You are on page 1of 8

Human security: from definilions lo invesligaling a discourse

?003 UN repon Humall Security Now esrablished a contrasc not only with the
rhe su b sequent - ,
t: te s -curiry but also for example
with that of human developmenr.- lt both adds
concept o f s ,1 e " .
as COll1p'lred ro the UNDP (United Nations Developrnent Programme) nouon of
2 an d narrows > ' .'
human development: adding a concern with stabiliry and narrowmg to a focus on the securmg
basi dsv in which goods include but are not limited to bodily secunry, It thus served
o f aslC goo S, I .., .. . .

HUMAN SECURITY: . ..'


as a pnonnzmg c
scope o f Iruma
oncept - an updated version of basic needs thinking - within the unlimited
...
. n development (Gasper ?005) Consideration
-'.
".
of hurnan pnorrnes connects to
. . ., .

FROM DEFINITIONS TO reflection about the interprerarion of'human'. It c.rrries no implication of a reduction of basic
need' to only material need; and in practice human securiry discourse encourages artennon to

INVESTIGATING A DISCOURSE 'ecriviry and tO rhernes of culture, communiry and solidariry.'


sub~
Understanding
.. di . hi
a concept and discourse requires attenuon to actual use, nsunguis mg
according to different users and contexts. Observation of human secunry .tlunking shows. an
d dezree of spread including into gender studies, environrnental studies, rmgranon
unexpecte '" ' • . . .
Des Gasper research and the thinking of various organizations, despite opposinon ofien from conventional
securiry srudies rheorists and some nacional governments, and lukewarrn or hoStllc: responses
fr0111many users of the sister discourses of human development and human nghrs. The spread
has come because a human securiry perspective seerns to help 111generaung unexpected insights,
Concepts of human securiry have been debated and disputed at lengrh for the pase twenry years h h person-centred artention to the intersections of multiple dimensions of life (sce, e.g.,
t roug , . ,. al O O· Ir .
or more. Many lists of definitions exisr and various comparative analyses of definitions.' These Jolly and Basu Ray 2006, 2007; Leichenko and O Brien 200ll; O Brien et : . 2 1 , ICCIOttO
reveal not a single concept bur a family wirh many variants, all of which rnight be relevant for et al. 2007; Truong and Casper 2011). The concept has also been cited by some groups 111
some audiences and contexts. One core rherne is the contrast between human securiry as the support of conclusions and interventions rhat many others find objectionuble .. One needs to
securiry of persons and sta te securiry as the securiry of a srate apparatus or ter ritory - a contrast ask: what variant of the discourse was used? And are the conclusions necessary inferences from
which highlights [he aspect: securiry for or of whom? We should consider besides that several the discourse, or dependent on other factors, and would they have been drawn anyway even m
other aspects, including: securiry of which goods; securiry to what extent; securiry against rhe absence of humun securiry language?
which threars; securiry using which means; and secured by whom. The ser of issucs now identified could justify a book-length trearment. This chapter will
Related to this exploration of notions of 'securiry', we need to consider meanings of take only some preliuunarv steps, including reflecting on 'securiry', 'humari' and some partner
'hurnan', thereby taking further the examination of 'securiry of which goods' and of the concepts within the semantic fidd of'human securiry'. The following two secnons will discuss
proposed justifications for securitization claims. In contrasr to their relatively refined discussion the 'human securiry' concept and some of the charactcristic contents and sryle of the related
of 'securiry', many writers give superficial attention to 'human', using merely a contrast discourse or discourses, in general terrns and with illustrations. The chapter concludes with a
between the inrnvidulJ and the srate. Yet for MahbUb ul Haq (1999), perhaps the main founder brief discussion of some of rhe possible roles and .iudiences. The aim is [O provide themes with
of current human securiry discourse, 'for [rhe] human security approach human beiflgs are the which to understand rhe debates around definirions beuer than by only listing and categorizing
core elernents', not simply individuals (Lama 2010: 4). Definitional of human beings is thar competing specihcations."
they are not self-enclosed or isolated individuals but cornplex beings whose individualiry arises
through relationships. Apart from referring to human beings, 'hurnan' can also connote both
The concept and the range of definitions
the hurnan species and whatever in human persons and collectivities is considered to be rnost
importanr, most worthy, rnost 'hurnan' and ar risk, and therefore as requiring to be secured.
Dimensions
One needs thus to explore a cornplex semantic field. No concept exists in isolation from
other concepts, from the social coruexts of users and their intended (and unintended) audiences, Discussions since rhe 19l10s have brought forward a concept of 'human securiry', in contrast
from purposes within those contexts, and frorn the accurnulared patterns of inrended and to the conventional rwenrietb-cenrury usages of 'securiry' [O mean nacional securiry or state
unintended use. In other words, a complex general concept needs to be explored as part of a securiry. The 1':194 UNDP Human Developmenr Report (HDR) was a key step in chis
discourse, or indeed as part of a famiJy of discourses since there are multiple different contexts of rnovement, and the process is ongoing. lt involves changes in auenrion, with reference [O, first,
use in which it is taken up and related to or confronted with diverse other concepts, users and rhe object of securiry: whose securiry? ln human securiry discourse rhe objecr becornes: all
concerns, and beca use even within a given context many differences are possible in emphasis. human persons, and sometimes, by implication, the human species.
Witrun a given context of use, a rnscourse is partly constituted by the patterns of implication, Second, the concc:pt broadens mention when considering security of whar) Human
complementariry, opposition and tension within a system of concepts. In human securiry securiry thinking involves more than only humanizing an existing state securiry discourse by a
literature one finds claims about the human securiry concept's links to, even constitution by, a concern for just the physicJl security of pc:rsons. The 19')4 HDR returned tO language usc:d
famiJy of other concepts that include vulnerabiliry, securitabiliry and participarion. We examine in the 1')40s during pIanning lor a new world order after [he cataclysmic crises of 1930-45:
this later. Similarly, the concept as championed in the 1994 HUlllatl Develvpmellt Report and 'freedom from fear' and 'frced0111 from want'.5 Subsequemly often added [Q [hese banners,
Des Gasper Hurnan security: from definitions lo investígating a discoutse

