The Sociology of Risk is one of the concepts used to analyze the current state of a global society. The development of risk theory has changed in recent decades. However, there is room for sociological criticism in which the concept of risk society must open up to the opportunities and possibilities of discursive debates after long period of industrial revolution to the recent issues of Anthropocene. Based on qualitative research through literature studies and conceptual-philosophical approaches, this article argues that risk governance is one of the challenges to developing the sociological discourse, especially when the community faces ecological disasters. In a later stage, it can realize the possibility of the world of many worlds, and praxis develops into a way of looking at the future of world which is increasingly eroded by the challenges of ecological crisis.

Sosiologi Risiko menjadi salah satu konsep yang digunakan untuk menganalisis kondisi masyarakat global saat ini. Perkembangan dan pemikiran teori risiko sendiri telah mengalami perubahan dalam beberapa dekade terakhir. Akan tetapi, terdapat ruang kritik sosiologis bahwa konsep masyarakat risiko harus membuka peluang terhadap risiko yang sejatinya telah berkelindan bahkan sebelum revolusi industri sekalipun dengan cara melibatkan diskursus Antroposen. Berbasis pada penelitian kualitatif melalui studi kepustakaan dan pendekatan konseptual-filosofis, artikel ini berargumen bahwa tata kelola sosial risiko menjadi salah satu tantangan tersendiri bagi perkembangan diskursus Sosiologi. Terutama ketika masyarakat dunia menghadapi krisis risiko ekologi global. Sehingga pada tahap selanjutnya dapat mewujudkan kemungkinan the world of many worlds dan secara praksis berkembang menjadi cara pandang untuk masa depan dunia yang semakin tererosi dengan tantangan krisis ekologi.


