# data[].attributes.body
1.) How does the concept of security/risk define the choices of companies (that presented the cases) and risk advisors (us in the reports)?

# data[].attributes.body
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY: Second order analysis --> Conceptual history

Koselleck - Skinner - Foucault (differences and commonalities tied the reports). Mentioning the three conceptual history approaches --> the one that I don't use will be put in the limitations of my work

Reports under Skinner's perspective --> reports as strategic moments.

Synchronic analysis:
--> study the immediate communicative situation
--> what speech can do in the contextual constraints
--> How key actors use the concepts
--> Focus on speakers' intentions and contextual constraints.
-->only on skinnners view: conceptual change through speech acts in strategic moments

Semantic field analysis: (Only Koselleck?)
--> Koselleck: concepts and counter-concepts related to key concepts
--> Skinner: Convention and their opponents
--> Foucault: discourses

Analyze concept from all three dimensions: 1.) Temporality 2.) Spatiality 3.) Hierarchy

exploring ambiguity, showing inconsistencies, highlighting confusing statements in the reports

# data[].attributes.body
The main aim is to explore differences in the use of the concept of security/risk

Secondary ojectives:

- find patterns in the use of the concept of security/risk
- find differences in their use
- highlight what understanding of risk and security are choosen/prioritized in the reports and presentations
- question presuppositions

# data[].attributes.body
To be announced

# data[].attributes.body
Main assumption (I don't have a conclusion) --> The concept of security changes based on the context it is used in and the people who interpret it.

# data[].attributes.body
- Danske Bank Report
- Danske Bank Website
- Danske Bank Power Point

- Control Risks Report
- Control Risks Website
- Control Risks Power Point

- PET Report
- PET Website
- PET Power Point

+ Power Points of Lecture 1, 2 and 6

----------------------------

Literature:
- Renn, O. (1992) "Concepts of Risk: A Classification" in Shelson Krimsky and Dominic Golding Social Theories of Risk, Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1992, pp. 53-82. (30 pages)

- Balwin, David A. 1997. "The Concept of Security." Review of International Studies, 23 (1): 5-26. (22 pages)

-Petersen, Karen Lund (2019) Teaching Innovation: Preparing for an uncertain future, chapter 1 and 3, Djøfs Forlag

-Schedler, Andreas (2011) “Concept formation”, in International Encyclopedia of Political Science, ed. by Bertrand Badie et al, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp. 371-383 (12 pages)

-Koselleck, Reinhart (1989) “Linguistic Change and the History of Events”, The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 61, No. 4 (Dec., 1989), pp. 649-666 (18 pages)

-Adcock, Robert (2005). 'What is a Concept?', Political Concepts: Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series [online] https://www.concepts-methods.org/Files/WorkingPaper/PC%201%20Adcock.pdf (37 pages)

- Wæver, Ole (2012) “Security: A Conceptual History for International Relations”, paper presented at “The History of the Concept of Security: from the Roman Republic to the Risk Society of today”, a conference arranged by Centre for Advanced Security Theory (CAST) at the University of Copenhagen and the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, November 26-28, 2012; the paper is 110 pages (and the whole paper is made available), but the obligatory part is only pages 2-24, summary and methodology. (22 pages)

- Rasmussen, Mikkel Vedby (2010) Risk and security. International Studies Compendium. Oxford: Blackwell, Publishing. Available at: www.isacompendium.com (36 pages).

- Corry, Olaf (2012), “Securitisation and 'Riskification': Second-order Security and the Politics of Climate Change”, Millennium - Journal of International Studies 40(2), pp. 235-258 (23 pages)

-Petersen, Karen Lund (2014) ‘The Politics of Corporate Security and the Translation of National Security’ in Kevin Walby and Randy K. Lippert Corporate Security in the 21st Century. Theory and Practice in International Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 78-94 (17 pages)

- Andersen, Niels Åkerstrøm (2003) Discursive analytical strategies: Understanding Foucault Koselleck,

Laclau, Luhmann, Policy Press. Chapters 1+5, pp. 1-33 and 93-118 (59 pages)

- Skinner, Quentin (2002) Visions of Politics: regarding method, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, chapters 1+5. pp. 1-7, 90-102 (18 pages)

- Skinner, Quentin (1995) "The State", in Terence Ball, James Farr, and Russell L. Hanson (eds.), Political Innovation and Conceptual Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 90-131 (42 pages)

- Koselleck, Reinhart (1985) “Begriffsgeschichte and Social History”, in Reinhart Koselleck, Futures Past, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 73-91 (19 pages)

- Ifversen, Jan (2011) “About key concepts and how to study them” Contributions to the History of Concepts, 6:1, pp. 65-88 (18 pages)

- Richter, Melvin (1995) The History of Political and Social Concepts, Oxford: Oxford University Press, chapter 2, pp. 26-57. (32 pages)

# data[].attributes.body
What is a concept? Concepts are part of the world and the world is accordingly changed by the use of concepts. Concepts acquire their meaning from their uses in their respective historical contexts.

There are various definitions to indicate the essence of a concept.
1.) Concepts are sub-components of thoughts
2.) Concepts are mental representations
3.) Concepts are guides to categories
4.) Concepts are the meaning of subsentential expressions
5.) Concepts are those things pivotal to understanding languages and discourses --> Understanding concept is built on understanding other concepts
6.) Concepts are abilities that are peculiar to cognitive agents

"Externalist" understand concepts as vehicles who mediate between referents, signifier and signified
--> Referents: objects or actions in the real world to which you can refer stuff and doing stuff
--> Signifier: Symbol or utterances used to refer to the referent (names and other stuff that helps us know what stuff is what stuff)
-->Signfied: The semantic net that denotes an understanding of a referent at a psycho-cultural level.

Externalists: point at stuff and say that is that -->singular proposition: a proposition hacing as its subject a proper name or descriptive phrase which applies only to one individual.
Internalists: have to think through things every time --> see concepts are thought's contents

Concepts are used and interpreted in different ways by people, are influenced by (and influence) culture.
Consequently, companies use the concepts in the way that suits more their view. For example, the concept of security in Company A is related to the security of THEIR company and how THEY understand security which differs on how company B understands the concept.