Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:40:40.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performativity in Action: How Risk Communication Interacts in Risk Regulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

P. Marijn Poortvliet ,
Martijn Duineveld  and
Kai Purnhagen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Examples abound of highly politicized instances of risk controversies, such as the climate debate, counterterrorism, and the commercialization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Numerous reasons, such as divergent perspectives, ways of communication, and interests, explain why involved actors often find themselves locked in a controversy.

For instance, in the GMO debates environmental politicians, NGOs, industrial parties, consumers, and GMO scientists have exerted very distinct ways of communication, resulting in a highly polarized and contested gene-risk landscape. As a consequence, some industrial players have left or terminated R&D activities in the EU, while other scientists escape the gaze of EU-regulations and started experimenting in places with a different approach to GMO regulation and control.

Type
Reports
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 213 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See on the bias-driven regulation in GMO communication on the example of the precautionary principle Kai Purnhagen, The Behavioural Law and Economics of the Precautionary Principle in the EU and Its Impact on Internal Market Regulation, 37 Journal of Consumer Policy, 2014, 459-460.

2 Slovic, P., Finucane, M.L., Peters, E., and MacGregor, D.G.. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. 24 Risk Analysis, 2004, 311–322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Loewenstein, G.F., Weber, E.U., Hsee, C.K., and Welch, N.. Risk as feelings. 127 Psychological Bulletin, 2001, 267–286 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

3 See e.g. Art. 3 No 10, Art. 6 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety OJ L 031 2002 p. 1 – 24 (General Food Law).

4 For a comprehensive overview see Aven, Terje, Misconceptions of Risk (Chichester, Wiley, 2009)Google Scholar.

5 Slovic, P.. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. 19 Risk Analysis, 1999, 689–701 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

6 P. Marijn Poortvliet and Anne Marike Lokhorst. The key role of experiential uncertainty when dealing with risks: Its relationships with demand for regulation and institutional trust. Risk Analysis (in press).

7 For an example in the context of GMO risks see Mulder, B.C., Poortvliet, P.M., Lugtig, P., and de Bruin, M.. Explaining end-users' intentions to use innovative medical and food biotechnology products. 9 Biotechnology Journal, 2014, 997–999 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

8 See on this point Micklitz and Tridimas.

9 Van Assche, Kristof, Beunen, Raoul, and Duineveld, Martijn, Evolutionary Governance Theory: An Introduction (Heidelberg, Springer, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Bialasiewicz, L., Campbell, D., Elden, S., Graham, S., Jeffrey, A., and Williams, A.J., “Performing Security: The Imaginative Geographies of Current US Strategy”, 26 Political Geography (2007), 405–422 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Austin, J.L., How to Do Things with Words (London, Clarendon Press, 1962)Google Scholar.

12 Ibid.

13 Mackenzie, D., Muniesa, F., and Siu, L. (eds.), Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

14 Bourdieu, P., Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge, Polity, 1991)Google Scholar.

15 Butler, J., Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York, Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar.

16 Assche, Kristof Van, Beunen, Raoul, and Duineveld, Martijn, “Performing Failure and Success: Dutch Planning Experiences”, 90 Public Administration (2012), 567–581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Assche, Kristof Van, Beunen, Raoul, and Duineveld, Martijn, Evolutionary Governance Theory: An Introduction (Heidelberg, Springer, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Butler, J., Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York, Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar. See also Mackenzie, D., Muniesa, F., and Siu, L. (eds.), Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

18 Kasperson, R.E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H.S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J.X., and Ratick, S.. The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. 8 Risk Analysis, 1988, 177–187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.