including in the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, is an even more general for protection oflife against violent attack, as if protection of health, and protection of anything
partner: freedom to live in digniry. The 1994 HDR specified in more detail seven rypical else against anything else, is not 'protection'. ... .
major arcas of securiry - economic securiry, food securiry, health securiry, environmental Security claims are claims of existential threat, meant to justify pnonry response. Attempts to
securiry, personal physical securiry, securiry of comrnuniry life, and political securiry - but limit such prioritisation to one rype of threat, such as threats of physical damage from physical
these form a partial checklist rather than a definitíon of human securiry," The matching defini- . I . d/or one type of referent/target such as rhe state, are arbitrary, The root and usages
vIO ence, an . .
tions concern arcas of reasoned human prioriry; Hampson et al. (2002) spoke of 'core human of rhe rerrn 'security' validate no such restriction; indeed according to Rothschild (1995), for
values' and the UN's advisory Cornmission on Human Securiry of 'the vital core' (CHS 2003). . terh te m applied only to individuals ., Further rernarked Owen, while authors like
centunes
More exact specification of what are considered arcas for prioriry attention and protecrion will MacFarlane and Khong do -
be place- and time-specific.
Next, consequent on this rethinking of the object of securiry and of securiry in what make rhe shift to the individual in theory [they] ignore it in practice by subjectively
respects, human securiry thought involves a much revised identification·· of, third, what are limiting what does and does not count as a viable threat ... [It] is communicable
securiry threats and, fourth, what are prioriry securiry measures, instruments and activities. disease, which kills 1 H,OOO,OOO people ayear, not [military-sryle] vlOlenc,e, which kills
Securiry services cannot, unfortunately, be taken for granted as prornoters of securiry and felt several hundred thousand, that is the [greater] real rhreat to individuals.
safery. Many people in many times and places have felt less secure thanks to the pracrices of .. . (Oww 2005: 38)
official securiry· forces.? Relevanr responses to threats include protection of persons in various
ways, but also empowerment of persons and strengthening of their 'securitabiliry': 'the abiliry Similarly, a combination of c1imatic movernents and planned neglect by colonial regimes left
to avoid insecure situations and to retain a [psychological] sense of securiry when such situations · of millions dead in the late nineteenth century (Davis 2001); a parallel danger IS emerging
do occur, as well as the abiliry to reestablish one's securiry and sense of securiry when these
= S
.
in rhe twenry-flfSt century (see, e.g., UNDP 2007; Hansen 2009). MacFarlane an
d~
ongs
,
have been compromised' (UNDP 2003: 5)." Similarly, the Global Environmental Change and approach reduces to a 'securiry studies approach', not a 'protection-based' one.
Human Securiry research program has defined human securiry as the capaciry of individuals and
communities to respond to threats to their social, human and environmental righrs."
Purpose
Fifih, rhe agenda ser by the human securiry concept involves attention to how much has, as
a matter of public prioriry, to be secured; it thus involves more detailed discussion of what is We need to consider for any concept its purpose, or purposes. For the human securiry copcept
'basic'. King and Murray influentially defined human insecuriry as deficiency in any key area: different users have had dilferent primary purposes, leading rodifferenr interpretations. Some
'deprivation of any basic capabilities' (200112: 594), with reference to specified rhreshold levels. relate, as we have seen, to re-focusing discussions of 'wnose securiry?' Two other widespread
Their measure of human securiry is thé expected number of years of life without falling below purposes have involved adding to UNDP's original concept of 'p;ll11an development' (UNDP
critical thresholds in any key domain of well-being (p. 592). It gives a conceptual strucrure 1990): firstly, by a concern with the stabiliry of attainment of the goods m human development;
which can be applied in a situation-specific way rhat reflects local conditions, ideas, values secondly, by including the good of physical security of persons. . .
and political processes; the exact meanings of 'critical' and 'key' will be settled through local The first of these latter two 'concerns leads to definitions of human secunry (HS) III terrns of
specification. But for international comparisons King and Murray proposed - as 'domains of the stabiliry of the a~hievement or acccss to goods; in particular when coping with 'downside
well-being which have been important enough for human beings to fight over or to put rheir risks', a phrase of Amarrya Sen (e.g: Sen 2003). But 'human securiry', if defined only lO terrns
lives or proper:ry at great risk [for]' (p.. 593) - at leasr: mcorne, health, education, political of that phrase, would concern·also rhe degree of stabiliry with which the super-rich hold
freedom, democracy (p. 598). Theirs is an objective measure of conditions in key dornains, rheir super-riches. His partner phrase. 'downturn with securiry' does not equate secunry to
not a measure of peoples judgements or feelings; but its findings can help ro inform people's the stabiliry of everything but rather to the removal of unacceptable risks for weaker groups.
subjective measures.!" Reflecting thar securiry is a prioritizing terrn, and that Sen here discusses 'human' securiry,
Sixth, and now taking us (like the issue of 'securiry by what means?') beyond the hurnan 'downturn with security' refers to securing the fulfilment of basic needs or the abiliry to fulfil
securiry concept and inro the discourse, comes the issue oí: secured (provided/protectedl them.
assisted)by whom? Implied by the rethinking of the object, components, threats to and instru- The second 01" rhe two concerns - broadening human development thinkiñg by adding
ments for securiry is also a rethinking and extensión - compared tO discussions of state securiry 'freedom from fear' to 'freedom from want' - involves the addition of personal physical security,
- of the range of relevant actors. We can think of a 'constellation of providers' (UNDP 2003). in the sense of freedom from violence, to the list of component objectives within 'human
So the HDR 1994 concept brought shifis in attention concerning securiry of whorn, securiry development' (HD). Physical security was fr0111the mid 1990s incorporated into the definition
with respect ro which rypes of good, to what exrent, and againsr what threats. The attention to of HD (see, e.g., UNDP 1996: 56). This contributed to a confusion rhat some people felt III

a broad range of types of good, and (correspondingly) of rypes of threat, is objected to by so me distinguishing between HS and Ho. .. .. .
authors, epitom..ised by MacFarlane and Khong (2006). They presume ownership of the ter m So me users soughr then to limit the meaning of HS to physical secunty of individuals, as
'securiry' by conventional 'securiry srudies' which concentrates on deliberate violent threats to sornetirnes espoused by the Canadian government and the Hurnan Secunty Network of like-
. physical well-being, and simply assert that threats from environmental change, for example, minded countries. As we saw, so me authors even want to Imut the concept to the phYS1Cal
are not part of the 'human securiry' ficld. In elfect they defend old-fashioned (state) securiry . f . t ·olent threats or even narrower, the physical securiry of persons
secunry o persons agalIls VI ' . ... .
studies' established access to privileged funding. They aim to reserve the term 'protection' only ·all
esp':Cl" y non-1m ·1·)
ltary d·unng vjolent conflicts and agamst orgamzed
. mtentlonal vlOlence.
(
HACSO . Biblioteca
Des Gasper

The purpose of this third answer is to broaden the scope of the securiry studies concept of
securiry, beyond state and military securiry, and/or to change the focus, to a concern with the
physical security of persons. It reacts against both the UNDP notion of HS, felt to be too broad,
and the traditional notion of national securiry, felt to be increasingly misleading or insufficient
in an era when most violent conflict is intra-national and overwhelrningly most of the casualties
are civilian.
The answer of the UN Commission on Human Securiry (CHS 2003) gave more careful
attention to the notion of 'hurnan'. Ir considers what are the requirements of being 'hurnan ',
in addition to sheer existence. These requirements go beyond freedoms from fear and from
want. We may add freedom from humiliation and indignity, perhaps also freedom from despair
(Robinson 2003), and, for eX~!TIple, the freedom of future generations to inherit a healthy
natural environment. The Corrunission defined human securiry as: 'to protect the vital core of
all human lives in ways that enhance human freedoms and human fulfilment' (CHS 2003: 4).
Human securiry so conceived concerns the securing of humaniry, humankind, which must be
ensured before its fuller flourishing is possible. Seen from the side of military security stuclies
and policy, this interpretation represents an extension beyond freedom from fear. Seen from rhe
Vl
:::o- e
side of human development thinking, it represents an extension beyond freedom from want,
.s"
N
<,
R c; g :r:~
but also a narrowing to concentrate on the highest priorities within each category. oo o ::l

