Ontological vs. societal security: same difference or distinct concepts?

Abstract

AbstractOntological security and the Copenhagen school’s societal security are both concerned with identity. While, the existing literature on ontological security has made use of the Copenhagen school’s concept of securitization, the linkage between societal and ontological security is unclear. Are they different, or does one subsume the other? This article uses the case of majority fears of minority threats to examine the difference between the two concepts. The article shows that the two are distinct—albeit complementary—concepts that explain different things in the security–identity nexus. Securitization theory explains that majorities sometimes designate minorities a threat to their chosen collective identity, while ontological security explains why individual persons—who possess multiple identities—assent to that securitization, including by agreeing to it as audiences, or by requesting it of powerful elites. The article goes on to examine the implications of this ‘ontological–societal security node’ for policymakers and practitioners.