Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Three Energy Streams of Security Culture – A Theoretical Research Model in Security Sciences

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Security and Defence in Europe

Abstract

The chapter presents the theoretical framework of the transdisciplinary and multidisciplinary model by the name of security culture; a model which may be helpful in conducting research within the discipline of security sciences. The security culture model comprises non-military and military factors that provide people with the opportunity to raise security, both on an individual and a collective scale. The concept of security culture constitutes, among others, the scientific axis of a Polish academic journal Kultura Bezpieczeństwa. Nauka – Praktyka – Refleksje [Security Culture. Science – Practice – Review]. The security culture model, as presented in the journal, bases on the concept of the influence exerted on reality by three energy streams of security culture. These streams include: the mental-spiritual stream, the stream of organizational and legal interactions (split into multiple ‘beams’), and the stream of energy related to the material reality, that represents the physical design of social reality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Security sciences (author’s equivalent for the Polish term nauki o bezpieczeństwie) – is a separate discipline belonging to the field of social sciences in the Polish classification of the fields of science and technology (largely basing on OECD classification). Security sciences only partially overlap with its ‘elder sister’ subdiscipline of political science – security studies. The word sciences in the name security sciences refers to social sciences approached in a systemic way, rather than to natural sciences as it often does. Much as security sciences belong to the scientific sphere of social sciences, they mainly concentrate on the problematics of security, in the context of the pursuit of the state of freedom from threats by a human being, as well as social groups and organisations that they establish. It should be emphasized that security sciences are equipped with a very precise and rigorous methodological framework, owing to which it has become possible to grant them in 2011 the status of a separate discipline within the Polish classification of sciences. Another distinguishing feature of security sciences is the fact that their focus is not only on the state-centric approach to national security and international security as it is in security studies, developed in English-speaking academia shortly after World War I to provide the theoretical framework for the prevention of new risks to international security. Security sciences predominantly focus on the individual and community-related aspects of security, as well as on the systemic approach to such aspects of security as internal security, homeland security, public security, or common security. Despite the general separateness of security sciences and security studies, they share vital common elements. First and foremost, both approaches concentrate on the security of a human being, and the human is their main focus. The second and the third shared elements are two research frameworks used in both approaches: the framework postulated by the Copenhagen school of security studies, and the theoretical model by the name of security culture (probably the most transdisciplinary and versatile concept within security research); both explained in the following article.

  2. 2.

    Issues concerning noticing differences between interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity – see in: Piwowarski [49].

  3. 3.

    E pluribus unum – (Latin) ‘out of many, one’.

  4. 4.

    The present article refers in its content, but also provides an extension, to the following work: Piwowarski [47].

  5. 5.

    Latin modus vivendi secundum virtutem (cf. [45]: 3).

  6. 6.

    Special consciousness – the author uses this term to refer to a form of the so-called relational consciousness, a category created by the British psychologist David Hay (1935–2014); Hay developed the evolutionary views of Alister Hardy; relational consciousness is an innate psychic trait that allows humans to experience spiritual states; it is marked in development, before the child can be socialized; Hay recognized four types of relational consciousness: (1) a child in relation to consciousness of the Absolute, (2) a child in relation to the consciousness of others, (3) a child in relation to the consciousness of the surrounding reality, (4) a child in relation to the self-consciousness. Relational awareness can be interpreted as an instruction to reduce the distance between the psyche of the self of the subject of security and various aspects of reality. See: Hay and Nye [23].

  7. 7.

    Marcus Tullius Cicero lived in the years 106–43 BC in Rome and was an excellent orator, philosopher, writer, statesman; the career of a court attorney led Cicero to high offices, such as a senator and a Roman consul; see: Everitt [18]; Kumaniecki [37].

  8. 8.

    In Oxford English Dictionary, 1510 is given as the date when the term culture first appears in the English language.

  9. 9.

    In the seventeenth century, the term culture appeared in the works of Samuel Pufendorf, such as De jure naturae et gentium libri octo published in 1672, in such terms as agricultura, cultura morum reliquis and, above all, cultura animi; it can be assumed that Pufendorf used the term cultura to describe all human creations: from social institutions, everyday objects, to language, human morality and customs.

  10. 10.

    In his collection of essays, Culture and Anarchy (1869) Matthew Arnold criticized the Victorian society; he divided it into barbarians (aristocrats), philistines (bourgeoisie) and the mob and proclaimed the crisis of society accompanied with threats to human security, originating in rendering social relationships dependent on money and luxury.

  11. 11.

    Action – it is a kind of human behavior with which subjects that are the authors of actions associate a certain meaning (sense of meaning); it was Max Weber who proclaimed the category of action; these days a basic concept of sociology: “Action means human behavior (…) if and on condition that the actor, or many actors, links it to a certain subjective sense” ([63]: 6).

  12. 12.

    Conditio sine qua non (Latin) – an essential condition, without the fulfilling of which a certain event, or a certain manifestation of a given existence, object or trait, is not possible.

  13. 13.

    Compare Culture [entry], [in:] The Concise PWN Encyclopaedia [56].

  14. 14.

    The concept of generation in the definition by Ossowska [44] is considered in a similar way.

  15. 15.

    Author’s own translation.

  16. 16.

    “Security sectors were another concept of the Copenhagen school. (…), [which enable] the analysis of variables” ([39]: 17).

References

  1. Adler MJ (1998) Paideia proposal. Touchstone, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bagby P (1975) Culture and history: prolegomena to the comparative study of civilizations. The State Publishing Institute PIW, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baldwin DA (1997) The concept of security, Review of international studies, vol. 23, no. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 5–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bauman Z (2000) Liquid modernity. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bierstedt R, Znaniecki F (1969) On humanistic sociology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bonnell VE, Hunt L (1999) Beyond the cultural turn. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  7. Buzan B., People, State and fear an agenda for international security Studies in the post-cold war era, Hemel Hempstead, Harvester 1991

    Google Scholar 

  8. Carroll JS (1998) Safety culture as an ongoing process: culture surveys as opportunities for enquiry and change. Work Stress 12:272–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cicero (1960) Tuscalan disputations. In: Philosophical writings, vol III. Polish Scientific Publishers PWN, Warszawa, p 557

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ciceronis MT (2009) Tusculanarum disputationum, Liber V, 5. In: Filipiak M (ed) Introduction to the sociology of culture. The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Lublin

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cieślarczyk M (2010) Culture of security and defense. Siedlce University of Natural Sciences and Humanities Publishing, Siedlce

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cooper MD (2000) Towards a model of safety culture. Saf Sci:36, 111–136

    Google Scholar 

  13. Etzioni A (2012) Active society. Nomos Publishing, Kraków

    Google Scholar 

  14. Etzioni A (2001) Political unification revisited: on building supranational communities. Lexington Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Etzioni A (2008) Security first: for a muscular, moral foreign policy. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  16. Etzioni A (1994) Spirit of community: the reinvention American society. Touchstone, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Etzioni A (2003) The monochrome society. Princeton University Press, Princeton/Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  18. Everitt A (2003) Cicero: the life and times of Rome’s greatest politician. Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Giddens A (2006) A social model for Europe? In: Giddens A, Diamond P, Liddle R (eds) Global Europe, social Europe. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  20. Guldenmund FW (2000) The nature of safety culture: a review of theory and research. Saf Sci 34:215–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hannerz U (1992a) Cosmopolitans and locals in world culture. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hannerz U (1992b) Cultural complexity: studies in the social organization of meaning. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hay D, Nye R (2006) The spirit of the child. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London/Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  24. Huntington S (2007) The clash of civilizations. Simon and Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jacobs M, Spillman L (2005) Cultural sociology at the crossroads of the discipline. Poetics: J Empir Res Cult, Media Arts 33:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jaeger W (2001) Paideia. The ideals of the Greek culture. Aletheia Foundation, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  27. Jameson F (2000) Globalization and political strategy. New Left Rev 4:49–68

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jameson F (1987) Postmodernism and cultural theories. Lectures in China (Houxiandaizhuyi he wenhualilun). Shanxi Teacher’s University, Xi’an

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jameson F (1991) Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  30. Jameson F (1998) The cultural turn: selected writings on the postmodern 1983–1998. Verso Books Publication, London/New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Jarmoszko S (2010) New patterns of security culture and processes of social bonds deterioration. In: Rekłajtis E, Wiśniewski R, Zdanowski J (eds) Unity and diversity. Culture vs. cultures. Aspra-JR, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kalina RM (1991) General categories of the classification and characteristics of external risks. In: Hołyst B (ed) Human being in a difficult stance. Polish Society for Psychological Hygiene, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kessler S (2016) The 5 personality patterns: your guide to understanding yourself and others and developing emotional maturity. Bodhi Tree Press, Richmond

    Google Scholar 

  34. Korzeniowski L (2008) Securitology. Science concerning human safety and social organizations. EAS, Kraków

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kroeber AL (1944) Configurations of culture growth. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. Kroeber AL (1952) The nature of culture. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kumaniecki K (1989) Cicero and his contemporaries. The Czytelnik Publishing, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  38. Laland KN, Galef BG (eds) (2009) The question of animal culture. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, p 243

    Google Scholar 

  39. Łapińska A (2014) The concept of cultural security – an attempt at systematization. Securitology 2:15–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Linton R (1945) The cultural background of personality. Appleton-Century Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  41. Luhmann N (1979) Trust and power. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  42. Malinowski B (1958) The scientific theory of culture. In: Malinowski B (ed) Sketches of culture theory. Książka i Wiedza (Book and Knowledge Publishing), Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  43. Mamdani M (2000) Beyond rights talk and culture talk: comparative essays on the politics and rights and culture. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ossowska M (1963) The concept of generation. Sociol Stud 2

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pflaum GM (1961) Geschichte des Wortes “Zivilization”. University of Munich, München

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pidgeon N (1991) Safety culture and risk management in organizations. J Cross Cult Psychol, Cardiff University 22:129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Piwowarski J (2015) Three pillars of security culture. Secur Cul. Sci Pract Rev 19:21–33. https://doi.org/10.24356/KB/19/1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Piwowarski J (2016a) Security studies. Elementary issues. University of Public and Individual Security APEIRON in Cracow, Kraków

    Google Scholar 

  49. Piwowarski J (2016b) Transdisciplinary nature of national security culture. Pomeranian University in Słupsk Publishing, Słupsk

    Google Scholar 

  50. Piwowarski J (2014) ViP protection and bushido quadrangle. The study of Japanese security culture. In: Bogdalski P, Cymerski J, Jałoszyński K (eds) Security of persons subjected to statutory protection against threats in the 21st century. Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Policji w Szczytnie, Szczytno

    Google Scholar 

  51. Riga summit 28–29.XI. (2006) North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. https://www.nato.int/docu/comm/2006/0611-riga/index.htm. Accessed 21 Nov 2018

  52. Rothschild E (1995) What is security? Daedalus 124(3):53–98

    Google Scholar 

  53. Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sprenger RK (2004) Trust: the best way to manage. Cyan Communications, London

    Google Scholar 

  55. Steinmetz G (ed) (1999) State/Culture: state-formation after the cultural turn. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  56. The Concise PWN Encyclopaedia, PWN, Warszawa 1996

    Google Scholar 

  57. Trifiletti LB, Gielen AC, Sleet DA, Hopkins K (2005) Behavioral and social sciences theories and models: are they used in unintentional injury prevention research? Health Educ Res 20(3):298–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Tungodden B (2001) A balanced view of development as freedom, Ch. Michelsen Institute, Bergen

    Google Scholar 

  59. Tylor EB (1871) Primitive culture, vol. 1, vol. 2. John Murray, London

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ullman RH (1983) Redefining security. Int Secur 8(1):129–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wallis M (1959) Biological concepts in humanities. In: Kotarbiński T (ed) Philosophical fragments, series II. PWN, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wasilewski M (2007) Paideutics of Protagoras and Plato. Polish Educational Research Association Publishing, Poznań

    Google Scholar 

  63. Weber M (2002) Economy and society. An outline of interpretative sociology. Polish Scientific Publishers PWN, Warszawa. (Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Tübingen 1922)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Xenophon (2014) The education of Cyrus. Cyropaedia, introduction by K. Głombiowski, trans. and footnotes by K. Głombiowski et al. University of Wrocław: ISKŚiO, Wrocław (original title: Kyrou paideia)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Zacher LW (2012) Individual and social contexts and challenges to security, Methodology of research on national security, vol 3. National Defense University of Warsaw, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  66. Zduniak A, Majchrzak N (2012) Emotional awareness as a distractor in security research processes, Methodology of national security research, vol 3. National Defense University of Warsaw, Warszawa

    Google Scholar 

  67. Zhang H, Wiegmann DA, von Thaden TL, Sharma G, Mitchell AA (2002) Safety culture: a concept in Chaos? Proceed Hum Factors and Ergonom Soc Annual Meeting 46(15):1404–1408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zohar D (1980) Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied implications. J Appl Psychol:65

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Public and Individual Security “Apeiron” in Cracow, Kraków, Poland

    Juliusz Piwowarski

Authors
  1. Juliusz Piwowarski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juliusz Piwowarski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nebrija University, Madrid, Spain

    J. Martín Ramírez

  2. Dobczyce, Poland

    Jerzy Biziewski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Piwowarski, J. (2020). Three Energy Streams of Security Culture – A Theoretical Research Model in Security Sciences. In: Ramírez, J.M., Biziewski, J. (eds) Security and Defence in Europe. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12293-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation