Advertisement

Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 67, Issue 3, pp 313–331 | Cite as

Maritime security and transformations in global governance

  • Åsne Kalland AarstadEmail author
Article

Abstract

In a short period of time stretching from 2010 to 2012, international guidance was issued, industry guidelines were re-written, and national laws were changed for the purposes of enhancing maritime security through armed private security provision. Having previously been shunned by ship-owners and national government alike, armed private security contractors are today considered legitimate security providers on board ships transiting piracy-infested waters. Recognizing the global shift in practice and perception, the article analyses the global governance arrangement surrounding the resort to armed private security in the maritime domain for the purpose of casting new light on private and public governance capacities. By doing so, the article also challenges implicit perceptions of maritime governance as distinct from land-based governance. In the maritime governance arrangement under scrutiny, public actors neither row nor steer; rather, they facilitate security governance by carving out privileged spheres for commercial industries through their convening capacities, regulatory infrastructure and legitimizing role. The facilitation by public actors of private actors in the governance arrangement surrounding private maritime security denotes both an active and passive reaction to changes in the globalized security environment in order remain relevant in contemporary security politics, also referred to as the ‘globalization paradox’. The findings highlight the truly global impact of evolving governance dynamics, and the changing relationship between private and public governors.

Keywords

Public Actor Private Actor International Maritime Organization Private Security Governance Arrangement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Dutton, Y. (2013). Gunslingers on the high seas: a call for regulation. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 24(1), 107–160.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roundtable of International Shipping Associations (2011). Letter for Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. Available at: https://www.bimco.org/~/media/About/Press/2011/Letter_to_Ban_Ki-Moon_-_Piracy.ashx. Accessed 28 Nov 2014.
  3. 3.
    Cullen, P. (2012). Surveying the market in maritime private security services. In C. Berube & P. Cullen (Eds.), Maritime private security. Market responses to piracy, terrorism, and waterborne security risks in the twenty-first century (pp. 25–37). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agnew, A. (1994). The territorial trap: the geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leander, A. (2010). Practices (Re)producing orders: understanding the role of business in global security governance. In M. Ougaard (Ed.), Business and global governance (pp. 57–78). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Owens, P. (2008). Distinctions, distinctions: ‘public’ and ‘private’ force. International Affairs, 84(2), 977–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Walker, R. B. J. (1993). Inside/ outside: international relations as political theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Williams, M. C. (2010). The public, the private and the evolution of security studies. Security Dialogue, 41(6), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Avant, D. D., Finnemore, M., & Sell, S. K. (2010). Who governs the globe? New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jessop, B. (2002). Globalization and the national state. In S. Aaronowitz & P. Bratsis (Eds.), Paradigm lost: state theory reconsidered (pp. 185–220). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bieling, H.-J. (2007). On the other side of the coin: conceptualizing the relationship between business and the state in the age of globalisation. Business & Politics, 9(3), 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Behr, H. (2008). Deterritorialisation and the transformation of statehood: the paradox of globalisation. Geopolitics, 13(2), 359–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cowen, D. (2014). The deadly life of logistics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cutler, C. A. (1999). Private authority in international trade relations: the case of maritime transport. In C. A. Cutler, V. Haufler, & T. Porter (Eds.), Private authority and international affairs (pp. 283–332). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steinberg, P. (2001). The social construction of the ocean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steinberg, P. (2009). Sovereignty, territory, and the mapping of mobility: a view from the outside. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(3), 467–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Colás, A., & Mabee, B. (2010). The flow and ebb of private seaborn violence in global politics: lessons from the Atlantic world, 1689–1815. In A. Colás & B. Mabee (Eds.), Mercenaries, pirates, bandits and empires: private violence in historical context (pp. 83–106). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leira, H., & de Carvalho, B. (2010). Privateers of the North sea: At worlds end. In A. Colás & B. Mabee (Eds.), Mercenaries, pirates, bandits and empires: private violence in historical context (pp. 55–82). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thompson, J. (1994). Mercenaries, pirates and sovereigns. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ritchie, R.C. (1997). Government measures against piracy and privateering in the Atlantic area, 1750–1850. In D. J. Starkey, E. S. van Eyck van Heslinga, J. A. de Moor (Eds.) Pirates and privateers: new perspectives on the war on trade in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berube, C., & Cullen, P. (Eds.) (2012). Maritime private security. market responses to piracy, terrorism, and waterborne security risks in the twenty-first century. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Florquin, N. (2012). Escalation at sea: Somali piracy and private security companies. In Small Arms Survey (Ed.) Small arms survey 2012: moving targets (pp. 190–217). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murphy, M. (2009). Small boats, weak states, dirty money: piracy and maritime terrorism in the modern world. London: Hurst and Company.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Petrig, A. (2014). Human rights and law enforcement at sea: arrest, detention and transfer of piracy suspects. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Abrahamsen, R., & Williams, M. C. (2011). Security Beyond the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cutler, C. A. (1997). Artifice, ideology, and paradox: the public/private distinction in international trade law. Review of International Political Economy, 4(2), 261–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cutler, C. A. (2003). Private power and global authority. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hall, R. B., & Biersteker, T. J. (Eds.) (2002). The emergence of private authority in global governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sassen, S. (2003). Globalization or denationalization. Review of International Political Economy, 10(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights: from medieval to global assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dupont, B. (2004). Security in the age of networks. Policing and Society, 14(1), 76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Guzzini, S., & Neumann, I. (Eds.) (2012). The diffusion of power in global governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Best, J., & Gheciu, A. (Eds.) (2014). The return of the public in global governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Loader, I., & Walker, N. (2007). Civilizing security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wood, J., & Shearing, C. D. (2006). Imagining security. Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Abrahamsen, R., & Williams, M. C. (2007). Security the City: Private Security Companies and Non-State Authority in Global Governance. International Relations, 21(2), 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Abrahamsen, R., & Williams, M. C. (2009). Security Beyond the State: Global Security Assemblages in International Politics. International Political Sociology, 3, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Berndtsson, J., & Stern, M. (2011). Private security and the public-private divide: contested lines of distinction and modes of governance in the Stockholm-Arlanda security assemblage. International Political Sociology, 5, 408–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Biaumet, G. (2016). The sentinel and the rebel. Multi-choice policing in Burundi and the state-centered approach of security sector reform. Crime, Law and Social Change. doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9654-2
  40. 40.
    Hönke, J. (2013). Transnational companies and security governance: hybrid practices in a postcolonial world. London and. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schouten, P. (2014). Security as controversy: reassembling security at Amsterdam airport. Security Dialogue, 45(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Salter, M. (Ed.) (2009). Politics at the airport. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Green, J. F. (2014). Rethinking private authority: agents and entrepreneurs in global governance. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Struett, M., Carlson, J. D., & Nance, M. (Eds.) (2013). Maritime Piracy and the Construction of Global Governance. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    IMB - International Maritime Bureau (2007). Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships, report for the period 1 January – 31 December 2006. London: ICC International Maritime Bureau. Report requested from: https://www.icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/request-piracy-report on 31.10.14. x.
  46. 46.
    IMB - International Maritime Bureau (2012). Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships, report for the period 1 January – 31 December 2011, London: ICC International Maritime Bureau. Report requested from: https://www.icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/request-piracy-report on 31.10.14. x.
  47. 47.
