Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Natural Resources and Social ConflictInsecurities of Non-Dominance: Re-Theorizing Human Security and Environmental Change in Developed States

Natural Resources and Social Conflict: Insecurities of Non-Dominance: Re-Theorizing Human... [Contemporary human security theory often characterizes people as secure or insecure based largely upon the ‘security’ of their respective states. Although some research explicitly notes that human insecurity can arise in developed and developing states, seldom does it pay the former more than cursory attention; repeatedly, the unspoken assumption is that citizens of developed states don’t actually experience, or experience very little, human insecurity (see, for example, Thomas and Wilkin, 1999; ICISS, 2001; Hampson et al., 2002; CHS, 2003; Roberts, 2008).1 Such an approach, however, assumes generally uniform security conditions within a given state, and depends upon gendered characterizations of ‘secure’ states in the Global North exporting or promoting human security to ‘insecure’ states in the Global South. Consequently, it obscures conditions of insecurity experienced by minority or marginalized groups within otherwise ‘secure’ states and societies. As a result, human insecurity within developed states remains under-theorized and under-examined.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Natural Resources and Social ConflictInsecurities of Non-Dominance: Re-Theorizing Human Security and Environmental Change in Developed States

Editors: Schnurr, Matthew A.; Swatuk, Larry A.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/natural-resources-and-social-conflict-insecurities-of-non-dominance-re-tp1oOU2EXV

References (41)

Publisher
Palgrave Macmillan UK
Copyright
© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2012
ISBN
978-1-349-33420-9
Pages
63 –82
DOI
10.1057/9781137002464_4
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[Contemporary human security theory often characterizes people as secure or insecure based largely upon the ‘security’ of their respective states. Although some research explicitly notes that human insecurity can arise in developed and developing states, seldom does it pay the former more than cursory attention; repeatedly, the unspoken assumption is that citizens of developed states don’t actually experience, or experience very little, human insecurity (see, for example, Thomas and Wilkin, 1999; ICISS, 2001; Hampson et al., 2002; CHS, 2003; Roberts, 2008).1 Such an approach, however, assumes generally uniform security conditions within a given state, and depends upon gendered characterizations of ‘secure’ states in the Global North exporting or promoting human security to ‘insecure’ states in the Global South. Consequently, it obscures conditions of insecurity experienced by minority or marginalized groups within otherwise ‘secure’ states and societies. As a result, human insecurity within developed states remains under-theorized and under-examined.]

Published: Oct 28, 2015

Keywords: Aboriginal People; Security Analysis; Develop State; United Nations Development Programme; Human Security

There are no references for this article.