ABSTRACT
The prognostic focus lies on long-term preventive strategies to mitigate climate change and on increasing the coping capacity and resilience of individual and communities. The scholars have pointed to the increased importance of risk as a security category and have questioned the neat boundary between normal politics and security in the Copenhagen School's dichotomous treatment of the two. The distinction between two forms of securitisation is only one dimension along which one can distinguish climate security discourses. The planetary danger discourse is at least partly a critical response to linking national security with the environment in the territorial security discourse. Analysing climate security discourses and charting their development over time is an essential part of our comparative endeavour. Indeed, as our research on climate security debates in the United States and Germany show, it is mostly the developing countries that are seen as endangered a risk which be kept at bay through minor adaptation interventions.
