The most prominent criticisms relate particularly to its conceptual ambiguity and lack of a precise definition. If everything is prioritized, then, by definition, nothing is. This in turn poses a practical dilemma for policy-makers charged with the allocation of already scarce resources. A different line of criticism comes from those who contend that states have been able to co-opt the human security narrative to further their own ends, augmenting hegemonic interests and narratives rather than challenging or transforming them Black, Finally, certain critics of human security have argued that the human security concept pathologizes and disempowers weak and undeveloped states, opposing the counter-narrative of the advocates who depict human security as emancipatory McCormack, ; Duffield and Waddell, This serves to disempower the citizens of weak or impoverished states.
Whilst their own state is held up to greater scrutiny and regulation by the international community — purportedly on their behalf — the citizens of those states do not have the means by which to control or hold to account major international institutions or powerful states. The concept of human security must therefore be viewed with great scepticism. To its advocates, it represents a new, broad, emancipatory lens through which to view security — a post-Cold War lens that focuses attention where it is needed most.
The individual, not the state, is the referent. States are the guarantors. However, this essay has shown that the concept is not without a long list of criticisms that not only challenge it at the conceptual level, but argue that its adoption has done little to change the behaviour of states or to alleviate the pressures that threaten the everyday lives of the most vulnerable.
It is inconclusive and amorphous, representing any potential hardship that may befall an individual. Simultaneously, not everything can be considered worthy of equal resource allocation. In a world where the risk of terrorism still presents itself, it would be foolish to assume states will treat this threat to human security the same way they treat the threat posed by environmental degradation, for example. Black, David R. MacLean, David R.
Shaw eds. Cameron, Maxwell A. Lawson and Brian W. Tomlin eds. Khong, Y. MacFarlane, S. Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou and Anuradha M. Cameron, Robert J. Toni Haastrup Date written: March Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing. E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team.
Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks! But neither can people be secure in the absence of strong, democratic and responsible states, as the multitude of collapsed states in the world illustrates. These are the challenges in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine today. Human security also underscores the close linkages between gross human rights violations and national and international insecurities.
The Rwandan genocide represents one of the worst human security failures, and the consequences still reverberate through the Great Lakes region of Africa nearly ten years later.
Therefore, realizing human rights lies at the core of protecting and empowering people. Human security also adds an important dimension to development thinking. As Amartya Sen argues 'development can be seen as a process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy'.
By focusing on downside risks, human security emphasizes that people must be protected when facing sudden and profound reversals in economic and social life. In addition to 'growth with equity', human security is equally concerned with 'downturns with security'. In the absence of safety nets, people face critical and pervasive insecurities in sudden downturns which, in turn, may be exacerbated, increasing conflict and violence, as recent examples in Asia and Latin America illustrate.
If security is to be protected, conflict prevented, human rights respected and poverty eradicated, we require urgently a new consensus on security. This is a shared responsibility. Human security provides an impetus for all countries, whether developed or developing, to review existing security, economic, development and social policies.
Creating genuine opportunities for people's safety, livelihood and dignity should be the overall objective of these policies. Equally important is to overcome the existing compartmentalization of policies and programmes along institutional divisions of work - along security, development and assistance lines.
0コメント