The riskology of the material in urban space

Kataev Dmitrii Valentinovich Doctor of Sociology Professor at the Department of Sociology and Management of the Lipetsk State Pedagogical University named after P.P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky 398020, Russia, Lipetskaya oblast', g. Lipetsk, ul. Lenina, 42, aud. 424 dmitrikataev@rambler.ru

Epifanov Aleksandr Olegovich Master at the Department of Sociology and Management of the Lipetsk State Pedagogical University named after P.P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky 398020, Russia, Lipetskaya oblast', g. Lipetsk, ul. Lenina, 42 h5ohh@mail.ru

Introduction

The increasing level of globalization and technological development contributes to the expansion of material priorities in society and thereby changes patterns of behavior. At the same time, the inertial process of urbanization is accompanied by an increase in population density, an expansion of the diversity of socio-cultural groups, demonstrates the temptations of the market and makes consumer services more accessible. All this creates a special field for studying the relationship between the turn to material and social risks.

Social risks cover a wide range of phenomena, from economic instability and unemployment to crime, social exclusion and lack of access to education and health care. In an urban environment, these risks may increase or decrease depending on behavioral patterns, decisions of individuals and socio-cultural groups. Material behavior, including the purchase of goods and services, investments, credit behavior and savings habits, has the potential to both reduce and increase the level of risks.

Such dynamics associated with the growth of material priorities and their impact on social risks are reflected in the concept of "Turning to the material" by the French philosopher and sociologist Bruno Latour, which determines the importance of analyzing material aspects in social research. Latour argues that modern society cannot be understood through abstract paradigms or ideologies. He emphasizes that material objects, technologies and infrastructure play an active role in shaping social relations and influence social phenomena and structures.

Research methodology

The article attempts to methodologically implement a "Turn to the material" in the analysis of social practices and the social risks they generate. This installation demonstrates the rejection of the use of the classical subject-object consideration of the problem. Instead, an object-centric approach is proposed, according to which the object includes, among other things, the function of an actor of social interaction, which has traditionally been attributed exclusively to the subject ^{[2, p. 35]}. Thus, the analysis of material aspects, including technical systems, consumer goods and technological solutions, becomes key to understanding how modern changes in the material environment can affect social risks in urban space.

The purpose of the study was to identify the main aspects affecting safety and risk management in the urban environment. To achieve this goal, various theories and concepts such as Space syntax, URA, and Risk governance and compliance were analyzed. Their applicability was considered with respect to material objects in the Sokolsky district of Lipetsk.

The object of the study is the material objects of urban space, the subject is the riskology of the material in urban space.

The main characteristics and features of urban space were described using the descriptive method. It allows you to examine in detail the structure of the urban environment and identify important aspects that affect safety and risk management.

The categorization method was used to analyze and classify various types of risks associated with urban space and its material aspects. This method made it possible to systematize and structure information about various types of hazards and threats, which gave a clearer idea of the nature of risks and their potential consequences for the urban environment.

The applicability of actor-network theory to the analysis of urban objects

The idea of putting things in the focus of sociological analysis is innovative. Before Latour, social and physical spaces were opposed in sociology. If things were considered, it was only as semantic, not material wholes, i.e. from the point of view of the meaning that the acting person associated with the thing. Now, at Latour's suggestion, the so-called "turn to the material" is taking place in sociology, bringing together researchers who emphasize the active role of things.

A complex socio-material network consisting of people and things in the role of actors is not a structure in the usual sense. Latour insists that the network is not a structure, but a way of acting. Action is not just human actions, but the effect of a network: the action is distributed among actors ^{[3, p. 73]}. Similarly, urban markets, shopping and business centers not only provide an opportunity to purchase goods and services, but also are places of social interaction. Here, people not only exchange goods, but also communicate, establish contacts, and share information. Such nodes can become platforms for the formation of communities, the creation of cultural and commercial ties between different segments of the population. They can contribute to the integration of different cultural groups, the formation of social networks and the strengthening of interaction between people. Thus, actor-network theory, with its concept of the actor and the network as a way of acting, seeks to overcome the conceptual problems that sociology faces when separating acting actors and objective structures.

