Abstract

ABSTRACTIn the context of the European Union's (EU) expanding role as internal security actor, all member states have been required to generate similar integreated national risk assessments by 2014. At first sight, this could be welcomed as a departure from the ad hoc or crisis-driven policy-making dynamics that have long been criticized by critical commentators of EU internal security policy. In particular, the evolution of risk assessments relates to wider efforts to forge an evidence-based approach to internal security and to advance broader concepts of risk prevention and resilience as guiding principles for its future role in internal security. However, there is also a need for critical reflection on this growing trend and its implications for the EU. Frameworks for risk assessment need to be contrasted with the varied or lacking risk management practices on the ground and deeper contestations of seemingly technical methods of risk assessment, going beyond the question of legal implementation that dominates the ‘post-Stockholm’ debate. This article elucidates the functional and political limits for the implementation of standardized risk assessments, but also shows how the adoption of common guidelines still serves as a political tool for the legitimation of further policy initiatives in EU internal security.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.