Theory of Risk- and Double-Risk- Society and its Application to the Diagnosis of the Development of Lithuanian Society

Abstract

This paper aims at diagnosing the current state and change of Lithuanian society from the perspective of a theory of risk-society (Beck, 1992) and reflexive modernization (Beck, Giddens, Lash, 1994). Paper illuminates a ‘double-risk’ character of Lithuanian society arguing that contemporary transitional and developing societies, e.g. Lithuanian, are turning into ‘risk-societies’ not after the urgent issues of social distribution of ‘goods’ are resolved, as the risk-society theory would suggest in the case of Western affluent societies. By contrast, a ‘double-risk’ society is characterised by mutual acuteness and inter-twined importance of both kinds of societal issues: creation and distribution of social welfare (‘goods’) as well as reduction and social distribution of risks (‘bads’). A double-risk society, similarly as a risk society is characterized by decreasing unquestionable faith in the modern institutions of science and technology, whereas a double risk-society is characterized by the painful and complex processes of transition from state-socialism that leads to disillusionment in other institutional pillars of modern society, namely the market economy and democratic governance. At the same time, a double-risk society encompasses and reflects most of the features pertaining to the risk-society – depleting social and geographical ‘boundaries vis-a-vis societal exposure to the variety of risks (environmental, nuclear); increasing importance of sub-politics with its characteristic aspects-vested interests and manipulative capacity of certain professions to shape social perceptions of risk; and decreased societal faith in the capacity of modern institutions of science and technology to cope with the globalizing risks.