Security Dynamics: Multilayered Security Governance in an Age of Complexity, Uncertainty, and Resilience

67 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience CHAPTER 4 Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience TAPIO JUNTUNEN & SIRPA VIRTA Takeaways o Leading Change Claims o inc easing complexi y and nonlinea change in con empo a y socie ies and global poli ics a e o en p esen ed as a jus i ica ion o inc easing demands o esilience as a key s a egic esponse in secu i y policy and p ac ices. Ou concep ual analysis jux aposes esilience as a secu i y men ali y wi h o he – pa ly o e lapping – secu i y men ali ies such as de ence, p o ec ion, and p e en ion. This p o ides a good case s udy o how pe cei ed complexi y o ou socie ies a ec s he way in which go e nance and leade ship a e unde s ood. The heo y o nodal secu i y go e nance esona es wi h he idea o ela ional leade ship. Ou analysis sugges s he ise o esilience as a men ali y migh also indica e a ce ain lack o e en c isis o leade ship. The chap e in i es eade s o exe cise a no ma i e and e hical e lec ion on he p ac ical e ec s o di e en secu i y men ali ies om he le el o indi iduals o he le el o global go e nance. I also gi es eade s a basic accoun o wha secu i y is, wha i means o go e n h ough secu i y, and wha he pu pose o secu i y is in ela ion o so e eign y, poli ical o de , and he eedoms and esponsibili ies o ci izens. 68 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience H ow should secu i y be go e ned? Wha a e he equi emen s o secu i y leade ship oday? These ques ions a e being oiced wi h inc easing u gency as a a ie y o new h ea s o secu i y eme ge and a e ecognised. The e is a g owing awa eness ha he p omo ion o secu i y as bo h an objec i e and subjec i e condi ion will equi e new ways o hinking and ac ing (Wood & Shea ing, 2007). In he pas decade, secu i y s udies in many disciplines, no ably in in e na ional ela ions, poli ical science, go e nance s udies, and c iminology, ha e add essed his challenge. The go e nance o secu i y is based on policies and s a egies which in ol e esponding o h ea s o b eaches o secu i y ha ha e al eady occu ed. I also in ol es an icipa ing and seeking o p e en h ea s ha migh occu . The analysis o secu i y go e nance explo es ways o hinking (men ali ies) unde lying hese s a egies, he o ganisa ional o ms used o implemen hose ways o hinking (ins i u ions such as he police, mili a y, and in e na ional o ganisa ions), he echniques used o u n men ali ies in o ac ion ( echnologies, policies, and s a egies), and he esul ing ac ions (p ac ices). In his chap e , we use he nodal heo y o ne wo ked and mul ilaye ed secu i y go e nance (Johns on & Shea ing, 2003) as he amewo k h ough which we analyse esponses o he changing secu i y en i onmen and inc easing complexi y o h ea s and isks. The pe spec i e o mul ilaye ed secu i y go e nance ocuses on he dynamics, con empo a y policies, and p ac ices o secu i y. I also p o ides pe spec i es on he socie al implica ions o di e en ways o unde s anding secu i y go e nance. The pu pose o his chap e is o analyse esilience poli ics as an example o a no el secu i y men ali y by compa ing i wi h some o he mo e adi ional secu i y men ali ies such as de ence, p o ec ion and p e en ion. We a gue he s ong impac o esilience poli ics as a no el secu i y men ali y in ecen yea s is e iden in he a ious e o s o ea ange ins i u ions, echnologies, and p ac ices o secu i y go e nance. As o he ques ion o social complexi y, we a gue he g owing in luence o esilience app oaches in ela ion o secu i y policy and go e nance The pu pose o his chap e is o analyse esilience poli ics as an example o a no el secu i y men ali y. 69 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience o e s an illus a i e example o how esponses o he in e connec edness o mode n socie ies and pe cep ions o inc easing unce ain y also