I527-290 ESRIF Final Report (WEB).indd - European Commission

302
Working Group 10: Governance and coordination
Annex 1: Four Models of Analysis
Culture as a factor in the perception/definition of threat Culture as a factor in the response to threat
Model IV / Action repertories
Model II / Knowledge and interpretation
Reduction of complexity to available individual/proprietary,
experience-based strategies; attempt to make national strategies
international standards; divergent national responses to same
structural pressures; problem of harmonization of national
implementation actions
Development of shared understanding of the concept of security; cognitive
construction of a common European security space; overcoming traditional
national interpretations and courses of action through the development of
common concepts and knowledge
Cultural factors
influencing the
thematic thrust of
national security
research programmes
Example: Explanation for the variety of research themes present in EU Member
States security research programmes and the interpretation of cultural factors as
part of the security problem vs. part of the solution. For example, immigrant
cultures may be interpreted as the cause of social radicalization processes that
mount up to threats to internal security (such as in France or the Netherlands);
differently, a user security culture may be interpreted as a social firewall against
IT security offences (as it is the case in Sweden).
(e.g. prevention/
preparedness v.
reaction/response;
technology v. society)
ESRIF FINAL REPORT - ANNEX IV
Example: Explains why EU Member States adapt differently to similar
security threats and also may implement commonly defined security
capabilities plans and research coordination strategies in divergent ways.
Standardisation for example might be implemented by Europeanization
(development of or adherence to common standards on the EU level) or by
a national joined-up approach of interagency coordination