安全的再定义及其边界

发布时间：2019-06-25 08:39

【摘要】：安全的认知与理念是社会历史发展的产物,安全的定义及外延等在社会科学语境中均缺少广泛的共识。但自20世纪七八十年代以来,大体可以分为两种流派与路径——即坚持国家为中心、以军事—政治为核心的传统派,与扩展安全指涉对象及增加经济、社会与环境等安全领域的扩展深化派。传统派批评安全概念的扩展导致安全概念的日益泛化和边界无限延伸,导致其失去作为分析工具的效用和价值及研究与应对重心上的分散与失焦。而扩展深化派则认为,传统安全论者的偏颇,忽略了非军事因素对安全的影响加剧,全球化加速,与多种行为体竞逐的国际新现实。解决两个学派与两种路径的冲突,关键在于再定义安全及其边界,并进而把握其本质特征。
[Abstract]:The cognition and idea of safety is the product of social and historical development, and the definition and extension of safety lack extensive consensus in the context of social science. However, since the 1970s and 1980s, it can be divided into two schools and paths-the traditional school of adhering to the state as the center, the traditional faction with military-political as the core, the expansion of the object of security and the expansion of the security fields such as economy, society and environment. The expansion of the concept of security criticism by the traditional school leads to the increasing generalization of the concept of security and the infinite extension of the boundary, resulting in the loss of its utility and value as an analytical tool and the dispersion and defocusing of the center of gravity of research and response. However, the extended deepening school believes that the bias of traditional security theorists ignores the new international reality that the influence of non-military factors on security is aggravated, globalization accelerates and competes with a variety of actors. To solve the conflict between the two schools and the two paths, the key lies in redefining security and its boundary, and grasping its essential characteristics.
【作者单位】：浙江大学非传统安全与和平发展研究中心;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大攻关项目《中国非传统安全威胁识别、评估及应对》(12&ZD099)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D815.5

【参考文献】