ha e e ec s on how he changing demands o leade ship a e unde s ood. Using he nodal heo y o secu i y go e nance, his chap e also asks wha implica ions – ins i u ional, p ac ical, and echnological – esilience s a egies and he supposedly inc easing ulne abili y o ou socie ies pose o secu i y leade ship. The chap e is s uc u ed as ollows: we begin by elabo a ing on wha secu i y is and i s ela ionship o key concep s such as so e eign y, o de , eedom, and poli ical legi imacy. F om he e we analyse how he eme gence o esilience poli ics as a no el secu i y men ali y has ans o med he agenda o secu i y go e nance, including dominan h ea pe cep ions and agency in p o iding secu i y. We also illus a e how he eme gence o esilience poli ics has a ec ed he way secu i y and he echnologies o i s go e nance ha e been ans o med in he las decade in he con ex o he No dic model o in e nal secu i y and c i ical in as uc u e poli ics as well as in he Eu opean Union Global S a egy (EUGS). We hen p esen a concluding discussion. Wha is Secu i y? In poli ical science, secu i y is de ined as he co e unc ion o he s a e. The mos amilia de ini ion can be ound in Thomas Hobbes’s Le ia han; Hobbes (1651/1999, p. 123) a gued ha wi hou he s a e, socie y would descend in o a wa o all agains all (i.e. a s a e o na u e). I was in o de o a oid his ha men came oge he o make a social con ac , building a s a e o p o ide secu i y. The e o e, he s a e has been gi en he powe o e people and e i o y. This excep ional powe de i es om he de ini ion o he s a e: “A s a e is a human communi y ha (success ully) claims he monopoly o he legi ima e use o physical o ce wi hin a gi en e i o y” (Webe , 1946/1991, p. 78. Emphasis in o iginal). To sus ain hei ex e nal secu i y, s a es ha e mili a y o ces and in elligence au ho i ies. To sus ain in e nal secu i y (poli ical, social, and public o de ), s a es ha e police o ces and c iminal jus ice sys ems. 70 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience Secu i y is commonly de ined as a s a e o being. This is illus a ed in he ollowing de ini ion, published in he SAGE Dic iona y o C iminology, which is ee o discipline-based conno a ions: Secu i y is he s a e o being secu e, speci ically eedom om ea , dange , isk, ca e, po e y o anxie y� Secu i y also implies ce ain y� The oo s o he e m a e in he La in secu i as/secu es, de i ed om se (meaning wi hou ) cu a ( ea , anxie y, pains, wo y)� Sa e y is closely ela ed o secu i y� Sa e y also means eedom om dange o isk� Howe e , i has addi ional conno a ions which ha e mo e o do wi h physical condi ions, e�g� eedom om inju y, he sa e y o he body and o p ope y� In his con ex ce ain y e e s o ce ain y o o de , assu ance and p edic abili y (Vi a, 2006, p� 371; Vi a, 2013b, p� 312)� When de ined as he co e unc ion o he s a e and, acco ding o he Uni e sal Decla a ion o Human Righ s (1948), as a co e human igh , secu i y is a powe ul poli ical concep and phenomenon. In his eading, he so e eign (s a e) has he powe o posi ion o de ine he go e nance, poli ical use, con en , objec i es, dis ibu ion, e c. o secu i y. Fundamen al ques ions o democ acy a e ambiguous in his con ex . Go e nance o secu i y – as a concep – e e s o o ganisa ions, s a egies, and p ac ices. Go e nance h ough secu i y is always a poli ical ac . The e is an i e ocable link be ween secu i y and he main enance o so e eign y. The ques ion o who has he powe o legi imacy o make claims on ma e s o (na ional) secu i y is undamen ally a poli ical one. When a speci ic phenomenon is au ho i a i ely labelled a secu i y issue – ha is, a h ea o he exis ing social o de – i is mo e easily pe cei ed as an issue o be deal wi h using excep ional measu es. The no mal unning o poli ics and go e nance does no ypically ely on such excep ional measu es (Huysmans, 2004). Wha we ha e p esen ed he e is a cons uc i is pe spec i e o secu i y, which s a s om he p emise ha h ea s pe cei ed by he s a e eli e o he socie y in gene al a e no jus “ou he e” in he objec i e eali y o be “picked up”. Ins ead, poli ical leade ship and o he au ho i ies a e in ol ed in p ocesses o signi ica ion ha cons uc and gi e meaning o hese h ea s. This also a ec s pe cep ions o wha secu i y is and wha i means o he poli y in he i s place (see also Vuo i, 2017). 