Human Security in Cambodia: Far From Over
Human Security in Cambodia: Far From Over
复制标题
柬埔寨的人类安全：远未结束
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Alice Beban
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pou Sovachana;Alice Beban
“人的安全”概念的基础是联合国开发计划署（开发署）1994年《人类发展报告》提出的“免于恐惧”和“免于匮乏”的基本原则。“人的安全”是关于保护个人和增强个人权能。它处理对人类生存的一般威胁，并找到克服这些威胁的方法，认识到国家本身有时会对自己的人民构成威胁。本报告旨在了解柬埔寨人民如何看待和解释国际上提出的“人的安全”和“不安全”概念，以及人们可以提出哪些建议来减轻对“人的安全”的威胁。我们对不同部门的人进行了访谈和焦点小组，包括政府、学术界、民间社会、农村和城市社区、媒体、学生和佛教僧侣。我们的研究表明，当我们用人类安全的概念取代柬埔寨的安全话语时，它开启了对人权和人类发展的理解和反应的新对话。2我们认为，通过对人类安全采取广泛的方法，承认“免于恐惧的自由”，“免于匮乏的自由”，和“有尊严地生活的自由”之间的相互联系可能是相互矛盾的。目前，关于安全所指的大部分辩论都过于集中在保护或赋权上;我们的研究参与者的声音使我们认为，安全来自政府和社区之间的沟通和对话，以及“合作领导”的重要性。
The concept of human security is based on the fundamental principles of ‘freedom from fear’ and ‘freedom from want’ through the 1994 Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).1 It argues for a shift from a state-centric view of security to one that focuses on the security of every individual. Human Security is about protection and empowerment of the individual. It tackles general threats to human existence and finds ways to overcome these threats, recognizing that the state itself can at times be a threat to its own people. This report aims to understand how the internationally minted notions of human security and insecurity are perceived and interpreted by Cambodian people, and what suggestions people may offer for mitigating threats to human security. We conducted interviews and focus groups with people in diverse sectors including government, academics, civil society, rural and urban communities, media, students, and Buddhist monks. Our research suggests that when we replace the discourse of security in Cambodia with the concept of human security, it opens new conversations toward understanding and responsiveness to human rights and human development.2 We argue that the connected, multi-dimensional insecurities in Cambodia can be revealed through taking a broad approach to human security that recognizes ‘freedom from fear’, ‘freedom from want’, and ‘freedom to live in dignity’ as inter-related in ways that may be contradictory. Currently much of the debate about the referent of security is too focused on either protection or empowerment; the voices of our research participants lead us to suggest that security comes from communication and dialogue between government and communities, and the importance of ‘cooperative leadership’.