Securitization as a causal mechanism
By Stefano Guzzini. 2011
177 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The article seeks to offer a way forward in discussions about the status of securitization theory. In my reading, this debate has been inhibited by the difficulty of finding an appropriate version of ‘understanding/explanation’ that would be consistent with the meta-theoretical commitments of a post-structuralist theory. By leaving ‘explanation’ and/or all versions of causality to the positivist other, the Copenhagen School also left its own explanatory status often implicit, or only negatively defined. Instead, the present article claims that the explanatory theory used in securitization research de facto relies on causal mechanisms that are non-positivistically conceived. Using the appropriate methodological literature renders this explanatory status explicit, exposing the theory’s non-positivist causality and thus, hopefully, enhancing its empirical theory.
Subfields: Molecular Biology, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b866613ed39e758f98b0488c4a710eb34e9d9cfe
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Molecular Biology
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- WHO decides on the exception? Securitization and emergency governance in global health (2014, background): “The downside of this concentration on the (de)construction of security problems, however, has been that the threatening political scenario itself – exceptionalism – has received far less theoretical and empirical attention in securitization studies (Bright, 2012: 862–867; Guzzini, 2011: 331–332).”