71 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience The as poli ical capi al es ed in he e m “secu i y” means ha any policy pu sued in i s name is di icul o a gue wi h: How could anyone easonably be opposed o secu i y (Zedne , 2009, p. 144)? Al hough con empo a y secu i y leade ship necessi a es an unde s anding o he complexi y o di e en socie al h ea s and isks, one should no o ge ha claims o secu i y a e essen ially con es ed. In o he wo ds, al hough secu i y is a a he common concep , i s use is no clea ly de inable. I can e e o a ious objec s, p ocesses, and socie al con ex s depending on one’s pe spec i e and alues (Buzan, 1983, p. 6; see also Gallie, 1956, p. 168). Secu i y can be seen as a undamen ally “wicked p oblem”, as a “pa icula ly complex and icky leade ship and managemen con ex ” (see he in oduc o y chap e o his book). This also means ha secu i y canno be “sol ed” o good, ei he in exis en ial e ms – meaning ha he e is no absolu e s a e o secu i y a ailable in human li e – o in he sense ha di e en s akeholde s would achie e a consensus o e he alue, meaning, and p ac ical e icacy o di e en secu i y men ali ies. Go e ning Secu i y Th ough Resilience In ecen yea s, schola s in a ious academic ields ha e no ed ha esilience poli ics is challenging adi ional ways o hinking abou he go e nance o secu i y, such as he men ali ies o de ence, p o ec ion, and p e en ion (Chandle , 2017; Co y, 2014; Vi a, 2013a). We a gue a secu i y men ali y based on esilience is eme ging and ans o ming he ways in which go e nance and go e nabili y a e pe cei ed. Ins ead o ocusing on he go e nance and p e en ion o o eseeable unce ain ies and h ea s, esilience poli ics is p esen ed as an answe o he assumed inabili y o ou socie ies and go e nmen s o gua an ee secu i y wi h p e en i e and p oac i e policies. This is hough o happen because o he inc easingly complex and in e connec ed na u e o ou socie ies and new h ea s emana ing om bo h man-made and na u al sou ces (Rosa, Renn, & McC igh , 2014). As a concep , esilience has a dis inc i e academic backg ound in li e sciences such as sys ems ecology as well as psychology and complexi y hinking da ing back o he 1950s (see Bou beau, 2018). F om hese 72 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience academic ields, esilience hinking has, o e he las wo decades, slowly ans o med in o a concep wi h policy ele ance o many socie ies and in e na ional o ganisa ions. In con empo a y secu i y poli ics, esilience is used as a s a egic p inciple o objec i e o a ious policy ields and issues such as plane poli ics and clima e change, go e nance o inc easing u banisa ion, coun e e o ism, c iminology, and social wo k. Resilience poli ics also has i s c i ics. Schola s ha e paid a en ion o he “da k side o esilience” (Schmid , 2015); his e e s o he endency o p io i ise eac i e p epa edness ins ead o inc easing secu i y h ough p e en ion, an icipa ion, and o esigh . They ha e wa ned abou he unin ended nega i e consequences o he inc easing esponsibilisa ion o ulne able communi ies and local ac o s as he subjec s o hei own a e and secu i y. Resilience poli ics has also been associa ed wi h he p ocess o neolibe alisa ion and aus e i y poli ics; ends ha can also be challenges o secu i y go e nance and leade ship models (Joseph, 2013). Finally, c i ics o esilience poli ics ha e also no ed some esilience app oaches seem o ea c ises almos as desi able expe iences local g oups can use as aluable lessons o ( e)build cohesion and he adap i e capaci ies o