{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02505446623093682, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02178649237472767, 'mean_word_length': 5.294520547945205, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
To Risk or Not to Risk? Uses and Limitations of Mary Douglas on Risk-Acceptability for Understanding Health and Safety at Work and Road Accidents

The recent Greening of politics in the West has encouraged rapid development of research into both environmental hazards and risk perceptions among the public. There are also longstanding traditions of research into behaviour under risk in such disparate fields as superpower relations (Allison 1971), inter-country commercial transactions, the economics of uncertainty, and the study of natural disasters (Torry 1979). Relatively few sociologists or social anthropologists have contributed. A major exception is Mary Douglas (1982, 1985, 1987). This paper is an attempt to make use of her work and to tests its limits, in answering two empirical questions: How do managers and workers address workplace hazards? And, how do motorcyclists and drivers behave on the roads?