Sociologický časopis 1997, 33(2):157-168 | DOI: 10.13060/00380288.1997.33.2.04

Bureaucracy, Risk, and Environmental Crisis Discourse

Oleg Suša
Filozofický ústav AV ČR, Praha

Published: April 1, 1997Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Suša, O. (1997). Bureaucracy, Risk, and Environmental Crisis Discourse. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review33(2), 157-168. doi: 10.13060/00380288.1997.33.2.04.
Download citation

References

  1. Beck, U. 1986. Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine Andere Moderne. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
  2. Beck, U. 1988. Gegengifte. Die organisierte Unverantwortlichkeit. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
  3. Beck, U. 1993. Erfindung des Politischen. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
  4. Beck, U. 1996. "Self-Dissolution and Self-Endangerment of Industrial Society: What Does This Mean?" In Reflexive Modernization. Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, ed. by U. Beck, A. Giddens, S. Lash. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Brown, D. A. 1987. "Ethics, Science and Environmental Regulation." Environmental Ethics 9: 331-349. Go to original source...
  6. Gillroy, J. M. 1992. "Public Policy and Environmental Risk: Political Theory, Human Agency, and the Imprisoned Rider." Environmental Ethics 14: 217-237. Go to original source...
  7. Griffith, R. F. 1981. Dealing with Risk. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  8. Inglehardt, R. 1990. The Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  9. Kahn, H. 1979. World Economic Development 1979 and Beyond. New York: The Hudson Institute.
  10. Kahn, H. 1983. The Coming Boom. Economic, Political and Social. London: Hutchinson.
  11. László, E. 1981. Goals for Mankind. Oxford: MIT, Oxford University Press.
  12. Lash, S., B. Szerzinski, B. Wynne 1996. Risk, Environment and Modernity. London: Sage.
  13. Luhmann, N. 1989. Ecological Communication. Cambridge: Polity.
  14. Luhmann, N. 1993. Risk. A Sociological Theory. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.
  15. Marien, M. 1994. "Infoglut and Competing Problems." Futures 28: 246-256. Go to original source...
  16. Mendelsohn, K. 1976. Science and Western Domination. London: Thames and Hudson.
  17. Milbrath, L. T. 1989. Envisioning a Sustainable Society. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  18. Paehlke, R. 1988. "Democracy, Bureaucracy and Environmentalism." Environmental Ethics 10: 291-307. Go to original source...
  19. Perrow, C. 1984. Normal Accidents, Normal Catastrophes. Living with High-Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
  20. Roberts, R. H. 1995. "Religion and Capitalism - a New Convergence." In Religion and the Transformations of Capitalism. Comparative Approaches, ed. by R. Roberts. London: Routledge. Go to original source...
  21. Rozsak, T. 1979. Person/Planet. The Creative Disintegration of Industrial Society. London: Gollancz.
  22. Sjöberg, L. (ed.) 1987. Risk and Society. London: Unwin.
  23. Suša, O. 1996. "Reakce na globální výzvu ekologické krize: nové globální hodnoty či adaptace institucí?" Pp. 82-86 in Koncipování budoucnosti v Evropě. Praha: VŠE.
  24. Torgerson, D. 1994. "Limits of the Administrative Mind: The Problem of Defining Environmental Problems." In Managing Leviathan, ed. by R. Paehlke, D. Torgerson. London: Belhaven Press.
  25. Weber, M. 1964. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A. M. Henderson and T. Parsons. Glencoe, IL: Free Press of Glencoe and London: Macmillan.
  26. Weber, M. 1966. Sociology of Religion. London: Macmillan.
  27. Weber, M. 1990. Politika ako povolanie. Bratislava: Spektrum.
  28. Wynne, B. 1996. "SSK's Identity Parade: Signing Up, Off-and-On." Social Studies of Science 26: 357-391. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.