text:
Human security
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Human security is an emerging paradigm for understanding global vulnerabilities whose proponents challenge the traditional notion of national security by arguing that the proper referent for security should be the individual rather than the state. Human security holds that a people-centred, multi-disciplinary understanding of security involving a number of research fields, including development studies, international relations, strategic studies, and human rights[clarification needed]. The United Nations Development Programme's 1994 Human Development Report[1] is considered a milestone publication in the field of human security, with its argument that insuring "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" for all persons is the best path to tackle the problem of global insecurity.[2]
Critics of the concept argue that its vagueness undermines its effectiveness,[3] that it has become little more than a vehicle for activists wishing to promote certain causes, and that it does not help the research community understand what security means or help decision makers to formulate good policies.[4] Alternatively, other scholars have argued that the concept of human security should be broadened to encompass military security: 'In other words, if this thing called ‘human security’ has the concept of ‘the human’ embedded at the heart of it, then let us address the question of the human condition directly. Thus understood, human security would no longer be the vague amorphous add-on to harder edged areas of security such as military security or state security.'[5]
In order for human security to challenge global inequalities, there has to be cooperation between a country’s foreign policy and its approach to global health. However, the interest of the state has continued to overshadow the interest of the people. For instance, Canada's foreign policy, "three Ds", has been criticized for emphasizing defense more than development.[6]
Contents
[hide]
1 Origins
2 Concept
2.1 UNDP's 1994 definition
2.2 Freedom from Fear vs Freedom from Want and beyond
2.3 Relationship with traditional security
2.4 Relationship with development
2.5 Relationship with human rights
2.6 Relationship with non-governmental organizations
2.7 Relationship with the environment
2.8 Gender and human security
2.9 Prevent, react, and rebuild
3 Relationship with Humanitarian Action
4 Practice
4.1 Humanitarian intervention
4.2 Anti-personnel landmines
5 Criticism
6 Formulation of a Human Security Index and an environment for discussing same
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
Origins[edit]
The emergence of the human security discourse was the product of a convergence of factors at the end of the Cold War. These challenged the dominance of the neorealist paradigm’s focus on states, “mutually assured destruction” and military security and briefly enabled a broader concept of security to emerge. The increasingly rapid pace of globalisation; the failure of liberal state building through the instruments of the Washington Consensus; the reduced threat of nuclear war between the superpowers, the exponential rise in the spread and consolidation of democratisation and international human rights norms opened a space in which both ‘development’ and concepts of ‘security’ could be reconsidered.
At the same time the increasing number of internal violent conflicts in Africa, Asia and Europe (Balkans) resulted in concepts of national and international security failing to reflect the challenges of the post Cold War security environment whilst the failure of neoliberal development models to generate growth, particularly in Africa, or to deal with the consequences of complex new threats (such as HIV and climate change) reinforced the sense that international institutions and states were not organised to address such problems in an integrated way.
The principal possible indicators of movement toward an individualized conception of security lie in the first place in the evolution of international society's consideration of rights of individuals in the face of potential threats from states. The most obvious foci of analysis here are the UN Charter, the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and its associated covenants (1966), and conventions related to particular crimes (e.g.,genocide) and the rights of particular groups (e.g., women, racial groups, and refugees).[7]
Concept[edit]
UNDP's 1994 definition[edit]
Mahbub ul Haq first drew global attention to the concept of human security in the United Nations Development Programme's 1994 Human Development Report and sought to influence the UN's 1995 World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen. The UNDP's 1994 Human Development Report's definition of human security argues that the scope of global security should be expanded to include threats in seven areas:
Coloured world map indicating Human Development Index (as of 2008). Countries coloured green exhibit high human development, those coloured yellow/orange exhibit medium human development, and those coloured red exhibit low human development.
The 2003 map
Economic security – Economic security requires an assured basic income for individuals, usually from productive and remunerative work or, as a last resort, from a publicly financed safety net. In this sense, only about a quarter of the world’s people are presently economically secure. While the economic security problem may be more serious in developing countries, concern also arises in developed countries as well. Unemployment problems constitute an important factor underlying political tensions and ethnic violence.
Food security – Food security requires that all people at all times have both physical and economic access to basic food. According to the United Nations, the overall availability of food is not a problem, rather the problem often is the poor distribution of food and a lack of purchasing power. In the past, food security problems have been dealt with at both national and global levels. However, their impacts are limited. According to UN, the key is to tackle the problems relating to access to assets, work and assured income (related to economic security).
Health security – Health Security aims to guarantee a minimum protection from diseases and unhealthy lifestyles. In developing countries, the major causes of death traditionally were infectious and parasitic diseases, whereas in industrialized countries, the major killers were diseases of the circulatory system. Today, lifestyle-related chronic diseases are leading killers worldwide, with 80 percent of deaths from chronic diseases occurring in low- and middle-income countries.[8] According to the United Nations, in both developing and industrial countries, threats to health security are usually greater for poor people in rural areas, particularly children. This is due to malnutrition and insufficient access to health services, clean water and other basic necessities.
Environmental security – Environmental security aims to protect people from the short- and long-term ravages of nature, man-made threats in nature, and deterioration of the natural environment. In developing countries, lack of access to clean water resources is one of the greatest environmental threats. In industrial countries, one of the major threats is air pollution. Global warming, caused by the emission of greenhouse gases, is another environmental security issue.
Personal security – Personal security aims to protect people from physical violence, whether from the state or external states, from violent individuals and sub-state actors, from domestic abuse, or from predatory adults. For many people, the greatest source of anxiety is crime, particularly violent crime.
Community security – Community security aims to protect people from the loss of traditional relationships and values and from sectarian and ethnic violence. Traditional communities, particularly minority ethnic groups are often threatened. About half of the world’s states have experienced some inter-ethnic strife. The United Nations declared 1993 the Year of Indigenous People to highlight the continuing vulnerability of the 300 million aboriginal people in 70 countries as they face a widening spiral of violence.
Political security – Political security is concerned with whether people live in a society that honors their basic human rights. According to a survey conducted by Amnesty International, political repression, systematic torture, ill treatment or disappearance was still practised in 110 countries. Human rights violations are most frequent during periods of political unrest. Along with repressing individuals and groups, governments may try to exercise control over ideas and information.
Since then, human security has been receiving more attention from the key global development institutions, such as the World Bank. Tadjbakhsh, among others, traces the evolution of human security in international organizations, concluding that the concept has been manipulated and transformed considerably since 1994 to fit organizational interests.[9]
Freedom from Fear vs Freedom from Want and beyond[edit]
In an ideal world, each of the UNDP's seven categories of threats (and perhaps others as a broader discussion might prioritize) would receive adequate global attention and resources. Yet attempts to implement this human security agenda have led to the emergence of two major schools of thought on how to best practice human security – '"Freedom from Fear"' and '"Freedom from Want"'. While the UNDP 1994 report originally argued that human security requires attention to both freedom from fear and freedom from want, divisions have gradually emerged over the proper scope of that protection (e.g. over what threats individuals should be protected from) and over the appropriate mechanisms for responding to these threats.
Freedom from Fear – This school seeks to limit the practice of Human Security to protecting individuals from violent conflicts while recognizing that these violent threats are strongly associated with poverty, lack of state capacity and other forms of inequities.[10] This approach argues that limiting the focus to violence is a realistic and manageable approach towards Human Security. Emergency assistance, conflict prevention and resolution, peace-building are the main concerns of this approach. Canada, for example, was a critical player in the efforts to ban landmines and has incorporated the "Freedom from Fear" agenda as a primary component in its own foreign policy. However, whether such “narrow” approach can truly serve its purpose in guaranteeing more fruitful results remains to be an issue. For instance, the conflicts in Darfur are often used in questioning the effectiveness of the "Responsibility to Protect”, a key component of the Freedom from Fear agenda.
Freedom from Want – The school advocates a holistic approach in achieving human security and argues that the threat agenda should be broadened to include hunger, disease and natural disasters because they are inseparable concepts in addressing the root of human insecurity[1] and they kill far more people than war, genocide and terrorism combined.[10] Different from "Freedom from Fear", it expands the focus beyond violence with emphasis on development and security goals.
Despite their differences, these two approaches to human security can be considered complementary rather than contradictory.[10] Expressions to this effect include:
Franklin D. Roosevelt's famous Four Freedoms speech of 1941, in which "Freedom from Want" is characterized as the third and "Freedom from Fear" is the fourth such fundamental, universal, freedom.
