Securitization as a mechanism in Australia's biosecurity lawmaking and disease response

dc.contributor.authorVines, Tim
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-27T03:06:56Z
dc.date.available2023-08-27T03:06:56Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractFour years into a global pandemic of COVID-19, the threat that infectious diseases and public health emergencies present to human prosperity and individual and community wellbeing is clear to all. While the response to COVID-19 saw the use of exceptional public health measures, the regulatory basis for these measures did not emerge from a vacuum, with many of the regulatory levers present in Australia prior to the pandemic. Pandemics have been a longstanding concern of government and non-government actors and officials and lawmakers have adopted regulatory measures designed to prepare for and, if possible, mitigate the risk from, infectious diseases. Existing literature, particularly within the security studies field, has centred a trilogy of 'biosecurity' issues that such measures seek to respond to: bioterrorism, emerging and remerging infectious diseases, and 'dual-use' pathogen research. Academics, health practitioners and humanitarian organisations alike, have expressed concern that the 'securitization of health' implicit in the concept of 'biosecurity' risks distorting regulatory responses and priorities, and creating space for 'exceptionalism' and norm violation. Drawing on the Copenhagen School's theory of 'securitization', and the insights of Braithwaite and Drahos (2000) on the mechanisms for the globalisation of rules and principles, this thesis adopts a case study research design to assess the role of securitization as a 'mechanism' in the development of biosecurity legislation and pandemic response measures in Australia. Cases examined include legislation and policymaking responding to fears in the mid-2000s about a hypothetical avian influenza pandemic in humans and post-2001 concerns about bioterrorism and dual-use research. Australia's response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic and 2013-16 West Africa Ebola outbreak are also explored. The study identifies multiple instances of securitization in Australia's pandemic preparedness law and policymaking. Securitization also features, in unexpected ways, in disease response. Novel findings from this study include a lack of genuine contestation between key legislative actors, and the use of hidden or implied threats and referent objects, for example the Australia-US security alliance. Likewise, this study found that superficially positive terms such as 'proportionality' were often deployed in aid of efforts to securitize a topic or profession, such as researchers. The significance of this study is its detailed analysis of the presence and use of security discourse in the development of biosecurity legislation and health measures. Its strength also arises from the use of multiple methods to examine and critique the analytical attention that security analysts commonly place on Ministers and public fora, offering a deeper examination of the role of public servants in deploying securitizing moves. Australia and the world are now moving to manage COVID-19 as an endemic disease. This transition will involve reflecting on what happened during the early years of the COVID-19 pandemic, and how the world can prepare for the next health emergency. It is hoped the thicker understanding this thesis provides of how Australia's pre-COVID-19 regulatory settings came to be, will support the development of future regulation and health measures that are clear-eyed as to the risks - and possible benefits - of securitizing disease.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/296871
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.titleSecuritization as a mechanism in Australia's biosecurity lawmaking and disease response
dc.typeThesis (PhD)
local.contributor.authoremailu4129387@anu.edu.au
local.contributor.supervisorFriel, Sharon
local.contributor.supervisorcontactu4162881@anu.edu.au
local.identifier.doi10.25911/BGMH-9J97
local.identifier.proquestYes
local.identifier.researcherIDHSH-9893-2023
local.mintdoimint
local.thesisANUonly.authore21d03b5-8bdb-4b97-8151-5e7b2425ac8c
local.thesisANUonly.key01edae1f-159f-157a-63ab-fbb473c3a5be
local.thesisANUonly.title000000010445_TC_1

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Securitization as a mechanism in Australian biosecurity lawmaking and disease response.pdf
Size:
5.97 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Thesis Material
Back to topicon-arrow-up-solid
 
APRU
IARU
 
edX
Group of Eight Member

Acknowledgement of Country

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.


Contact ANUCopyrightDisclaimerPrivacyFreedom of Information

+61 2 6125 5111 The Australian National University, Canberra

TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12002 (Australian University) CRICOS Provider Code: 00120C ABN: 52 234 063 906