Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies
This article aims to bring to the fore some of the underlying rationales that inform common conceptions of the constitution of risk communication in academic and policy communities. "Normative,""instrumental," and "substantive" imperatives typically employed in the util...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Risk analysis 2008-12, Vol.28 (6), p.1619-1637 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1637 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1619 |
container_title | Risk analysis |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Wardman, Jamie K |
description | This article aims to bring to the fore some of the underlying rationales that inform common conceptions of the constitution of risk communication in academic and policy communities. "Normative,""instrumental," and "substantive" imperatives typically employed in the utilization of risk communication are first outlined. In light of these considerations, a theoretical scheme is subsequently devised leading to the articulation of four fundamental "idealized" models of risk communication termed the "risk message" model, the "risk dialogue" model, the "risk field" model, and the "risk government" model, respectively. It is contended that the diverse conceptual foundations underlying the orientation of each model suggest a further need for a more contextualized view of risk communication that takes account not only of the strengths and limitations of different formulations and functions of risk communication, but also the underlying knowledge/power dynamics that underlie its constitution. In particular, it is hoped that the reflexive theoretical understanding presented here will help to bring some much needed conceptual clarity to academic and policy discourses about the use and utility of risk communication in advanced liberal societies. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01108.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69875501</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69875501</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5698-2d1c7217f74682ce138fddb51aeb30b935ae8bd979093dd5915cd576108352913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1DAURi0EotPCX4CIBbsMfsSvDWI09CVGIHUoLK-c2EGeJnGJE5j-e5xmVCQ2xQvbss_9ruyDUEbwkqTxbrcknOlcaFosKcZqiQlJ8_4JWjxcPEULTCXNC8boETqOcYcxwZjL5-iIKKm51nqBPqxDFwc_jIMPXRbq7MrHm2wd2nbsfGXuT32Xrewv01XOZhtfut402TZU3g3exRfoWW2a6F4e1hN0fXb6dX2Rb76cX65Xm7ziQqucWlJJSmQtC6Fo5QhTtbUlJ8aVDJeaceNUabXUWDNruSa8slyK9CzGqSbsBL2dc2_78HN0cYDWx8o1jelcGCOkJpJz_DjIJOGSavkoSLRgvJAigW_-AXdh7Lv0WqBYCikKNUFqhqo-xNi7Gm5735r-DgiGSRrsYHIDkxuYpMG9NNin0leH_LFsnf1beLCUgPcz8Ns37u6_g-HqcruatikgnwN8HNz-IcD0NyAkkxy-fz4HRcn208XHM_iW-NczX5sA5kfvI1xvafpcTLhILQv2B-k4u3I</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>207676486</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Wardman, Jamie K</creator><creatorcontrib>Wardman, Jamie K</creatorcontrib><description>This article aims to bring to the fore some of the underlying rationales that inform common conceptions of the constitution of risk communication in academic and policy communities. "Normative,""instrumental," and "substantive" imperatives typically employed in the utilization of risk communication are first outlined. In light of these considerations, a theoretical scheme is subsequently devised leading to the articulation of four fundamental "idealized" models of risk communication termed the "risk message" model, the "risk dialogue" model, the "risk field" model, and the "risk government" model, respectively. It is contended that the diverse conceptual foundations underlying the orientation of each model suggest a further need for a more contextualized view of risk communication that takes account not only of the strengths and limitations of different formulations and functions of risk communication, but also the underlying knowledge/power dynamics that underlie its constitution. In particular, it is hoped that the reflexive theoretical understanding presented here will help to bring some much needed conceptual clarity to academic and policy discourses about the use and utility of risk communication in advanced liberal societies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0272-4332</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1539-6924</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01108.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18795999</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Academic profession ; Communication ; Dialogue ; Discourse analysis ; field/habitus ; governmentality ; Humans ; Information Dissemination - methods ; Models, Theoretical ; Policy research ; Public Policy ; Risk ; Risk Assessment - methods ; risk communication ; Risk Management ; sender/receiver ; Society ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Risk analysis, 2008-12, Vol.28 (6), p.1619-1637</ispartof><rights>2008 Society for Risk Analysis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5698-2d1c7217f74682ce138fddb51aeb30b935ae8bd979093dd5915cd576108352913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5698-2d1c7217f74682ce138fddb51aeb30b935ae8bd979093dd5915cd576108352913</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1539-6924.2008.01108.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1539-6924.2008.01108.