Advertisement
Published in:
2012 | OriginalPaper | Chapter
From ‘Securitization’ of Climate Change to ’Climatization‘ of the Security Field: Comparing Three Theoretical Perspectives
Author : Angela Oels
Published in: Climate Change, Human Security and Violent Conflict
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.
Select sections of text to find matching patents with Artificial Intelligence. powered by
Select sections of text to find additional relevant content using AI-assisted search. powered by
Since 2003, climate change has been articulated as a threat to national, international, and human security in scientific publications and political declarations. What does the articulation of climate change as a security issue mean in terms of policy implications? How is climate change being rendered governable as a security issue and what are the consequences of this? In this chapter, three theoretical perspectives are introduced that shed light on this question: the Copenhagen School, the human security perspective, and the Paris School. These three schools all offer theoretical perspectives on the question of what it means (or should mean) to render something governable as a security issue and whether or not this is desirable. As well as being those most discussed in the literature, these three schools also cover the full spectrum of positions on the issue: against securitization, for securitization, and neutral (it depends).