1991International Studies QuarterlyRequires access

The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security

Helga Haftendorn

Open publisher page 167 citations

Abstract

The term “security” is as ambiguous in content as in format: is it a goal, an issue-area, a concept, a research program, or a discipline? There is no one concept of security; “national security,” “international security,” and “global security” refer to different sets of issues and have their origins in different historical and philosophical contexts. The author argues that the concept of international security might most appropriately describe current security affairs. She challenges the concept of national security as fixated on the nation-state and not taking into account the security of other states. She criticizes the notion of global security as presupposing a world-wide common definition of security and shared sets of values, rules, and principles not yet existing. In the long term, however, the world might be moving in the direction of a global security system if institution-building continues and leads to common practices, rules, and enforcement capabilities. As all concepts yield only limited explanations and are of marginal value for theory-building, the essay identifies some assumptions and questions to be clarified in future research programs. In a closing section the field of international security studies and its relationship to international relations are discussed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The term “security” is as ambiguous in content as in format: is it a goal, an issue-area, a concept, a research program, or a discipline? There is no one concept of security; “national security,” “international security,” and “global security” refer to different sets of issues and have their origins in different historical and philosophical contexts. The author argues that the concept of international security might most appropriately describe current security affairs. She challenges the concept of national security as fixated on the nation-state and not taking into account the security of other states. She criticizes the notion of global security as presupposing a world-wide common definition of security and shared sets of values, rules, and principles not yet existing. In the long term, however, the world might be moving in the direction of a global security system if institution-building continues and leads to common practices, rules, and enforcement capabilities. As all concepts yield only limited explanations and are of marginal value for theory-building, the essay identifies some assumptions and questions to be clarified in future research programs. In a closing section the field of international security studies and its relationship to international relations are discussed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 167 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The term “security” is as ambiguous in content as in format: is it a goal, an issue-area, a concept, a research program, or a discipline? There is no one concept of security; “national security,” “international security,” and “global security” refer to different sets of issues and have their origins in different historical and philosophical contexts. The author argues that the concept of international security might most appropriately describe current security affairs. She challenges the concept of national security as fixated on the nation-state and not taking into account the security of other states. She criticizes the notion of global security as presupposing a world-wide common definition of security and shared sets of values, rules, and principles not yet existing. In the long term, however, the world might be moving in the direction of a global security system if institution-building continues and leads to common practices, rules, and enforcement capabilities. As all concepts yield only limited explanations and are of marginal value for theory-building, the essay identifies some assumptions and questions to be clarified in future research programs. In a closing section the field of international security studies and its relationship to international relations are discussed.

Key concepts: International security, Sociology, Political science, International relations, Media studies, Law and economics, Library science, Computer science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security — Research Paper | ScholarLens