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18795999$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wardman, Jamie K</creatorcontrib><title>Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies</title><title>Risk analysis</title><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><description>This article aims to bring to the fore some of the underlying rationales that inform common conceptions of the constitution of risk communication in academic and policy communities. "Normative,""instrumental," and "substantive" imperatives typically employed in the utilization of risk communication are first outlined. In light of these considerations, a theoretical scheme is subsequently devised leading to the articulation of four fundamental "idealized" models of risk communication termed the "risk message" model, the "risk dialogue" model, the "risk field" model, and the "risk government" model, respectively. It is contended that the diverse conceptual foundations underlying the orientation of each model suggest a further need for a more contextualized view of risk communication that takes account not only of the strengths and limitations of different formulations and functions of risk communication, but also the underlying knowledge/power dynamics that underlie its constitution. In particular, it is hoped that the reflexive theoretical understanding presented here will help to bring some much needed conceptual clarity to academic and policy discourses about the use and utility of risk communication in advanced liberal societies.</description><subject>Academic profession</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Dialogue</subject><subject>Discourse analysis</subject><subject>field/habitus</subject><subject>governmentality</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information Dissemination - methods</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>Policy research</subject><subject>Public Policy</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Risk Assessment - methods</subject><subject>risk communication</subject><subject>Risk Management</subject><subject>sender/receiver</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0272-4332</issn><issn>1539-6924</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1DAURi0EotPCX4CIBbsMfsSvDWI09CVGIHUoLK-c2EGeJnGJE5j-e5xmVCQ2xQvbss_9ruyDUEbwkqTxbrcknOlcaFosKcZqiQlJ8_4JWjxcPEULTCXNC8boETqOcYcxwZjL5-iIKKm51nqBPqxDFwc_jIMPXRbq7MrHm2wd2nbsfGXuT32Xrewv01XOZhtfut402TZU3g3exRfoWW2a6F4e1hN0fXb6dX2Rb76cX65Xm7ziQqucWlJJSmQtC6Fo5QhTtbUlJ8aVDJeaceNUabXUWDNruSa8slyK9CzGqSbsBL2dc2_78HN0cYDWx8o1jelcGCOkJpJz_DjIJOGSavkoSLRgvJAigW_-AXdh7Lv0WqBYCikKNUFqhqo-xNi7Gm5735r-DgiGSRrsYHIDkxuYpMG9NNin0leH_LFsnf1beLCUgPcz8Ns37u6_g-HqcruatikgnwN8HNz-IcD0NyAkkxy-fz4HRcn208XHM_iW-NczX5sA5kfvI1xvafpcTLhILQv2B-k4u3I</recordid><startdate>200812</startdate><enddate>200812</enddate><creator>Wardman, Jamie K</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200812</creationdate><title>Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies</title><author>Wardman, Jamie K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5698-2d1c7217f74682ce138fddb51aeb30b935ae8bd979093dd5915cd576108352913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Academic profession</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Dialogue</topic><topic>Discourse analysis</topic><topic>field/habitus</topic><topic>governmentality</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information Dissemination - methods</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>Policy research</topic><topic>Public Policy</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Risk Assessment - methods</topic><topic>risk communication</topic><topic>Risk Management</topic><topic>sender/receiver</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wardman, Jamie K</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wardman, Jamie K</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies</atitle><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><date>2008-12</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1619</spage><epage>1637</epage><pages>1619-1637</pages><issn>0272-4332</issn><eissn>1539-6924</eissn><abstract>This article aims to bring to the fore some of the underlying rationales that inform common conceptions of the constitution of risk communication in academic and policy communities. "Normative,""instrumental," and "substantive" imperatives typically employed in the utilization of risk communication are first outlined. In light of these considerations, a theoretical scheme is subsequently devised leading to the articulation of four fundamental "idealized" models of risk communication termed the "risk message" model, the "risk dialogue" model, the "risk field" model, and the "risk government" model, respectively. It is contended that the diverse conceptual foundations underlying the orientation of each model suggest a further need for a more contextualized view of risk communication that takes account not only of the strengths and limitations of different formulations and functions of risk communication, but also the underlying knowledge/power dynamics that underlie its constitution. In particular, it is hoped that the reflexive theoretical understanding presented here will help to bring some much needed conceptual clarity to academic and policy discourses about the use and utility of risk communication in advanced liberal societies.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><pmid>18795999</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01108.x</doi><tpages>19</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0272-4332 |
ispartof | Risk analysis, 2008-12, Vol.28 (6), p.1619-1637 |
issn | 0272-4332 1539-6924 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69875501 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Business Source Complete |
subjects | Academic profession Communication Dialogue Discourse analysis field/habitus governmentality Humans Information Dissemination - methods Models, Theoretical Policy research Public Policy Risk Risk Assessment - methods risk communication Risk Management sender/receiver Society Studies |
title | Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T00%3A43%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Constitution%20of%20Risk%20Communication%20in%20Advanced%20Liberal%20Societies&rft.jtitle=Risk%20analysis&rft.au=Wardman,%20Jamie%20K&rft.date=2008-12&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1619&rft.epage=1637&rft.pages=1619-1637&rft.issn=0272-4332&rft.eissn=1539-6924&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01108.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69875501%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=207676486&rft_id=info:pmid/18795999&rfr_iscdi=true |