Page 162 - 《国际安全研究》2020年第3期

Journal of International Security Studies
successfully address the challenge posed by terrorist organizations’ constant efforts
to seek biological weapons, proactively respond to the persistent pressure generated
by hostile countries’ possession and development of biological weapons and
efficiently tackle the weak binding regulations of the international community. The
US biodefense policy has a dual impact on global biosecurity. On the one hand, it
will promote international cooperation by conducting exchanges and dialogues with
other countries or relevant international organizations as well as providing
biosecurity assistance to them. On the other hand, subject to massive biodefense
projects, enormous input in terms of funds and the “domestic security interests
always go first” thinking, it may incur risks and thus jeopardize the global
biosecurity situation.
[Keywords] biodefense policy, bioterrorism, biological weapons, national security,
biosecurity
[Authors] LIU Changmin, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor, Department of
International Relations, School of Political Science and Public Administration,
China University of Political Science and Law; SONG Mingjing, Ph.D. Student,
Department of International Relations, School of Political Science and Public
Administration, China University of Political Science and Law (Beijing, 100088).

127 Fragmentation in Security Construction of Biodiversity Issues
WANG Sidan
[Abstract] The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) have been the significant
institutional frameworks for global environmental governance and cooperation since
1992. Biodiversity issues deserve more attention from the international community
in terms of international cooperation, social recognition and progress in actions and
governance. While biodiversity governance is no less urgent than other global
environmental issues, its fragmented securitization is not conducive to the
construction of a holistic security awareness. The fragmentation in security
construction of biodiversity issues presents itself at four levels: ecological
conservation, objectives of governance, international negotiations, states and other
actors. As far as the ecological conservation is concerned, it is important to raise
people’s security awareness about biodiversity. The objectives of governance focus
on the links between the “Aichi Targets” and security. The international negotiations
cover such issues as financial mechanisms, resource mobilization, access and
benefit-sharing (ABS) to and of genetic resources, protected areas (PAs) and the
mainstreaming of the issue. Contracting parties and other actors have not only raised
their own concerns about different topics but also integrated the construction of
biodiversity security into multiple security concerns such as food, water, public
health and economic security. However, although the biodiversity issue has been
incorporated into security discourse, its fragmented security construction fails to
promote effective global governance due to a lack of common awareness of
biodiversity security as well as concise and clear-cut governance objectives and
paths.
[Keywords] biodiversity, securitization, security construction, ecological security,
environmental security, security governance
[Author] WANG Sidan, Lecturer, Institute of International Relations, China
Foreign Affairs University (Beijing, 100037).
（本期英文编辑：张国帅 高静）

· 160 ·