ABSTRACT
This chapter presents the case for a comprehensive and multidimensional security concept, including a prioritized environmental component. Following a brief overview of the current state of the security debate, two very different lines of criticism against the notion of linking environment and security are presented and critiqued. The 'orthodox' view argues that a relatively restrictive definition of security should be maintained in order to protect the conceptual and substantive integrity of security studies as a discipline. The 'radical' view reflects distaste for the normative and ontological implications of the security discourse and argues that it is inappropriate to 'securitize' non-military social or environmental issues. The chapter outlines the advantages of a comprehensive security concept, in a context emphasizing the desirability of an intellectual partnership between academics and practitioners geared towards the generation of more balanced, integrated and environmentally sound security policy-making.