The Government of Japan considers Freedom from Fear and Freedom from Want to be equal in developing Japan’s foreign policy. Moreover, the UNDP 1994 called for the world’s attention to both agendas.
Surin Pitsuwan, current Secretary-General of ASEAN cites theorists such as Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Houme to conclude that "human security is the primary purpose of organizing a state in the beginning.".[11] He goes on to observe that the 1994 Human Development Report states that it is "reviving this concept" and suggests that the authors of the 1994 HDR may be alluding to Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech without literally citing that presentation.
Although "freedom from fear" and "freedom from want" are the most commonly referred to categories of human security practice, an increasing number of alternative ideas continue to emerge on how to best practice human security. Among them:
Paul James.[12] James asks two apparently simple questions: Firstly, why, if 'the human’ as a category by definition encompasses all considerations of governance, the state and the military, does military security continue to be treated as prior, more significant, or even equal to human security. By contrast, "when children play ‘category’ games", he says, "they implicitly understand such issues of ordering". Secondly, why does human security get narrowly defined in terms of liberal notions of 'freedom': freedom from want and freedom from fear. In response to these two questions, he provides the following alternative definition, with human security encompassing military security:
Human security can be defined as one of the foundational conditions of being human, including both (1) the sustainable protection and provision of the material conditions for meeting the embodied needs of people, and (2) the protection of the variable existential conditions for maintaining a dignified life. Within this definition it then makes sense that the core focus of human-security endeavours should be on the most vulnerable. It makes sense that risk management should be most responsive to immediate events or processes that have both an extensive and intensive impact in producing material and existential vulnerabilities of people in general or a category of persons across a particular locale.[12]:87
G. King and C. Murray.[13] King and Murray try to narrow down the human security definition to one's "expectation of years of life without experiencing the state of generalized poverty". In their definition, the "generalized poverty" means "falling below critical thresholds in any domain of well-being"; and it is in the same article, they give brief review and categories of "Domains of Well-being". This set of definition is similar to "freedom from want" but more concretely focused on some value system.
Caroline Thomas.[14][15] She regards human security as describing "a condition of existence" which entails basic material needs, human dignity, including meaningful participation in the life of the community, and an active and substantive notion of democracy from the local to the global.
Roland Paris.[3] He argues that many ways to define "human security" are related with certain set of value and lose the neutral position. So he suggests to take human security as a category of research. As such, he gives a 2*2 matrix to illustrate the security studies field.
Security for Whom?
What is the Source of the Security Threat?
Military Military, Non-military, or Both
States National security
(conventional realist approach to security studies)
Redefined security
(e.g., environmental and economic [cooperative or comprehensive] security)
Societies, Groups, and Individuals Intrastate security
(e.g., civil war, ethnic conflict, and democide)
Human security
(e.g., environmental and economic threats to the survival of societies, groups, and individuals)
Sabina Alkire.[16] Different with those approaches seek to narrow down and specify the objective of human security, Sabina Alkire pushes the idea a step further as "to safeguard the vital core of all human lives from critical pervasive threats, without impeding long-term human fulfilment". In a concept as such, she suggests the "vital core" cover a minimal or basic or fundamental set of functions related to survival, livelihood and dignity; and all institutions should at least and necessarily protect the core from any intervention.
Lyal S. Sunga.[17] In 2009, Professor Sunga argued that a concept of human security that is fully informed by international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law and international refugee law, and which takes into account the relevant international legal norms prohibiting the use of force in international relations, will likely prove more valuable to international legal theory and practice over the longer term, than a concept of human security which does not meet these conditions because these fields of law represent the objectified political will of States rather than the more subjective biases of scholars.
Relationship with traditional security[edit]
See also: Political realism
Coined in the early 1990s, the term human security has been used by thinkers who have sought to shift the discourse on security away from its traditional state-centered orientation to the protection and advancement of individuals within societies.[7][18] Human security emerged as a challenge to ideas of traditional security, but human and traditional or national security are not mutually exclusive concepts. It has been argued that, without human security, traditional state security cannot be attained and vice versa.[10]
Europe after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648
Traditional security is about a state's ability to defend itself against external threats. Traditional security (often referred to as national security or state security) describes the philosophy of international security predominance since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 and the rise of the nation-states. While international relations theory includes many variants of traditional security, from realism to liberalism, the fundamental trait that these schools share is their focus on the primacy of the nation-state.
The following table contrasts four differences between the two perspectives:
Traditional Security
Human Security
Referent Traditional security policies are designed to promote demands ascribed to the state. Other interests are subordinated to those of the state. Traditional security protects a state's boundaries, people, institutions and values. Human security is people-centered. Its focus shifts to protecting individuals. The important dimensions are to entail the well-being of individuals and respond to ordinary people's needs in dealing with sources of threats.
Scope Traditional security seeks to defend states from external aggression.Walter Lippmann explained that state security is about a state's ability to deter or defeat an attack.[19] It makes use of deterrence strategies to maintain the integrity of the state and protect the territory from external threats. In addition to protecting the state from external aggression, human security would expand the scope of protection to include a broader range of threats, including environmental pollution, infectious diseases, and economic deprivation.
Actor(s) The state is the sole actor. Decision making power is centralized in the government. Traditional security assumes that a sovereign state is operating in an anarchical international environment, in which there is no world governing body to enforce international rules of conduct. The realization of human security involves not only governments, but a broader participation of different actors,[20] viz. regional and international organizations, non-governmental organizations and local communities.
Means Traditional security relies upon building up national power and military defense. The common forms it takes are armament races, alliances, strategic boundaries etc. Human security not only protects, but also empowers people and societies as a means of security. People contribute by identifying and implementing solutions to insecurity.
Relationship with development[edit]
See also: International development and Development economics
Human security also challenged and drew from the practice of international development.
Traditionally, embracing liberal market economics was considered to be the universal path for economic growth, and thus development for all humanity.[14] Yet, continuing conflict and human rights abuses following the end of the Cold War and the fact that two-thirds of the global population seemed to have gained little from the economic gains of globalization,[21] led to fundamental questions about the way development was practiced. Accordingly, human development has emerged in the 1990s to challenge the dominant paradigm of liberal economy in the development community. Human development proponents argue that economic growth is insufficient to expand people’s choice or capabilities, areas such as health, education, technology, the environment, and employment should not be neglected.
Human security could be said to further enlarge the scope for examining the causes and consequences of underdevelopment, by seeking to bridge the divide between development and security. Too often, militaries didn’t address or factor in the underlying causes of violence and insecurity while development workers often underplayed the vulnerability of development models to violent conflict . Human security springs from a growing consensus that these two fields need to be more fully integrated in order to enhance security for all.
The paper "Development and Security" by Frances Stewart argues that security and development are deeply interconnected.[22]
Human security forms an important part of people’s well-being, and is therefore an objective of development.
An objective of development is “the enlargement of human choices”. Insecurity cuts life short and thwarts the use of human potential, thereby affecting the reaching of this objective.
Lack of human security has adverse consequences on economic growth, and therefore development.
Some development costs are obvious. For example, in wars, people who join the army or flee can no longer work productively. Also, destroying infrastructure reduces the productive capacity of the economy.
Imbalanced development that involves horizontal inequalities is an important source of conflict.
Therefore, vicious cycles of lack of development which leads to conflict, then to lack of development, can readily emerge. Likewise, virtuous cycles are possible, with high levels of security leading to development, which further promotes security in return.
Further, it could also be said that the practice of human development and human security share three fundamental elements:[16]
First, human security and human development are both people-centered. They challenge the orthodox approach to security and development i.e. state security and liberal economic growth respectively. Both emphasize people are be the ultimate ends but not means. Both treat human as agents and should be empowered to participate in the course.
Second, both perspectives are multidimensional. Both address people’s dignity as well as their material and physical concerns.
Third, both schools of thought consider poverty and inequality as the root causes of individual vulnerability.
Despite these similarities, the relationship with development is one of the most contested areas of human security . "Freedom from fear" advocates, such as Andrew Mack, argue that human security should focus on the achievable goals of decreasing individual vulnerability to violent conflict, rather than broadly defined goals of economic and social development. Others, such as Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy, argue that human development and human security are inextricably linked since progress in one enhances the chances of progress in another while failure in one increases risk of failure of another.[23]
