Description
Securitisation studies is a vibrant, dynamic subfield which has provided vital insight into the processes of security (de)construction. Despite securitisation theory being subject to an ocean of critique, development and refinement, Balzacq et al. (2016) note that the ‘relevant criteria for adjudicating whether a development is an instance of securitization’ remains ‘a very significant problem’ in the literature. Whether securitisation happens or not (and to what extent and in what respects) is, arguably, the most important part of any study of (de)securitisation processes. A lack of clarity here is, therefore, untenable. This article addresses this gap, drawing on a series of core debates in securitisation studies alongside insights from Public Policy and Ontological Security Studies to develop an innovative heuristic framework to systematically analyse different types/dimensions of securitisation success and failure, as well as the grey areas in-between them. Disentangling success of the process of security (de)construction from the implications of such (de)construction – for agents, subjects and referents of securitisation – the article elucidates the complex, multi-dimensional and contested nature of securitisation success. Our original ‘success heuristic’ aims to guide rigorous empirical research and help systematise hitherto unworkable cross-case comparisons, while also productively advancing broader theoretical debates in securitisation research.