According to Latour, actors play no less a role in creating a social order than people, due to the fact that in modern conditions the material environment and various technical means are important for organizing social interactions and people have to build relationships with material objects ^{[3, p. 38]}. Therefore, social relations are a quality not just of people, but of people accompanied by devices that ensure the connectivity of the social world. An example is urban infrastructure, which includes roads, transport system, public places, engineering communications and other elements of the material environment that influence social interactions and the organization of public life in the city. Using the concept of actors and networks, infrastructure can be considered as an active participant in the formation of social relations. Roads and vehicles facilitate the movement of people, which affects the way they interact and access resources; public spaces such as parks or squares can promote social activity and community formation.

It should be borne in mind that behind a certain event in the real world (the victory of a candidate in an election, the opening of a new store, the writing of a scientific article, etc.) there are chained links of the network. Network elements are entities of various kinds; anything can become an element if it forces another element to act. People, material entities (things, sounds, smells) and immaterial entities (ideas) can act as elements or nodes of the network. That is why networks are called heterogeneous. For example, an unpleasant smell from the garbage can or annoying noise should be taken into account as an active element if it is their intervention that causes us to change the trajectory of movement.

Identification of risk theories of urban space

Risks in the urban environment include various aspects (social, economic, environmental, technological and political), which is why approaches and concepts of their analysis may vary depending on the context, focus and area of research. Such variability is due to the peculiarities of cities in territorial location, population, infrastructure, economy and culture. Before starting to identify them, it is necessary to define the concepts and theories on which risk management is based. This transformation involves translating abstract concepts into concrete measurable variables and methods of measuring them. In the context of the work, this means establishing a link between theoretical concepts and practical steps that can be taken to analyze, measure and manage risks in the city ^{[1, p. 148]}.

The operationalization of concepts begins with the identification of various risks, such as environmental, social, technological and others. In relation to URA, environmental risks may include threats to the health of residents, for example, the impact of construction on air or water quality. The assessment process makes it possible to quantify and qualitatively measure the level of threat to the health of residents, providing a basis for the development of management strategies and policies. Technological — related to the integration of new technologies. The analysis of their shortcomings, system failures, and problems during use helps to prevent technological incidents. Social may imply a negative impact on well-being due to a revision of infrastructure or a change in the location of key facilities. Here, the assessment of social risks includes the study of potential consequences for social structure, employment, access to education and health care.

Regarding Space syntax, environmental issues may be related to changes in the urban structure, the inaccessibility of green areas, or an unfavorable environment due to the location of heavy industry. Social — limited accessibility of public places. This can affect social interactions, opportunities for social events, and the overall life of the urban community. Technological — safety of intersections, road signs and other infrastructure elements. Proper placement is necessary to ensure traffic safety and prevent accidents.

Governance, Risk and Compliance covers environmental risks within the framework of insufficient control or non—compliance with environmental standards, social risks mean the destabilization of state bodies or institutions that may violate public safety, technological ones — not only control over the introduction of new technologies, but also assessment of their impact on the safety and functioning of the city, development and implementation of technical standards and regulations.

After identifying the risks, it becomes necessary to collect relevant data to assess, analyze and resolve the situation. URA includes collection and analysis for identification, assessment and risk management. This involves collecting information about the various types, their likelihood and impact on the social and material aspects of the area. Data analysis allows you to assess vulnerabilities, anticipate possible consequences and develop mitigation strategies. Space syntax focuses on the analysis of spatial structures, their impact on the movement of people and transport. Data collection includes mapping the urban environment, estimating traffic trajectories, and analyzing the layout and structure of the city. The analysis allows you to understand which parts of the city are most accessible, which routes are preferred, and how changes in infrastructure can affect the circulation of people and transport. GRC analytics vary around the activities of social institutions that create databases, conduct surveys, and collect information from various sources to form a comprehensive overview.

Next, the modeling process takes place, which includes the creation of formal or mathematical models. In Space syntax, models can represent spatial graphs that demonstrate the structure and connections between city sections or infrastructure facilities. These models can be used to analyze traffic flows, estimated traffic trajectories, building density, as well as to assess the impact of specific changes in urban planning. In URA, models can be in the form of diagrams and graphs, documents, action plans, strategies, algorithms that assess the likelihood of certain risks, their impact and the direction of scenarios. In GRC, the models reflect the interrelationships between different actors and institutions, showing the flows of information, power and responsibility in risk management. They can be based on the analysis of statistical data and probabilities, to assess the probability of occurrence and calculate the consequences, or systemic — reflecting the interaction of risks with each other.

Thus, the operationalization of risks provides a comprehensive method of their analysis, assessment and management from the perspective of three risk theories in the context of urban infrastructure development. URA theory focuses on risk identification, taking into account the variety of threats to public safety and the development of urban systems. Space syntax, in turn, analyzes the spatial structures and interconnections of urban spaces, allowing you to identify vulnerable points. Governance, Risk and Compliance covers a wide range of risks and impacts.

Understanding the relationship between physical space, population, and infrastructure is key to identifying environmental features and risks. The interconnectedness of objects in space is a key characteristic of the Space syntax approach, proposed by Bill Hiller and Julien Hanson in the early 1980s, as a tool to help urban planners model the likely social consequences of their projects ^{[5, p. 1568]}. The method is based on the influence of the shape and organization of space on human behavior, on their interaction and movement flows, which in turn highlights the risks associated with security, social tension and dynamics of interaction in certain areas of the urban environment. Spaces are understood as voids — rooms of buildings, streets of cities, spaces between objects that restrict the movement of people or the field of view ^{[4, p. 59]}. Space syntax uses graphical analysis tools to study the structure of a city's square, street networks, building locations and their interconnections. Such an organization of space can form behavioral patterns, determine the degree of accessibility, integration and permeability of various parts of the city, which directly affects the level of risks in the area.

Similarly, a central city square with an extensive structure or multiple alternative routes can encourage a more even distribution of citizens and increase the integration of different parts of the city. While the area of a certain area, parts of the city with limited ways of movement may be less popular or integrated into the general urban context. Based on this, it is possible to identify the risk of accessibility and mobility, when places with low integration or limited access can create obstacles to the movement of certain groups, such as people with disabilities, which can increase social and environmental risks. In addition, isolated parts that are more difficult to view or interact with can become places of hidden activities, which increases the risk of crime or accidents due to lack of visibility or poor integration into the general urban context.

The inability to completely isolate risks contributes to the formation of the problem of their identification, assessment and regulation. As a defining tool, the paradigm of "risk management" (Governance, Risk and Compliance) was formed, implying how individuals, entities and institutions, public and private, cope with risks through the legal sphere, regimes, as well as informal agreements ^{[15, p. 1]}. The concept includes both an institutional structure, so is the political process that guides and restricts collective activity. Thus, risk management stands out as a separate institution responsible for meeting security needs.

Modern solutions to collectively significant problems have shifted from traditional state-oriented approaches with hierarchically organized government agencies to separately created bodies linking regional, national and international levels. This implies an increasingly multi-layered and diverse socio-political landscape.

The action of the concept is represented by the passage of certain stages:

1. Risk identification — begins with the identification and identification of possible threats that may affect the goals or objectives of the organization. This includes an analysis of internal and external factors that pose potential risks. The main political and public actors (government, companies, epistemological communities, associations of epidemiologists, disaster management communities) identify risks that are designated as problems associated with uncertainty. Such a framing method defines how society and politics rely on schemes for selecting and interpreting understanding and responding to such phenomena, for the social construction of relevant risk topics.

2. Management. The stage includes the development of strategies. Organizations can take various measures to mitigate, control, or transfer risks. For example, they may take out insurance to mitigate financial risks or establish additional measures.

3. Monitoring and adaptation are ongoing processes that involve monitoring risks and their changes over time. Organizations should regularly evaluate their strategies and adapt them to the changing environment.

4. Participation of stakeholders, involvement of subjects. It is necessary to obtain a variety of points of view and opinions that are important for full understanding and evaluation ^{[15, p. 5]}.

The activity of the designated stages is determined by the approach to urban Risk Assessments (URA). By the objectives of the concept, the authors mean the definition of risk, answers to questions about the characteristics of potential hazards (such as frequency and severity), as well as the identification of community vulnerabilities and their potential exposure. The assessment helps to prioritize risk management measures, taking into account the likelihood and impact of potential events, the cost-effectiveness of preventive measures and the availability of resources. The following stages are offered for the URA:

1. Analysis of the existing situation, which implies: study of national laws and regulatory framework; formation of an institutional framework; determination of the extent of the urban area to be assessed; assessment of requirements for data, finance and technical skills depending on the level of risk.

2. Raising awareness and consulting with the public, familiarizing stakeholders with the basic concepts of risk management, organizing training on the relationship between urban growth.

3. Conducting and disseminating the final assessment, including the impact of the hazard, the impact on institutional and socio-economic components.

4. Assessment of the level of acceptable risk, after which the authorities can either ignore the risk or decide to manage it by: controlling processes and behaviors that generate new risks (for example, by improving zoning and ensuring compliance with building standards); reducing existing risk (by strengthening infrastructure); or preparing for an event (strengthening civil protection mechanisms protection, emergency planning) ^{[14, p. 31]}.

Features of the application of "Turning to the material"

Taking into account these approaches, it is not so much the objects themselves that are of interest, but, to a greater extent, the ideas about objects revealed in the course of social practices, how these objects are perceived and used. The "turn to the material" covers the riskological concepts of the network effect, dividing actions between actors. PCM allows us to consider Space syntax not only as a model of the physical organization of space, but also as an analytical tool that helps to understand the social consequences.

Some spaces implement the transit functions of the urban environment (inside the building there are corridors, passageways, outside there are streets, axial structures, extended urban spaces). Others provide a variety of life processes (inside the building there are rooms and halls for communication, outside there are city squares and parks where people interact more than just go somewhere). Combinations of linear and enclosed spaces occur at different scales of the urban environment, starting with the scale of individual rooms and buildings and ending with individual territories ^{[6, p. 130]}.

For example, what cultural or social aspects can influence how people use or perceive different parts of the city. Space syntax, using spatial structure analysis, can more accurately take into account the relationship between the shape of space and social actions, based on the role of material objects ^{[17, p. 272]}. PCM pays attention not only to the structure of space, but also to the roles of people and material elements. It allows us to take into account the interaction between the physical characteristics of the city and social processes. Thus, such a synthesis makes it possible to predict possible social and infrastructural problems in the urban environment. This makes it possible to create improvements in the planning of the urban environment in order to reduce risks and improve the living conditions of citizens.

In Risk governance, the PCM approach introduces a deeper analysis of the management methodology, turning it to consideration of physical aspects such as the state of infrastructure, natural factors and technical features, taking them into account as potential sources of risk, which complements and expands the range of identification. Along with switching the analysis to material objects, Risk governance implies monitoring the selected aspects in order to fix changes in the environment. Based on monitoring and evaluation, existing management strategies are being reviewed, which has an impact on their updating. This may include reviewing infrastructure maintenance plans, adapting technological solutions, introducing new security measures, etc. For example, when determining insurance measures, organizations can take into account not only financial aspects, but also material elements such as the state of infrastructure, physical security and accessibility.

Reassembling strategies also involves synthesizing the opinions, interests, and points of view of the various actors that may be affected. They include representatives of enterprises, government agencies, academic and scientific communities, experts, etc. The approach recognizes the importance not only of the voices of people and institutions, but also the influence of the material on them. This means the correlation of factors with theoretical concepts of infrastructure, topography, geographical location, as well as social and economic parameters.

Regarding the identification of potential risks using URA, the identification and analysis of vulnerability, taking into account the material aspects of the urban environment, make it possible to more accurately assess the impact of external and internal material factors.

The stage of analysis of the existing situation now implies: the collection of legal documents, official declarations, laws and regulations related to security, urban planning and zoning; geospatial data and cartographic resources are included in the study of the urban area; the institutional foundations being formed and requirements assessments indicate the creation of commissions or working groups, the development of methodologies and criteria for assessment, as well as the definition of technical data requirements.

In the context of familiarization of the parties with the basic concepts of management and organization of training, material is built from new factors, namely, information resources (reports, presentations, visual materials), technical tools (data visualization tools, risk modeling, geospatial tools or other technical applications that allow you to demonstrate and analyze risks in the process of urban growth) and educational materials — curricula, organization of discussions, forums and projects and research.

Ignoring or accepting risk after assessment is caused by direct exposure to material objects, their correction or enhancement. For example, when assessing the risk of a possible flood, measures can be taken: to control the processes of movement along flooded streets, to prevent new risks; to strengthen infrastructure or prepare for an event, evacuation.

Application of concepts in urban space

Fig. 1. — map of the Svobodny Sokol district of Lipetsk (https://garantplus48.ru/jilie.php?poll=result&poll=result )

↔ – Sokolsky Bridge

O – Bus station

● – Previous location of the bus station

The choice of the Svobodny Sokol district of Lipetsk as an object of analysis within the framework of the theories of URA, Space syntax, Risk governance and the PCM approach is justified by a wide range of observed cases, material and social aspects that can be taken into account to demonstrate risk management and ensure sustainable development of the area.

The Sokolsky Bridge in Lipetsk is a key element of the transit functions of the urban environment, connecting the district parts of the city. As a linear object, it represents a key element affecting the circulation of people and transport. From March to September 2023, the bridge underwent major repairs, which is why it was almost completely blocked. During the renovation, changes in the spatial structure had a significant impact on the social actions and movements of citizens.

The increased risk in this context arose due to time constraints, route changes and inconveniences for residents and businesses. The closure of most of the road infrastructure (only two lanes remained open) created restrictions on access to important parts of the city, which affected not only automobile traffic, but also public transport ^[10].

Businesses dependent on transport infrastructure (e.g. shops, restaurants, offices) experienced difficulties in customer service due to the reduced accessibility of the area. Companies, especially those that depend on logistics and transportation, suffered temporary difficulties in carrying out their activities due to the limited accessibility of the area ^[13].

In addition, repairs lead to noise, dust, increased activity of construction equipment and temporary environmental changes. This can create discomfort for those living in the area. In addition, the closure of pedestrian routes has created inconveniences for pedestrians, who are forced to look for alternative routes ^[12].

Thus, according to the theory of Space syntax, a material object is designated as a territorial frame represented by a bridge connecting urban spaces. In order to avoid even greater risks associated with the emergency condition of the span, sidewalks, pavement and fencing, the Government has established the necessary step towards restoration.

On October 1, 2023, the Sokolskaya bus station was moved to a new location, in the building of the shopping center, at a distance of two kilometers from the former point. Such an innovation was caused by the fact that the old building did not meet the requirements of anti-terrorist security.

The event relates to the field of risk assessment and management (URA), such as ensuring passenger safety, preventing consequences for residents of the area and influencing the business environment. At the same time, the transfer of the bus station can also be considered as a step towards sustainable development of the city, providing safer and more comfortable conditions for passengers and taking into account safety requirements.

The described areas of activity determine two interrelated principles of URA theory:

1) moving the bus station means anticipating and assessing potential threats to passenger safety and the impact on the social environment and the economy of the area. Ensuring safety and minimizing negative social consequences become a priority, influencing decision-making on the development of urban infrastructure ^[7];

2) on the other hand, the pursuit of sustainable development may generate new risks that need to be addressed. The new station location has unfurnished pavilions, narrow platforms, and instead of a large spacious hall that was in the old room, people got a small room with an area of 50 square meters. meters ^[9]. Accordingly, the situation seems to be an example that when developing and implementing innovations, new difficulties arise in the infrastructure that need to be analyzed and kept in mind to ensure the sustainable functioning of the system.

Thus, in URA theory, risk and development are mutually linked: risk management contributes to sustainable development, and the pursuit of sustainable development generates new risks that require control, thereby forming an interdependent cycle based on the desire for sustainable and safe development of urban infrastructure.

The institutional activity of event control is more extensive than previous concepts, and therefore highlights a broader phenomenon as an object. The concept of Risk governance can cover not only the district, but also the entire city as a whole. An example of such activity is the introduction of a temporary ban on holding mass events, as was done according to the recommendations of Rospotrebnadzor to reduce morbidity. From December 11 to December 21, 2023, there was a restriction on holding mass cultural, sports and other events with the participation of children ^[8]. In addition, 8 schools have gone to distance learning ^[11].

The decision to impose restrictions is a reaction on the part of municipal educational and health institutions to the risk of morbidity. Such a socio-economic nature of management allows us to take into account the relationship between the physical characteristics of the city (for example, accessibility of educational institutions, leisure activities) and social processes (transition to distance learning). Such an analysis helps to review existing strategies for managing education and organizing mass events in the city.

Such measures should take into account the interests of parents, educational institutions, health institutes and other participants in urban life, according to the theory of Risk governance. Morbidity monitoring and social impact analysis allows you to adapt management strategies to minimize risks in the future. This may include increased attention to the sick, provision of equipment for distance learning, quarantine, strengthening epidemiological requirements, and much more.