hei communi ies (Tie ney, 2015). These obse a ions on he da k side o esilience o e s uden s o leade ship and managemen a good example o how cu en ends in s a egic hinking can also be app oached wi h c i ical and e hical delibe a ion. Con es ing T adi ional Secu i y Men ali ies Resilience is usually de ined as he la en abili y o sys ems, indi iduals, communi ies, and o ganisa ions o (i) wi hs and he e ec s o majo dis up ions, (ii) main ain one’s abili y o ac amid a c isis, and (iii) bounce back om a c isis and use he expe ience o inc ease one’s adap abili y in he u u e (see B and & Jax, 2007). As a no el secu i y men ali y – as a se o ideas ha makes claims abou how secu i y is alued and achie ed (Wood & Shea ing, 2007, p. 7)— esilience challenges some o he adi ional s a e-cen ic secu i y men ali ies such as hose o de ence, p o ec ion, and p e en ion. In he secu i y men ali y based on he p imacy o de ence, he 73 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience ocus o go e nance is on sa egua ding he e i o ial in eg i y and con inui y o key socie al unc ions o he na ion s a e (ex e nal secu i y). In he case o p o ec ion and p e en ion, he ocus o go e nance is ei he on social, economic, and poli ical subs uc u es. These co ela e wi h he le el o human de elopmen o on p o iding in e nal secu i y and o de h ough puni i e ac ions, policing and o he de e ing echnologies and p ac ices. When examined h ough he logic o de ence, he main secu i y h ea s a e usually pe cei ed o be posed by o he s a e ac o s o o he ela i ely o ganised collec i e en i ies o poli ies. In he logic o p o ec ion, he main h ea s a e pe cei ed o s em om s uc u al dis o ions such as po e y, inequali y, and o he cul u al p ac ices ha cause s uc u al iolence. Finally, in he logic o p e en ion, secu i y policy ocuses mo e on he gene al wel a e o socie y and i s o de liness. P edominan h ea s a e usually pe cei ed o s em om o ganised illegal ac i i ies o speci ic socie al dis o ions ha endange domes ic o de and he sense o secu i y, such as he p ocess o poli ical adicalisa ion. The secu i y men ali y based on esilience, by con as , emphasises he adical openness and unce ain na u e o he h ea en i onmen in an age o inc easing complexi y (Jun unen & Hy önen, 2014). Thus, he p ima y objec i e o esilience poli ics is no o enhance he obus ness o c i ical in as uc u es (e.g. ene gy ne wo ks), no does esilience poli ics ely pu ely on physical echnologies o coe cion (e.g. mili a y o police o ces). Ins ead, i emphasises he need o inc ease he men al and physical adap abili y o indi iduals, communi ies, he p i a e sec o , and ci il socie y o ace unp edic able, e en ine i able h ea s. Resilience poli ics aims o enhance he unc ionali y o socie y. Tha is, o main ain he co e pu poses o socie ies du ing c ises due o he igh coupling o socie al unc ions wi h he inc easing complexi y and ulne abili y o mode n physical in as uc u e (Pu siainen, 2018, p. 633). The main di e ences be ween he logics o de ence, p o ec ion, p e en ion, and esilience in ligh o secu i y go e nance a e illus a ed in Table 1. These logics a e u he elabo a ed h ough i e dimensions: who o wha he e e en objec o secu i y go e nance is, wha kinds o h ea pe cep ions he logic elies on, who he p ima y secu i y ac o s (p o ide s o secu i y) a e, how he agenda o secu i y policy is 74 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience o mula ed, and how he ole o secu i y policy is unde s ood in ela ion o he no mal unning o poli ics. REFERENT OBJECT OF SECURITY GOVERNANCE DOMINANT THREAT PERCEPTIONS KEY SECURITY AGENTS SECURITY POLICY AGENDA (STATED OR IMPLICIT) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICS AND SECURITY DEFENCE Te i o ial in eg i y o he s a e and bo de s; c i ical in as uc u e and con inui y o s a e unc ions Fea and unce ain y caused by o he s a es o o he wise highly o ganised poli ical ac o s; con lic