"],"firstnames":["George"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"February","year":"2006","note":"Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865","keywords":"governance, governmentality, regulation, risk colonization, societal and institutional risk","pages":"91–112","bibtex":"@article{rothstein_theory_2006,\n\ttitle = {A theory of risk colonization: {The} spiralling regulatory logics of societal and institutional risk},\n\tvolume = {35},\n\tissn = {0308-5147},\n\tshorttitle = {A theory of risk colonization},\n\turl = {https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865},\n\tdoi = {10.1080/03085140500465865},\n\tabstract = {Explanations of the growing importance of risk to regulation identify three processes; the need to respond to newly created and discovered risks; the growth of regulatory frameworks; and the use of the risk instrument as an organizing idea for decision-making in modernity. Synthesizing these explanations, we propose a theory of risk colonization. We introduce a distinction between societal and institutional risks, the former referring to threats to members of society and their environment, and the latter referring to threats to regulatory organizations and/or the legitimacy of rules and methods of regulation. We argue that pressures towards greater coherence, transparency, and accountability of the regulation of societal risks can create institutional risks by exposing the inevitable limitations of regulation. In the first stage of risk colonization, framing the objects of regulation as ‘risks’ serves as a useful instrument for reflexively managing the associated institutional threats. This can be followed, in a second stage, by a dynamic tension between the management of societal and institutional risks that results in spiralling feedback loops. The very process of regulating societal risks gives rise to institutional risks, the management of which sensitizes regulators to take account of societal risks in different ways. We discuss links between this theory and the concept of governmentality and conclude with some speculations about the possible positive and negative consequences of risk colonization.},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\turldate = {2021-07-04},\n\tjournal = {Economy and Society},\n\tauthor = {Rothstein, Henry and Huber, Michael and Gaskell, George},\n\tmonth = feb,\n\tyear = {2006},\n\tnote = {Publisher: Routledge\n\\_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865},\n\tkeywords = {governance, governmentality, regulation, risk colonization, societal and institutional risk},\n\tpages = {91--112},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Rothstein, H.","Huber, M.","Gaskell, G."],"key":"rothstein_theory_2006","id":"rothstein_theory_2006","bibbaseid":"rothstein-huber-gaskell-atheoryofriskcolonizationthespirallingregulatorylogicsofsocietalandinstitutionalrisk-2006","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140500465865"},"keyword":["governance","governmentality","regulation","risk colonization","societal and institutional risk"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"search_terms":["theory","risk","colonization","spiralling","regulatory","logics","societal","institutional","risk","rothstein","huber","gaskell"],"keywords":["governance","governmentality","regulation","risk colonization","societal and institutional risk"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["Bn7xRaKMY43f7hFwh","A6vS8ZPftztqxzpFy"]}