Threats and impediments to human security are part of the daily-lived experience of large numbers of people (especially in developing countries) but their vulnerability and precariousness are neither readily understood nor measurable. Action tends to be generic, imitative, and overly ambitious. If each country or region confronts a different context of human security and faces a set of specific challenges, how are we to proceed? This article argues that the field of human security needs to engage more fully with a range of sociological and anthropological concepts to maintain its relevance and gain greater analytical purchase on the multiple insecurities of the 21st Century. It reconsiders human security within conceptual discussions of ‘safety’ and ‘risk’ and their complex relationship to ‘trust’ and ‘uncertainty’. In particular, we bring into focus the utility and application of important theoretical and empirical developments in the understanding of marginality and by extension insecurity generated by such scholars as Zygmunt Bauman, Anthony Giddens, Mary Douglas, Olivia Harris, James C. Scott and Edward P. Thompson. Keywords: Human Security, Risk, Safety, Trust; Uncertainty

View full abstract

The world today faces multiple threats that spread faster and more extensive than ever before and threaten the core of our human security. These threats cannot be seen or solved in isolation but must be addressed collectively to enable people to live their lives free from want, free from fear, and free to live in dignity. These three; fear, want, dignity, are the essential components of human security, a concept that remains open for discussion. Human security is entrenched in religion, in fact, religion is the primary source for literature on human security and dignity. This theoretical research focuses on the classical Islamic scholarship, especially the work of Imam Al-Shatibi compared to the contemporary discourse on human security mainly featuring the UNDP1994 report. While the research compares contemporary and classical Islamic literature, it engages the critical discussion of the term that mainly points to the inability to present a unified, measurable, and commonly accepted definition. To this conclusion, most scholars agreed, and Imam Al-Shatibi stresses the importance of time, place, and cultural differences in actualizing human security as it suits the individual or group. This research presents a framework that combines all human security dimensions and means of protection from the Islamic perspective that shares many commonalities with the contemporary discourse on the subject. The main conclusion implies that faith is key to actualizing human security. However, faith components are up the individual to possess, but the nature of this individual that is driven by incentive makes law necessary. Thus a role for the state acting as the regulator is also essential. Notably, this research marginally mentions the practice of both the individual and the state and focuses on the theory, and on this regard, the discussion on the practice based on the presented framework is an important future research.

View full abstract

“Partnership” in foreign aid, as it originally appeared in Partners in Development published by the Pearson Commission in 1969, called for mutual commitment and accountability based on an equal relationship between donors and recipients. Partnership was thought difficult to implement because of asymmetric power relation between donors and recipients, disagreement as to what constitutes sound policies and donor accountability. Nevertheless, several international organizations addressing a wide range of human security issues arose around the beginning of the 2000s, advertising themselves as organizations underlain by partnership. These “partnership organizations” had governing bodies which included representatives from the governments of developing and developed countries, NGOs from the North and the South as well as the private sector, as members with equal voting rights. This article explores how these organizations introduced such governance structure despite the difficulties of institutionalizing partnership. Namely, it reviews the processes through which the Global Fund Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria as well as the Education for All Fast Track Initiative (later the Global Partnership for Education) introduced the decision-making mechanisms underpinned by partnership drawing on theoretical debates on institutional design in International Relations. It reveals that, in introducing inclusive decision-making mechanisms, the two organizations appealed to the connection between partnership and the effectiveness of aid, rather than advocating its normative value. Keywords: partnership, institutional design, foreign aid, international organization, human security

View full abstract