Risk Society
Sociological theory
Global crisis


  1. Baum, Seth D., and Itsuki C. Handoh. 2014. “Integrating the Planetary Boundaries and Global Catastrophic Risk Paradigms.” Ecological Economics 107:13–21.
  2. Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Vol. 17. London: SAGE Publications.
  3. Beck, Ulrich. 2005. Power in the Global Age: A New Global Political Economy. Polity.
  4. Beck, Ulrich. 2009. World at Risk. Vol. 9. edited by P. Press. Cambridge.
  5. Beck, Ulrich. 2014. Ulrich Beck: Pioneer in Cosmopolitan Sociology and Risk Society. Springer.
  6. Brown, Antony G., Stephen Tooth, Joanna E. Bullard, David S. G. Thomas, Richard C. Chiverrell, Andrew J. Plater, Julian Murton, Varyl R. Thorndycraft, Paolo Tarolli, and James Rose. 2017. “The Geomorphology of the Anthropocene: Emergence, Status and Implications.” Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 42(1):71–90.
  7. Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, and Yannick Barthe. 2011. Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. MIT press.
  8. Cappelen, Herman, Tamar Gendler, and John P. Hawthorne. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Methodology. Oxford University Press.
  9. Cernev, Tom. 2022. “Global Sustainability Targets: Planetary Boundary, Global Catastrophic Risk, and Disaster Risk Reduction Considerations.” Progress in Disaster Science 100264.
  10. Chernilo, Daniel. 2021. “One Globalisation or Many? Risk Society in the Age of the Anthropocene.” Journal of Sociology 57(1):12–26.
  11. Clark, Nigel, and Bronislaw Szerszynski. 2020. Planetary Social Thought: The Anthropocene Challenge to the Social Sciences. John Wiley & Sons.
  12. Craib, Ian. 2011. Anthony Giddens (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.
  13. Daly, Christopher. 2010. An Introduction to Philosophical Methods. Broadview Press.
  14. Davies, Jeremy. 2016. The Birth of the Anthropocene. USA: Univ of California Press.
  15. Davis, Robert. 2011. “Inventing the Present: Historical Roots of the Anthropocene.” Earth Sciences History 30(1):63–84.
  16. Douglas, Mary. 2003. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. Routledge.
  17. Gibbard, Philip, and Martin J. Head. 2009. “The Definition of the Quaternary System/Era and the Pleistocene Series/Epoch.” Quaternaire 20(2):125–33.
  18. Giddens, Anthony. 2002. Runaway World: How Globalisation Is Reshaping Our. London: Profile Books.
  19. Goble, Rob. 2021. “Through a Glass Darkly: How Natural Science and Technical Communities Looked at Social Science Advances in Understanding Risk.” Risk Analysis 41(3):414–28.
  20. Kingery, Sandra, Stephen Williams, Daniel Innerarity, and Javier Solana. 2013. Humanity at Risk: The Need for Global Governance. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
  21. de la Cadena, Marisol, and Mario Blaser. 2018. A World of Many Worlds. Duke University Press.
  22. Lidskog, Rolf, and Go Sundqvist. 2013. “Sociology of Risk.” Pp. 75–105 in Essentials of risk theory. Springer.
  23. Luhmann, Niklas. 1993. “Risk: A Sociological Theory, Trans.” Rhodes Barrett, Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
  24. Mahaswa, Rangga, and Putu Pradnya Lingga Dharmayasa. 2021. “Kesadaran Ekologis Pasca Pandemi: Sebuah Tinjauan Filosofis.” Jurnal Masyarakat Dan Budaya 23(1).
  25. Mahaswa, Rangga Kala. 2022. “Masyarakat Antroposen.” Kompas, May 2, 1.
  26. Mahaswa, Rangga Kala, and Agung Widhianto. 2020. “Questioning the ‘Anthropos’ in the Anthropocene: Is the Anthropocene Anthropocentric?” P. 1040 in SHS Web of Conferences. Vol. 76. EDP Sciences.
  27. Malm, Andreas. 2016. Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming. Verso Books.
  28. Mythen, Gabe. 2021. “The Critical Theory of World Risk Society: A Retrospective Analysis.” Risk Analysis 41(3):533–43.
  29. Nygren, Katarina Giritli, Anna Olofsson, and Susanna Öhman. 2020. A Framework of Intersectional Risk Theory in the Age of Ambivalence. Springer.
  30. Rockström, Johan, Will Steffen, Kevin Noone, Åsa Persson, F. Stuart Chapin, Eric F. Lambin, Timothy M. Lenton, Marten Scheffer, Carl Folke, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. 2009. “A Safe Operating Space for Humanity.” Nature 461(7263):472–75.
  31. Roeser, Sabine, Rafaela Hillerbrand, Per Sandin, and Martin Peterson. 2012. Handbook of Risk Theory: Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk. Vol. 1. Springer.
  32. Rosa, Eugene, Ortwin Renn, and Aaron McCright. 2013. The Risk Society Revisited: Social Theory and Risk Governance. Temple University Press.
  33. Royle, Camilla Elizabeth. 2016. “Marxism and the Anthropocene.” International Socialism (151).
  34. Sepkoski, David. 2020. Catastrophic Thinking: Extinction and the Value of Diversity from Darwin to the Anthropocene. Science. Culture.
  35. Sørensen, Mads, and Allan Christiansen. 2013. Ulrich Beck: An Introduction to the Theory of Second Modernity and the Risk Society. Routledge.
  36. Steffen, Will, Wendy Broadgate, Lisa Deutsch, Owen Gaffney, and Cornelia Ludwig. 2015. “The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration.” Anthropocene Review 2(1):81–98.
  37. Steffen, Will, Reinhold Leinfelder, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N. Waters, Mark Williams, Colin Summerhayes, Anthony D. Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Paul Crutzen, and Matt Edgeworth. 2016. “Stratigraphic and Earth System Approaches to Defining the Anthropocene.” Earth’s Future 4(8):324–45.
  38. Uhrqvist, Ola, and Björn-Ola Linnér. 2015. “Narratives of the Past for Future Earth: The Historiography of Global Environmental Change Research.” The Anthropocene Review 2(2):159–73.
  39. Vernadsky, Vladimir I. 1998. The Biosphere. Springer Science & Business Media.
  40. Whitmee, Sarah, Andy Haines, Chris Beyrer, Frederick Boltz, Anthony G. Capon, Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, Alex Ezeh, Howard Frumkin, Peng Gong, and Peter Head. 2015. “Safeguarding Human Health in the Anthropocene Epoch: Report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health.” The Lancet 386(10007):1973–2028.
  41. Zalasiewicz, Jan, Colin Waters, Martin J. Head, Will Steffen, James P. Syvitski, Davor Vidas, Colin Summerhayes, and Mark Williams. 2018. “The Geological and Earth System Reality of the Anthropocene.”
  42. Zalasiewicz, Jan, Mark Williams, Colin N. Waters, Anthony D. Barnosky, and Peter Haff. 2014. “The Technofossil Record of Humans.” The Anthropocene Review 1(1):34–43.


  • There are currently no refbacks.