Human Security
A Tool for Better Solutions
Mara Simane – LAPAS
Poor and Vulnerable Populations 2007—10
EE CA FSU Turkey
IMF WEO
databases and WB
staff calculations
Economic Premise
May, 2010 nr. 12.
Under 5$ per day.
Why Human Security ?
• In time of limited funding helps determine
priorities
• Facilitates collaboration
• Puts people first
• It works with perception
• It gives answers data can’t
Definitions
Human Security – “freedom from fear and freedom
from want” (Kofi Annan)
Securitability – ability to be and feel secure, and to
reestablish a state of security and sense of
security when these have been compromised
Dimensions of Human Security
Objective
Perception
Situations
Threats
Warning Signals
Risks
Opportunities
low ------------------ securitability --------------- high
Trauma
Security Strategies
Illnesses
Lessons Learned
Suicide
Helplessness
Anxiety
Temporary Unease
Consequences
Security Threshold
Concentric Circles of Security
Individual
Family/Friends
Society/Local
National
International
Strengthening Securitability
1. Identify the individual/group
2. Identify insecurity/threats (perceived and actual)
3. Identify priority securitability factors
4. Identify security providers
5. Develop security strategies
6. Prioritize the actions based on relevance to threats
and ability to implement the actions.
Health
Security
Economic
Security
Personal
Security
Environmental
Security
7 Realms
of Human
Security
Food
Security
Community
Security
Political
Security
Poverty and Inequality in the Baltics
Absolute poverty ?
Poverty risk (after social transfers)E-stat 08
Objective
EE 19% (19-22nd)
LV 26% (27-last)
LT 20% (22-24th)
GINI EU27(31) EE(31) LV(38) LT(34)
S80/S20 EU12(5.2) EE(5.0) LV(7.3) LT(5.9)
» Shadow economy
» Non monetary support
Perceived Poverty Threats (to others)
Access to decent housing
Hot meal 1 time per day
Higher/adult education
Having medical care
Starting up a business
EE+23
EE+0
EE+6
EE+6
EE+8
LV+22
LV+24
LV+35
LV+23
LV+24
LT+18
LT+1
LT+23
LT+11
LT+15
Eurobarometer 321, 2009 “Would you say that being poor hampers very much, somewhat,
not very much or nota at all people’s chances of ? Answer “very much”
Expectations of security levels
Mainly responsible for reduction of poverty
EU
27
EE
LV
LT
EU
9
-7
-3
-3
National
53
+ 11
+ 24
+23
Local auth.
7
+2
-5
-5
NGOs
7
-6
-6
-6
Individuals
13
+6
-3
0
Eurobarometer 321, 2009
Desirable policies – National level
Desirable policy to help people out of poverty
EU
27
EE
LV
LT
Work opportun.
61
+11
+13
+14
Ensuring ec.
growth
42
+2
+16
+21
Suf and reg >
social benefits
32
+0
+8
-1
Training &
qualification
38
+ 16
- 11
+2
Eurobarometer 321, 2009
Trust of Security Levels
Tend to trust when speaking about measures in fight
against poverty
EU
27
EE
LV
LT
EU
45
+14
+8
+14
National
36
+1
-22
+9
Local auth.
50
+5
-8
-17
NGOs
63
-1
-5
-6
Individuals
57
+4
-3
-4
Eurobarometer 321, 2009
Building Securitability
1. Identify the individual/group:
2. Identify insecurity/threats (perceived and actual)
o ask people
o verify actual threats
o identify perceptions
3. Identify priority securitability factors
Building Securitability
4. Identify security providers
– perceived and potential
5. Develop security strategies
6. Prioritize the actions based on relevance to threats
and ability to implement the actions.
30,000 per day - children die of hunger and poverty
related diseases
http://endpoverty2015.org
Download

securitability