The connotations attached to the concept of ‘risk’ have changed over the last several decades. In particular, the image of risk, at least in the world's most economically advanced countries, has turned from predominantly positive to highly critical. A sociological look at this historic change reveals the emergence of a plurality of risk definitions that can be attributed to different risk cultures. We can distinguish risk cultures by their proximity to the dominant social practice of risk taking; namely risk cultures belong either to the centre or the periphery of society. Social movements that resist risky technologies are examples of a peripheral risk culture. Due to a certain concept of social community their perception of risk differs fundamentally from that of the centre. In addition, cultural variation across countries leads to different representations of risk-avoidance in social movements. This contribution illustrates these differences by comparing the American and German anti-nuclear movements.
BeardCharles A.1955 (1932). ‘Introduction’ in BuryJohn B., The Idea of Progress: An Inquiry into its Growth and Origin. New York: Dover Publications.
2.
BellahRobert1986. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. New York: Harper and Row.
3.
BonßWolfgang1995. Vom Risiko. Unsicherheit und Ungewißheit in der Moderne. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition.
4.
BornWilli1967. ‘Krebs durch radioaktive Hausmittel’, Strahlenschutz in Forschung und Praxis7: 323–334.
5.
BrowerDavid1971. ‘Muir and Friends’, Not Man Apart1(3): 10.
6.
CovelloVincent T., McCallumDavid B. and PavlovaMaria T. (eds) 1989. Effective Risk Communication. New York: Plenum Press.
7.
DahrendorfRalf1979. Life Chances: Approaches to Social and Political Theory. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
8.
DouglasMary and Aaron Wildavsky 1983. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environ mental Dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
9.
DowieMark1996. Losing Ground: American Environmentalism at the Close of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: MIT Press.
10.
DownsAnthony1972. ‘Up and Down with Ecology: The “Issue-Attention Cycle”’, Public Interest28: 38–50.
11.
DysonKenneth1980. The State Tradition in Western Europe: A Study on an Idea and Institution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12.
GuggenbergerBernd1980. Bürgerinitiativen in der Parteiendemokratie. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
13.
HalfmannJost1988. ‘Risk-Avoidance and Sovereignty: New Social Movements in the United States and West Germany’, Praxis International8(1): 14–26.
14.
HalfmannJost1989. ‘Social Change and Political Mobilization in West Germany’, in KatzensteinPeter (ed.), Indus try and Politics in West Germany: Toward the Third Republic, pp. 51–86. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
15.
HalfmannJost and JappKlaus1993. ‘Modern Social Movements as Active Risk Observers’, Social Science Information32(3): 427–446.
16.
HartzLouis1955. The Liberal Tradition in America. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
17.
HauffVolker and ScharpfFritz W.1975. Modernisierung der Volkswirtschaft. Frankfurt: Europäische Verlagsanstalt.
18.
HegelGeorg F. W.1949. Philosophy of Right, trans. by KnoxT. M.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
19.
HuntingtonSamuel P.1981. American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
20.
JasanoffSheila1986. Risk Management and Political Culture: A Comparative Study of Science in the Poity Context. Social Research Perspectives: Occasional Reports on Current Topics, No. 12. New York: Russell Sage.
21.
JasanoffSheila1999. ‘The Songlines of Risk’, this issue.
22.
JoppkeChristian1993. The Social Struggle over Nuclear Energy: A Comparison of West Germany and the United States. Berkeley: University of California Press.
23.
JungermannHelmut and SlovicPaul. 1993. ‘Die Psychologie der Kognition und Evaluation von Risiko’, in BechmannGotthard (ed.), Risiko und Gesellschaft, pp. 167–207. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
24.
JungermannHelmut, RohrmannBernd, and WiedemannPeter M. (eds) 1991. Risikokontroversen. Konzepte, Konflikte, Kommunikation. Berlin: Springer.
25.
KahnemannDaniel, SlovicPaul, and TverskyAmos (eds) 1982. Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press.
26.
KatzensteinPeter1987. Policy and Politics in West Germany: The Growth of a Semi-Sovereign State. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
27.
KitscheltHerbert1985. ‘Zur Dynamik neuer sozialer Bewe gungen in den USA: Strategien gesellschaftlichen Wandels und “American Exceptionalism”’, in BrandKarl W. (ed.), Neue soziale Bewegungen in Westeuropa und den USA, pp. 248–305. Frankfurt: Campus.
28.
KitscheltHerbert1986. ‘Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies’, British Journal of Political Science16: 57–85.
29.
KoselleckReiner1975. ‘Fortschritt’, in BrunnerOtto, ConzeWerner and KoselleckReiner (eds), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politischsozialen Sprache in Deutschland, Vol. 2, pp. 351–423.
30.
KrohnWolfgang and WeyerJohannes1990. ‘Die Gesellschaft als Labor’, in HalfmannJost and JappKlaus (eds), Riskante Entscheidungen und Katastrophenpotentiale, pp. 89–122. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
31.
LaddAnthony E., HoodThomas C. and Van LiereKent D.1983. ‘Ideological Themes in the Anti-nuclear Movement: Consensus and Diversity’, Sociological Inquiry52(2–3): 252–272
32.
LowranceWilliam W.1976. Of Acceptable Risk. Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann.
33.
LuhmannNiklas1993. Risk: A Sociological Theory. Berlin: de Gruyter.
34.
NelkinDorothy and PollakMichael1981. The Atom Besieged: Extraparliamentary Dissent in France and Germany. Cambridge: MIT Press
35.
NisbetRobert1980. History of the Idea of Progress. London: Heinemann.
36.
Perez-DiazVictor1978. State, Bureaucracy, and Civil Society. London: Macmillan.
37.
PerrowCharles1984. Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
38.
RadkauJoachim1983. Aufstieg und Krise der deutschen Atomwirtschaft. Reinbek: Rowohlt.
39.
RaynerSteve1984. ‘Disagreeing about Risk’, in HaddenSusan G. (ed.), Risk Analysis Institutions and Public Policy. Port Washington, NY: Associated Faculty Press.
40.
RuchtDieter1980. Von Wyhl nach Gorleben. München: C. H. Beck.
41.
RuchtDieter1990. ‘Campaigns, Skirmishes and Battles: Anti-Nuclear Movements in the USA, France, and West Germany’, Industrial Crisis Quarterly4: 193–222.
42.
SchwingRichard C. and AlbersWalter A. (eds) 1980. Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough?New York: Plenum Press.
43.
ShabecoffPhilip1993. A Fierce Green Fire: The American Environmental Movement. New York: Hill and Wang.
44.
SieferleRolf P.1984. Fortschrittsfeinde? Opposition gegen Technik und Industrie von der Romantik bis zur Gegenwart. München: C. H. Beck.
45.
SklairLeslie1970. The Sociology of Progress. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
46.
SkowronekStephen1982. Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47.
StarrChauncey1969. ‘Social Benefits versus Technological Risk’, Science165(19): 1232–1238
48.
de SwaanAbram1988. In Care of the State: Health Care, Education, and Welfare in Europe and the USA in the Modern Era.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
VogelDavid1980/1. ‘The Public-Interest Movement and the American Reform Tradition’, Political Science Quarterly95(4): 607–627.
50.
WildavskyAaron1988. The Search for Safety. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
