Reading Peace through the lens of Human Security: a perspective on SDG 16
Introduction
Peace is often understood, in a reductive perspective, as absence of war. Can a society or a country, where people experience poverty, discrimination and violation of fundamental human rights, be considered peaceful? This question, apparently simple, invites to rethink the real meaning of peace and to reflect on the conditions necessary to achieve it. Although the absence of conflicts remains a fundamental and necessary requirement, a peaceful context can be considered as such, only if social, political, economic and institutional conditions allow people to live with dignity.
This wider meaning emerges clearly in the Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG 16) of the United Nations 2030 Agenda, which aims at promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, where access to justice is guaranteed for everyone and where effective and accountable institutions are present. The addressed issues show how the broader ambition goes far beyond the absence of armed conflicts, recognizing concepts like peace, justice, inclusion as strictly interconnected.
In this context the meaning of human security offers an interesting perspective for exploring the meaning of peace in greater depth. Shifting the focus from the protection of states to the security of individuals, this approach encourages us to consider the multiple vulnerabilities that affect people’s everyday lives as well as reflecting on structural causes hindering the achievement of human security and lasting peace.
Evolution of the concept of security: Human Security
For much of the twentieth century, security has been mainly understood in terms of national defence and territorial integrity; however, since the end of the Cold war, its meaning has expanded in several directions1: alongside the state, the individual has become a primary referent of security, while new issues, such as poverty, environmental degradation, human rights violations, and epidemics have progressively gained importance as threats to security.
Human security has gained international relevance through the UNDP’s 1994 Human Development Report 2. The Report describes human security as follows:
“It is concerned with how people live and breathe in a society, how freely they exercise their many choices, how much access they have to market and social opportunities and whether they live in conflict or in peace.”3
It further states:
“It means safety from the constant threats of hunger, disease, crime and repression. It also means protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the pattern of our daily lives-whether in our homes, in our jobs, in our communities or in our environment.” 4
The idea that the main threats are only the ones originating from outside the national borders and the ones affecting the State, has been put under discussion, while the importance of people’s wellbeing has gained more and more attention: indeed, a country can be free from external military threats, while its population continues to face several forms of insecurity in everyday life.
2 UNDP, 1994, Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security.
3 UNDP, 1994, Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security, p. 23.
4 UNDP, 1994, Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security, p. 3.
Human Security and Positive Peace
To better understand the relation between human security and peace, it may be useful to recall the distinction between positive and negative peace, analysed by Johan Galtung. Negative peace refers to the absence of direct violence, a recognizable and explicit form of violence, in which is generally easy to identify someone responsible for the violent act. By contrast, positive peace is closely associated with the absence of structural violence, understood as the set of social, economic, and political conditions systematically preventing individuals to satisfy their basic needs. Structural violence is a less visible form of violence, often deeply embedded in society and does not necessarily involve a direct perpetrator.
This distinction suggests that the absence of armed conflict, a form of direct violence, while fundamental, does not necessarily guarantee the required conditions for a just and lasting peace. To achieve this objective, it is necessary to address other forms of insecurity. Similarly, the human security approach does not limit itself to consider direct violence and armed conflict as the only forms of insecurity, instead it invites us to consider other forms of insecurity capable of harming individuals. Human security and positive peace, therefore, both encourage us to look beyond explicit, direct violence and to consider the conditions shaping people’s security and well-being.
Understanding SDG 16 through the lens of human security
By promoting peaceful societies, SDG 16, recognises that violence, institutions’ fragility, unequal access to justice can undermine the foundations of sustainable development and, ultimately, peace. Therefore, it emerges the central role of the individual as the primary referent of security, in line with the human security approach, which encourages to pay attention to the experiences of individuals and communities, including vulnerabilities that may persist even in the absence of armed conflicts.
In line with this perspective, promoting peaceful societies, requires more than addressing violence once it has already occurred. In fact, it means understanding the conditions that expose people to insecurity; this highlights the importance of prevention and identification of the structural causes underlying the different forms of insecurity and that undermine human security and peace.
In this context, institutions play a very important role; effective, accountable and inclusive institutions can help correct or avoid the emergence of problems that give rise to insecurity, undermine human security, and hinder the achievement of positive peace.
The human security approach, therefore, is not synonymous with SDG 16, nor do all its dimensions fall directly within the Goal’s targets. It does, however, offer a complementary perspective for understanding its scope by drawing attention to people’s vulnerabilities and the importance of addressing the causes of insecurity before they translate into more severe forms of violence and exclusion.
Conclusion
The evolution from a predominantly state-centered approach to security towards a more people-centred concept has highlighted the importance of protecting individuals from a wide range threats, which affect their livelihoods, freedoms, and dignity.
Rethinking peace through the lens of human security help recognising the interconnected nature of contemporary challenges and the importance of placing the individual at the centre of the discussion.
Indeed, individual is the primary referent of human security and, at the same time, the ultimate beneficiary of positive peace. Despite their specific characteristics, both concepts recognise that security and peace cannot be assessed exclusively in terms of the absence of conflicts but must also be considered in light of the conditions that enable people to exercise their rights and fully develop their potential.
This perspective is consistent with the broader ambition of SDG 16, which recognises that peace is closely linked to building inclusive and just societies, supported by effective and accountable institutions.
Human security does not claim to offer a universal solution to the challenges of peacebuilding. Rather, it encourages us to rethink the priorities of security policies and the ones promoting peace, placing people’s vulnerabilities and the importance of addressing the structural causes of insecurity at the centre.
References
Baldwin, D. A. (1997). The concept of security. Review of International Studies, V. 23, pp. 5–26.
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, V. 6 (No. 3), pp. 167–191. htp://www.jstor.org/stable/422690
Rothschild, E. (1995). What is security? Daedalus, V. 124 (No. 3), pp. 53–98.
Stewart, F. (2004). Development and security (Working Paper No. 3). Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity.
UNDP. (1994). Human development report 1994: New dimensions of human security.
Author: Carolina Ciabatti
Bio: Carolina Ciabatti has an interdisciplinary academic background in Global Security Policies, Economics, and International Business. Her research interests focus on human security and the role of industry and technology in sustainable development, a topic explored in her Master’s thesis in collaboration with UNIDO in Colombia. She works as an International Business Developer and Project Manager, specialising in high-tech solutions and partnerships in emerging markets. She is also a Board Member of the World Food Forum Italy Chapter and Representative of its Working Group on Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Agrifood Systems.
