TY - JOUR

T1 - Concrete governmentality

T2 - shelters and the transformations of preparedness

AU - Deville, Joseph

AU - Guggenheim, Michael

AU - Hrdličková, Zuzana

N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Deville, J., Guggenheim, M. and Hrdličková, Z. (2014), Concrete governmentality: shelters and the transformations of preparedness. The Sociological Review, 62: 183–210. doi: 10.1111/1467-954X.12129 which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-954X.12129/abstract This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.

PY - 2014/6

Y1 - 2014/6

N2 - This article analyzes how shelters act as a form of concrete governmentality. Shelters, like other forms of preparedness, are political acts in the absence of a disaster. They are materializations and visualizations of risk calculations. Shelters as a type of concrete governmentality pose the question of how to build something that lasts and resists, and remains relevant both when the object that is being resisted keeps changing and when the very act of building intervenes so publicly in the life of the restless surrounding population. Comparing shelters in India, Switzerland and the UK, we highlight three transformations of preparedness that shelters trigger. First we analyse how shelters compose preparedness by changing the relationship between the state and its citizens. Rather than simply limiting risk or introducing ‘safety’, the building of shelters poses questions about who needs protection and why and, as we will show, this can generate controversy. Second, we analyse how shelters decompose preparedness by falling out of use. Third, we focus on struggles to recompose preparedness: Changing ideas about disasters thus lead to shelters being suddenly out of place, or needing to adapt.

AB - This article analyzes how shelters act as a form of concrete governmentality. Shelters, like other forms of preparedness, are political acts in the absence of a disaster. They are materializations and visualizations of risk calculations. Shelters as a type of concrete governmentality pose the question of how to build something that lasts and resists, and remains relevant both when the object that is being resisted keeps changing and when the very act of building intervenes so publicly in the life of the restless surrounding population. Comparing shelters in India, Switzerland and the UK, we highlight three transformations of preparedness that shelters trigger. First we analyse how shelters compose preparedness by changing the relationship between the state and its citizens. Rather than simply limiting risk or introducing ‘safety’, the building of shelters poses questions about who needs protection and why and, as we will show, this can generate controversy. Second, we analyse how shelters decompose preparedness by falling out of use. Third, we focus on struggles to recompose preparedness: Changing ideas about disasters thus lead to shelters being suddenly out of place, or needing to adapt.

KW - shelters

KW - materiality

KW - risk

KW - nuclear war

KW - preparedness

U2 - 10.1111/1467-954X.12129

DO - 10.1111/1467-954X.12129

M3 - Journal article

VL - 62

SP - 183

EP - 210

JO - The Sociological Review

JF - The Sociological Review

SN - 0038-0261

IS - Supp. S1

ER -