Security as a Public Value

Purpose: Security would seem to constitute the most fundamental public value, and is intrinsically linked with the right to life. Keeping the public safe from internal and external threats is the primary function of governments and states. At the level of global governance, systemic security, and a guarantee of freedom from existential threats for sovereign states, lie at the heart of international law, international organizations, and the normative rules of coexistence. Yet the definition of security has evolved over time. The proliferation of threats to security, and spillover between them, has seen an expansion along the X-axis of issues. Meanwhile, consideration of an increasingly broad hierarchy of the subjects of security (those for whom security should be provided) has seen expansion along the Y-axis of referent objects in two directions from the state - upwards towards international communities and ultimately to the global biosphere, and downwards peoples, communities, and vulnerable groups and individuals. A combination of these perspectives has manifested in three of the gravest crises to face domestic and international governance policymakers: the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and the global humanitarian crisis of refugees and forced migrants. This paper traces the evolution of security public values and reflects the emergence of a holistic conceptualization of governance prescription in response. Method: This research project used a qualitative approach consisting of literature review and document analysis. The results of this study should be supplemented by quantitative and qualitative studies in the future. The literature review consists of a comprehensive assessment of scholarly academic publications from competing perspectives in the fields of political and moral philosophy, public administration, and international relations. The document survey is mainly related to the policy documentation output of national governments and international organizations, as well as media reports. Results: The research identifies how the exponential growth of security challenges, and their interlocking and cross-contaminating nature, has rendered traditional modalities anachronistic. It identifies how conceptualizations of what constitutes ‘security’ have steadily expanded to include a greater focus on human beings as the referent object, and to include a broader range of ‘threats’ to these referent objects. Questions related to state and systemic security remain relevant and interact with human-centric issues and perspectives in an increasingly complex web of insecurities. Global governance policymaking has likewise expanded to encompass non-traditional security (NTS) issues, but in doing so has shone a spotlight on the controversial dualistic nature of international organizations. In 2005, United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Kofi Annan referenced the interrelatedness of the three pillars of the UN by noting “we will not enjoy security without development, development without security, and neither without respect for human rights. Unless all these causes are advanced, none will succeed.” In doing so he neatly encapsulated the progress made by the evolution of security and governance conceptualizations, as well as ongoing challenges. Policy prescription and obligations for those who govern, therefore, must increasingly consider spillover between these diverse agendas. This has been reflected in the newly emerging discourse on the humanitarian-development-peace nexus (HDPN). The article assesses not only the promise of the HDPN, but also continued shortcomings in terms of how it is currently operationalized at the global level, two decades after Annan’s original call to action for a more integrated and human-centered approach to security and governance.