Human security and women’s security reality in Northwest Russia - Environmental and Human Security in the Arctic - page 244

subjective views on security. Being concerned with subjectivity and secu-
rity evokes different opinions, interests and values. What is at stake here is a
struggle between a positivist approach to human security that demands meas-
urements and substantial delimitation of the concept, and an epistemology
that questions what and who defines security in the life-world of individuals.
In terms of knowledge of security, human security addressed from the bottom
up therefore is the attempt to keep a technical or technocratic understanding
of security at a distance (Büger 2006; Wibben 2008).
By prioritizing the role of ad hoc interactions based on personal network
connections in security as well as the role of the victims' process of re-describ-
ing self, the complexity of local security production has been emphasized.
Each individual woman may choose differently in this process. This points,
however, to another important, but under-reflected, aspect in regard to
security and security policies that is implicit in the human security debate:
de-militarized security practices. In regard to empirical studies on human
security, a particular concern is the identification of a security issue. Who
identifies what human security is in a specific empirical setting? The delib-
erative definition of an issue as a matter of security is a practice considered
particularly problematic by a group of human security critics termed post-
positivist by Ewan (2007). The argument is that processes of securitization
elevate issues on to an emergency agenda, which implies exceptional politics,
in particular by military means (Wæver 1995). Human security issues are
best kept off this agenda, argues Buzan (2004), because they are more effec-
tively addressed by normal politics. Such a perspective acknowledges military
security policies and neglects the existence of alternative security strategies.
In regard to women's security in Northwest Russia, such a perspective disre-
gards the security practices of not only non-state crisis centres, but a plethora
of actors that engage in security practices pertaining to individual and com-
munity concerns. However, there are also differing views on the issue, and we
see this in the specific context of Northwest Russia:
The understanding of social problems, and this also characterizes the
problem of women, is completely different among state and societal [non-
governmental] organizations. The state understanding [of the problem]
is [based on] strict instructions. For example, a woman receives help from
the state if she has a small income or if she is raising a child. That is, there
are specific parameters on the basis of which they help her. Of course
that is not the way it ought to be. And non-governmental organizations,
they don't do that. For them it is not important how much she earns. For
them it is important what kind of problem she has, that she contacted
them [the non-governmental organization/crisis centre] with that prob-
lem [and that] she needs help.
(Informant 9/2006)