Insecurity: The Frame of Development
A paper I wrote which I think you may find interesting
For many in the global south, insecurity means something more threatening than a lack of self-confidence. It reflects danger and fear, potentially from one’s government, from stepping outside one’s door, or from within one’s own household. A citizen’s insecurity may be caused by various reasons, but the consequences of the lack of citizen security threaten a country’s ability to develop. The political, economic, and social insecurities of a country encompassall development goals and issues by being the root of the issue and the solution. Moving forward with development in the global south, citizens’ security is crucial in successful development projects and should be the overarching discourse. As a goal, a developed country has reached a point of security by safely protecting its citizens from structural violence, crime, and social insecurities.
While there is much discourse related to vulnerability and capabilities, it is important to realize that security encompasses these arguments. If citizens are capable and not vulnerable, then they are secure. The term vulnerability describes citizens who are easily susceptible to harm in regards to famines, lack of nutrition, environmental threats, political violence, and so on. On the other hand, the concept of citizens’ capabilities refers to whether they have the ability to impact their surroundings. The idea of capabilities is similar to the idea of “the pursuit of happiness” in the United States constitution, that it is every citizen’s right to be capable of pursuing a better life. Amartya Sen places a large emphasis on the importance of capabilities by saying that poverty is the deprivation of capabilities. He takes the idea of capabilities in relation to freedoms a step further by saying that a citizen must be involved in the processes of “freedom of actions” and be able to access the “actual opportunities.” (Sen 17) But security refers to a combination of vulnerability and capabilities, as a secure citizen is not susceptible to harm (violence, crime, and other barriers to their human rights) while having the capability to better their life and have the kind of access that Amartya Sen presents. Thus, it can be reasoned that the goal of development is to first conciliate a citizens’ vulnerability while giving them capabilities. Hence, development is about solving citizens’ insecurity.
In essence a developed country is secure. The ideal secure country would have low crime rates including murder, petty crime, and sexual violence. In addition, the country would be free from structural violence, gender inequality, and malnutrition, while providing medical attention, and of emergency relief, and a plethora of other issues. Solving these basic security problems would create a secure citizenry who can live without fear since their surroundings are geared toward supporting their capabilities and ending their vulnerability. This secure country mirrors what many conceive as a developed country. While one can argue that many “developed” countries have not entirely solved these issues, there is a standard of safety, which sets many countries far above the majority located in the global south. For example, the United States has areas with high crime rates, but the probability of a mass genocide or gang takeover is next to zero.
When looking at “developed” countries it is important to examine the metrics , that deem them “developed.” Some scholars view development as economic growth, or human development, or even citizens’ freedoms. While many scholars and agencies view development in different terms, they all are looking for security. Three commonly known metrics for development are GDP, HDI, and Amartya Sen’s idea of development as freedom. Each metric believes that when the goals they outline are fulfilled, development is progressing. For example, the GDP of Mexico is currently valued at $1.04 trillion dollars. Relying on GDP as a sole metric, the country is not developed compared to the United States, who boasts of a GDP of $14.58 trillion (“World Economic Outlook Database September 2011”). According to this scale, Mexico should make more strides towards increasing their economic growth. However, this one-sided approach leaves out many other factors such as the abilities of the people who make up the country. The HDI (Human Development Index), a development metric designed by UN economists to incorporate the human aspect of development, attempts to take into account citizen’s capabilities. According to Mahbub ul Haq, the founder of Human Development report:
The basic purpose of development is to enlarge people’s choices….The objective of development is to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives.
HDI aims at this “enlarge(ment) (of) people’s choices” by taking into account life expectancy at birth, mean years of schooling, expected years of schooling, and gross national income per capita.
However, even this metric leaves out parts of the capabilities of the individual as addressed by Amartya Sen who defined development as freedom. Sen says that the basic development idea is “advancing the richness of human life.” Sen continues to argue that through the expansion of citizen’s freedoms, all development issues can be solved from economic issues to social issues to political issues. He splits up the idea of Freedoms into processes and opportunities that refer to being involved in the processes of freedom in addition to the opportunities a citizen has (Sen 17). By giving the citizens the power to define their own futures in a democratic way, development will flourish (Human Development Concept). All of these metrics define development as moving forward for the betterment of a country, but have very different approaches to measuring it. However, they all address an aspect of security. GDP addresses economic insecurities, while HDI addresses social insecurities, and Sen’s approach addresses initially addresses political insecurities. It can be reasoned, that these major metrics all measure security in some way. However, there is one metric missing.