Thus, Risk governance, implying an integrated approach, includes not only the assessment and identification of risks, but also the development of strategies and policies. Given the diverse impact of risks (environmental, social, technological, political, and others), the paradigm correlates them with affected parties, including businesses, government agencies, environmental and public organizations, and others. Paired with the concept of PCM, they create a toolkit for complex analysis, which includes:

1) Vulnerability search — analysis of material structures allows you to identify areas or objects that are most at risk. Various parameters of objects are highlighted here, such as physical characteristics (for example, the condition of buildings, height, length), their functionality (regulation of traffic flow, transit between districts), as well as their role in the urban environment.

2) Modeling — the emphasis is on creating abstract or mathematical models that predict the impact on urban infrastructure. By using data on the urban environment, topography, infrastructure characteristics and expected events, it is possible to simulate various scenarios, including natural disasters, technological accidents, climate change and other factors affecting the urban environment.

3) Strategy optimization — the choice of the optimal option here depends on the result of previous modeling and analysis. It includes a set of actions to prevent, mitigate or respond to events that have already occurred (development of evacuation plans, building resilience, early warning technologies, etc.).

Discussions and research results

The study of risks through the prism of material — equips a wide field for theoretical and methodological analysis. Here, the concepts of Space syntax, URA and Risk governance are tools for analysis, evaluation and management. As subjects of future discussions, their methodology comes to the fore of the discussion. There are questions about how adaptable and applicable the concepts are for different types of cities, with unique sizes and features. A hypothesis is naturally formed — is it possible to cover the entire risk of any city with the help of these approaches? As a unique sum, any city represents a combination of various factors such as infrastructure, social structures, topography, economic component, cultural heritage and climatic features. All together, this creates a unique atmosphere and structure for each specific space. The combination of these approaches makes it possible not only to identify the factors of events, but also to understand how institutions and authorities form mechanisms for responding and managing in an urban environment.

The assessment of the applicability of the approaches varies around the analysis of the topographic structure, the identification of vulnerabilities and the definition of management strategies. The approaches represent an adaptive framework with a wide range of tools that allows you to move in an individual direction to fully cover risks related to the characteristics of cities. Thus, the material prism of Space syntax, URA and Risk Governance allows for a unique study depending on the characteristics of the city.

A wide range of applications can highlight the question — how do these paradigms relate to each other? This idea leads to an integrated approach, combining theories for complex analysis. They are often considered as interconnected levels, where Space syntax provides a framework of spatial structure, URA helps in assessing the risks associated with the use of this space, and Risk governance, being on top of the rest, allows you to develop risk management strategies.

Characterized by the adaptability of management to the diversity of urban environments and their unique features, the concepts determine the transition to neo-institutionalism. It involves the creation of new institutions, methods and processes of risk management based on the interaction of various theories and practices ^{[16, p. 17]}. The application of theories in a single context contributes to the formation of new institutional approaches to risk management, which take into account not only social and political aspects, but also material, financial and political factors, which is fundamental for a neo-institutional approach to management.

Conclusions and recommendations

The urban environment as a complex system combines spatial structures, socio-cultural factors and management decisions. In order to form an idea defining a security and management system of all these characteristics, it is necessary to conceptualize not only spatial dynamics, but also direct participation in the process of forming solutions aimed at creating a sustainable urban environment. Focusing on material objects, from infrastructure to the physical characteristics of the city, allows you to more accurately assess risks and develop management strategies. The theoretically justified material aspect indicates the level of urban space security based on real planning features.

Monitoring repairs, changes in transport accessibility, relocation of institutions, restrictions on events and many other reactions to events lead to the understanding that risks are closely related to material elements. All this includes an integrative approach, together with practical aspects of management. The combination of theories such as Space syntax, URA and Risk governance with a material component is becoming a new stage in the evolution of risk management. The paradigm provides an opportunity not only to analyze risks, but also to anticipate the possible consequences of reactions and changes.

Further integration with practical management mechanisms may include improved tools for monitoring and forecasting risks based on tangible data. Initiatives in this area may involve the development of digital platforms that facilitate improved analysis and control. By itself, the possibility of applying theories based on any city highlights the makings of technological innovation, due to the presence of unique characteristics in each urban environment. In addition, the expansion of the use of these concepts involves the introduction of new approaches and tools in the work of management bodies. Based on the material data and taking into account the forecasts presented by these paradigms, social institutions begin to actively engage in the risk management process.