This, the final chapter, seeks to consolidate and extend the thematic and empirical strands that have run through the book up to this point, to reach a series of concluding, albeit tentative, thoughts on the production of harm in capitalist societies. It therefore begins by revisiting the social harm ‘lens’ to reflect on its merits and limitations. In doing so, it specifically assesses the ability of this lens to capture the interwoven and interrelated nature of harms within capitalist society.

However, this chapter principally serves to complete the trajectory of the twin themes of ‘preventable harm’ and the ‘variance of capitalist harm’ that run throughout the analysis. In a way, the analysis provided in the book lends itself to a regime ‘contest’ in which regimes have been evaluated in respect of their performance according to a number of harm indicators, and we therefore eventually arrive at a conclusion over the ‘best’ and ‘worst’ harm reduction regimes. Developing the analyses provided in Chapters Four and Five, this chapter draws together the observations made thus far, to explain how the features of these regimes determine the contrasting levels of harms between societies. The analysis is further developed through the examination of outliers within regimes that deviate significantly from the norms of the regime family. Such an exercise aids our understanding of the ways in which different aspects of harm reduction interrelate and shape the forms that these regimes take – providing a more holistic sense of harm prevention. Not only does this analysis allow reflection on the aspects of social organisation that serve to generate or reduce harms, but further contributes to the argument that these harms are preventable, insofar as they do not appear to conform to a ‘natural’ rate, as specific forms of organisation demonstrably ‘design out’ harms from societies.

It is important to add a significant caveat at this point, that the judgements made in this chapter in relation to ‘more or less’ harmful capitalist forms are contingent on a number of factors. It is difficult to draw definitive conclusions on the basis of the limited number of harms reviewed in the book, and the restrictions placed on the analyses of these harms due to the paucity and availability of comparative indicators against which harms could be measured.