A key aspect of security deals with fear. It’s a subjective human emotion not calculable in a spreadsheet, but the circumstances that can create fear are measurable. The development and implementation of a metric calculating citizen’s safety is key to moving forward with development. A citizen’s safety should be a primary issue for international development agencies and scholars because without a citizen’s safety all development projects are at risk. The 2011 World Bank World Development Report stated “Some 1.5 billion people live in countries affected by repeated cycles of political and criminal violence, and no low-income fragile or conflict-affected country has yet to achieve a single MDG (Millenium Goal)” (“WB Urges Countries to Focus on Citizen Security”). Hypothetically, the Mexican government decides to boost their GDP by creating a corn refinery, but if all of the workers don’t feel safe enough to leave their homes due to riots then the construction is halted. Personal safety trumps development. Say the UN wishes to build schools for girls in Afghanistan to encourage higher HDI, but the girls don’t feel safe enough to go because it will make them a target for the Taliban. Safety wins again. Without the safety of citizens, all plans for development, whether economic, political, or social, will fail. World Bank President Robert B. Zoelick Zoelick, recently “called for the harmonization of security and development to break the cycles of fragility and violence affecting more than one billion people.” In agreement, development scholars and agencies need to understand the value in harmonizing development and security when they are one in the same.
Now in order to fully understand an insecure citizen, it’s important to analyze current citizens and their situation. A citizen’s insecurity is not better exemplified than by Somaly Mam, a sex trafficking survivor. Somaly was born into an ethnic minority in Cambodia where she was insecure on all levels. Her village had no political voice, her surroundings were economically insecure, and she lacked family, contributing to her social insecurity. Out of these circumstances, an old man posing as her grandfather told her that he would secure a job and a new life for her in his family. Somaly jumped at the opportunity to be financially and emotionally secure, but the man was not her grandfather at all. Because of the dire economic state of Cambodia, an economy of sex has emerged, based on sexually exploiting young girls. Somaly soon experienced the vile workings of this industry immediately after leaving her village with her “grandfather.”
While Cambodia is undeniably underdeveloped there are political, economic, and social insecurities, which repress any hope for change. Political corruption trickles down to an unresponsive police force, a lack of sustainable industry creates high unemployment causing people to look towards violence for money, and a lack of education to create an awareness of citizen’s basic human rights all contribute to Cambodia’s insecurity. Somaly was in a vulnerable position, with her capabilities taken away from her since she was born. She embodies an insecure citizen. Before, no police saved her from the brothel as she was raped multiple times a day, nor do they save many vulnerable girls today. The sex trade today is a product of insecure financial futures, insecure social structures, and an insecure political frame where there is no room for those affected to voice their pain (Mam).
While the core of insecurity is violence, it is important to look at the bigger issues, which cause the violence, rather than the specific definition. As John Gultang says,
Everything now hinges on making a definition of ‘violence’. This is a highly eneviable task….However, it is not so important to arrive at anything like the definition, or the typology – for there are obviously many types of violence. More important is to indicate theoretically significant dimensions of violence that can lead thinking, research, and potentially, action, towards the most important problems
When analyzing insecurity and looking for solutions, it is important to take the examples of violence as a reflection of larger issues within a country. In Somaly Mam’s case, she was ultimately trafficked into prostitution due to an unstable economy where stable jobs are hard to come by. But if one had to define certain kinds of violence, Gultang defines violence with a social structure as structural violence (Galtung 5). As James Gilligan emphasizes in his book Violence, Any approach to a theory of violence needs to begin with a look at the structural violence of this country” (Gilligan 191). An example of violence with a social structure can be seen in the Rwandan genocide.
While sex trafficking goes on unseen by the world at times, genocides are in the public’s eye and have massive consequences on citizen’s security. The Rwandan genocide was a cultural massacre that occurred between the Hutus and the Tutsis. Prior to the genocide, Rwanda was the ideal location to receive international aid. As Philip Gourevitch reflects,
If you were a bureaucrat with a foreign-aid budget to unload, and your professional success was to be measured by your ability not to lie or gloss too much when you filed happy statistical reports at the end of each fiscal year, Rwanda was the ticket.