s be ween s a e ac o s De ence o ces and o he key ac o s p o ec ing e i o ial in eg i y and he con inui y o key s a e unc ions and in e nal o de The in en ions o ( a ional s a e) ac o s can be in luenced h ough he p ac ices o ex e nal de e ence, alliance poli ics, powe p ojec ion, cos ly signalling, e c� Secu i y issues end o be sepa a ed om o he socie al p ocesses and no mal poli ical o de ; secu i y as he ealm o excep ional; enemy images migh p e ail PROTECTION Vulne able indi iduals, g oups, and communi ies Poli ical, economic, and social s uc u es ha cause inequali y and su e ing; global wa ming, esou ce sca ci y, and dep i a ion; in as a e e hnic con lic s Local go e nmen s ( esponsibili y o p o ec ); in e na ional and nongo e nmen al ac o s p o iding humani a ian assis ance and in e en ions Explici ambi ion o emo e he s uc u al sou ces o insecu i y and ee he su e ing om ha m Secu i y issues a e comp ehensi ely “nes ed” in he socioeconomic s uc u es o he socie y and cul u e; s a e-d i en secu i y conce ns a e o en poli icised PREVENTION Poli ical, social, and public o de and he wel a e o socie y O ganised c ime and iolen ex emism; illegal immig a ion and human a icking; e o ism and adicalisa ion; c ime, iolence, and dis u bances o public o de in gene al Law en o cemen ac o s such as police, eme gency se ice, and o he s a e ac o s; also, inc easingly, social secu i y ac o s, p i a e companies, and communi ies Inclusi e “paci ica ion” o he socie y h ough a mix u e o wel a e policies and c ime p e en ion, including coun e e o ism, isible policing, and law en o cemen Poli ical legi imacy and au ho i y o he secu i y p o ide s is cen al, bu o he wise, he ela ionship be ween secu i y and poli ics is ambiguous and con es ed RESILIENCE P ocesses main aining he cohesion and e e yday unc ioning o socie y Unp edic able nonlinea h ea s such as en i onmen al haza ds and o he a ious “wicked p oblems”; blu ing o ex e nal and in e nal sphe es o secu i y Ci il socie y, local communi ies, p i a e sec o , and e en ually also indi idual ci izens; go e nmen go e ning “ om a dis ance” To s eng hen indi iduals’ and socie ies’ au onomic capaci ies o adap a ion, eco e y, and e o m Unclea : educes he need o ely on a icula ed h ea s and enemy images ypical o he logic o de ence, bu inc eases secu i isa ion o he socie al ab ic TABLE 1: Fou logics o men ali ies o secu i y policy (see Hy önen & Jun unen, 2016; Vi a, 2013a) 75 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience The assumed echnological and socie al complexi y o he so-called “ isk socie y” indica es challenging imes o adi ional op-down models o secu i y go e nance, leade ship, and managemen , bo h wi hin and be ween so e eign en i ies. E ans and Reid (2014) e en sugges secu i y go e nance based on esilience is an in i a ion o lea n o li e li e mo e dange ously – no sa ely. The esponsibili y o p o ide o inc ease esilience seems o di use o an inc easing numbe o ac o s o nodes. The ole o ci il socie y, p i a e ac o s, and g ass oo s mo emen s is on he ise. Tha said, some schola s claim his has led o he esponsibilisa ion o indi iduals and communi ies wi hou a ue ansi ion o powe o esou ces o pa icipa e in he s a egic p ocesses ha de ine he conc e e p ac ices and goals o secu i y go e nance (Glad el e , 2018; S a k & Taylo , 2014; Tie ney, 2015). O he s emphasise ha go e nance app oaches based on esilience ha e he po en ial o e e se he old op-down leade ship p ocesses and gi e ci izens and communi ies mo e agency o e hei own poli ical and social condi ions. Howell (2015, p. 69) ap ly sums up his idea: As a echnique o go e nance, esilience wo ks p ima ily h ough an a emp o enhance i s a ge s: a mo e ambi ious aim han esponsibilisa ion� This, I suspec , is ue whe e e esilience in ol es a concep o no jus “bouncing back” ( om disas e s, a acks, c ises, e c�), bu o “bouncing o wa d”� This ype o unde s anding