ABSTRACT
The study of security privatization and the emergence of a global private security industry is often framed in opposition to state authority and the public provision of security. As the sector has expanded and globalized, much academic debate has been about the extent to which the state is losing power and sovereignty, and thus getting weaker as the private is getting stronger. This was, and remains, a particularly strong narrative about security privatization in non-Western countries, where the rise of the private has often been treated as an indication – and sometimes also a cause – of state weakness and even failure. On occasion this argument is articulated as a downward spiral, where the state’s inability to secure its territory and citizens is seen to have spurred the initial growth of private actors, with their existence in turn further undermining the strength, legitimacy and authority of the state. In Europe and North America, state sovereignty and authority has been an equally central topic of debate, but has taken a slightly different form. Rather than fears of incipient state failure, the rise of the private has here often been analysed as part of new forms of networked governance or multi-level governance. In this view, the state has outsourced some of its security functions and much as it may or may not be weakened by this, it continues to rule and regulate at a distance, in collaboration with a plethora of private non-state actors.
