The Functional Actor in the Securitization Process

Table of Contents

Introduction

1. Theoretical frame

1.1 The Securitization Theory

1.2 „Auxiliary Theories“

1.2.1 Henri Tajfel’s and John Turner’s Social Identity Theory

1.2.2 Fritz Heider’s Social Balance Theory

2. The Consideration of the Functional Actor from the Perspective of the „Auxiliary Theories“

2.1 The Functional Actor’s Position in the Securitization Constellation

2.2 A Possible Classification of the Functional Actor

2.3 Features Resulting From the In-Group Processes

2.4 Features Resulting from Intergroup Processes

2.5 Why and when is there a Securitizing Act? The Balance Theory Confirmed by SIT

3. Critique on the Limits of SIT in Clarifying the Functional Actor

Conclusion

References

Research Objectives and Themes

This research paper aims to identify the social-psychological characteristics of the "functional actor" (or "significant addressed audience") that facilitate the securitization process. By integrating the Social Identity Theory and the Social Balance Theory into the Copenhagen School’s securitization framework, the author seeks to understand why these actors consent to extraordinary measures and how internal group dynamics influence political security decisions.

• Theoretical integration of Social Identity Theory and Social Balance Theory into securitization studies.
• Classification of functional actors based on institutionalization and social-psychological factors.
• Analysis of in-group processes, such as salience, loyalty, and commitment, in the context of security threats.
• Examination of intergroup conflict dynamics and the role of identity in legitimizing securitizing acts.

Excerpt from the Book

Chapter Summary

Introduction: Outlines the research gap regarding the "functional actor" in securitization theory and proposes the use of Social Identity Theory and Social Balance Theory to better understand their psychological motivations.

1. Theoretical frame: Presents the foundational concepts of the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Theory, alongside Henri Tajfel’s Social Identity Theory and Fritz Heider’s Social Balance Theory as explanatory auxiliary frameworks.

2. The Consideration of the Functional Actor from the Perspective of the „Auxiliary Theories“: Analyzes the position and classification of the functional actor, detailing how in-group and intergroup processes influence the actor's readiness to support securitization.

3. Critique on the Limits of SIT in Clarifying the Functional Actor: Examines the theoretical shortcomings of using Social Identity Theory to explain all facets of actor behavior, particularly regarding institutional versus non-institutional actors.

Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, confirming that while psychological approaches are complementary to securitization theory, they do not cover the entire spectrum of political and structural drivers of security policies.

Keywords

Securitization, Functional Actor, Social Identity Theory, Social Balance Theory, Significant Addressed Audience, In-group Processes, Intergroup Relations, Security Studies, Collective Action, Existential Threat, Referent Object, Securitizing Move, Social Psychology, Political Decision-making, Conflict Resolution.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research paper?

The paper focuses on identifying the social-psychological requirements that drive the "functional actor" to support or reject a securitization move as defined by the Copenhagen School.

What are the primary theoretical frameworks used?

The study utilizes the Securitization Theory as the base, supplemented by Henri Tajfel’s Social Identity Theory and Fritz Heider’s Social Balance Theory to analyze actor behavior.

What is the main research question?

The research asks which social-psychological characteristics facilitate the functional actor's facilitation of securitization, analyzed through the lenses of identity and balance theories.

Which scientific methodology is employed?

The author employs a connective and integrative theoretical analysis, synthesizing primary sources from the Copenhagen School with secondary psychological literature to profile the functional actor.

What topics are covered in the main body?

The main body covers the position of the functional actor in the securitization constellation, their classification, the impact of in-group and intergroup processes on their consent, and the utility of SIT in explaining these dynamics.

Which keywords best describe this work?

Key terms include Securitization, Functional Actor, Social Identity Theory, Social Balance Theory, and Collective Action.

How does the Social Balance Theory apply to securitization?

It is used to schematize the "actors' constellation" and define the interpersonal and inter-group relations that drive an actor to choose conflict over cooperation to protect its identity.

What does the author conclude about SIT's role in security analysis?

The author concludes that while SIT provides necessary psychological depth to understand actor motivation, it cannot fully explain political decision-making without also accounting for structural and historical factors.