Private Security and the Public-Private Divide: Contested Lines of Distinction and Modes of Governance in the Stockholm-Arlanda Security Assemblage1

Berndtsson, Joakim; Stern, Maria

doi:10.1111/j.1749-5687.2011.00142.x

Cited by 52 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many scholars problematize the responsibilities of actors involved in governance (Abrahamsen and Williams, 2009;de Nevers, 2009;Berndtsson and Stern, 2011;Berndtsson, 2012;Bulkeley and Schroeder, 2012;Dorusson and Gizelis, 2013). It is commonly argued that private actors have become part of the security sphere in such a way that they overlap and interlink with state practices, which may yield unwelcomed consequences.…”

Section: 'Sharing Responsibility'mentioning

confidence: 98%

Beyond the ‘RtoP’: Responsibility as doing, being and sharing

Wagnsson

2015

Int Polit Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

| This review article exposes that the scholarly interest in the notion of 'responsibility' in the field of security studies goes far beyond the 'Responsibility to Protect' and the debate on emerging 'responsible stakeholders' in Asia. It is argued that the significant scholarly attention to 'responsibility' reflects political concerns with transnational threats and humanitarian issues, but it also mirrors a quest for status and power in a post-hegemonic security milieu as well as a need to distribute responsibilities among powers in an effective way. The article reviews approximately 160 peer-reviewed articles to expose strengths and weaknesses in the scholarly production of knowledge on responsibility in the field of security studies. The article suggests a new way to categorize works on responsibility in terms of 'doing', 'being' or 'sharing'; focusing on one or several of these three aspects is an effective way to capture key contemporary problems in international security.

show abstract

Section: 'Sharing Responsibility'mentioning

confidence: 98%

Beyond the ‘RtoP’: Responsibility as doing, being and sharing

Wagnsson

2015

Int Polit Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This transformation of security practices undermines the state monopoly on the use of violence. On the one hand, the increased demand for security professionals results in an increase supply through the proliferation of private security actors, creating a new source for security that is much less accountable and costlier (Leander 2005;Abrahamsen and Williams 2011;Berndtsson and Stern 2011). On the other hand, the increased globalization and interconnectivity of security practices result in the transnationalization of criminal and terrorist organizations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Routledge Handbook of International Political Sociology

Guillaume

Bilgin

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When compared to traditional approaches to security studies, critical approaches to security studies are often presented in terms of a deepening and widening of the security studies' agenda (Krause and Williams 1997). In that version of disciplinary history, traditional security studies scholars are represented as people focusing on state-centric approaches with a more solid ontology; with a clear understanding of key concepts such as national interest, national security, and so on, and their implications on international politics, as well as a less flexible epistemology. From that standpoint, critical approaches to security studies are seen as a disruption of that existing agenda. As part of the deepening/widening meta-narrative of critical approaches to security studies, the contributions of these approaches are represented in terms of the inclusion of different scales (human security, cosmopolitan security, urban security, etc.) as well as different issue areas (borders, environment, immigration, maritime security, etc.) into security studies' agenda. Our chapter concentrates on introducing how international political sociology has helped developed the critical agenda in security studies; we move away from a deepening/ widening perspective that is common in such review chapters and instead present a review of some of the thematic contributions in an international political sociology to security studies, in the form of a discussion of such concepts as materialities, practices, relationalities, reflexivity and the micro-politics of the everyday (for a broader reflection about security, see Burgess in this volume).International political sociology seems to enjoy an organic relationship with security studies, considered in the broader sense of the concept to include approaches that focus on discourses, practices and technologies of security. Most notably, those scholars interested in the political sociology of international security seem to focus on the everyday over the exceptional, as well as on the 'everydayness' of the exceptional in their studies of what counts as security today through reflexive lenses that regularly questions the ontological and epistemological assumptions of security's concepts and theories. This preference makes an international political sociology approach particularly engaging within the context of contemporary security studies scholarship. A majority of the all-time most-cited articles published in the journal International Political Sociology have a security focus (Dillon 2007;Salter 2007; Huysmans 2008, among others), yet unlike traditional approaches to security, these publications focus on the new materialities, practices, relationalities, reflexivity and the micro-politics of security in an attempt to see the effects of 'security' on the everyday. More specifically, a common theme is on the (in)security practices of security actors in

show abstract

“…Across the various strata of policing and security activities, previously discernible boundaries between the public and private spheres have become indistinct and the contemporary context of policing is at once both pluralised and interconnected (see, for example: Berndtsson & Stern 2011;Jones & Newburn 2006;Marx 1987). The realm of 'high policing' (Brodeur 1983) -long associated with the preservation and augmentation of state interests by intelligence agencies-is no exception.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pluralization of High Policing: Convergence and Divergence at the Public–Private Interface:

O'Reilly¹

2015

CRIMIN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. (2015) 'The pluralization of high policing : convergence and divergence at the public-private interface.', British journal of criminology., 55 (4). pp. 688-710. Further information on publisher's website:https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu114Publisher's copyright statement:This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in British Journal of Criminology following peer review. The denitive publisher-authenticated version O'Reilly, C. (2015) 'The pluralisation of high policing : convergence and divergence at the public-private interface.', British journal of criminology, 55(4): 688-710, is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu114. Additional information:Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. By focusing upon pluralisation, this paper addresses these deficiencies whilst also developing a more nuanced theoretical platform for future high policing research. This is significant, as the skewed nature of previous academic studies towards public forms has eclipsed a wide--range of dubious activity in the private sphere. Of course, inherent low--visibility has assisted this evasion of critical attention, but so too has conceptual and empirical neglect. The first step in tackling these lacunae is, therefore, to identify and address frailties that inhibit existing theoretical frameworks and research agendas. With these ambitions in mind, this paper aims to do the following: to spotlight archetypal private high policing providers and draw attention to their most disconcerting activities; to articulate the theoretical implications of these private manifestations and propose necessary conceptual refinement; to evaluate key areas of public/private distinction as well as to consider blurred boundaries where operational overlaps and strategic coalescences occur;and also, to provide a roadmap for future research ambitions in what is an under--recognised, and highly challenging, field.The discussion is in divided into three parts. In Part One, the conceptual evolution of high policing is retraced and its contemporary relevance reaffirmed. Part Two progresses analysis towards the pluralisation of high policing, proposing a typology of private actors and mapping their interaction with the public sphere. Part Three seeks to identify points of connectivity and contrast. In particular it examines the symbolic power of high policing and tests the assumption that public actors have greater resources in this regard. High PolicingThe influential high policing hypothesis was introduced to pol...

show abstract

Private Security and the Public-Private Divide: Contested Lines of Distinction and Modes of Governance in the Stockholm-Arlanda Security Assemblage1

Cited by 52 publications

References 35 publications

Beyond the ‘RtoP’: Responsibility as doing, being and sharing

Beyond the ‘RtoP’: Responsibility as doing, being and sharing

Routledge Handbook of International Political Sociology

The Pluralization of High Policing: Convergence and Divergence at the Public–Private Interface:

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About