There is no such thing as a crisis: A critique of and alterative to the dominant crisis management model

Abstract

In this Forum piece, I propose an alternative conceptual model, one that replaces the crisis event with the claim of urgency made by a leader as the focal unit of analysis. The proposed crisis‐as‐claim model insists that no claim of urgency is legitimate per se. From the perspective of the researcher, the crisis‐asclaim model reverses cause‐and effect from the event to the claim as independent variable. Finally, the crisis‐as‐claim model elides the consideration of heroic leadership so common in the crisis‐as‐event model, positioning instead leaders as claims makers always intent on advancing interests and enhancing power.

Understanding the social construction of crises: Comparing the crisis‐as‐claim model with securitization theory

“…First, the crisis‐as‐claim model focuses specifically on claims by leaders (Spector, ). While early securitization scholars also concentrated on (political) power holders and emphasized the importance of a securitizing actor's position (Buzan et al, ; Waever, ), later securitization scholars have argued that other actors may engage in securitization as well (e.g., Vaughn, ).…”

“…Second, the crisis‐as‐claim model emphasizes discursive claims as the first step towards the construction of crises (Spector, ). Initially, securitization scholars likewise focused on speech acts (Emmers, ; Waever, ), but there is a growing consensus that certain practices and work routines may lead to securitization as well, since these convey the message to outside observers that a security threat is present (e.g., interrogation and surveillance of migrants) (Bigo, ; Léonard, ).…”

“…Thirdly, the crisis‐as‐claim model suggests that when a crisis claim is accepted, the leader may deploy certain resources as desired (Spector, ). Securitization theory has developed the outcome of successful claims more extensively and describes that accepted claims enable the relatively unhindered use of extraordinary emergency measures (e.g., militarization of a response) (Buzan et al, ; Elbe, ).…”

“…In his recent article, Spector (, 1) critiques the ‘dominant conceptual model threaded through both the literature and practice of crisis management'. This so‐called crisis‐as‐event model regards crises as ‘material events with objective elements that pose a threat to a social unit' and necessitate leaders' response to achieve recovery (Spector, , 4). In contrast to this positivist model, Spector introduces the crisis‐as‐claim model, which builds on social constructionist assumptions.…”

“…Leaders exercise power through making crisis claims and may have various reasons to do so (e.g., individual interests). Ultimately, these claims can be evaluated on accuracy and plausibility to judge their legitimacy (Spector, ).…”