concei es o esilience as a s a egy o inc ease he capabili y o indi iduals and communi ies o ac in an inc easingly au onomous and independen manne wi hou he need o ely excessi ely on s a e au ho i ies. This esona es wi h he idea ha secu i y is ac ualised in a ious socie al nodes, including “o ganic” nodes o leade ship a he g ass oo s le el. This line o hinking acknowledges ha he adi ional leade ship and go e nance models based on a linea unde s anding o how e en s un old a e no su icien by hemsel es. The unde s anding o leade ship as a ela ional concep is also impo an in ligh o he ac ualisa ion o di e en esilience s a egies. To sum up, he e seems o be a he wide ag eemen among secu i y schola s ha he e is no single de ini ion o a ge o applica ion o esilience poli ics. They end o speak abou esilience in he plu al o 82 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience Bu on, M. (2008). Doing secu i y: C i ical e lec ions and an agenda o change. Basings oke, England: Palg a e-MacMillan. Buzan, B. (1983). People, s a es and ea : The na ional secu i y p oblem in in e na ional ela ions. London, England: Ha es e Whea shea . Chandle , D. (2017). Resilience. In M. Dunn Ca el y & T. Balzacq (Eds.), Rou ledge handbook o secu i y s udies (pp. 436–446). Abingdon, England: Rou ledge. Co y, O. (2014). F om de ense o esilience: En i onmen al secu i y beyond neo-libe alism. In e na ional Poli ical Sociology, 8(3), 256–274. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ips.12057 C oss, M. K. D. (2016). The EU global s a egy and diplomacy. Con empo a y Secu i y Policy, 37(3), 402–413. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13523260.2016.1237820 Dunn Ca el y, M., Kau man, M., & Søby K is ensen, K. (2015). Resilience and (in)secu i y: P ac ices, subjec s, empo ali ies. Secu i y Dialogue, 46(1), 3–14. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0967010614559637 Eu opean Council. (1999). P esidency conclusions. Re ie ed om h p://www.consilium.eu opa.eu/media/21059/ ampe e-eu opean- council-p esidency-conclusions.pd Eu opean Ex e nal Ac ion Se ice. (2016). Sha ed ision, common ac ion: A s onge Eu ope: A global s a egy o he Eu opean Union’s o eign and secu i y policy. Re ie ed om h ps://eeas.eu opa.eu/a chi es/ docs/ op_s o ies/pd /eugs_ e iew_web.pd E ans, B., & Reid, J. (2014). Resilien li e: The a o li ing dange ously. Camb idge, England: Poli y P ess. Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essen ially con es ed concep s. P oceedings o he A is o elian Socie y, 56, 167–198. Glad el e , S. (2018). The poli ics o pa icipa ion in communi y-based ea ly wa ning sys ems: Building esilience o p eca i y h ough local oles in dissemina ing disas e in o ma ion. In e na ional Jou nal o Disas e Risk Reduc ion, 30, 120–131. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ijd .2018.02.022 Hobbes, T. (1999). Le ia han, eli, Ki kollisen ja al iollisen yh eiskunnan aines, muo o ja al a [Le ia han, o , The ma e , o me, and powe o a commonweal h ecclesias icall and ci ill]. T ansla ed by T. Aho. Tampe e, Finland: Vas apaino. (O iginal wo k published 1651) 83 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience Howell, A. (2015). Resilience as enhancemen : Go e nmen ali y and poli ical economy beyond ‘ esponsibilisa ion’. Poli ics, 35(1), 67–71. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467-9256.12080 Huysmans, J. (2004). Minding excep ions: The poli ics o insecu i y and libe al democ acy. Con empo a y Poli ical Theo y, 3(3), 321–341. h ps://doi.o g/10.1057/palg a e.cp .9300137 Hy önen, A.-E., & Jun unen, T. (2016). Sopeu u a yh eiskun a ja esilienssi: u allisuuspolii inen analyysi [Adap able socie y and esilience: Secu i y poli ical analysis]. Poli iikka, 58(3), 206–223. Re ie ed om h p://u n. i/URN:NBN: i:ELE-1778742 Johns on, L., & Shea ing, C. (2003). Go e ning secu i y. Abingdon, England: Rou ledge. Joseph, J. (2013). Resilience as embedded neolibe alism: A go e nmen ali y app oach. Resilience: In e na ional Policies, P ac ices and Discou ses, 1(1), 38–52. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/21693293.2013.765741 Jun unen, T., & Hy önen, A.-E. (2014). Resilience, secu i y and he poli ics o p ocesses. Resilience: In e na ional Policies, P ac ices and Discou ses, 2(3), 195–206. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/21693293.2014.948323 Me hmann, C., & Oels, A. (2015). F om ‘ ea ing’ o ‘empowe ing’ clima e e ugees: Go e ning clima e induced mig a ion in he name o esilience. Secu i y Dialogue, 46(1), 51–68. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0967010614552548 Mälksoo, M. (2016). F om he ESS o he EU global s a egy: Ex e nal policy, in e nal pu pose. Con empo a y Secu i y Policy, 37(3), 374–388. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13523260.2016.1238245 Pu siainen, C. (2018). C i ical in as uc u e esilience: A No dic model in he making? In e na ional Jou nal o Disas e Risk Reduc ion, 27, 632–341. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ijd .2017.08.006 Pyc o , A., & Ba ollas, C. (2014). Applying complexi y heo y: Whole sys ems app oaches o c iminal jus ice and social wo k. B is ol, England: Policy P ess. Rosa, E. A., Renn, O., & McC igh , A. M. (2014). The isk socie y e isi ed: Social heo y and go e nance. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Uni e si y P ess. 84 Leading Change in a Complex Wo ld: T ansdisciplina y Pe spec i es Secu i y Dynamics: Mul ilaye ed Secu i y Go e nance in an Age o Complexi y, Unce ain y, and Resilience Schmid , J. (2015). In ui i ely neolibe al? Towa ds a c i ical unde s anding o esilience go e nance. Eu opean Jou nal o In e na ional Rela ions, 21(2), 402–426. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1354066114537533 S a k, A., & Taylo , M. (2014). Ci izen pa icipa ion, communi y esilience and c isis-managemen policy. Aus alian Jou nal o Poli ical Science, 49(2), 300–315. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/10361146.2014.899966 Tie ney, K. (2015). Resilience and he neolibe al p ojec : Discou ses, c i iques, p ac ices – and Ka ina. Ame ican Beha io al Scien is , 59(10), 1327–1342. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0002764215591187 Tucci, N. (2016). The making o he EU global s a egy. Con empo a y Secu i y Policy, 37(3), 461–472. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13523260.2016.1232559 Vi a, S. (2006). Secu i y. In E. McLaughlin & J. Muncie (Eds.), The SAGE dic iona y o c iminology (pp. 371–374). London, England: SAGE. Vi a, S. (2013a). Go e ning u ban secu i y in Finland: Towa ds a Eu opean model. Eu opean Jou nal o C iminology, 10(3), 341–353. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1477370812473536 Vi a, S. (2013b). Secu i y. In E. McLaughlin & J. Muncie (Eds.), The SAGE dic iona y o c iminology (pp. 312–315). London, England: SAGE. Vi a, S., & B ande s, M. (2016). Legi ima e secu i y? Unde s anding he con ingencies o secu i y and delibe a ion. B i ish Jou nal o C iminology, 56(6), 1146–1164. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/bjc/azw024 Vi a, S., & Taponen, J. (2017). Policing egimes in ansi ion in he No dic coun ies. In E. De oe, A. Edwa ds, & P. Ponsae s (Eds.), Policing Eu opean me opolises: The poli ics o secu i y in ci y- egions (pp. 121–143). Abingdon, England: Rou ledge. Vuo i, J. (2017). Cons uc i ism and secu i iza ion s udies. In M. Dunn Ca el y & T. Balzacq (Eds.), The Rou ledge handbook o secu i y s udies (pp. 64–74). London, England: Rou ledge. Webe , M. (1991). F om Max Webe : Essays in Sociology. T ansla ed and edi ed by H. H. Ge h & C. W igh Mills. London, England: Rou ledge. (O iginal wo k published 1946) Wood, J., & Shea ing, C. (2007). Imagining secu i y. Po land, OR: Willan. Zedne , L. (2009). Secu i y. Abingdon, England: Rou ledge.