Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 342

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out?

Wynne, Brian·2002·Current Sociology

Abstract

Risk and environmental discourses have usually been regarded as critical, in the sense that they are the substantive focus of critical reflexive processes discussed under the rubric of the risk society, reflexive modernization and other theories of late-modern cultural politics and change. The forces of power which shape new technological trajectories have encountered some of their most effective criticism in the form of environmental risk critique and feminist critique. However, even environmental risk discourses have been fundamentally shaped by an assumption that any uncertainties which risk assessments might show will be resolvable by more science. The basic discourse of modern science and technology policy - that even if predictive control is not yet fully in our grasp, it soon will be - is not challenged by the cultural focus on risk. Indeed, the recent emphasis on rendering risk and regulatory science more accountable, inclusive and transparent, actually diverts attention from the more difficult upstream arena of rendering innovation-oriented science more democratically accountable. In key respects, prevailing risk and environmental discourses can be seen to act by default as covers, and thus legitimators, of existing privileged forces driving technological innovation trajectories.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0011392102050003010

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Cited by

See all 342

Metadata

Authors
Wynne, B.
Venue
Current Sociology
Published
2002-05
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
459-477
ISSN
  • 0011-3921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7064
OpenAlex
W2012922436
Cited by
342
References
52
FWCI
18.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0011392102050003010
The paper
Wynne, B. (2002). Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out? Current Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392102050003010

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.