The following table is adopted from Tadjbakhsh[24] to help clarify the relationship between these two concepts.
Variables
Human Development
Human Security
Values Well-being. Security, stability, sustainability of development gains
Orientation Moves forward, is progressive and aggregate: “Together we rise” Looks at who was left behind at the individual level: “Divided we fall”
Time Frame Long term Combines short-term measures to deal with risks with long term prevention efforts.
General objectives Growth with equity. Expanding the choices and opportunities of people to lead lives they value. “Insuring” downturns with security. Identification of risks, prevention to avoid them through dealing with root causes, preparation to mitigate them, and cushioning when disaster strikes.
Policy goals Empowerment, sustainability, equity and productivity. Protection and promotion of human survival (freedom from fear), daily life (freedom from want), and the avoidance of indignities (life of dignity).
Relationship with human rights[edit]
See also: Human rights
Human security is indebted to the human rights tradition (the ideas of natural law and natural rights). The development of the human security model can be seen to have drawn upon ideas and concepts fundamental to the human rights tradition. Both approaches use the individual as the main referent and both argue that a wide range of issues (i.e. civil rights, cultural identity, access to education and healthcare) are fundamental to human dignity. A major difference between the two models is in their approach to addressing threats to human dignity and survival. Whilst the human rights framework takes a legalistic approach, the human security framework, by utilizing a diverse range of actors, adopts flexible and issue-specific approaches, which can operate at local, national or international levels.
The nature of the relationship between human security and human rights is contested among human security advocates. Some human security advocates argue that the goal of human security should be to build upon and strengthen the existing global human rights legal framework.[25] However, other advocates view the human rights legal framework as part of the global insecurity problem and believe that a human security approach should propel us to move above and beyond this legalistic approach to get at the underlying sources of inequality and violence which are the root causes of insecurity in today's world.[14]
Relationship with non-governmental organizations[edit]
See also: Non-governmental organization
The term NGO (Non Government Organisation) cannot be simply defined due to complexities surrounding its structure, environment and complex relations it shares with its internal factions; being its organisational mission, membership and sources of funding, and external factors such as the relationship it shares with actors; detailing the economic, political and societal constructs they may be bound by. A generic understanding of the term may refer to the actions taken in the interests of independent, voluntary contributors which exist independently from governments and corporations, designed to represent and provide a collective voice to individuals regarding issues. These issues cover contributions to the fields and industries of human development, health and nutrition, human rights and education, and environmental concerns; all of which influence and affect human security.
The traditional roles of NGOs may be classified into three components, in accordance with Lewis:[26]
- Implementer: refers to the mobilisation of resources in order to aid the provision of goods and services, such as the act of service delivery.
- Catalyst: refers to the emotional and psychological aspect of the NGOs ability to inspire, facilitate or contribute to spur action or thinking.
- Partner: refers to the NGOs relationships shared with external actors such as governments, donors or the private sector players through joint activities, or projects with communities, with the purpose to strengthen the relationship between the NGOs and these partners in a mutually beneficial fashion.
The expansion of these roles have culminated in assisting the creation of a society where NGOs serve as important players in the global arena in regards to maintaining human security. Due to this increasing influence and the emergence of growing natural and man-made disasters, NGOs now are contracted by governments in order to adequately respond to crises, as well as assist individual or collectivised groups of citizens in lobbying their interests; thus culminating in the ability to enact, influence and change government agendas. However, NGOs are still largely dependent on certain levels of government funding, hence critics may argue that NGOs pose the ability to potentially damage issues of human security due to this financial dependence. Despite these critiqes, the focus, expertise and infrastructure developed by NGOs through their activities linked with human development and human rights allow them to make unique contributions to human security provision.[27]
Relationship with the environment[edit]
Comprehensive human security attempts to unify environmental security together with social (societal) security. A great number of intertwined environmental and social components together create the framework for comprehensive human security under the assumption that neither of those two categories is attainable in the long run without synergy between the two.[28] That is to say that the trends in environmental, resource, and population stresses are intensifying and will increasingly determine the quality of human life on our planet and as such are a large determining factor of our social security.[29]
Arthur H. Westing posits that the two interdependent branches of comprehensive human security can be broken down into a series of subcomponents to better achieve optimal environmental and social security. Environmental security is composed of two subcomponents: (a) Rational resource utilization, that is resource use that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”[30] Social security can be simplified to components of (a) Established political safeguards, (b) Economic safeguards, (c) Personal safeguards, and (d) Military safeguards.[28]
The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) states that a major goal of comprehensive human security is to “transmit practical recommendations to policy-makers on how to strengthen human security through better environmental management and more effective natural resource governance.”[31] The overreaching goal being a pervasive global mindset that recognizes the interdependent natures of the natural environment and our collective social security.
Gender and human security[edit]
Human security focuses on the serious neglect of gender concerns under the traditional security model. Traditional security’s focus on external military threats to the state has meant that the majority of threats women face have been overlooked. By focusing on the individual, the human security model aims to address the security concerns of both women and men equally. Women are often victims of violence and conflict: they form the majority of civilian deaths; the majority of refugees; and, are often the victims of cruel and degrading practices, such as rape.[32]:96 Women's security is also threatened by unequal access to resources, services and opportunities.[32]:97–100 Women's rights are neglected especially in the Middle East and Southeast Asian regions where customary practices are still prevalent. Although there are different opinions on the issue of customary practices, it infringes upon human security's notion where women and men are innated with equal human rights. Attempts to eradicate such violent customary practices requires political and legal approaches where human security in relation to gender should be brought up as the main source of assertion. Such cruel customary practices as honor killing, burning brides and widows, child marriage are still in existence because of women's vulnerability in economic independence and security. Human security in relationship to gender tries to overthrow such traditional pracitices that are incompatible to the rights of women. Also human security seeks to empower women, through education, participation and access, as gender equality is seen as a necessary precondition for peace, security and a prosperous society.[32]:105–107
Prevent, react, and rebuild[edit]
See also: Responsibility to protect
Human security seeks to address underlying causes and long-term implications of conflicts instead of simply reacting to problems, as the traditional security approach is often accused of doing. "The basic point of preventive efforts is, of course, to reduce, and hopefully eliminate, the need for intervention altogether,"[33]:19 while an investment in rehabilitation or rebuilding seeks to ensure that former conflicts do not breed future violence. The concepts of prevention and rebuilding are clearly embraced as the “responsibility to prevent” and well elaborated in "The Responsibility to protect report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty."
Relationship with Humanitarian Action[edit]
In several senses there is a natural fit between human security concepts and humanitarian principles. The concern with the protection of people or individuals is a core humanitarian value as well as of human security. In this sense it shares human security’s merging of development and security and the casting of the protection of life as the referent object.
Human security and humanitarian action also shared a similar process of evolution. The rise of the human security discourse in the 1990s paralleled an equally rapid expansion in humanitarian roles and a broadening in the objectives of humanitarianism that was labeled the ‘new humanitarianism’. Humanitarian assistance, once encompassing a narrow set of emergency based life saving interventions conducted by a small group of relatively independent actors, became ‘an organising principle for intervention in internal conflicts, a tool for peacebuilding and the starting-point for addressing poverty, as well as a palliative in times of conflict and crisis.’ It also merged with development concerns such as the promotion of social justice and societal cohesion.
The human security discourse was also used as a tool to resist aid policies becoming hijacked by narrow security concerns. States, such as the Republic of Ireland, promoted the Human Security concept as a way to ensure a more balanced approach to security and development issues both nationally and within the EU.
Despite the sense of a natural fit between human security concepts and humanitarian principles they have enjoyed a difficult relationship. Human security perspectives have the potential to interfere with the traditionally apolitical nature of humanitarianism in conflict situations, leading to a blurring of the boundaries between politico-military interventions and those designed primarily to reduce suffering.[34] In another sense the emphasis on human security has legitimised the idea of armed international intervention as a "moral duty" if states are deemed incapable or unwilling of protecting their citizens. Similarly the adoption of 'holistic' security and development strategies within UN Integrated peacekeeping missions is viewed by some as having the potential to compromise humanitarian principles.