~ ~ ~ '" :r: oe
"O
:€¡: e <2 a M
'0
-2 e E '"
A range of definitions e B ::l
c c::
e::l e~ .S "
~ '00 ¿ "O

So, broadly speaking, the concept of 'human securiry' redirects securiry discussions in one or ~ ~ e~ ~o o, -E::l ;;;- .~

~ on "
o· El
typically more of the following ways: from the national/state
victims; beyond physical violence as the only relevant threat/vector;
level to human beings as potential
and beyond physical harrn -
:::: cr¡
""-
c
::2
o
P ª-
M

v
e,
o v o
o
U Vl" '"
as the only. relevant damage. The redirection can be done to dilferent exrents, so we encounter v .~
.c;: eo ""'o
o'"
"O
""'o
diverse 'human securiry' definitions, as shown in the shaded cells in Table 2.1. The columns ~ .§ .se Z eo e, c
-;;;- ~ ;o- Ee, e
~
v
'"
concern how wide a range of values is included in the concept. Columns I and [[ have broad
'""
:3 ~ a- "~o '" :::> '0 ......
a "
~ e a- -.;> ¡; 'E::l
M ""'
O
ranges, from Human Development discours;; column V 'a much narrower range, from conven- u
"V
w '00
~;:
o" eS ~
v
"O

S
e -o s: en
"
o a- "O
06 ""'o
,: -co
tional security studies; and in between
Picciotto
'freedorn
et al. (2007), forexarnple,
from want', using as a weighting
thern columns III and IV have an intermediate
in colurrin IV cover the aspects of 'freedom from fear' and
criterion the impact
scope.

on human survival chane es;


~
--5i

~"
'-"
Q :<:
0
~ '.::z -E
:::> §
~ :r:'" ."
:;
o v
e, c-, " ~ "v> o
~ .a
" oon a-
E
X
o
•....
o :~ u
vi '.o ~

:r:
O"'

:r:'" '"E :r: " S2..


Vl

thus they look at far more rhan direct deaths from armed violence. These various interpreta-
.~
:::: :r: .2
""
.c
el.
'"
Ví ~ - "O

tions of hurnan securiry can be compared with a base case which is nota concept of hurnan :;

securíry: a 'pure' capability approach definition of human development as expansion of valued


v
~ o-
a-
capabilities. The rows bring in whether
terrns of stability of achievement
or not human securiry is defined or partlydefined
of valued or prioriry goods.
in
.c
~
E
::l
~
~§, -o
a-
e,
R13 .5
"o, .c <2
§

Ü ~
We noted rhat rninimalist dcfinitions fail to respond to the fact that much more premature
""'O
;: ]
e e Z
:::> .~ 8o, Ea "
dearh and human wounding
concept
arise from poverry than from physical violence. The UNDP
of human securiry involves a focus on a broader range of aspects of peoples security
than only physical safety and survival. To keep the conceptsufficiently sharp and distinctive but
tE
o

"
"O
- :$ t~ "'< e 0..';:1
v
Vl .«:

o
t: 8-
o
~
M
v
" "E .co o-
not arbitrarily restricted, rhe Comrnission on Human Securiry formulated the range of aspects to
~ "
¿¿ ~
f
.~
""'o ~
.c Ü
include, in effect, basic needs plus stability, with their specification to occur Vid reasoned prior- e t:
~ o E
itization within the relevant political communities. Given the relevance both of priority needs
and stable fulfilrnent and the advantages of a conception that is neither extremely broad nor very
~"
~
] ~ v E
." " ""'o
.D
""'o
o
<b
"O

narrow, and neither rigidly universal nor purely local, this formulation constitutes a relatively
e
o
8 ~
t: ">o
M

g § 2' v
~
Vl
s '"> ~ ~ "O
attractive concept ofhuman securiry and is now quite widely used (see also Owen 2004). e~ ":; "e
"O M
.5 .S ~ '"
Hubert (2004) added that, given the development-human securiry nexus it rnight though '" Vl "O
~
-'" :.:: > ";; Vl
:r: :r: ~
make little difference in the end whether the concept adopted of human security is broad or ~ " Sí
Des Gasper Human security: from definitions to investigating a discourse

