ABSTRACT
In the United States, one saw the predominance of territorial danger, whereas the debate in Germany focused on the individual level, with the invocation of danger still prevalent, but also frequent risk framings as counter-alarmist moves and attempts of a perceived objectification. In Mexico, one found an emphasis on individual and planetary risk, while the overall debate was less securitised than in Germany and the US. In Turkey, the securitisation of climate change has been largely unsuccessful. Territorial danger reifies the state as the main reference point of security; individual framings inscribe a human security conception that ultimately sees states as less important than the well-being or survival of a global community of human beings, or what in English School terms be called world society. Distinguishing securitisations thus allows us to see the contestations within and across countries over the configurations of legitimate governance.