However, the ethnic tensions between the Hutu government and the Tutsi minority came to a boiling point. The Hutu government systematically calculated that “they could kill 1,000 people every twenty minutes.” Over the course of 100 days, “approximately 500,000 to 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu were slaughtered.” Clearly, “the genocide was caused by a system that is built in structural violence.” This systematic state-controlled structural violence created the most overwhelming kind of political insecurity a country will know. Governments targeting citizens not because of what they do, but who they are, threatens any development or sense of security. The country’s political security is threatened when state run violence and intimidation are used widespread. Amartya Sen would agree that through structural violence, there is no hope for development as freedom (Uvin, Howard 4-8).
However, not only is political security is threatened, but social and economic security are equally affected. The country is put on standstill due to mass violence and an extermination, and all former development is destroyed as weapons destroy homes, hospitals, roads, and all kinds of infrastructure. But most importantly the people’s safety is at risk, from cross-fire or because they are targets; all Rwandans were affected and many fled, creating a large refugee problem. For many Rwandans their social security is affected, as t they didn’t know if their village was to be raided, their house flattened, and their children murdered; this is the strongest sense of fear a citizen can know. They have had their capabilities snatched from them by the state and just remain vulnerable; they embody insecurity. Currently, Rwanda works on getting back on the development track, with the citizen’s safety the first idea on their mind (Uvin, Howard 4-8). However, according to an article about the World Bank and Citizens Security, “Deaths from civil war are now a quarter of what they were in the 1980s, replaced in many countries by other forms of organized crime and political violence that hold back development (“World Bank Shifts Focus to Security in Poor Nations”).
While political violence happens all around a country, the violence just beyond one’s door, crime, can be creating just as strong of a feeling of insecurity. Criminal violence is something that most of us are far less aware of in the United States. New Yorkers everyday find policemen checking subway cars and offering advice on how to stay safe. But for the people of Mexico, fear of crime is taken to another level. The crime of Mexico is categorized under structural violence as well due to the social structure of gangs and the organization of mass crime across the country and even into the United States through drugs. In “2007 there were 2561 drug-related deaths in Mexico and by 2008, this number had increased to somewhere between 5620 and 6756.” This statistic reflects the country as a whole that is affected daily by criminal activity, usually related to drugs. While Mexico’s crime spans from drug trafficking to rape to abductions, a major source of crime in Mexico comes from drug cartels that are a major cause of recent spikes in “theft, fraud, extortion and kidnapping” (Widner).
Unfortunately, the situation is exacerbated because of government corruption. With police being the most common executers of public safety, the protection from crime seems to ride in their hands. However, as Widner pointed out, the violence is too much even for the police as it “is not uncommon to hear an officer say, ‘I’m not going to risk my life for a handful of pesos and leave my family destitute.’ We can take that to mean that the police prefer not to enforce the law and, in the prevailing context of corruption, would rather take a bribe than a bullet.” Many see more police as an answer to solving citizen’s security especially in relation to crime, but one must remember that police are citizens are well. When police safety is threatened, a country must recognize that there are larger issues to solve. Also, if an entire police force is corrupted, it contributes to a higher level of citizen insecurity as the citizens have no one to trust and report their fears (Widner).
An underlying cause of such high crime in Mexico is attributed to the economic instability of Mexico in collaboration with the drug demand in the United States. Drugs are a financially lucrative industry to be involved in, but competition doesn’t foster economic growth, it fosters deaths. Crime is used as a business tool for drug cartels, or a way to make a living as “the benefit to the murderer may be the elimination of a rival. Alternatively, the benefit to the murderer or hit man may be cash from the cartel.” This in turn affects citizen’s security in a social way as they are targeted (Widner).
The consequences of such high criminal violence takes a huge toll on the economic prospects of Mexico. The World Bank Report says that “Conflict and violence have a major impact on economic and social development,” saying that unemployment was the “overwhelmingly most important factor.” (“World Bank Shifts Focus to Security in Poor Nations”) Looking to nurture non-violence sustainable industry is possible due to the available agriculture sector and amount of Mexicans in need of jobs, but crime stands in the way. The criminal activity all over Mexico hurts all forms of industry. Citizens get caught up in the violence and have their social security affected. The insecurity surrounding criminal violence stems from fear of death, abduction, thievery, and for families, a fear that their children will become a part of the drug industry. Crime creates massive economic insecurity, while perpetuating government corruption and political insecurity. While all citizens are caught up in drug related violence, it creates large-scale social insecurity as well.