Authors such as White and Cliffe drew attention to the way in which the 'broadening of aid objectives from pure survival support towards rehabilitation, development and/ or peace-building' led to the 'dilution of commitment to core humanitarian principles'. Furthermore, many humanitarian organisations have sought to develop rights-based approaches to assistance strategies which challenge the apolitical approach of traditional humanitarianism. Rights based approaches view poverty and vulnerability as rooted in power relations – specifically, the denial of power, which is itself related to the denial of human rights. Hence rights based approaches to humanitarian action relate the achievement of security for marginalized people to the realization of their human rights and often to broader social change. Multimandate humanitarian organisations that seek more inclusive and participatory forms of citizenship and governance and the achievement of broader social rights outcomes therefore risk enmeshing apolitical humanitarian responses in advocacy programmes that push for broader social changes.
Practice[edit]
While there are numerous examples of the human security approach in action, two notable global political events with direct ties to the human security agenda include the development of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principles guiding humanitarian intervention and the passage of the Ottawa Treaty banning anti-personnel landmines.
Humanitarian intervention[edit]
Main article: Humanitarian intervention
The application of human security is highly relevant within the area of humanitarian intervention, as it focuses on addressing the deep rooted and multi-factorial problems inherent in humanitarian crises, and offers more long term resolutions. In general, the term humanitarian intervention generally applies to when a state uses force against another state in order to alleviate suffering in the latter state (See, humanitarian intervention).
Under the traditional security paradigm humanitarian intervention is contentious. As discussed above, the traditional security paradigm places emphasis on the notion of states. Hence, the principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention that are paramount in the traditional security paradigm make it difficult to justify the intervention of other states in internal disputes. Through the development of clear principles based on the human security concept, there has been a step forward in the development of clear rules of when humanitarian intervention can occur and the obligations of states that intervene in the internal disputes of a state.
These principles on humanitarian intervention are the product of a debate pushed by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. He posed a challenge to the international community to find a new approach to humanitarian intervention that responded to its inherent problems.[33] In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) produced the "Responsibility to protect", a comprehensive report detailing how the “right of humanitarian intervention” could be exercised. It was considered a triumph for the human security approach as it emphasized and gathered much needed attention to some of its main principles:
The protection of individual welfare is more important than the state. If the security of individuals is threatened internally by the state or externally by other states, state authority can be overridden.
Addressing the root causes of humanitarian crises (e.g. economic, political or social instability) is a more effective way to solve problems and protect the long-term security of individuals.
Prevention is the best solution. A collective understanding of the deeper social issues along with a desire to work together is necessary to prevent humanitarian crises, thereby preventing a widespread absence of human security within a population (which may mean investing more in development projects).
The report illustrates the usefulness of the human security approach, particularly its ability to examine the cause of conflicts that explain and justify humanitarian intervention. In addition, it could also act as a paradigm for identifying, prioritizing and resolving large transnational problems, one of the fundamental factors that act as a stimulus for humanitarian intervention in the first place. However, human security still faces difficulties concerning the scope of its applicability, as large problems requiring humanitarian intervention usually are built up from an array of socio-political, cultural and economic problems that may be beyond the limitations of humanitarian projects.[35] On the other hand, successful examples of the use of human security principles within interventions can be found.
The success of humanitarian intervention in international affairs is varied. As discussed above, humanitarian intervention is a contentious issue. Examples of humanitarian intervention illustrate, that in some cases intervention can lead to disastrous results, as in Srebrenica and Somalia. In other cases, a lack of clarity as to the rules of when intervention can occur has resulted in tragic inaction, as was witnessed during the Rwandan genocide. One example is of a successful humanitarian intervention and also of humanitarian principles being applied is East Timor which, prior to its independence, was plagued with massive human rights abuses by pro-Indonesian militias and an insurgency war led by indigenous East Timorese against Indonesian forces. A peacekeeping mission was deployed to safeguard the move to independence and the UN established the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). This not only dealt with traditional security priorities, but also helped in nation building projects, coordinated humanitarian aid and civil rehabilitation, illustrating not only a successful humanitarian intervention but also an effective application of human security principles.
Anti-personnel landmines[edit]
Main article: Ottawa Convention
State Parties to the Ottawa Treaty
In contrast to the traditional security discourse which sees security as focused on protecting state interests, human security proponents believe that Anti-personnel mines could not be viable weapons of war due to the massive collateral damage they cause, their indiscriminate nature and persistence after conflict. In particular, they argue that Anti-personnel mines differ from most weapons, which have to be aimed and fired since they have the potential to kill and maim long after the warring parties have ceased fighting. The United Nations has reckoned that landmines are at least ten times more likely to kill or injure a civilian after a conflict than a combatant during hostilities.[36] The effects are also long-lasting. The ICBL estimates that anti-personnel mines were the cause of 5,751 casualties in 2006.[37] Whereas traditionally, states would justify these negative impacts of mines due to the advantage they give on the battlefield, under the human security lens, this is untenable as the wide-ranging post-conflict impact on the day-to-day experience of individuals outweighs the military advantage.
The Ottawa Convention, which led to the banning of anti-personnel landmines, is seen as a victory for the Human Security agenda. The Ottawa Convention has proved to be a huge step forward in the 'Freedom from Fear' approach. In Ottawa, the negotiations were moved outside traditional disarmament forums, thus avoiding the entrenched logic of traditional arms control measures.[38]:36 According to Don Hubert, an advocate of Human Security from the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, the main reason for its success was a multilateral focus. While INGO's like the UN and the ICRC remain the key players along with middle power states like Norway and Canada, its actual power and push comes from the involvement of a host of civil society actors (NGOs) and the general public.[38] Human Security proponents believe that this treaty has set new standards in humanitarian advocacy and has acted as a landmark in international lawmaking for a more secure world.
Critics of the treaty, however, caution against complacency on its success. Many states, they point out, have neither signed nor ratified this convention. They include China, Russia and the United States who are major contributors to the global weapons trade.[39] Second, even though there were a diverse group of civil society actors, the real influence on the treaty came from the ones in the 'global north'. Third, cynics may argue that the success of this campaign stems from the fact that these weapons were outdated and of limited military value and this treaty just helped to accelerate a process that would have happened anyway.[40]
Criticism[edit]
Walter Dorn raises several additional criticisms. In particular he asks whether it is in fact as radical a departure in foreign policy terms as is sometimes claimed. Dorn argues that international community has been concerned with issues of human safety since at least the time of the establishment of the International Committee of the Red Cross in the 1860s. Stuart Gordon argues that Canada, one of its principal adherents, has in many ways simply recast its traditional Pearsonian foreign policy in the language of human security. Dorn also questioned whether the concept was really necessary ‘since all the initiatives in the human security agenda were already advancing before the advent of the concept.’ Finally he suggests that the concept may be counterproductive. In their effort to fortify against ‘virtually limitless UN interventionism’ governments may repress ‘their populations into servility."
Richard Jolly and Deepayan Basu Ray, in their UNDP report, suggest that the key criticisms of human security include: Human security does not have any definite boundaries, therefore anything and everything could be considered a risk to security. This makes the task of policy formulation nearly impossible; Human security, when broadened to include issues like climate change and health, complicates the international machinery for reaching decisions or taking action on the threats identified; Human security risks engaging the military in issues best tackled through non-military means; Human security under the UN risks raising hopes about the UN’s capacity, which it cannot fulfil.
Other authors, such as Roland Paris, argue that human security is not such a fundamental recasting of the security debate in terms of a central struggle ‘between Realist, traditional, state-based, interest-based, approaches and new, Liberal cosmopolitan, de-territorialised, values-based approaches, which focus on individual human needs. ‘ Rather, he suggests that the talk of two radically different ‘paradigms’ has been much exaggerated.
Formulation of a Human Security Index and an environment for discussing same[edit]
As if to answer the points above, a Human Security Index[41] was prototyped and released in 2008. Project coordinator D. A. Hastings notes that "if one were challenged to create an index on the condition of people-centric Human Security, such as the authors of the Human Development Index faced in 1990 and expanded qualitatively in 1994, one could now begin to do so – at least for the sake of discussion and resultant improvements." The release document and a United Nations Bangkok Working Paper[42] publish and discuss the original approach, which is based partly on:
The original Human Development Index of the United Nations Development Programme, made more geographically complete (to 230+ countries) as described in a report issued by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific.[43]
The essay on Human Security in the 1994 Human Development Report.
