Abstract:
As the effects of climate change become a reality, we are encouraged to re-examine the entire basis that formed and drives modern society forward. In a society preoccupied with threat and consequence, this paper demonstrates how risk perceptions shape both the problems and solutions around the current ecological crisis. When risk is deconstructed, uncertainty, vulnerability, and value are discovered as the primary pieces that shape what is perceived as risk. When applied to nature, I argue that understandings of its value as either for humans or for itself create a rift in human responsibility. A differently prioritised or assigned moral status manifests in views such as anthropocentricity and ecocentricity. As value is also a prerequisite of risk, these views become the foundation for how the world is perceived, and thus provides a lens for what is considered at risk.
How risk is perceived thus frames the notion of (in)security, which directly shape who is to be secured and from what. This is done through a process of securitization, whereby risks are politically and socially produced and reproduced. Amidst the varying ideologies, there are two contrasting risk perceptions: the environment as a risk or at risk. These perceptions are at odds in that the environment is either understood through an anthropocentric lens as a threat to humans (human security), or through an ecocentric lens as threatened by humans (ecocentric security). This distinction is essential because it frames what the cause of risk (or problem) around climate change is. This paper concludes by recognising that the current anthropocentric perception of environmental security (as a subset of human security) stems from values and ideologies which may not accurately address the underlying vulnerabilities to and drivers of climate change.
Keywords: environment, risk, anthropocentric, ecocentric, securitization, risk, human, security, perceptions, framing, moral status, value