narrow, if we realise that human security wiil not be well achieved without development, nor Vulnerability and capability
vice versa. The Human Security Repon series from Canada (e.g. Mack 2005) considers only
armed conflict and organized violence as well as their effects, which in fact rarnify into almost Humans come in units - as persons. We enumerate hurnans in terrns of integers, whole
everything else, So too may their causes. So while violence appears convenient as a focus nor fractions and decimals. And rhe lives of human persons likewise involve specific
b
num ers,
for data coilection and subsequent model-building, the associated research and policy should threshold levels: one does not live a quarter-fold when one receives only a quarter of one's
extend much further. When we look at the fuller human security discourse, we may then find dietary requin:ments; one dies, relatively quick.ly. Being human has vanous specific reqUlre-
rhese needs come socially specific notions of a series of normanve thresholds
thar the disputation around the concept comes to matter less. ments F r 0111
ran <>e of aspects: the minimum levels required for normative acceptability. 'Human
across a '" .
security' issues in the area of health, for example, do nor inc\ude all health issues, only. those
The discourse - concepts in context up to a normatively ser mínimum threshold, which is to so me degree historically and societally
Behind the foreground features - a focus on security ofindividual persons, and a wider scope of relative. (See, e.g., Owen 2005; Casper 1996, 2005.) Lack of the threshold concept leads wnters
the areas considered under 'securiry' and as contributory factors and possible countermeasures like MacFarlane and Khong (2006) to attempt to decree that whole issue áreas Iike health and
to insecurity - are generative themes. One is a humanist norrnative concern for the well-being environment are outside the rernit of 'securiry'. in the misraken belief thar this is necessary in
offeilow humans: the proposition that what matters is the content ofindividuals'lives, including arder to allow meaningful priority to anything within human security discussions.
a reasonable degree of stability. It is part of what O'Bricn (2010) cails the equity dimension in Attention to the lives of real persons underlines that vulnerabiliry, not only capability, is a
human security thinking. It is largdy shared with the sibling discourses ofhuman rights, human defining feature ofhumanity. Invulnerability could even make one inhuman, without sympathy.
needs, and human development (Casper 2007b). Much human security thinking contains in We are more likely to be open to the vulnerabilities of others if we share such vulnerabilities
particular an insistence on fulfilling basic rights, derived from basic needs, for all. ourselves (Rifkin 2009). Ahuman securiry approach seeks to manage and modera te vulner-
Second, the focus on threats to basic human values leads to a humanist methodology of ability, and complements the stress on capability found in human development thinking.
attention to mundane realities of life - including exploration of the things that people value and At rhe same time, human security thinking emphasizes capability too, as seen in the concept
of the diverse bur interconnected threats (actual and/or felt) to these values. of 'securitability' and the stress on empowerment as well as protection. To only be protected
Third, then, is a richer picture of being humano Humans are not only individual choosers, can be disempowering. It reduces both felt security and objective security because capabilities
but are' encumbered subjects' who have each a body, gender, emotions, life-cycle, identity and wither or are never developed and confidence stays low. For the Global Environmental
social bonds, including mernberships of (multiple) groups and of a common species. N;rmative Change and Human Security programme, human security is defmed as where 'individuals and
priorities for being human include a sense of meaning andidentification, and recognition of communities have the options necessary to end, mitigate or [sufficiently] adapt to threats to
and respect for others. The vision of humans is as both vulnerable and capable. their human, social and environmental rights; have the capaciry and freedom to exercise these
Fourth, as' part of what O'Brien calls the discourse's connectivity aspects, is a character- options; and actively participate in pursuing these options' (http://www.gdrc.org/sustdev/
istic stress on the interconnection of rhreats. Elsewhere 1 have called this feature 'joined-up husec/Definitions.pdf, accessed 6 June).
thinking', and used che terrn 'joined-up feeling' for the motivating focus on human vulner- Many authors explore the posited neccssary conditions for human security outcomes; Krafi,
abiliry and on the human rights that flow for all from basic human needs (Gasper 2007b). u for example, holds thar 'Human security by its very nature implies [i.e., requires] a more open
Besicles a generalized concern with interconnections, human security thinking involves, fifihl y, kind of society - citizens must be able to voice out to the governl11ent their security concerns
attention to the specific intersections of diverse forces in persons' and groups' lives. so thar these can be given proper attention in the. context of the societal good' (2007: 5).
Sorne authors define liuman securiry as includingthose posited conditions and capabilities.
The Cornmission for Africa's definirion inc\uded a similar stress .on participation, apparendy
A holistic methodology of attention to the lives of real persons proposed as an inseparable. necessarycondirion: people-centered
We fmd in human security thinking an anthropological concern for understanding how
individual persons live. People seek bodily, material, psychological and existential security, Risks human securiry becornes an all-encornpassing condition in which individual citizens
and insecurities are case- and 'person-specific, and partly subjecrive, so human security analysis live in freedom, peace and safetv and participate fully in the process of governance.
requires listening to people's 'voices', their fears and perceptions, including the 'voices of the They enjoy the protection offundamental rights, have access to resources and the basic
poor' but also of the rich (Narayan et al. 2000; Burgess et al. 2007). The methodology lends necessities of life, including health and education, and inhabit an environment that is
itself particularly to surfacing concealed issues of women's security (see, e.g., Hamber et al. not injurious to their health and wellbeing.
2006). Such insights are of long standing in the humanities, in anthropology, and in the basic (COlIIl/lission J'Jr Afrim 2005: 392)
needs school in peace and conflicr studies (Burton, 1990; Mitchell, 2001), but are frequently
forgotten in other fields. Human security rhinking has given thern a new home. The broader
Interconnection and nexuses
('UNDP/japanese') perspecrive on human security (e.g. CHS 2003; JICA 2006) seerns to have
advantages here over a narrower (,Canadian' or MacFarlane-Khong) one, in conducing to fuller Analyses of requirements can support claims for policy priority to these requirements if and
use of this holistic perspective. where the analyses identify a major causal connection, from fulftlment or non-fulftlment of
a highlighted factor, through to a qualitatively different ser of other things that have clear
Des Gasper Human security: from definitions to investigating a discourse

normative importance. The term 'nexus' captures when such a connection concerns a major Intersectionality
link, active at least in so me situations, between 'spheres' that are conventionally conceived and
administered separately - such as between environment and war. Human security thinking The theme oi interconnection is ofien formulated al a general leve! in terrns of relations
looks at such links: for exarnple between economy, conflicts, distribution, environment and between vast sers of facrors, the subject matters of different intellectual disciplines (e.g. Brauch
health. 2009). Applied though through the holistic merhodology of attention 10 the lives of real
The foundational ideas of the United Nations Charter and its system for coJlective security ersons, rhe rheme leads us 10 the imersections of rhese factors and to the patterns of impact
highlight freedom frorn want and indignity in addition to freedom from fear, because of not on diverse individuals, groups and localities - rhe 'local difficulties' that arise as various stress-
only the first two's independent importance bUI also an expectation rhat freedom from fear will faclOrs ami vulnerabilities interact.
never be attained or stable if freedom from want and indignity are absent. 'Collective security Leichenko and O'Brien's book Doubie Exposute shows how economic globalization and
now lis) seen to require the defense ofhuman rights norms and principies' (Quaraert 2009: 40). global environmental change, for example, have addirive effects and interactive effects, which
State security is expected to be fragile and expensive - as well as morally empty - if not based trigger further rounds of reactions and con~equ,nces. The groups who are most threatened by
on the security of persons. Similar principies can apply within nations: 'unless industry is re global environmental changes are ofien the groups who are most rhreatened by global econorruc
be paralysed by recurrent revolts on the part of outraged human nature, it must satisfy criteria changes. They are more exposed, for example because of where they live. Tlíey are also more
which are not pure!y econornic', wrote R. H. Tawney (1926: 284). vulnerable - more damaged by the same exposure and more damaged by their actual exposure
Nor are the links only limited bilateral ones. Econornic trends can greatly increase _ beca use they have fewer resources to use in prorection. And often they are the leasr resilient
the chances of conflict, via mechanisms that have lain outside of rhe fie!d of attenrion of beca use again they have fewer economic, social, cultural and political resources. Leichenko
businessmen, conventional acadernic econornists and economic policymakers (Collier et al. and O'Brien reveal how we miss rhese vital cornbinations and interactions when we work in
2003; Picciotto 2005; Picciotro et al. 2007); the resulting conflicts may then have implications abstracled disciplinary discourses, whether of social science or of environmental science. We
for distribution and health, as well as for cconorny, crime and further confiict; the distributional norice rhern when w« instead undertake a holistic analysis of human securiry that starts by
changes may impact on the environment; and so on. The 'joined-up thinking' required is looking al particular people and locations and al the intersecting forces in their lives."
feasible to a worthwhile extent, even as we move beyond traditional problem-framings, because
we can se!ect rhe particular interconnections to be stressed according re their importance Roles - how can concepts help?
case-by-case.
A discourse is inevitably incomplete and underdefmcd, and thus has multiple potentials. How
it becornes actualized, and how it íurther evolves, depends on its users an·d contexts of use. In
Thresholds and tipping points clarifying a concept and discourse we must ask for what tasks rhey are being used or useful: their
Human security analysis sometimes centres on a particular, dangerous type of connection, roles and with respecr to whorn; for example, in defining a research programme or in indicating
at a particular locus: a flashpoint or tipping point, a stress leve! beyond which threshold the and motivating a policy o-ienration.!"In particular, much usage of the human security concept,
negative effects dramatically escalate, even leading to collapse or, in the case of persons, death and the very choice of the label 'human securiry', can be understood as 'boundary work'
or higWy increased chances of death, whether through disease or violence or self-harrn, as (Star and Griesemer 1'!H9) that aims 10 span between conventionally separated intellectual and
in the suicides of those broken by harassment or debt. Benearh certain leve!s of malnutrition political spheres,
small children can suffer irreversible mental d~ficits. Some rypes of stress or abuse may produce
irreversible emotional harm. Arguably, whole societies roo can go over a stress tipping point
Adding to understanding
as in Rwanda in 1994, when bad harvests, economic crisis and extreme externally imposed
expenditure CUlS were loaded on top of a history of tense inter-group relations and recent Ahuman securiry approach can often generate fresh case-specific understandings and insights,
armed .confiict (Prunier 1997; Uvin 1999)." Conternporary literature on climate change is through the holistic methodology of looking al specific peoples lives and vulnerabilities with
replete with warnings about tipping points in our clima te systems, beyond which deleterious an eye for inrerconnections and inrersecrions. When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans
change will accelerate markedly and become effective!y irreversible (e.g. CampbeJl et al. 2007; the victims were especially poorer Afro-Americans, poorer people in general since they lived
Dyer 2010). Climate tipping points are impersonal; but in human systems tipping points on worse land, and people over sixry, This last group suffered more than 60 per cent of rhe
often have a strong normative component, linked 10 ideas about rightful entitlements and 1HOOdeaths. Leichenko and O'Brien (2008) recount how economic change had made the city
past agreements. When normative thresholds or bottom-lines are fe!t to have been violated, more vulnerable. Its old industries had declined. Strong lobbies had ensured that many new
results can be the sarne as for breaching of an impersonal causal threshold: eruption or collapse. channels had been CLItfrom rhe Mississippi river 10 the sea, which allowed new paths for storm
We should distinguish though berween the concept of thresholds, which are points beyond surges from the ocean 10 reach rhe ciry. Privatization and corporatization of municipal and
which there is dangerous change, the concept of tipping point, where such change notably social services meant that coordinarion was weak and could not cope with emergency demands.
acce!erates, and the more extreme notion of 'point of no return'. These were conflated in Patients in priva le health care facilities were irnmediately evacuated afier the hurricane, while
the synthesis report on UNESCO's multi-year human security research programme (2008), chose in public care were lefi wuiting for five days. Similarly, in the reconstruction phase,
perhaps contributing 10 rhe resistance that prograrnme findings met from the organization's for-profit facilities were rebuilt much fasrer than not-for-profit schools and public housing. By
funders and controllers. using ahuman security approach, looking al the particular situation and multiple vulnerabilities
FLACSO - Biblioteca
Des Casper Human security: from definitions to investigating a discourse

of particular groups/rypes of people, and thus as in storytelling and scenarios becoming aware Promoting solidarity?
of and 'emphasizing the dynamic imeractions between processes, responses, and outcomes,
[Leichenko & O'Brien] ... elicit new insights and research quesrions beyond those associated Human security analysis recognizes emotions, identifies surprising conjunctures and can give a
with separate framings and discourses' (2008: 33). swse o[reallives and persons. The language ofsecuriry' irself touches emotions, which is both
Likewise, reviews of the many national and regional Human Development Reports that have a source of strength and of danger (Casper and Truong 2010). While the 'human security' label
taken ahuman securiry approach find that they have produced novel insights and suggestions aims tO reoriem securiry discourse, it carries risks of being taken over by the psychic insecu-
(jolly and Basu Ray 2006, 2007; Gomez er al. 2013). The srudies look imo sources of objective rities and fears of the rich and rhe military instincts of those with large arsenals and the habit of
and felt insecuriry, without a pnoti restrictions according to disciplinary habits or an intellecrual using rhern. However, those fe_arsand habits exist already and have long had ways of expressing
ternplate fixed by a donor organization. Amongst such HDRs, severa! deserve wide attention, themse!ves without requiring 'hurnan securiry' language in order to do so. The difference made
including the reports for Chile (1998), Afghanistan (2004), Costa Rica (2005), ehe Arab Region b such a language may be in the opposite direction, gradually helping to promote interpersonal
y k di ..
(UNDP 2009), Benin (2011), Africa (2012), and not least the earlier Larvia report (UNDP and global sensitiviry and solidarity. Human securiry thinking 100 s at verse, situation-
2003). specific, interacting threats and how rhey.affect the lives of ordinary people: ~specially the most
vulner,lble. lt promotes the abiliry to imagine how others live and feel;and tlie perceptIon of an
intensively interconnected shared world in which humaniry forrns a 'community offare'. lt thus
Reorienting policy analysis favou~s the changes that are needed for global sustainabiliry in respect of how people perceive
Extending these insights, O'Brien (2006, 2010) suggests that the debate on global environ- shared vulnerabilities, shared interests and shared humanity (The Earth Charter; Casper 2009).
me mal change has been stuck in an inappropriare problem-frame. First, it is dominated by A narrow concept of human security does not block such changes, but is less conducive than
natural science queseions and nor sufficiently framed in terms ofhuman significance. Ir is likely the broader versions,
then to get stuck in science wars which are inherently endless, since more knowledge ofien Human security thinking has to opérate at various levels, just as we see in thinking about say
produces more uncertainry not less: whereas we should be thinking about which hurnans face 'well-being' or 'equiry'. Research and policy programmes in particular geographical, historical
known dangers and which ones also face the nastier sides of the inevitable uncertainties (Casper and organizational contexts will each make their own particular definitions. S0111eof those will
2012). Second, like convemional securiry srudies, the debate continues to opérate wieh a now be narrow, orhers broad. At che same time, a broad conceptual perspective is necessary since it
partly obsolete naeional frarning of issues, so ehae policy debate is dominated by again inher- CJn inspire and guide the diverse particular endeavours.
ently endless disputes over the respective rights and blame chat should accrue eo nations. She
proposes that more fruitful and more pertinent may be to frame discussion in terrns of human Notes
securiry: to recognize that many poor persons face high and rising insecuriry, and to consider
Fo; example, an online deposirory of definitions at http://www.gdrcorg/susldev/husec/Definitions.
how to respond to this.
pdf, and the coilation and comparative analysis in Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy (2007).
Wider attention ro contributory factors increases our awareness of vulnerabiliry and Iragiliry, 2 One CJn draw various serniotic squares for a concept of 'hurnan securiry'. Such a square shows a
but also of opportunities and resilience. In policy design, ahuman securiry perspective raises conrrast along the IOp row, and conrradictions-along the diagonals. Different contrasts can be drawn:
issues of systern re-design to reduce chances of crises, not only palliative responses when crises of'human' with 'staté' or 'national'; of'securicy' with 'rights' or 'development' or 'growth', etc.
have hit (Lodgaard 2004), and has.served 'as a focal poim around which an imegrated approach 3 Berrnan (2007), for example, reduces the basic needs aspect mistakenly 10 basic material needs alone
and also obscures the global-wide agenda in 'human-' language, such as seen in human rights law.
to global governance is emerging' (Betts and Eagleron-Pierce 2005: 7). lt increases ehinking
4 The chapter builds from and extends arguments presented in Gasper (2OOS,~010). .
about prioritization within sectors (as in the MDGs progranune) and, if we use broad concepts 5 In the phrase 'freedom from wanr', 'want' has its older sense of non-fultilment of a basic need. In rhis
of human securiry, also between sectors. Seeking system re-design and intersectoral rebalancing spirit Eleanor Roosevelt declared,for example: 'The freedom of man, I contend, is the freedom 10 eat'
are campaigns for change over.the longer terrn, buc may bring evemuallarge-scale benefits. (, The seven securities may overlap. The checklist can also be treated as about potemial areas of threats.
7 See, e.g., the Bangladesh Human Se.curity Repon and the Latvia Human Development Report on
human security (UNDP 2002, 2003). .
Providing an intellectual bridge X Leaning and Aries (20oo) detinition of human security likewise concerns psychological ~ecurity, and
presents rhis an important resource in dealing with rhe objective insecurity in a person or group's
Besides human security thinking's promotion of analytical integration, it offers 'boundary work' environment. See also Leaning et al. (2004).
services in other respects, Consideration of the sources of and threats to human securiry helps <) See http://www.gdre.org/sustdev/husec/Definitions.pdf. The UN Trust Fund for Human Security
to bring together the differem organizational worlds o[ humanitarian relief, socio-economic (2007) emphusises 100 that: 'human security goes beyond protective mechanisms tO inelude the need
10 elllpower individuals, identifying their security threats and articulating the means by which they will
developmem, human rights, conflict resolutÍon and national security (Uvin 2004). Human
implement the changes needed' (Nkire 2010).
security discourse also synthesizes ideas [rom the predecessor 'human discourses' o[ human
10 For further work along such lines, see Werthes et al. (2011). For another detaiJed recent objective
needs, human rights and human developmem (Gasper 2007b). It better grounds human rights index ofhuman security, that grollps lInder three main headings - economic, environmental and social
and human developmene work in attemion to the nature ofbeing and well-being; focuses them fabric - see Ihe work of David Hastings, for UNESCAP and others, at http://www.humansecuri-
on high priorities; highlights imerdependence more than does human rights language, and tyindex.org/. It involves objective measures of objective aspects. We can also have objective measures
of subjective feelings/perceptions, and subjective measures of subjective fedings (Iike fear) or of
increases attention to dangers, vulnerability and fragility; and it connects to human subjectivity,
objective conditions. (See Gasper 2007. for J more rdined vocablllary than only objective/subjecrive.)
which increases its explanatory force and motivating potemial.
Des Gasper Human security: from definitions to investigating a discourse