James Gilligan argues that the “deadliest form of violence is poverty,” which is categorized under social insecurities. He goes onto say that
Every fifteen years, on the average, as many people die because of relative poverty as would be killed in a nuclear war that caused 232 million deaths; and every single year, two or three time as many people die from poverty throughout the world as were killed by the Nazi genocide of the Jews over a six year period.
The statistics are shocking and categorized under social securities, which are heavily related to capabilities and vulnerability in relation to poverty. As poverty is a type of violence, eradicating poverty would eliminate a large source of insecurity. As the International Labor Organization outlines, especially in Africa, Social insecurity weaknesses can be attributed to a “lack of access to social protections,” “governance deficiencies”, and an “effective lack of conceptual and normative orientation.” Social security issues relate to what would happen inside of the household, and the insecurities citizens face. From gender inequality to a lack of health care to even a lack of basic needs such as clean water, social insecurities are the focus of many current development projects (“In Africa: Social Security Department”). Please see my colleague Lexi St. John’s paper regarding social security and its importance in regards to the discourse of Insecurity.
The small amount of research and emphasis on citizen’s security in the community of International Development scholars and agencies is alarming. When looking at the development of a country one must keep security in mind as a goal and as an agent. The political, economic, and social insecurity state of a country can dissolve development projects. Hence, when moving forward with development of the global south, citizen’s security is a crucial factor in not only successful projects but in successful development. It can be reasoned that development’s goal is security and development’s goals are achieved through security. Thus, the overarching discourse should be framed in the idea of solving citizen’s insecurity with the idea of a developed country reaching a point where citizens feel safe politically, economically, and socially. As shown by Rwanda and Mexico, everything from structural violence to crime can undermine development intiatives from industry to human rights. However when looking to solve citizen’s insecurity, it is crucial to focus on the important issues raised that are caused by various acts of violence, as they reflect the key areas of improvement and attention in a country.
Works Cited
Widner, Benjamin, Manuel L. Reyes-Loya, Carl E. Enomoto. “Crimes and Violence in Mexico: Evidence from Panel Data.” The Social Science Journal 48.4 (2011): 604. Proquest. Web. 5 Dec 2011.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0362331911000346)
Galtung, Johan. “Violence, Peace, And Peace Research.” Journal of Peace Research 6.3 (1969): 167-91. JSTOR. Web. 6 Dec. 2011. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/422690.pdf?acceptTC=true>.
Gilligan, James. Violence: Our Deadly Epidemic and Its Causes. New York: G.P. Putnam, 1996. Print.
“The Human Development Concept.” Human Development Reports. United Nations. Web. 13 Dec. 2011. <http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/>.
“In Africa: Social Security Department.” International Labour Organization. ILO. Web. 15 Dec. 2011. <http://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/secsoc/projects/africa.htm>.
Mam, Somaly, and Ruth Marshall. The Road of Lost Innocence. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2008. Print.
Sen, Amartya. Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf, 1999. Print.
Uvin, Peter, and Howard Adelman. “[Aiding Violence: The Development Enterprise in Rwanda].” Books in Canada 1999: 4-8. ABI/INFORM Complete; ProQuest Central; ProQuest Education Journals; ProQuest Research Library; ProQuest Social Science Journals. Web. 13 Dec. 2011 .
“WB Urges Countries to Focus on Citizen Security.” AllAfrica.com: n/a. ABI/INFORM Complete; ProQuest Central; ProQuest Education Journals; ProQuest Research Library; ProQuest Social Science Journals. Apr 12 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.
“World Bank Shifts Focus to Security in Poor Nations.” Wall Street Journal (Online): n/a. ABI/INFORM Complete; National Newspapers Premier; ProQuest Central; ProQuest Education Journals; ProQuest Research Library; ProQuest Social Science Journals; The Wall Street Journal. 11Apr 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011 .
“World Economic Outlook Database September 2011.” International Monetary Fund. Sept. 2011. Web. 9 Dec. 2011. <http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2011/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?sy=1980>.