    Oliveira, G. C. (2013). New wars’ at sea: a critical transformative approach to the political economy of Somali piracy. Security Dialogue, 44(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kraska, . J. (2013). International and comparative regulation of private maritime security companies employed in counter-piracy. In D. Guildfoyle (Ed.), Modern piracy: legal challenges and responses (pp. 19–249). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pristrom, S., Li, K. X., Yang, Z., & Wang, J. (2013). A study of maritime security and piracy. Maritime Policy & Management, 40(7), 675–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pittney Jr., J. J., & Levin, J. C. (2013). Private anti-piracy navies: how warships for hire are changing maritime security. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Safety4Sea (2011). Industry Guidelines regarding the use of Private Maritime Security Contractors, 20.05.2011: http://www.safety4sea.com/industry-guidelines-regarding-the-use-of-private-maritime-security-contractors--4073. Accessed 20 April 2015.
  52. 52.
    SAMI - Security Association for the Maritime Industries (2014). The Evolution of the Security Association for the Maritime Industry (SAMI) and piracy in the Indian Ocean. Lessons from Piracy. Available at: http://www.lessonsfrompiracy.net/files/2014/06/DRAFT-The-Evolution-of-the-Security-Association-for-the-Maritime-Industry-8-May-14.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept 2014.
  53. 53.
    Best Management Practice 4 (2011). Best Management practices for Protection against Somali Based Piracy. Version 4, August 2011. Edinburgh: Witherby Seamanship International Ltd.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Best Management Practice 3 (2010). Best Management Practice 3. Piracy off the Coast of Somali and Arabian Sea Area. Version 3, June 2010. Edinburgh: Witherby Seamanship International Ltd.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Brown, J. (2012). Pirates and privateers: managing the Indian oceans private security. Pirates and Privateers: Managing the Indian Ocean’s Private Security Boom. Lowy Institute for International Policy, September 2012. http://www.lowyinstitute.org/files/brown_pirates_and_privateers_web.pdf. Accessed 05 Oct 2014.
  56. 56.
    Lobo-Guerrero, L. (2008). Pirates,” stewards, and the securitization of global circulation. International Political Sociology, 2(3), 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Miller, J. (2009). Piracy causes changes in routes, insurance. The Wall Street Journal, 9 April. Available at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123923616654003355. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  58. 58.
    JWC - Joint War Committee (2010). Increased Range of Somali-Based Piracy. JW2010/009, 16th December 2010.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Liss, C. (2009). Privatization of maritime security in Southeast Asia. In T. Jäger & G. Kümmel (Eds.) Private military and security companies: chances, problems, pitfalls and prospects. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Aegis (2015). Services – Aegis Maritime. Available at: http://www.aegisworld.com/service/maritime/. Accessed 01 Dec 2014.
  61. 61.
    Carmola, C. (2010). Private military companies and new wars: risk, law & ethnics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bures, O. & Carrapico, H. (2016). Private security beyond private military and security companies: exploring diversity within private-public collaborations and its consequences for security governance. Crime, Law and Social Change. doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9651-5
  63. 63.
    Pfeifer, S. (2009). Aegis sets sights on foiling pirates off Somali coast. Financial Times, 21 April. Available at: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6b6020fa-2e0b-11de-9eba-00144feabdc0.html?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true#axzz4LyBXb11x. Accessed 05 Oct 2014.
  64. 64.
    MSC - Maritime Safety Committee (2011). Report of the Maritime Safety Committee on its Eighty-ninth Session. MSC 89/25, 27.05.11. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    IMO – International Maritime Organization (2015a). Private Armed Security. Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Security/PiracyArmedRobbery/Pages/Private-Armed-Security.aspx. Accessed 30 Dec 2015.
  66. 66.
    IMO - International Maritime Organization (2012b). Revised Interim Guidance for Flag States Regarding the use of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel on board Ships in the High Risk Area. IMO Doc.MSC.1/Circ.1406/Rev.2. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    IMO - International Maritime Organization (2012c). Revised Interim Guidance to Ship owners, Ship Operators and Ship Masters on the use of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel on Board Ships in the High Risk Area. IMO Doc. MSC.1/Circ.1405/Rev2. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    IMO - International Maritime Organization (2011). Interim Recommendations for Port and Coastal States Regarding the Use of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel on Board Ships in the High Risk Area. IMO Doc.MSC.1/Circ.1408. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    IMO - International Maritime Organization (2012a). Interim Guidance to Private Maritime Security Companies Providing Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel on Board Ships in the High Risk Area. IMO Doc.MSC.1/Circ.1443. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Klinkenberg, I. K. (2013). Pirates Versus Private Security Companies – A road to safety or insecurity at sea. Unpublished MA dissertation. Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Department of Nograric.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Grewal, T. (2008). International ship safety regulations. In W. Talley (Ed.), Maritime safety, security and piracy. London: Informa Law.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    International Transport Federation Defining FOCs and the Problems they Pose. Available at: http://www.itfseafarers.org/defining-focs.cfm. Accessed 3 Jan 2015.
