Acceso usuarios
Philippe Bourbeau
In its current configuration, the literature on securitisation � the process of integrating an issue into a security framework that emphasises policing and defence � relies mainly on two logics: the logic of exception and the logic of routine. For some scholars, these two approaches to the study of securitisation frame a battleground on which a conflict among various structural, critical, cultural and sociological standpoints is waged. Although many graduate students cut their theoretical teeth on these debates, little has been gained thus far in the battle for possession of the field. By questioning the literature�s underlying understanding of these two logics as opposing and competing, I pursue two aims in this article. First, I seek to bolster current research on the securitisation process by moving the conversation away from its current analytical stalemate. I caution scholars against overdrawing distinctions between the two logics, for it is not clear that they are mutually exclusive. Second, I seek to recognise and harness the strengths of both logics, and to identify the fruitful theoretical �bricks� each framework contributes to our understanding of securitisation. I illustrate the preceding set of arguments through an analysis of the social construction of migration as a security threat in France since the end of the Cold War.