An Equitability/Inclusiveness Enhanced Human Development Index – in which each of the components of the HDI (education, health, and income) are modified by an indicator of equitability in an attempt to adjust, for example, for the gap between the indicator of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Per Capita (adjusted for purchasing power parity) and the desired measure of financial resources "in the pocket" of a typical person in a country. In that index some countries with relatively equitable ratings compared to their Human Development Index (such as Iceland, the Slovak Republic, and Estonia) do relatively well, whereas some countries with relatively inequitable ratings compared to their HDI (such as Ireland, Greece, and the USA) do less well.
A Social Fabric Index which enumerates human security with respect to environment, diversity, peacefulness, freedom from corruption, and info empowerment. This was blended with the Human Development Index to form the prototype Human Security Index.
A 2010 enhancement to the HSI recast the composite index around a trinity of Economic, Environmental, and Social Fabric Indices.[44] The result is thus conceptually similar to the Triple Bottom Line of Corporate Social Responsibility as described by John Elkington, as well as to the stated goals of the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.[45] The release note of HSI Version 2 also notes efforts to balance local and global context, individual and society concerns, left-right political issues, east-west and north-south cultural and social issues. Current Version 2 of the HSI ingests about 30 datasets and composite indicators, and covers 232 countries and dependencies. It is released at HumanSecurityIndex.org.
Considerable differences in national ratings and standings have been noted between the HSI and indicators such as GDP per capita or the Human Development Index. Several small island countries plus Bhutan, Botswana, and some central-eastern European countries do considerably better in the HSI than they do in GDP per capita or HDI. Conversely, Greece and some Eurozone peers such as Ireland and Spain, several countries in the Gulf, Israel, Equatorial Guinea, the USA and Venezuela do worse in the HSI than in GDP per capita or HDI. Influential factors vary (as is viewed in the data and discussions on the HumanSecurityIndex.org Website), but include diversity and income equality, peacefulness, and governance.
See also[edit]
Arms Trade Treaty
Environmental racism
Food security
Gender and Security Sector Reform
Global spread of H5N1
Government
Human development
Human rights
Human Security Report Project
Human Security Report 2005
Human trafficking
Humanitarian crisis
Humanitarian intervention
International relations
National security
Non-governmental organization
Poverty reduction
Security sector reform
Sexual slavery
Social security
Three generations of human rights
Water crisis
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development
International security
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b United Nations Development Programme (1994): Human Development Report
Jump up ^ America's Climate Choices: Panel on Advancing the Science of Climate Change, National Research Council (2010). ""Chapter 16. National and Human Security".". Advancing the Science of Climate Change. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. p. 389. Retrieved 16 April 2012. Footnote 1 - Human security is defined as freedom from violent conflict and physical want (see Khagram and Ali [2006] for one recent review and synthesis).
^ Jump up to: a b Paris, Roland (2001): Human Security - Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? In: International Security, Vol. 26, No. 2. 87-102.online
Jump up ^ For a comprehensive analysis of all definitions, critiques and counter-critiques, see Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou & Chenoy, Anuradha M. Human Security: Concepts and Implications, London: Routledge, 2006
Jump up ^ James, Paul (2014). "Human Security as a Left-Over of Military Security, or as Integral to the Human Condition". In Paul Bacon and Christopher Hobson. Human Security and Japan’s Triple Disaster. London: Routledge. p. 73.
Jump up ^ Spiegel, J.M., and R. Huish. 2009. Canadian foreign aid for global health: Human security opportunity lost. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 15(3):60-84.
^ Jump up to: a b S. Neil Macfarlane and Yuen Foong Khong, "Human Security and the UN: A Critical History", Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61773/g-john-ikenberry/human-security-and-the-un-a-critical-history
Jump up ^ World Health Organization, "Chronic Diseases" http://www.who.int/topics/chronic_diseases/en/
Jump up ^ S. Tadjbakhsh, "Human Security In International Organizations: Blessing or Scourge?", The Human Security Journal, Volume 4, Summer 2007. Archived February 15, 2010, at the Wayback Machine.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Human Security Centre. “What is Human Security.” Retrieved on 19 April 2008 from http://www.humansecurityreport.info/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=24&itemid=59
Jump up ^ Pitsuwan, Surin. Regional Cooperation for Human Security. Keynote address to the International Development Studies Conference on Human Security: The Asian Contribution. October 2007. online
^ Jump up to: a b James, Paul (2014). "Human Security as a Left-Over of Military Security, or as Integral to the Human Condition". In Paul Bacon and Christopher Hobson. Human Security and Japan’s Triple Disaster. London: Routledge.
Jump up ^ King, Gary and Christopher Murray. Rethinking Human Security. Political Science Quarterly, Vol.116, No.4 #585-610 online
^ Jump up to: a b c Thomas, C., (2001) “Global governance, development and human security: exploring the links,” Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22(2):159-175
Jump up ^ See also in Alkire, Sabina (2002). "A conceptual framework for human security - working paper no. 2" (PDF). Center for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity (CRISE), Queen Elizabeth House. University of Oxford.
^ Jump up to: a b Alkire, Sabina (2002). "A conceptual framework for human security - working paper no. 2" (PDF). Center for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity (CRISE), Queen Elizabeth House. University of Oxford.
Jump up ^ Sunga, Lyal S. (2009). "The Concept of Human Security: Does it Add Anything of Value to International Legal Theory or Practice?" in Power and Justice in International Relations Interdisciplinary Approaches to Global Challenges Power and Justice in International Relations (Edited by Marie-Luisa Frick and Andreas Oberprantacher) 2009 Ashgate Publishers [1]
Jump up ^ Arcudi, Giovanni (2006). “La sécurité entre permanence et changement”, Relations Internationales, Vol. 1, No. 125, pp. 97-109. ISSN 0335-2013, DOI 10.3917/ri.125.0097
Jump up ^ Walter Lippmann, U.S. Foreign Policy (Boston, 1943), p.51
Jump up ^ Jeong Ho-Won (undated): Human Security and Conflict. George Mason University. online
Jump up ^ see Financial Times, 24 December 1994 and New York Times, 15 July 1996: 55
Jump up ^ Stewart, Frances (2004). "Development and Security", Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security, and Ethnicity (CRISE), Working Paper 3, London: University of Oxford.
Jump up ^ Tadjbakhsh & Chenoy, Human Security: Concepts and implications , London: Routledge, 2006
Jump up ^ S Tadjbakhsh, “Human Security”, 'Human Development Insights Issue 17, New York: UNDP HDR Networks
Jump up ^ Hampson, F., Madness in the multitude: human security and world disorder, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 2002
Jump up ^ Lewis Opoku-Mensah, Paul and Lewis, David and Tvedt, Terje, eds (2007) Reconceptualising NGOs and their roles in development: NGOs, civil society and the international aid system Aalborg University Press, Aalborg, Denmark
Jump up ^ Michael, Sarah. 2002. "The Role of NGOs in Human Security", Working Paper #12, The Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations and The Kennedy School of Government Harvard University
^ Jump up to: a b Westing, Arthur (2013). Arthur H. Westing: Pioneer on the Environmental Impact of War. Springer. pp. 15–16. ISBN 9783642313226.
Jump up ^ Pirages, Dennis; DeGeest, Theresa Manley (2004). Ecological Security: An Evolutionary Perspective on Globalization. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 59–60. ISBN 9780847695010.
Jump up ^ "UN Global Issues, Environment". he Brundtland Report, “Our Common Future”. Retrieved 5 November 2012.
Jump up ^ "Environment and Human Security". International Institute for Sustainable Development. Retrieved 5 November 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b c Haq, K., 'Human Security for Women,' in Tehranian, M. (ed.),Worlds Apart: Human Security and Global Governance, London, I.B.Tauris Publishers, 1999.
^ Jump up to: a b ICISS "The Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty", Ottawa: International Development Research Council, 2001.
Jump up ^ Arcudi, Giovanni (2004). “Forces de police et forces armées, sécurité et défense: où sont les frontières?”, Cahier du GIPRI, No. 2, pp. 17-64.
Jump up ^ "Thomas, N. and Tow, WT. (2002) "The Utility of Human Security: Sovereignty and Humanitarian Intervention SAGE Publications, Vol. 33(2): 177-192"
Jump up ^ [2]
Jump up ^ [3]
^ Jump up to: a b Don Hubert, "The Landmine Treaty: A Case Study in Humanitarian Advocacy" Watson Institute for International Studies, Occasional Paper #42, 2000.
Jump up ^ "Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor". Icbl.org. 2009-05-12. Retrieved 2012-04-16.
Jump up ^ Fen Osler Hampson, "Chap.5: Promoting the Safety of Peoples: Banning Anti-Personnel Landmines", from Madness in the Multitude: Human Security and World Disorder, Oxford University Press, 2002
Jump up ^ David A. Hastings, "Describing the Human Condition – from Human Development to Human Security", GIS-IDEAS 2008 Conference "Towards a Sustainable and Creative Humanosphere", 2008 online <http://wgrass.media.osaka-cu.ac.jp/gisideas08/viewabstract.php?id=299>
Jump up ^ David A. Hastings, "From Human Development to Human Security: A Prototype Human Security Index", United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Working Paper WP/09/03, 2009 online <http://www.unescap.org/publications/detail.asp?id=1345>
Jump up ^ Hastings, David A. (2009). "Filling Gaps in the Human Development Index". United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Working Paper WP/09/02.
Jump up ^ Hastings, David A. (2012). "The Human Security Index: An Update and a New Release" (PDF). HumanSecurityIndex.org Documentation Report V.1.1.
Jump up ^ "Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress - Home page". Stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr. Retrieved 2012-04-16.
External links[edit]
Commission on Human Security
Human Security Brief
Human Security Gateway
Human Security Index
Human Security Report
Human Security Report Project
UN OCHA - Human Security
CERI Program for Peace and Human Security
UNICEF
UNIFEM
UNHCR
Disarmament Insight initiative
Home Security
Authority control
NDL: 01096932
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Human_security&oldid=798255482"
Categories:
International security
Neologisms
Hidden categories:
Webarchive template wayback links
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from January 2017
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Български
Deutsch
Español
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
日本語
Polski
Slovenščina
Suomi
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 31 August 2017, at 21:08.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: id class style

