Uncertain subjects: risks,liberalism and contract

Uncertainty has been largely overlooked in the governmentality literature dealing with risk, especially because of contemporary emphases on models of statistical or actuarial risk calculation. Yet it represents a distinctive way of governing through the future, whose place in the formation of rationalities of neo-liberalism, and of 'enterprising subjects', is vital. Indeed, in domains of enterprising activity, the governmental modality of uncertainty marginalizes or subordinates statistical and expert models of risk management. In part this is because of enterprise's 'inventive' orientation - which sits ill with risk's assumption of a future that reproduces the past. Not only is uncertainty central to techniques of neo-liberal government, it has a genealogy that is distinguishable from the genealogy of more rationally calculative modalities of liberal government - but also reaching back to the beginnings of liberalism. In the development of contract law, blueprints for government through uncertainty provide a foundational element in the constitution of liberal subjects, and for the 'reasonable' techniques of government through the future which are a hallmark of liberalism. It is concluded that the place of uncertainty is central to liberalism and thus unlikely to be marginalized by 'risk society' developments.     

Economy,state and civil society

The paper identifies a double crisis of agency facing socialists-the inability of the state to act effectively as the agent of society as a whole, and of the party adequately to represent the diversity of people's interests. It argues that this crisis can be resolved by the development of civil society, enabling the exercise of social control over the state and the economy.

An institutional framework for participatory economic democracy is then outlined, based on the author's model of 'negotiated co-ordination'. The model incorporates market exchange, since enterprises use their existing capacity to meet market demand, but not market forces, since interdependent investment decisions are not taken separately by enterprises acting independently, but collectively through negotiation involving all those with an interest in their combined outcome.

The model is constructed on this basic principle of self-government-that decisions should be taken by those affected by them. The conclusion reached is that the dual crisis of agency can be resolved by the development of civil society, but that a role remains for the state, in resolving residual conflicts of interest when negotiation fails to produce agreement, and for political parties, in promoting alternative perspectives on the distribution of resources, rights and responsibilities.     

Public health and vulnerable groups

Editors' Introduction

Public health and vulnerable groups