11 :rhe Canadian gover~ment and its Human Security Network partners have, however, ofien added Asrri Suhrke, David Tardif-Douglin, Stein Villurnstad, Lennart Wohlgemurh (1':196) The lntem.uionuí
freedom from want content to a 'freedom from fear' centred interpretarion. Sornetirnes the Respollse to Conjtu: dlld GelliJcide: USSu/1S frOItl ,he RlVdlld., Experieuce - Syllrllesi:; Repon. Copenhagen:
government even declared 'For Canada, human security means freedorn from pervasive threats to Sreering COl11mittee of the Joint Evaluarion of Emergency Assistance to R wanda.
peoples rights, safery or lives,' (http://www.gdrc.org/sustdev/husec/Oefirutions.pdQ. Gasper, O, (1996) 'Needs and basic needs - a clar ification of foundational concepts for development ethics
12 Oefined m terrns of all the forces 'to threaten human lives, livelihoods and digniry'. This formulation and poliey' , Pp, 71-101 in Ql/esriollill,l! Development, C, Kohler, C Core, U. P Reich, T Ziesemer
IS found in many of!icialJapanese staternents, e.g. Govt. ofJapan (1999) andJICA (2006). (eds), Marburg: Metropolis.
13 Work for the 2009 European Report on Development, on development-conAict linkages and on Casper, O, (2005) 'Securing humanity - siruating "human securiry" as concept and discourse',jol/"I<¡I of
diverse causes and consequences of srate fragility, adopted rhe 'joined-up thinking' label. HI/I/¡<l1IDe¡;elop1l1ellt, 6(2): 221-245,
14 The international Jomt Evaluation ofEmergency Assistance to Rwanda concluded rhat: Casper, O. (2007a) 'Hurnan well-being: concepts and conceptualizations', in M. McCiUivray (ed.), Hl""<l1I
[Explanatory factor 6 behind the 1994 R wanda genocide o! almost a million people in a few We/l-Beil/'¡:: Coucep: ,1Ild Me,lSllrelllelll. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacmiUan, pp. 23-64,
months was:] The econonuc slump starting in the late 1980s and the effects of the actions subse- Gasper, D. (2007b) 'Human rights, human needs, human developmenr, human security - relationships
quently taken by the government in consultation with the international donor community ie berween four international "hurnan" discourses'. FO"'lIlfor Developlllwr Stude«, 2007/1: 9-43.
the strucrural adjustment programmes of 1990 and 1992. The economic deterioration, la:g~l; Casper, O. (2009) 'Global ethics and human security', in G. Honor Fagan and Ronaldo Munck (eds), Vol.
due to a sharp dechne of world market prices for coffee - Rwandas prime export earner - as 1 of Clou"liz,lfioll ,l/Id Sewriry: AII Eucvdopedi«. Westport, CT: Creenwood, pp. 155-171,
well as to unfavourable weather and economic policies such as increased-prorecticnism, price Casper, O. (2010) 'The idea of human securiry', in K. O'Brien, A, L Sr. Clair, B. -Kristoffersen (eds),
controls and other regulations, affected the whole society In US dollar terrns, GDP per capita feU Cli/ll,lIe C/I,lIlge, Ethic: ,1Ild H"I/I<lIl Secl/riry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23-46.
by so me 40 per cent over the four years 1989-1993 ." The international community including Casper, O. (2012) Climate Change - The Need For AHuman Rights Agemla Within A Framework Of
the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, overlooked [rhe] porentially explosive Shared Human Security, Soci,,1 Rcse.uá): AII lntenuuiounl QIl,lfferly ofrile Socia! Scie11ce;, 79(4), 9153--1014.
SOCIaland p,ohtlcal consequences when designing and imposing economic conditions for suppcrt Casper, D., and T-O. Truong (2010) 'Oevelopment Ethics through the Lenses of Caring, Cender and
to R wanda s econorruc recovery. (Eriksson et al. 1996: 15) Human SeclIrity'. pp. SH-<J5 in C"jJdbilities, Power .ind lnstitutions: Towotds .1 More C,itjúll DelleJoplfletlt
15 See also O'Brien and Leichenko (2007), O'Brien et al. (2010). Eúiia, S. Esquith and E Cirlord (eds), University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
16 Werthes and Debiel (2006) and Gasper (2010) are two more extended arternpts to delineate roles in Gomez, O., O, Casper, y. Mine (2013) Cood PMrice.< ill Addressillg HlIlllllll Secllriry l/lfOllg/¡ Nationa! Human
this field. Develap11le1lt Report.<. Report tO Human Oevelopment Report Office, UNDP, New York.
Hamber, B., Hillyard, P., Maguire, A., McWilliams, M" Robinson, C,' Russell, O. and Ward, M, (2006)
'Discourses in transition: re-imagining women's security', lntemnticnal RelatiotlJ, 20(4): 4X7-S02.
References Hampson, E a.,
Daudelin, J; Hay, J. B,; Reid, H.; Martin, T. (2002) Mldl/e.ü in the Multinuie: H1l11/,11l
Sec/lrity ,1IIi1 H'<"ld Disotdet, Oxford University Press, Ottawa.
Alkire, S. (2010) 'Human Development: Definitions, Critiques, and Related Concepts', Human
Hansec. J. (2009) Srorllls <1" My Cr'lIIdchildrel/, London: Bloomsbury.
Development Research Paper 2010/01, New York: United Nations Development Prozrarnme.
Haq, M, ul (1999) Reflt'ai(¡¡" 01/ HlIIII"1/ Developmrnt (2nd edn). Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Berpman, J (2007) orhe "vital core'", in G. Shani, M. Sato, M. Pasha (eds), Proteaino HI/I/~lII SeC/lriryill "
Hubert, O. (2004) 'An idea thar works in practice', Secllriry Di,'¡oglle, 25(3): 351-352.
»st 9/11 World. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macrnillan.
JICA (2006) Povertv Red/l(fiol/ 'lIId HIIII/,III Se(1lrity, Tokyo: JICA, Available at: http://www.jica.go.jp/
Betts, A., Eagleton-Pierce, M. (2005) Editorial Introduction: Human Secur ity, St. Alltollyi ll1temarioll,d
english/ pu blicati o ns/ reports/ study / ropical/ poverty _reducti o n/ pdfl poverty _ e02. pdf
RevlelV, 1(2),5-10.
Japan, Govr. of (19'!9) Diplol/l,¡lic Blllebo"k 1999, Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Brauch, H. C. (2009) Human Security Concepts in Policy and Science. In: Brauch H G' a ald S .
U Gri J M' C K . ' '.' sw pnng, Jolly, R. and Basu Ray, O. (2006) The HlIIII<lII Se(1lriry Fnnnewoth ,lIId N,uiol1<l1 HIII/1<l11DellClop111el/r Reports,
.;, rin, .: esjasz, .: ameri-Mbote, I'; Behera, N. C; Chourou,B,; Krummenacher, H, (Eds.):
NOHR Occasional Paper no.5. New York: UNDP.
F<lCllIg
C Clobal
(B l.EI/vlro/UI/elit"l
. C/I<lllge: Environmental " HI/III"I/ Ellergy', Food , He (,ltl, dn d W, r
ti er
S .
emnty JoUy, R. and Basu Ray, O. (2007) 'Human securiry - national perspectives and global agendas', jOllm,d af
oucepts er m - Heidelberg - New York: Springer- Verlag): 965-990,
lntetnation.i! DellClopl1lel/l, 19(4): 457-472.. .
Burgess, J P., wltl1. A. Amicelle, E .. Bartels, R. Bellanova, A. Cerami, E, Eggum, G. Hoogensen, S,
King, C, and Murray, C. (2001/2) 'Rethinking human security', Poliri,,'¡ Stieu«: QII",rerly, 116(4): 5ll5-610.
Kittelsen,
S '. K,...Knibbe,
M. de Koning, . K. Koser .",'. K Krause and ti
- O '. Salemink (?007) P romolflg H IIIllilll
IU. -
Krafi, H. J (2007) 'The human security imperatives'. The Neiu Ze<iI,¡lId ll1cem,úi,,'¡,,1 RevielV, 32(5),
ecunty: Ethical, Normative 'lIIdEdl/f<lhol/,,1 Frameworks in Westem EI/rope, Paris: UNESCO
Septelllberlacrober', available ar: http://www.questia.colll/library/ICI-16.! 133564/the-hulllan-
Burton, J W (1990) Coujua: Rwc Human Needs. New York..St. Martin's Press.
security_illlperarives-herman-kraft-argues (accessed 9 September 2013)
Campbell, K. M.; J Gulledge; J. R. McNeill; J Podesta; P Ogden; L. Fuerth; R. J Woolsey' A. T J
Lama, M, (2010) HI/I/I,¡II Se(1lriry iu [,/llid. Ohaka: The University Press Lrd.
Lennon; J Snuth; R, WeJtz, and D. Mix (2007) The Age of COI/;e<Jl/el/~es:The Foreigl/ Policy ,"uí Nntionai
Leaning.]. and Arie, S, (2000) HIIII1<¡1/Se(1lriry: A Fr,l1l/ClVOrkfor ASSesilllel1t iu COl/flie: 'l1ld Transition. Tularie:
Securitv lmplications of Glob,¡1 Chlllllte C/ul11ge. Washington, OC: Center for Strategic and International
Studies/Center for a New American Security. USAlD.
CHS /C ornrrussion
..
Leaning J., Arie, S. and Stires, E. (2004) 'Humar security in crisis and transition', Praxis: TI/(' Fler¡her
on Human Secunry. (2003) HIII/l(11l SeC/lriry No,", New York: UN Secretary-Ceneral's
Cornmission on Human Secunry, available http://www.humansecurity~chs.oro-/finalreport/ (accessed jOl/fII,¡l oIll/renl<lfú"I<il De/ldop111el/r, 19: 5-30,
Leichenko, R. and a'Brien, K. (200H) DOllble Expo.",re, New York: OUP
6 June 2013). "
Lodgaani, S. (2004) Human Security - concept ami operatiollalization. In M, Muller and B. de Caay
Collier, P., V L ElIiott, H. Hegre, A. Hoeffier, M, Reynal-Querol, N. Sambarus (2003) 'Breakino- the
Fortman (eJs.), Fm1ll W,,,¡;,,e «'. Welj;lfe, Assen: Roya! van CorCllm, 16-3H,
conAlct trap: cIvIl war and development policy.' World Bank Policy Research' Report, Washin:ton
DC: World Bank. b ,
MacFarlane, N. and Khong Y.E
(2006) Hl1ll/,¡1/ Scwrily ,,,1<1the UN - A Criric,,1 Hisrory. Bloomington, IN:

Commission for Africa (2005) O"r Coml/"loll ll1lerest: Reporl of tile COllll/lissioll for Africa, London: University of lndiJlu Prcss.
Mack, A. (2005) HI/I/I,1I1 St'(1Iriry Report. Vancouver: Human Securiry Centre, Universiry of British
COI11l11lSSlOnfor Africa,
Oavis, M. (2001) LlIe VictOrill1l Holocal/sts - El Nillo Famill" al/d tile M"killg of the TI¡ird World. London: Columbia Press.
Mirchell, C. (ed.) (2001) 'Special issue in honor "fJobo W Burton', ll1refll,lfiol/,djollrll,d <1" Pe,lCe Sflldies,
Verso,
Dyer, C. (2010) Cli11l"re w,m. Oxford: aneworld Publications, 6(1),
NarJyan, D., with R. Pate!, K. Schalfr, A. Rademacher and S. Koch-Schulte (2000) v¡'ic!'S oIlhe Poor: C111
Eriksson, J, with contributions by Howard Adelman, John Borton, Hanne Christensen, Krishna Kumar,
AI/yolle He,,, Us' New York, N.Y: published for the World Bank, Oxfonl University Press.
Des Gnsper

O'Brien, K. (2006) 'Are we missing rhe point? Global envirorunental change as an issue of human
securiry', Glob,¡l Environmental CIi,/IIge, 16: 1-3.
O'Brien, K. (2010) 'Shifting the discourse: clirnate change as an environmental issue versus c1imate change
as ahuman security issue', K. O'Brien, A. L. St. Clair, B. Kristoffersen (eds.) Clilllate CI¡úJ¡ge, Ethics
.lId HUIII'II/ Secuntv, Cambridge:
O'Brien, K. and Leichenko,
Cambridge
R. (2007) Hum'lI/
Universiry Press.
Secunty; Vlllllerability and Sustainoble Adaptation. HORO
3
Occasional Paper 2007/9. New York: UND?
O'Brien, K., Sr. Clair, A. L. and Kristoffersen,
Carnbridge: Cambridge University Press.
B. (eds) (2010) Climate CI/atlge, Ethics and Human Setwitv. IN DEFENSE OF THE BROAD
Owen, T. (2004) 'Human
Owen, T. (2005) 'Conspicuously
security - conflict, critique
absent? Why rhe Secretary
and consensus', Security Dialogue, 35(3): 373-387.
General used human security in al! but narne', VIEW OF HUMAN SECURITY
St. Allfholly~ lnternational Review, 1(2): 37-42.
Picciotro, R. (2005) Memorandum subrnirred tú Select Committee on Inrernational Oevelopment,
www.publicarions.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/ crnintdev/ 464/5031502, UK House of Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh
Cornmons. Accessed 8 October 2007.
Picciotto, R., Olonisakin, E and Clarke, M. (2007) Global Deveiopment <llId HIIIII,/II Sewriry. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers/Springer.
Prunier, G. (1997) 71" Rwanda Crisis - History of a Cenocide (2nd edn). London: Hurst & Co.
Quataert, J. H. (2009) Ad/JO{,llillg Diglliry: HUIII,II/ Rigllls Mobi/iz.¡tiolls ill Glob,,1 Politics. Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Rifkin, J. (2009) The Empathit Civilizarioll. New York: Penguin.
Robinson, M. (2003) 'Protection and empowerrnent: connecting hurnan rights and human security', Almost two decades afier its mainstream outing in the 1':194 UNDP Humatl Development Repon
http://www.oxan.comlabout/newsI2003-09-18. accessed 8 October'2007. (HDR), the concepr of human security continúes to be a point of contention between those
Rorhschild, E. (1995) 'What is security?', Daedalus, 124(3): 53-98. who favor a broad definition, those who prefer a narrow versión and those who reJect the
Sen, A. (2003) 'Hurnan securiry now', Solea Cakk,,; lt¡twl<ltioll<l1 QU<lrrerly,July 2003. notion altogether. What was supposed ro be a simple, noble and obvious idea soon becarne
Star, S. and Griesemer,J. (1989) 'Instirutional ecology, "translarions" and boundary objects', Social Studies
of Saence, 19: 387-420. engulfed in a cacophony of political and acadernic debates. centered on. mI definirions, their
Tadjbakhsh, S. and Chenoy, A., ·2007. Humau Securitv: COIICeptS"lid Implíonions. Abingdon: Routledge. advantages and weak points, and on 1tS theoretical and practical applicabiliry,
Tawney, R.H. (1926) Religioll ,/lid the Rise oj Copitnlism. Can human securiry be considered a paradigm shift, or is it simply an advocacy agenda, a
Thakur, R. (2004) 'A polirical worldview', $emrity Di,¡/ogue 35(3), 347-8. 'g1ue that holds rogether a jumbled coalition? of middle powers and developrnent agencies that
The Earth Charrer, hrtp://www.earthcharterinaction.org/content/ (accessed 14 December 2010).
want to exist on the internarional scene? It is oft described as a vague concept with no analyrical
Truong, T-O. and Gasper, O. (eds) (2011) Tr,II/S/I,lliollal Migr,llioll and Human Sewriry. Berlín: Springer.
or practica] utiliry; so broad that it ineludes everything, and therefore, nothing; and a' new
UNOP (1990) HUIlIdIl Developmeut Repon 1990. New York: Oxford Universiry Press.
UNDP (1994) H/{'J/{/II Development Repon 1994. New York: Oxford University Press. neruesis from Norrhern countries, wrapped in an excuse to launch 'just wars' and interventions
UNDP (1996) Human Developmet/r Repon 1996. New York: Oxford University Press. in weak sures, This chapter sets out to defend the broad approach that defines hurnan securiry
UNOP (2002) B'/IIgl<ldesh Humm. Setwitv Repon 2002: 111 Seotth ofJlIstice and Diglliry. Dhaka: UNOP. as freedom from want, from fear and from indignities as universal ami indivisible cornponents.
UNDP (2003) Latvia Human Development Repon 2002-2003: HIIIII</IISeO/rity. Riga: UNOP. Ir argues that as a normativo concept, human security embodies a number of added values to
UNDP (2007) HIIIIl<lI/ Development Repon 2007-8: Figluillg Climate Ch,/IIge: Hum.m Solid<lrity in • Divided
World. New York: Oxford Universiry Press. rhe fields of securiry srudies, human development and human rights, and is nor a mere arternpt
UNOP (2009) Ardb Human Developmen: Repon 2009: Ghd/lfllges to Human Sewrity in the Ar,¡b Counuies. tO 'securitize' issues in order to solicit interventions in the narne of 'enlightened self interese'
New York: UND? and 'Responsibiliry tO Protect' (R2P).
UNESCO (2008) Human Sewrity - Approathes Ami Challenges. Paris: UNESCO.
Uvin,? (1999) 'Developmenr aid and structural violence: rhe case ofRwanda', Development, 42(3):49-56.
Werthes, S. and Debiel, T. (2006) 'Human security on foreign policy agendas', Introduction to T. Oebiel Scopes and definitions
and S. Werthes (eds),.HIIIJ/{/II SeO/riry 011Foreign Policy Agmdas: Cltdllges, GOIICL'PtS,Cases. INEF Repon
!!012006. Duisburg: Universiry of Duisburg-Essen, pp. 7-20. As Peter Sroett advances, 'Defining words is a fundamental act ... When definitions are
Werthes, S., Heaven, C. and VoUnhals, S. (2011) Assessillg HIIIII"" Il1seCllrity Worldwide. INEF Repon constructcd in a closed and lirnited fashion, alrernative thinking can be srifled and orthodoxy
10212011. Duisburg: University of Duisburg-Essen: INEE reiníorced," Defining the concept of hurnan security serves to delineate realiry, framework
and priorities for the policy agenda. For rhc academic one, however, it can also be 'a robust
pedagogical process ... pushing acadernic discourse farther along its path of self-discovery'
Defining is afta all an act, performed by an actor, and never sometning neutral or objective. Ir
is therefore importanr to bear in mind how the definition of human securiry emerged from or
against pase theories, who is defining, for what purposes, and what consequences such an act
entails for policy and academic debates.
The word 'secur iry' irself, as Steve Smith puts ir, is 'an essentially contesrcd concept,"
While Buzan re fe es to security as ultimately a political process, 'when an issue is presenred as

You might also like