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: b

values: The text near this tag may need clarification or removal of jargon. (January 2017)

value: sup

attrs: class style

values:
noprint Inline-Template
margin-left:0.1em; white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Freedom_from_want
mw-redirect
Freedom from want

values:
/wiki/UN_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
mw-redirect
UN Declaration of Human Rights

values: List of countries by Human Development Index

values:
/wiki/Developing_countries
mw-redirect
Developing countries

values:
/wiki/Infectious_disease
mw-redirect
Infectious disease

values:
/wiki/Greenhouse_gases
mw-redirect
Greenhouse gases

values:
/wiki/Domestic_abuse
mw-redirect
Domestic abuse

values: Edit section: Freedom from Fear vs Freedom from Want and beyond

values: Edit section: Relationship with traditional security

values:
/wiki/Political_realism
mw-redirect
Political realism

values:
/wiki/Mutually_exclusive
mw-redirect
Mutually exclusive

values:
/wiki/State_security
mw-redirect
State security

values:
/wiki/Infectious_diseases
mw-redirect
Infectious diseases

values: Edit section: Relationship with development

values: Edit section: Relationship with human rights

values:
/wiki/Natural_rights
mw-redirect
Natural rights

values: Edit section: Relationship with non-governmental organizations

values: Edit section: Relationship with the environment

values: Edit section: Prevent, react, and rebuild

values: Edit section: Relationship with Humanitarian Action

values:
/wiki/United_Nations_Secretary_General
mw-redirect
United Nations Secretary General

values:
/wiki/Ottawa_Convention
mw-redirect
Ottawa Convention

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #0078ac; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: -webkit-column-break-inside: avoid;page-break-inside: avoid;break-inside: avoid-column

values: International Committee of the Red Cross

values: Edit section: Formulation of a Human Security Index and an environment for discussing same

values:
/wiki/Triple_Bottom_Line
mw-redirect
Triple Bottom Line

values:
/wiki/Corporate_Social_Responsibility
mw-redirect
Corporate Social Responsibility

values:
/wiki/Gender_and_Security_Sector_Reform
mw-redirect
Gender and Security Sector Reform

values:
/wiki/Security_sector_reform
mw-redirect
Security sector reform

values:
/wiki/Water_crisis
mw-redirect
Water crisis

values: Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development

values: div-col columns column-count column-count-3

values: -moz-column-count: 3; -webkit-column-count: 3; column-count: 3;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://gking.harvard.edu/files/hs.pdf

values:
nofollow
http://www.iisd.org/ecp/es/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.icbl.org/lm/2007/
external text

values: -moz-column-width: 32em; -webkit-column-width: 32em; column-width: 32em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
http://www.humansecurity-chs.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.humansecuritybrief.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.humansecuritygateway.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.humansecurityindex.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.humansecurityreport.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.hsrgroup.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
external text
http://ochaonline.un.org/humansecurity

values:
nofollow
http://www.peacecenter.sciences-po.fr/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.unifem.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.unhcr.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.securitybees.com/
external text

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing clarification from January 2017

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Human_security
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: الأمن البشري – Arabic

values: Човешка сигурност – Bulgarian

values: 人間の安全保障 – Japanese

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Human_security rootpage-Human_security skin-vector action-view


