… as a result, many actors will alter their approach to these issues and devise new ways to address them, most notably through the freeing up and dedication of increased resources. Behavioral change could thus be understood to be stimulated, in part, by the process of securitization itself” (Leboeuf & Broughton, 2008: 18). Speaking about the possible ecological threats, we always think about “the struggle of people with nature” that is about natural disasters. It is not possible to control these events (Conway, 2010). However, the influence humans impose on the planet, which results in such phenomena as global warming, environmental pollution and the destruction of ozone layer can be considered as safety threat. If to consider referential objects, it is possible to state that instead of the traditional safety object in the person of government we get the wide choice in connection with every sector.In environmental sector the list of possible referential objects are very wide: from concrete things such as survival of separate species (tigers, whales, humans) and fauna (rainforests, lakes) to more large-scale problems such as protecting planetary climate and biosphere. Many of such referential objects originate from the relations between people and biosphere (Wæver, 2006). The environment becomes a very suitable object for the use of securitization logic, which follows the formula “the environment should survive and this question is the most important because if the environment is destroyed, other questions will have no sense” (Williams, 2011). If the politics and the existing principles can’t resolve the problem, Greenpeace and ecoterrorists will take emergency measures to save the environment. The idea of the steady development can be the environmental equivalent of the state sovereignty, because this is the major principle that should be protected (Barnett, 2001).In order to implement the securitization there should be the individuals, who state that the object is in the conditions of real threat. It can be one person or a group of people. Very often this role is played by political leaders, lobbyists, pressure groups, etc. However, the securitization should not be understood as subjective process, but as inter-subjective and socially constructible. Understanding something as a threat does
Barnett, J 2001, The meaning of Environmental Security. Ecological Politics and Policy in the New Security Era, London, Zed Books,
Conway, D 2010, ‘The United Nations Security Council and Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities’, 1:3 Climate Law,375 .
Kellow, A 2006, ‘A New Process for Negotiating Multilateral Environmental Agreements? The Asia-Pacific Partnership beyond Kyoto’,60:2 Australian Journal of International Affairs, 287, at 290.
Leboeuf, A, Broughton, E 2008, Securitization of Health and Environmental Issues: Process and Effects. A research outline. The Institut Français des Relations
Meadows D.L 1972, The Limits to Growth, New York, Universe Books
Scott, S. V 2012, The Securitization of Climate Change in World Politics: How Close have We Come and would Full Securitization Enhance the Efficacy of Global Climate Change Policy?. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 21: 220–230. doi: 10.1111/reel.12008
Wæver, O 2006,‘Aberystwyth, Paris, Copenhagen: New Schools in Security Theory and the Origins between Core and Periphery’. Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, Montreal, March 2004, cited in R. Taureck, ‘Securitization Theory and Securitization Studies’, 9:1 Journal of International Relations and Development, 53, at 54.
Williams, M. C 2011, ‘The Continuing Evolution of Securitization Theory’, in: T. Balzacq (ed.), Securitization Theory: How Security Problems Emerge and Dissolve, Routledge, , 212, at 212.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples