The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The securitization of development debate within the global governance literature: a critique

The securitization of development debate within the global governance literature: a critique
The securitization of development debate within the global governance literature: a critique
Since the late1990s, theorists have attempted to understand an apparent securitization of development within the policies produced by global governance networks and institutions (Beall et al., 2005; Duffield, 2007; Woods, 2005). The key assumptions central to much of the securitization of development debate are that; significant areas of the South are excluded from formal global economic networks, but are reintegrating through parallel economic activity; the discourses of security and development are linked by global governance institutions, such that significant areas of the South are conceived as an international security threat; the major agencies of global governance are unified through a liberal consensus, and pursue liberal change through the distribution of aid and through development programmes.

This research is concerned with the ways in which this debate aids our understanding of contemporary global governance, and its limitations. This theoretical and empirical evaluation takes a number of forms including: an analysis of the policy discourse of key global governance institutions; an examination of world economic trends; a statistical project investigating the distribution of development aid; and a case study of development programming.

This thesis argues that the securitization of development debate aids our understanding of global governance through its identification of both liberal societal transformation as a key rationale of global governance and the security development nexus as a central framework for North-South relations. It further provides important insights into the productive power of liberal global governance networks and develops a fruitful application of post-structural analysis to the problematic of global development.

This research also identifies theoretical and empirical limitations within this debate. In light of these, an approach is proposed which takes greater account of firstly, the structural dynamics of the global economy and secondly, the internal contradictions and complexities inherent within the discourses of global governance. The former would involve greater engagement with the literature that demonstrates a complex and varied picture of global economic expansion and contraction. This research further suggests that the effect of the axiom that there can be no development without security is ambiguous. And also argues that the suggestion that global governance pursues liberal change through the distribution of aid needs qualification. Finally, further analysis to determine the utility of engaging with the governmentality literature is proposed.
Lazell, Melita
30a1b731-b6fe-4cd8-ab20-4127b11728d9
Lazell, Melita
30a1b731-b6fe-4cd8-ab20-4127b11728d9
Glenn, John
d843e423-d1f9-4be5-b667-8e44a42efff2
McGrew, Tony
ca436d48-93ce-4a06-96fc-48a1d0d8612e
Culliford, David
25511573-74d3-422a-b0ee-dfe60f80df87
Thomas, Caroline
aa99259d-8ada-4cca-96eb-24da68563df4

Lazell, Melita (2011) The securitization of development debate within the global governance literature: a critique. University of Southampton, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, Doctoral Thesis, 267pp.

Record type: Thesis (Doctoral)

Abstract

Since the late1990s, theorists have attempted to understand an apparent securitization of development within the policies produced by global governance networks and institutions (Beall et al., 2005; Duffield, 2007; Woods, 2005). The key assumptions central to much of the securitization of development debate are that; significant areas of the South are excluded from formal global economic networks, but are reintegrating through parallel economic activity; the discourses of security and development are linked by global governance institutions, such that significant areas of the South are conceived as an international security threat; the major agencies of global governance are unified through a liberal consensus, and pursue liberal change through the distribution of aid and through development programmes.

This research is concerned with the ways in which this debate aids our understanding of contemporary global governance, and its limitations. This theoretical and empirical evaluation takes a number of forms including: an analysis of the policy discourse of key global governance institutions; an examination of world economic trends; a statistical project investigating the distribution of development aid; and a case study of development programming.

This thesis argues that the securitization of development debate aids our understanding of global governance through its identification of both liberal societal transformation as a key rationale of global governance and the security development nexus as a central framework for North-South relations. It further provides important insights into the productive power of liberal global governance networks and develops a fruitful application of post-structural analysis to the problematic of global development.

This research also identifies theoretical and empirical limitations within this debate. In light of these, an approach is proposed which takes greater account of firstly, the structural dynamics of the global economy and secondly, the internal contradictions and complexities inherent within the discourses of global governance. The former would involve greater engagement with the literature that demonstrates a complex and varied picture of global economic expansion and contraction. This research further suggests that the effect of the axiom that there can be no development without security is ambiguous. And also argues that the suggestion that global governance pursues liberal change through the distribution of aid needs qualification. Finally, further analysis to determine the utility of engaging with the governmentality literature is proposed.

Text
Melita_Lezall_thesis.pdf - Other
Download (1MB)

More information

Published date: November 2011
Organisations: University of Southampton, Faculty of Social, Human and Mathematical Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 342183
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/342183
PURE UUID: 62f65609-34bf-49a9-b64a-b08b0ab25fc9
ORCID for John Glenn: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-9694-8282
ORCID for David Culliford: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-1663-0253

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 Nov 2012 11:31
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:19

Export record

Contributors

Author: Melita Lazell
Thesis advisor: John Glenn ORCID iD
Thesis advisor: Tony McGrew
Thesis advisor: David Culliford ORCID iD
Thesis advisor: Caroline Thomas

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×