Mid Sweden University

This introduction to a special issue on "Intersectional Analysis of Risk" and its contributors explores the development and current trends in intersectional risk analysis over the past two decades. Using Scopus, 778 publications between 2003 and 2022 were identified across social sciences, humanities, psychology, health, and arts. VOSviewer was employed to analyse these publications and identify trends and themes. The evolution of intersectional risk analysis shows its progression from HIV studies to encompass new areas such as climate change and environmental justice. By showcasing how intersectional perspectives and risk research have converged over time and how more and more research areas are incorporating intersectional risk analysis, this introduction hopes to inspire readers to delve into the articles in this special issue and continue developing intersectional risk analysis.

Kritik har riktats mot etablerade metoder för att kvantitativt mäta och kartlägga upplevelser av (o)trygghet, där trygghet ofta definieras som avsaknad av brott. Trygghet är dock mer komplext, och relaterar till individens sociala positioner, kroppsliga uttryck, erfarenheter och de maktstrukturer vi lever i. Vi ansluter oss till denna vidare förståelse av trygghet och menar att en reduktionistisk syn på trygghet som avsaknad av brott är problematisk i den svenska kontexten, där trygghetsmätningar ofta informerar kommuners arbete med att förbättra trygghet i offentliga rum. Mot denna bakgrund syftar denna studie till att introducera en intersektionellt grundad explorativ kvantitativ analys av trygghet och ge ett empiriskt exempel på resultaten av en sådan analys. Exemplet bygger på Brottsförebyggande rådets (Brå) Nationella trygghetsundersökning (NTU) från 2019. Studiens resultat illustrerar det komplexa samspelet mellan maktordningar och upplevelser av (o)trygghet i offentliga rum.

Since the early twenty first century, feminist and intersectional approaches to risk research have gained momentum, initially emerging from studies on HIV risks within health studies. Over the past decade, these approaches have expanded to other fields. As editors of this special issue, Katarina Giritli Nygren and Anna Olofsson introduce a reflection piece anchoring the issue. The reflection piece includes insights from seven influential scholars in the intersectionality, equality, and risk fields: Lisa Bowleg, Dean Curran, Kelly Hannah Moffat, Claudia Mitchell, Lori Peek, Ignacio Rubio C., and Jens O. Zinn. Each scholar offers personal reflections on the development of intersectional analyses in risk research, highlighting key areas for future research. Three themes emerged: challenging risk as a neutral concept, addressing the complexity of risks in everyday life, and navigating between social structures and identity struggles. Contributors argue for contextualising risk within broader societal structures, embracing complexity, and understanding the intertwined nature of inequalities. Some, but not all, also advocate for intersectionality as a critical concept for studies of systemic change and equality. Overall, the reflections underscore the importance of centring intersectionality in understanding the dimensions of inequality and risk. The piece concludes by calling for further conversations and reflections to deepen our understanding of risk mobilisations and their links to inequality, both locally and globally. Such conversations can challenge assumptions and revitalize risk research, envisioning alternative worlds that prioritize equality.

This chapter shows how intersectional risk theory (IRT) can contribute to a greater understanding of inequality in relation to health risks. IRT is based on a combination of feminist research and risk research. Compared to other theoretical frameworks, it also helps researchers to uncover how the intersections between risk and inequality are in fact mutually dependent and constituted. This chapter first shows the relevance of IRT to global public health research. Then, it introduces the theoretical framework and its methodological implications. To illustrate how IRT can be applied, it provides a concrete example of expert discourses on elective cesareans (ECS) in Sweden and Brazil. The example highlights the intersections between risk and hegemonic norms and social positions on gender, age, class, and so on. It also shows that the medical discourse on risk in relation to cesarean sections can be both global and local.

Based on earlier crises, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic might aggravate the already-wide employment gap between foreign (out-side Europe)- and native-born people, creating a long-term employment crisis. The aim of this paper is therefore to investigate how the pandemic has affected the labor market situation for foreign-born individuals in Sweden during 2019–2022. In the paper, we combine sociology and economics with an intersectional approach, which enables the identification of mechanisms and trends affecting the labor market for the foreign-born. We use a labor force survey (Labour Force Studies, LFS, collected by Statistics Sweden) to analyze the effects of the pandemic on the labor market situation for foreign borns. The preliminary results show that during the investigated period, the employment rate fell more for the foreign-born (out-side Europe) compared with the native-born. Furthermore, we found that within the foreign-born group, the employment rate fell more for foreign-born women than for native-born women. The results indicate that the labor market situation has worsened more for women than men and for the foreign-born than the native-born and that foreign-born women are most affected. By identifying the underlying discriminatory structures and the groups that are particularly vulnerable, the results can provide a basis for policy actions aimed at preventing a further weakening of the labor market situation for foreign-born individuals and creating essential settings for increased resilience in future crises.

This paper maps a current trend in risk research, namely intersectional analysis of risk. In the last decades the concept of risk has spread into almost all kinds of societal domains. The original focus on technical and environmental risks has transferred to areas such as health, crime, regulation, social inequality, public and social policy, and global risk as well as the management of risks in everyday life and intimate relationships. Scientific advances and the global media have together created a long string of alarms about risks of different magnitude: from more recent the Covid 19 pandemic, to terrorist threats. The distribution and impact of these risks are not equal, instead they tend to follow and reinforce already existing structural inequalities. In the wake of this development we have seen a growing body of feminist and intersectional approaches in the study of risk. The two perspectives informs each other: On the one hand, the  intersectional perspective advance risk research by clarifying how new complexities in the reproduction of social inequalities brought about by globalization and the intersections between social class, gender, ethnicity, and other social categorisations, are connected to the production of risks. Risk research, on the other hand, inform intersectional analysis by clarifying the mechanisms in risk governance that are reproducing old inequalities (i.e., class and gender) and producing new inequalities.  Through a systematic literature review, this paper aims to map insights and viewpoints from scholars regarding intersectional analyses of risks associated with inequality on an individual, group or community level, including analyses of individual perception and behaviour, policy, mass media and discourses.