text:
Shooting Star (Glee)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Shooting Star"
Glee episode
Episode no.
Season 4
Episode 18
Directed by
Bradley Buecker
Written by
Matthew Hodgson
Featured music
"Your Song"
"More Than Words"
"Say"
Production code
4ARC18
Original air date
April 11, 2013 (2013-04-11)
Guest appearance(s)
Dot-Marie Jones as Shannon Beiste
Iqbal Theba as Principal Figgins
Blake Jenner as Ryder Lynn
Melissa Benoist as Marley Rose
Jacob Artist as Jake Puckerman
Becca Tobin as Kitty Wilde
Lauren Potter as Becky Jackson
Alex Newell as Wade "Unique" Adams
Ginny Gardner as Katie Fitzgerald / Marissa
Trisha Rae Stahl as Millie Rose
Episode chronology
← Previous
"Guilty Pleasures" Next →
"Sweet Dreams"
Glee (season 4)
List of Glee episodes
"Shooting Star" is the eighteenth episode of the fourth season of the American musical television series Glee, and the eighty-fourth episode overall. Written by Matthew Hodgson and directed by Bradley Buecker, it aired on Fox in the United States on April 11, 2013.
Contents
[hide]
1 Plot
2 Production
3 Reception
3.1 Ratings
3.2 Public reception
3.3 Critical response
4 References
5 External links
Plot[edit]
Glee club director Will Schuester (Matthew Morrison) creates a week assignment of "Last Chances" after Brittany Pierce (Heather Morris) announces her beliefs that an asteroid will destroy the city, although she soon finds out that it was actually a Ladybug that was on her telescope. Brittany later tells Becky Jackson (Lauren Potter) that she'll be graduating soon, and Becky becomes scared of what will happen once Brittany is gone, but Brittany tells her she will be fine if she prepares herself. Meanwhile, football coach Shannon Beiste (Dot-Marie Jones) reveals her feelings for Will, but he reveals that he has gotten back together with Emma Pillsbury (Jayma Mays), leaving Beiste heartbroken.
Ryder Lynn (Blake Jenner) spots Katie Fitzgerald (Ginny Gardner), the girl he has been texting and that he has developed feelings for, and leads her to the choir room, where he serenades her with "Your Song", only to learn that her name is Marissa, and that she has never texted Ryder: someone else has been using Marissa's picture to pose online as "Katie". Ryder decides to find out who "Katie" is, having shared all of his secrets and fears with her, and arranges a meeting with her over text in front of the choir room the following day. Meanwhile, Sam Evans (Chord Overstreet) announces his love for Brittany and serenades her with "More Than Words" in the auditorium, but she struggles with her own feelings, and instead dedicates the song to her cat, Lord Tubbington, whom she feels is being neglected by her relationship with Sam.
As the glee club gathers in the choir room, two gunshots are heard, and the school goes into lockdown, with Brittany trapped in the bathroom and Tina stranded outside because she was late. Will and Beiste try to keep the students calm, but Sam decides to go after Brittany. Will then leaves them in Beiste's care and brings Brittany and two other students into the choir room. Meanwhile, Kitty breaks down and admits that she altered Marley's Sandy costumes and apologizes to her, and the two embrace. Ryder calls Katie's phone, and it rings inside the choir room; Artie Abrams (Kevin McHale) encourages the glee club members to record their goodbyes to their families in case they die. However, after several hours in lockdown, the police clear the area and the students are allowed to leave.
After the police fail to find the gun, cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester (Jane Lynch) announces that it belonged to her, and misfired, in order to cover up for Becky, who had stolen her father's gun and brought it to school as she was afraid of being out of school after graduating. Principal Figgins (Iqbal Theba) is forced to fire Sue, but Will remains convinced of her innocence. Will also creates an online dating profile for Beiste, and is surprised when one of her suitors turns out to be former football coach Ken Tanaka (Patrick Gallagher), while Sam presents Brittany with another cat, Lady Tubbington, and she finally declares her love for him as well.
Ryder goes to the choir room the following day, but "Katie" never shows up. He then returns to the auditorium and joins his friends in a performance of "Say", during which they comfort each other after the traumatic experience.
Production[edit]
The episode was directed by co-executive producer Bradley Buecker[1] and written by Matthew Hodgson. It is centered on McKinley High in Lima, Ohio, and the New York cast does not appear.[2] Show co-creator Ryan Murphy described it as "the most powerful emotional Glee ever".[3]
Prior to the episode, a disclaimer appeared: "This episode of Glee addresses the topic of school violence. Viewer discretion is advised." This was the first time a parental advisory warning was used in the show.
The episode features the feline character Lord Tubbington, Brittany's cat. A video about the episode released by the show to YouTube discussed the difficulties of working with animals.[1]
Recurring characters in this episode include McKinley High football coach Shannon Beiste (Dot-Marie Jones), Principal Figgins (Iqbal Theba) and glee club members Wade "Unique" Adams (Alex Newell), Marley Rose (Melissa Benoist), Jake Puckerman (Jacob Artist), Kitty Wilde (Becca Tobin) and Ryder Lynn (Blake Jenner), cheerleader Becky Jackson (Lauren Potter), Marley's mother and McKinley lunch lady Millie Rose (Trisha Rae Stahl) and Ryder's online love interest "Katie Fitzgerald", who has used the likeness of a McKinley student named Marissa (Ginny Gardner).[4]
The three songs from the episode are all being released as singles: Extreme's "More Than Words" sung by Overstreet and Morris with New Directions, Elton John's "Your Song" performed by Jenner, and John Mayer's "Say" performed by New Directions.[5][6][7]
Reception[edit]
Ratings[edit]
The episode had 6.67 million American viewers, up from 5.91 million when its previous episode, "Guilty Pleasures", aired three weeks previously.[8][9] It garnered 2.4/6 rating/share among adults 18-49, a 20 percent ratings increase from the last episode's 2.0/6 rating/share.[8][9]
Via DVR, the episode was watched by 2.43 million viewers with an 18-49 rating of 1.0, bringing the total to 9.09 million viewers and a 3.4 rating.[10]
Public reception[edit]
The episode, airing four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, was too much for the parents of that town, as noted by Los Angeles Times contributor Patrick Kevin Day.[11] Andrew Paley, whose children survived the shooting at Sandy Hook, appeared on CNN on April 12, 2013 to complain that no one from Glee or its network, Fox, reached out to warn the people of Newtown about the content of the episode.[11] Paley and other parents of Newtown had no problem with the network airing such an episode, but noted: "What's really upsetting is that no one, none of the producers, reached out to the town of Newtown to let us residents, who are so close to this, know that this episode was airing and that if anybody is a fan of Glee... it would have been a shocker to them if they didn't know what the episode was about."[11] However, residents of Newtown did receive a warning via a Newtown victims' advocacy group, the Newtown Action Alliance, which got wind of the episode's content early and sent out a warning email.[11]
Critical response[edit]
Critical reception of the episode was mixed. Early reviews from pre-broadcast screenings were mostly positive. Jenna Mullins of E! Online declared it "an emotional roller coaster" and "one of the most unsettling episodes of Glee ever".[12] Mullins singled out the performances by Chord Overstreet, Matthew Morrison, and Jane Lynch as "most likely make you feel like you've been punched straight in the heart".[12] While he conceded that the series "has never been a show that shied away from hot-button topics", TVLine correspondent Michael Slezak noted that episode's central plot "runs headlong into one of the most polarizing debates facing the [United States] today."[3] Slezak asserted that the "harrowing" episode has effective, powerful sequences that "stick with [the viewer] after the credits stop rolling", and lauded the writing for preventing "Shooting Star" from "turning into Law & Order: Lima, while still retaining its teeth".[3] However, some reviews from after the episode's debut were negative. Carina Adly McKenzie of Zap2it suspected the show had chosen a school shooting for storyline "to boost its dwindling ratings" and that "instead of making a real statement about guns in school, or about gun control in general, Glee shied away from the issue."[13] Vulture's Lauren Hoffman gave the installment a one-star rating out of five, saying the show is not very good at tackling a big issue such as a school shooting, unlike My So-Called Life and Degrassi: The Next Generation. She wrote, "It seems far more respectful to point to real stories with real consequences as a means of generating awareness, rather than making up a story where everything turns out just fine in the end." She also pointed out that a problem was the insufficient time given to the actual shooting and its aftermath.[14] Brandon Nowalk of The A.V. Club panned the episode as "exploitative trash", gave it an "F" grade, and wrote that it turned "a school shooting into another empty inspirational card".[15]
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b "Sneak Peek: "Shooting Star"". YouTube. Fox Broadcasting Company. April 5, 2013. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
Jump up ^ "Spoiler Chat: Scoop on Glee, Game of Thrones, New Girl, Suits, 90210 and More!". E! Online (NBC Universal). March 29, 2013. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b c Slezak, Michael (April 9, 2013). "Glee Preview: 10 Scoopy Tidbits From This Week's Harrowing 'Shooting Star' Episode". TVLine. PMC. Retrieved April 10, 2013.
Jump up ^ "Listings – Glee on Fox". The Futon Critic. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
Jump up ^ "Glee Cast – MP3 downloads". amazon.com. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
Jump up ^ Goldberg, Lesley (April 8, 2013). "Glee First Listen: New Directions Covers 'More Than Words,' Elton John (Exclusive)". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved April 8, 2013.
Jump up ^ "Glee Is BACK With A Shooting Star! Hear All The Songs From This Week's Episode HERE!". perezhilton.com. April 8, 2013. Retrieved April 8, 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b Kondolojy, Amanda (April 12, 2013). "Thursday Final Ratings: 'Hannibal' & 'American Idol' Adjusted Up". TV by the Numbers. Retrieved April 12, 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b Bibel, Sara (March 22, 2013). "Thursday Final Ratings:'The Vampire Diaries', 'American Idol', 'Grey's Anatomy' & '1600 Penn' Adjusted Up; 'Beauty and the Beast' Adjusted Down". TV by the Numbers. Retrieved March 22, 2013.
Jump up ^ http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/04/29/live7-dvr-ratings-modern-family-leads-adults-18-49-ratings-increase-smash-earns-biggest-percentage-increase-the-following-tops-total-viewership-gains-in-week-29/179875/
^ Jump up to: a b c d Day, Patrick Kevin (April 12, 2013). "Glee". Los Angeles Times. Tribune Company. Retrieved April 13, 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b Mullins, Jenna (April 9, 2013). "Glee Spoiler Bomb: 5 Things to Know About "Shooting Star". E! Online (NBCUniversal). Retrieved April 10, 2013.
Jump up ^ McKenzie, Carina Adly (April 12, 2013). "'Glee,' 'One Tree Hill,' and 'Degrassi' attempt the impossible: Can school shooting be done 'right' on TV?". Zap2it. Retrieved August 21, 2013.
Jump up ^ Hoffman, Lauren (April 12, 2013). "Glee Recap: No One Dies". Vulture. Retrieved August 21, 2013.
Jump up ^ Nowalk, Brandon (April 12, 2013). "Shooting Star". The A.V. Club. The Onion. Retrieved April 12, 2013.
External links[edit]
Glee portal
Television portal
"Shooting Star" at Fox.com
"Shooting Star" on IMDb
"Shooting Star" at TV.com
[hide]
v
t
e
Glee episodes
Season 1
"Pilot"
"Showmance"
"Acafellas"
"Preggers"
"The Rhodes Not Taken"
"Vitamin D"
"Throwdown"
"Mash-Up"
"Wheels"
"Ballad"
"Hairography"
"Mattress"
"Sectionals"
"Hell-O"
"The Power of Madonna"
"Home"
"Bad Reputation"
"Laryngitis"
"Dream On"
"Theatricality"
"Funk"
"Journey to Regionals"
Season 2
"Audition"
"Britney/Brittany"
"Grilled Cheesus"
"Duets"
"The Rocky Horror Glee Show"
"Never Been Kissed"
"The Substitute"
"Furt"
"Special Education"
"A Very Glee Christmas"
"The Sue Sylvester Shuffle"
"Silly Love Songs"
"Comeback"
"Blame It on the Alcohol"
"Sexy"
"Original Song"
"A Night of Neglect"
"Born This Way"
"Rumours"
"Prom Queen"
"Funeral"
"New York"
Season 3
"The Purple Piano Project"
"I Am Unicorn"
"Asian F"
"Pot O' Gold"
"The First Time"
"Mash Off"
"I Kissed a Girl"
"Hold On to Sixteen"
"Extraordinary Merry Christmas"
"Yes/No"
"Michael"
"The Spanish Teacher"
"Heart"
"On My Way"
"Big Brother"
"Saturday Night Glee-ver"
"Dance with Somebody"
"Choke"
"Prom-asaurus"
"Props"
"Nationals"
"Goodbye"
Season 4
"The New Rachel"
"Britney 2.0"
"Makeover"
"The Break Up"
"The Role You Were Born to Play"
"Glease"
"Dynamic Duets"
"Thanksgiving"
"Swan Song"
"Glee, Actually"
"Sadie Hawkins"
"Naked"
"Diva"
"I Do"
"Girls (and Boys) On Film"
"Feud"
"Guilty Pleasures"
"Shooting Star"
"Sweet Dreams"
"Lights Out"
"Wonder-ful"
"All or Nothing"
Season 5
"Love, Love, Love"
"Tina in the Sky with Diamonds"
"The Quarterback"
"A Katy or a Gaga"
"The End of Twerk"
"Movin' Out"
"Puppet Master"
"Previously Unaired Christmas"
"Frenemies"
"Trio"
"City of Angels"
"100"
"New Directions"
"New New York"
"Bash"
"Tested"
"Opening Night"
"The Back-up Plan"
"Old Dog, New Tricks"
"The Untitled Rachel Berry Project"
Season 6
"Loser Like Me"
"Homecoming"
"Jagged Little Tapestry"
"The Hurt Locker, Part One"
"The Hurt Locker, Part Two"
"What the World Needs Now"
"Transitioning"
"A Wedding"
"Child Star"
"The Rise and Fall of Sue Sylvester"
"We Built This Glee Club"
"2009"
"Dreams Come True"
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shooting_Star_(Glee)&oldid=807497534"
Categories:
Glee (season 4) episodes
2013 American television episodes
Hidden categories:
Pages using infobox television episode with incorrectly formatted episode list
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Čeština
Edit links
This page was last edited on 28 October 2017, at 10:14.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