  73. 73.
    Van Hespen, I. (2014). Protecting Merchant Ships from Maritime Piracy by Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel: A Comparative Analysis of Flag Stat Legislation and Port and Coastal State Requirements. Journal of Maritime Law & Commerce, 45(3), 361–400.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    IMO - International Maritime Organization (2015). Member States, NGOs and IGOs. Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/About/Membership/Pages/Default.aspx. Accessed 23 May 2015.
  75. 75.
    ICS - The International Chamber of Shipping (2014). John Stawpert, Manager Environment and Trade 02.10.14.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    IMO - The International Maritime Organization (2014). Sascha Pristrom and Henrik Madsen, Technical Officers, 1.09.14.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    MSC - Maritime Safety Committee (2012). Guidance for private maritime security companies agreed by IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee. Briefing: 17, 25.05.12. Available at: http://www.imo.org/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/17-msc-90-piracy.aspx#.VMv8EC4YG5I. Accessed 20 Jan 2015.
  78. 78.
    ISO - International Standardization Organization (2013). Ships and marine technology — Guidelines for Private Maritime Security Companies (PMSC) providing privately contracted armed security personnel (PCASP) onboard ships (and pro forma contract), ISO/PAS 28007. Geneva: ISO, 2013.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    SCEG – Security in Complex Environments Group (2015). Accredited Certification for PSC1/ISO 18788 and ISO 28007, available at: https://www.adsgroup.org.uk/pages/95837038.asp. Accessed 5 Aug 2014.
  80. 80.
    MSC - Maritime Safety Committee (2014). Report of the Maritime Safety Committee on its Ninety-fourth Session. MSC 94/21, 26.11.2014. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Lloyd’s Register LRQA (2014). Your guide to implementing ISO/PAS 28007. Coventry: Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance Limited, May 2014.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    SCEG - The Security in Complex Environments Group (2014). Paul Gibson, Director, 1.09.14.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Siebels, D. (2014). International standards for the private security industry. The RUSI Journal, 159(5), 76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    ICS - International Chamber of Shipping (2013). Comparison of flag state laws on armed guards and arms on board. Available at: http://www.ics-shipping.org/docs/default-source/Piracy-Docs/comparison-of-flag-state-laws-on-armed-guards-and-arms-on-board3F9814DED68F.pdf?sfvrsn=0. Accessed 10 Jan 2015.
  85. 85.
    Hansen, S. J. (2012). The evolution of best management practices in the civil maritime sector. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 35(7–8), 562–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    SAMI - The Security Association for Maritime Industries (2014). Peter Cook, CEO, 2.09.14.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Hirst, O., & Thompson, G. (1992). The problem of “globalization”: International economic relations, national conomic management and the formation of trading locks. Economy and Society, 21, 357–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    xxx (2016). Who governs Norwegian maritime security? Public facilitation of private security in a fragmented security environment. Cooperation and Conflict (forthcoming 2016).Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Mabee, B. (2003). Security studies and the ‘security state’: security provision in historical context. International Relations, 17(2), 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Barrows, S. (2009). Racing to the top…at last: the regulation of safety in shipping. In W. Mattli & N. Woods (Eds.), The politics of global regulation (pp. 189–210). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Carrapico, H. & Farrand, B. (2016). Dialogue, partnership and empowerment for network and information security’: the changing role of the private sector from objects of regulation to regulation shapers. Crime, Law and Social Change. doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9652-4
  92. 92.
    Bures, O. (2016). Contributions of private businesses to the provision of security in the EU: beyond public-private partnerships. Crime, Law and Social Change. doi: 10.1007/s10611-016-9650-6
  93. 93.
    Bueger, C. (2015). What is maritime security? Marine Policy, 53, 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations