The book "Risk and Culture" by Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky explores the relationship between risk and culture, focusing on the rise of environmentalism in Western societies. The authors argue that the perception of risk is a social process determined by cultural principles, which prioritize certain dangers over others. They suggest that environmentalism, like historical fears of pollution, is a social construct that supports specific forms of social criticism and control. The book compares modern environmental concerns with those of primitive cultures, noting that both are driven by the selection of "real dangers" based on social and cultural factors. However, the review criticizes the book for its narrow focus on environmental groups and its failure to consider the role of science, economics, and rational decision-making in shaping public concern about environmental issues. The reviewer argues that the book reduces culture to a theory of group structure and overlooks the importance of rational factors in risk selection. The review also highlights the need for better communication between environmental agencies and the public to address the widespread confusion and paranoia about technological risks.The book "Risk and Culture" by Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky explores the relationship between risk and culture, focusing on the rise of environmentalism in Western societies. The authors argue that the perception of risk is a social process determined by cultural principles, which prioritize certain dangers over others. They suggest that environmentalism, like historical fears of pollution, is a social construct that supports specific forms of social criticism and control. The book compares modern environmental concerns with those of primitive cultures, noting that both are driven by the selection of "real dangers" based on social and cultural factors. However, the review criticizes the book for its narrow focus on environmental groups and its failure to consider the role of science, economics, and rational decision-making in shaping public concern about environmental issues. The reviewer argues that the book reduces culture to a theory of group structure and overlooks the importance of rational factors in risk selection. The review also highlights the need for better communication between environmental agencies and the public to address the widespread confusion and paranoia about technological risks.