value: i

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

values: text-align:center;font-size:125%;font-weight:bold;font-weight: normal; background: #CCCCFF; padding: 0.25em 1em; line-height: 1.5em;

value: tr

attrs: href title

value: span

value: td

attrs: colspan style

values: text-align:center;font-weight: bold; font-size: 110%

value: abbr

attrs: scope style

values:
row
white-space: nowrap

values: text-align:center;background: #CCCCFF; padding: 0.25em 1em; line-height: 1.5em;

values:
/wiki/Dot-Marie_Jones
mw-redirect
Dot-Marie Jones

values:
/wiki/Shannon_Beiste
mw-redirect
Shannon Beiste

values:
/wiki/Principal_Figgins
mw-redirect
Principal Figgins

values:
/wiki/Marley_Rose
mw-redirect
Marley Rose

values:
/wiki/Jake_Puckerman
mw-redirect
Jake Puckerman

values:
/wiki/Becky_Jackson
mw-redirect
Becky Jackson

values:
/wiki/Wade_%22Unique%22_Adams
mw-redirect
Wade "Unique" Adams

values:
/wiki/Millie_Rose
mw-redirect
Millie Rose

values: text-align: left; padding: 5px; margin: 0; padding-left: 1em

values: width: 50%; padding: 0.2em 0.1em 0.2em 0; text-align: center;

values: width: 50%; padding: 0.2em 0 0.2em 0.1em; text-align: center;

values:
/wiki/NBC_Universal
mw-redirect
NBC Universal

values:
/wiki/PMC_(company)
mw-redirect
PMC (company)

values:
/wiki/Tribune_Company
mw-redirect
Tribune Company

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: display:table-cell;padding:0.2em 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em;vertical-align:middle

values: margin:0.5em 0 0.5em 1em;border:solid #aaa 1px

values:
nofollow
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2403599/
external text

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:2013 American television episodes

values: Category:Pages using infobox television episode with incorrectly formatted episode list

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values:
/wiki/Shooting_Star_(Glee)
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Shooting_Star_Glee rootpage-Shooting_Star_Glee skin-vector action-view


text:
Long bone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Long bone
Structure of a long bone (Femur)
Long bones in human skeleton. (shown in red)
Details
Identifiers
Latin
Os longum
TA
A02.0.00.011
FMA
7474
Anatomical terms of bone
[edit on Wikidata]
The long bones are those that are longer than they are wide. They are one of five types of bones: long, short, flat, irregular and sesamoid. Long bones, especially the femur and tibia, are subjected to most of the load during daily activities and they are crucial for skeletal mobility. They grow primarily by elongation of the diaphysis, with an epiphysis at each end of the growing bone. The ends of epiphyses are covered with hyaline cartilage ("articular cartilage"). The longitudinal growth of long bones is a result of endochondral ossification at the epiphyseal plate. Bone growth in length is stimulated by the production of growth hormone (GH), a secretion of the anterior lobe of the pituitary gland.
The long bones include the femora, tibiae, and fibulae of the legs; the humeri, radii, and ulnae of the arms; metacarpals and metatarsals of the hands and feet, the phalanges of the fingers and toes, and the clavicles or collar bones. The long bones of the human leg comprise nearly half of adult height. The other primary skeletal component of height are the vertebrae and skull.
The outside of the bone consists of a layer of connective tissue called the periosteum. Additionally, the outer shell of the long bone is compact bone, then a deeper layer of cancellous bone (spongy bone) which contains in the medullary cavity the bone marrow.
Contents
[hide]
1 Structure
2 Clinical significance
3 Additional images
4 References
Structure[edit]
The outer shell of the long bone is made of cortical bone also known as compact bone. This is covered by a membrane of connective tissue called the periosteum. Beneath the cortical bone layer is a layer of spongy cancellous bone. Inside this is the medullary cavity which has an inner core of bone marrow made up of yellow marrow in the adult and red marrow in the child..
Clinical significance[edit]
There are two congenital disorders of the long bones. In a disorder known as rachitis fetalis anularis the ends of the long bones (epiphyses) are enlarged.[1] Another disorder is known as rachitis fetalis micromelica in which there is a deficiency in the growth (as a shortness) of the bones.[1]
There is a surgical procedure called distraction osteogenesis which is used to lengthen long bones.
Additional images[edit]
Long bones in human skeleton. (shown in red)
Parts of a long bone (Femur)
Classification of bones by shape
Distribution of forces on a long bone (Femur)
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b al.], consultants Daniel Albert ... [et (2012). Dorland's illustrated medical dictionary (32nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier. p. 1570. ISBN 978-1-4160-6257-8.
Stedman's Online Medical Dictionary, 27th Edition[permanent dead link]
Anatomy of long bone
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Long bones.
[hide]
v
t
e
Bone and cartilage
Cartilage
perichondrium
fibrocartilage callus
metaphysis
Cells
chondroblast
chondrocyte
Types
hyaline
elastic
fibrous
Bone
Ossification
Primary bone
intramembranous
endochondral
Cells
osteoblast
osteoid
osteocyte
osteoclast
Types
cancellous
cortical
Regions
subchondral bone
epiphysis
epiphyseal plate/metaphysis
diaphysis
Condyle
Epicondyle
Structure
Osteon
Haversian canals
Volkmann's canals
connective tissue
endosteum
periosteum
Sharpey's fibres
enthesis
lacunae
canaliculi
trabeculae
medullary cavity
bone marrow
Shapes
long
short
flat
irregular
sesamoid

This human musculoskeletal system article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
v
t
e
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Long_bone&oldid=825598322"
Categories:
Long bones
Musculoskeletal system stubs
Hidden categories:
Pages with unresolved properties
All articles with dead external links
Articles with dead external links from January 2018
Articles with permanently dead external links
All stub articles
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
العربية
Башҡортса
Català
Dansk
Deutsch
Esperanto
Bahasa Indonesia
Basa Jawa
ქართული
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Português
Русский
Suomi
ไทย
7 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 14 February 2018, at 08:56.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href class

values: Long bones - anterior view - with legend.png

values:
/wiki/Phalanx_bones
mw-redirect
Phalanx bones

values:
/wiki/Human_skull
mw-redirect
Human skull

values:
/wiki/Compact_bone
mw-redirect
Compact bone

values:
/wiki/Cancellous_bone
mw-redirect
Cancellous bone

values:
/wiki/Cortical_bone
mw-redirect
Cortical bone

values:
/wiki/Congenital_disorder
mw-redirect
Congenital disorder

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

values:
/wiki/Subchondral_bone
mw-redirect
Subchondral bone

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: position: absolute; right: 15px; display: none;

values:
metadata plainlinks stub
presentation
background:transparent

values: Category:Pages with unresolved properties

values: Category:All articles with dead external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from January 2018

values: Category:Articles with permanently dead external links

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Long_bone
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: عظم طويل – Arabic

values: Көпшәле һөйәктәр – Bashkir

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ba
display: none;

values:
https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Os_llarg
Os llarg – Catalan
ca
ca
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ca
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-da
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-eo
display: none;

values: ლულოვანი ძვლები – Georgian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ka
display: none;

values:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pijpbeen
Pijpbeen – Dutch
nl
nl
interlanguage-link-target

values: Трубчатые кости – Russian

values:
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putkiluu
Putkiluu – Finnish
fi
fi
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fi
display: none;

values: กระดูกยาว – Thai

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-th
display: none;

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Long_bone rootpage-Long_bone skin-vector action-view