The Politics of Gun Control and India's Internal Security
In the past two decades, security has come to be one of the most contested and debated concepts within the domain of international relations. Its state-centred contours interpreted narrowly as security of territory from external aggression, or as protection of national interests in foreign policy or as global security from the threat of nuclear holocaust, have today made way for a new security understanding that includes economic, environmental, cultural sectors and new security referents—societies, nonstate actors, individuals. This conceptual widening has been complemented at a practical level by a growing focus on conflicts and security challenges that stem from within states and which trace their roots to non-traditional sources such as drugs, terrorism, small arms, cyber war and trafficking in human beings.
Security and development – are they two sides of the same coin? Investigating India's two-pronged policy towards left wing extremism
In this article, I investigate India's two-pronged policy approach, which combines security and development intervention to address the root cause and symptoms of left wing extremism. While the two policy sets are meant for two very distinct policy subjects – the angry extremist and the neglected poor – I argue that in renewing state legitimacy against internal dissent, development goals are made to coincide with traditional security concerns for state survival and stability. In this article, I unpack three representations of the problem of left wing extremism – as terrorism, as a parallel regime and as a ‘political disorder’ – in relation to the particular policy responses they each advocate. Through these three representational frames, the effects that the security imperative has on the idea and practice of development are uncovered.
Integrated land degradation monitoring and assessment: Horizontal knowledge management at the national and international levels
The need for improved horizontal knowledge management at the national and international levels is essential for monitoring and assessment of land degradation and desertification. At the national level, governments utilise scientific, socio‐economic and technical data and information for strategic planning, priority setting and national environment and development planning. However, challenges including the lack of capacity and lack of collaboration and sharing of information across governments affect responses to and the effectiveness of monitoring and knowledge exchange, along with the ability to effectively implement treaties. At the international level, a number of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) share cross‐sectoral themes related to research and monitoring, information exchange, technology transfer, capacity building and financial resources. The need for increased synergies stems from the similarities between the issues they address. Challenges for improving knowledge management at the international level include insufficient interaction between the scientific bodies of the various MEAs; duplication of reporting, monitoring and assessment efforts; limited knowledge management between the various assessments addressing ecosystems and biological diversity during the past decade; and insufficient collaboration between the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the UN system and the international non‐governmental organisation (NGO) community. This paper examines these challenges and offers recommendations on how monitoring and assessment knowledge can be better managed at the national and international levels. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.