Contribution short abstract:

Within the Anthropocene era, threats and consequent crises will grow but must be used as windows of opportunity. Development thinking about threats and consequent crises has often been inadequate. Human security thinking can help in counteracting this. The paper outlines how.

Contribution long abstract:

Within the Anthropocene era, threats and consequent crises will grow but must be used as windows of opportunity. Development thinking about threats and consequent crises has often been inadequate. Human security thinking can help in counteracting this.

Part One explores how understanding and addressing crises through development processes and thinking can be obstructed, by: a) casual crisis talk; b) waiting for trickle-down; c) overriding preoccupation with root-causes; d) developmental hypermetropia; e) the politics and perceptions of crises; f) limits to attention, comprehension, and empathy; g) a too narrow view of admissible solutions.

Part Two discusses contributions from a human security perspective. Section 2.2 considers how the 2020 Human Development Report on the Anthropocene provides new thinking but has limitations: i) mechanistic understandings of social and policy processes; ii) one-sided emphasis on agency and freedoms; iii) lack of a notion of enough, related to iv) limited understanding of needs theory; leading to v) an unbalanced rendition of drivers of change. Section 2.3 suggests how human security ideas can help in responding. We understand human security thinking as including: 1) a normative concept and goal, 2) an analytical framework to serve that objective, 3) a corresponding policy philosophy linking peace, development and human rights, and 4) policy planning approaches to support operationalization. Each has various versions. Section 2.4 connects these ideas to thinking about transitions, as requiring changes in vision and values as well as in methodologies and analysis/planning tools. Human security ideas can contribute at each of these levels.