The climate change issue is increasingly becoming the focus of the world. The discussion around how to solve this worldwide issue has never stopped. This essay will take global climate issues as the theme to discuss the realism of traditional security theories and the concept of "securitization" in critical security studies. The concept of "securitization" is an important concept put forward by the Copenhagen School. It emerged around the end of the Cold War and was a genre of critical security studies. There are great differences between critical security studies and state-centric traditional security studies. Innovation in security studies is accompanied by new flaws. By defending the theories of realism and criticizing the concept of securitization, we could obtain some possible ways to solve these global issues. At present, the theory of realism is still the most appropriate key to solve the climate change issue.

Xuanchang Cao. Critical Reflections on the Theories of Security Studies Based on Climate Change Issues. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences (2023) Vol. 6, Issue 20: 30-34. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJHSS.2023.062006.

[1] Buzan B, Wæver O. Macrosecuritisation and security constellations: reconsidering scale in securitisation theory [J]. Review of International Studies, 2009, 35(2): 253-276. 

[2] Campbell R. Opinion: The climate wars are here-whether we like it or not [J]. Renew: Technology for a Sustainable Future, 2021 (156): 16-17. 

[3] Christie R. Critical voices and human security: To endure, to engage or to critique? [J]. Security Dialogue, 2010, 41(2): 169-190.

[4] Falkner R. The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics [J]. International Affairs, 2016, 92(5): 1107-1125. 

[5] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Summary for Policymakers [M]// Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2022: 1-36.

[6] Parker C F, Karlsson C. The UN climate change negotiations and the role of the United States: assessing American leadership from Copenhagen to Paris [J]. Environmental Politics, 2018, 27(3): 519-540. 

[7] Snyder G H. Mearsheimer’s World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security: A Review Essay [J]. International Security, 2002, 27(1), 149–173.

[8] Stevens D, Vaughan-Williams N. Citizens and security threats: Issues, perceptions and consequences beyond the national frame [J]. British Journal of Political Science, 2016, 46(1): 149-175. 

[9] Theisen O M, Holtermann H, Buhaug H. Climate wars? Assessing the claim that drought breeds conflict [J]. International Security, 2011, 36(3): 79-106. 

[10] The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan [EB/OL]. UNFCCC, 2022[2023-09-22]. https://unfccc.int/documents/624444

[11] The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Submission by Transforma, iGST Latin America and the Carribean regional hub, Disclosure Insight Action (CDP) and Climate Analytics Carribean [EB/OL]. UNFCCC, 2023[2023-09-22]. https://unfccc.int/ documents/ 627558

[12] Wæver, O. Chapter 3: Securitization and Desecuritization [M]// Lipschutz R D. On Security. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995: 48-78. 

[13] Walt S M. Realism and security [M]// Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.

[14] Wohlforth W C. Realism and security studies [M]// Balzacq T, Dunn Cavelty M. The Routledge handbook of security studies. New York: Routledge, 2017.