• Marija LJ. Popović Криминалистичко-полицијска академија Београд


critical schools, human security, conceptualization, analytical and normative usability


Contemporary Security Studies expanded their research field to human security after the Cold War. The concept of human security is one of the most imprecise concepts of security, often criticized for its bottomless. Theoretical imprecision of this concept stems from the difficulties in determining its analytical framework, but also from the unacceptable lack of of harmony when it's about analytical and normative framework of the concept. For that reason, the concept of human security is still a major scientific research challenge for the theory of security studies. This paper's aim is to highlight the contribution that critical school of security studies made to expansion of research field of security studies, introducing the individual as the relevant level of analysis, and thus paving the path for the emergence and shaping of human security as a theoretical concept that is used for solving practical problems. The contribution of critical school to conceptualization of human security is of a high importance. It is primarily reflected in challenging till than undisputable and sacrosanct traditionalist conception according to which not only the protector, but also a reference object can only be nation state. Besides, the critical school shows through its anti-foundationalist ontological approach that threats are socially constructed by nature and that they are not objectively given and determined by a fixed structure, and therefore they can be influenced. Creating the concept of emancipation, representatives of critical school put the concept of human security in front of another huge task, and it is striving to create the conditions for the liberation of humans from threats that are endangering their vital values. Emancipation, ie lack of threat, is closely related to the politicization of the security, which is another important contribution of the critical school to human security concept. The politicization in the context of human security indicates that it's place is in the domain of ordinary politics and established rules. It is therefore opposed to the securitization, because securitization is considered to be the consequence of failure to mobilize ordinary political mechanisms to solve human security problems, and it should be very restrictively used because it gives legitimacy to the use of extraordinary measures, often highly contentious. This paper concludes with the position that the concept of human security should seek broader analytical and normative framework, which will only in a specific context (the context of the region or state) to get its full (local or regional) form. Potential solution to the problem of analytical vagueness of the concept of human security (which is of a great significance for its existence within security studies) lies in defining human security in a broader manner in order to meet the criteria of emancipatory concept, but it is important that the width is limited to those security threats to human's values that are in a given area designed as existentially significant. Thus, a necessary prerequisite of human security as a theory concept is its ability to meet the requirements of practice to solve specific problems identified as human security problems in a specific social context.


Download data is not yet available.


Booth Ken: „Security and Emancipation“, in: Hughes, W. Christopher; Meng, Lai Yew (ed.) (2011): Security Studies - a reader, Routledge, London and New York, pp. 36-43.

De Wilde, Jaap, „Speaking or Doing Human Security?“, in: Den Boer, Monica; De Wilde, Jaap (eds.) (2008): The Viability of Human Security, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

Ejdus, Filip (2012): Međunarodna bezbednost: teorije, sektori i nivoi, Službeni glasnik i Beogradski centar za bezbednosnu politiku, Beograd.

Floyd, Rita (2007): Human Security and the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Approach: Conceptualizing Human Security as a Securitizing Move, Human Security Journal, Volume 5, pp. 38-49.

Hampson, Fen Osler: „Višeznačnost pojma ljudske bezbednosti“, u: Dulić, Dragana (2003): Ljudska bezbednost, Fakultet civilne odbrane Univerziteta u Beogradu, Beograd, str. 9-33.

Johan, Alberth, Henning, Carlsson (2009): Critical Security Studies, Human Security and Peace, IEI, Linköping University, Linköping.

Kaldor, Mary; Martin, Mary; Selchow, Sabine (2007): Human security: a new strategic narrative for Europe, International Aff airs, Volume 83, Issue 2, pp. 273–288.

Krause, Keith; Williams, C. Michael: „From Strategy to Security: Foundations of Critical Security Studies“ in: Krause Keith, Williams C. Michael (eds.) (1997): Critical Security Studies – Concepts and Cases, UCL Press, London, pp. 33-59.

Lipovac, Milan; Glušac Luka (2011): Perspektive koncepta ljudske bezbednosti, Kultura polisa, god. VIII , br.16, str. 57-76.

Newman, Edward (2010): Critical human security studies, Review of International Studies vol. 36, pp. 77–94.

Paris, Roland: „Human Security“, in: Hughes, W. Christopher; Meng, Lai Yew (ed.) (2011): Security Studies - a reader, Routledge, London and New York, pp. 71-79.

Pavićević, Đorđe (2011): Kritička škola društva Frankfurtske škole, Godišnjak Fakulteta političkih nauka, br. 5, Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd, str. 49-66.

Pinar, Bilgin, „Critical Theory“, in: Williams, D. Paul (ed.) (2008): Security Studies: An Introduction, Routledge, New York and Wolverhampton, pp. 89-102.

Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou; Chenoy, Anuradha (2007): Human Security: Concepts and implications, Routledge, London and New York.




How to Cite




Monographic study