Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Human Security and Citizenship in Finnish Religious Education: Rethinking Security Within the Human Rights Horizon

  • Published:
Human Rights Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses citizenship in Finnish religious education (RE) in relation to human security. It traces the characteristics of human security that connect citizenship, religion, and education in Finnish policy documents. The article focuses on basic education (grades 7–9). Its data were analyzed employing qualitative content analysis (QCA). The findings indicate that citizenship in Finnish RE entails personal security concerns dealing with psychological and human rights issues. These are found to be essentially human security as conceptualized by the United Nations (UN). However, Finnish policy documents sparingly utilize human security in explicit terms. Finland rather emphasizes the practical applications of human security. Incorporation of explicit global citizen and human rights issues into RE in the new Finnish curriculum seems to project critical global citizenship. This is found to promote human security. Following Finland’s bid for practical application of human security, we recommend (but cautiously) that human security be explicitly integrated into the Finnish RE curriculum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In this article, RE means the study of religion as a core subject in public schools.

  2. The OSCE was formerly known as the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe and it effectively began in 1975 following the Helsinki Final Act. It is now the world’s largest regional security organization (OSCE 2007, 21–22).

  3. REDCo Means: “Religion in Education: A contribution to Dialogue or a factor of Conflict in transforming societies of European countries” (Weisse 2007).

  4. See below for the reason for employing the UN policy about human security in the “Focus and Methodology” section.

  5. The entire Finnish basic education ranges from grades 1–9 (Finnish National Board of Education – FNBE 2014, 27). It is compulsory, and it usually begins when the child turns seven (Section 25 of the Basic Education Act 628/1998; Amendments up to 1136/2010). (See: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1998/en19980628.pdf. Accessed 31 December 2017.)

  6. The Finnish government usually employs the institution of various committees to bring education under its strict control. They help in planning government actions and in drafting government policies affecting the whole education sector. The proposals of these committees are more or less official curricula. So, the committees are vital instruments of educational policy as practiced by the state (Simola 2000, 2114–2115). As becomes apparent later in this study, the reports of the committees across various sectors/ministries are usually considered and harmonized in the making of curriculum for basic (compulsory) education (cf. ibid.).

  7. The constructivist perspective belongs to discourse analysis in which linguistic categories within and outside the materials under examination shape the interpretation of the social reality (Schreier 2012, 47). Implicit realist assumption, by contrast, is of QCA and it mainly concerns the reality that can be found in the materials under investigation. Generally, the realist assumption would not consider the relationship between the linguistic categories of the materials under analysis and the social reality (ibid.).

  8. Note that the four freedoms ideas are articulated in the message of Roosevelt to the members of the 77th Congress of the US in 1941. See: https://fdrlibrary.org/documents/356632/390886/readingcopy.pdf/42234a77-8127-4015-95af-bcf831db311d. Accessed 5 May 2016.

  9. See more details about this in the latter part of this conceptual framework.

  10. Human security has many conflicting definitions, as it is multifaceted (Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy 2007).

  11. There are other different but interwoven forms of human security (e.g., socio-economic security, environmental security, political security etc.). However, they all revolved around personal security (Gasper 2005).

  12. See Gearon’s critiques of this move below.

  13. C.A.S.E. is a network of junior and senior researchers interested in critical security studies (C.A.S.E. 2006).

  14. It remains debatable as to whether the list of security sectors should be expanded to include more issues like religion and gender (Albert and Buzan 2011).

  15. It remains debateable as to whether security sectors are generally ontological or should rather be taken as analytical devices (ibid.).

  16. He seems to understand security in RE in military terms. He notes: “The word security is now associated most commonly with the protection of national and international interests, often with militaristic overtones. It is in this sense in which ‘securitization’ is used” (Gearon 2012a, 216). His view that liberal democracies have become intolerant by “bringing military and security concerns into the [RE] classroom” (Gearon 2012a, 231) seems to lend credence to this.

  17. Jackson was a leading researcher in the REDCo project. He also contributed to the recommendations of the CoE and the Toledo Guiding Principles (Jackson 2015).

  18. This is a precursor of what is now called human security (cf. Jackson 2015, 354).

  19. Finland Minister of the Interior in 2012

  20. See Statistics Finland: http://www.stat.fi/index_en.html. Accessed 15 July 2017

  21. See: http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1998/en19980628.pdf. Accessed 21 November 2015

  22. This development is significant, as human rights are not explicit in the previous RE curriculum (FNBE 2004).

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank our highly valued anonymous reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief of this journal and Dr. Robert Whiting for their efforts and comments on this paper. The original research ideas relating to the relationship between security and citizenship in Finnish RE that eventually brought about this article were presented by the first and corresponding author of this article in “Changing Subjects, Changing Pedagogies: Diversities in School and Education” conference held in Helsinki (Finland) on the May 27–29, 2015 and in “Shifting Borders in Religious Education” conference held in Tartu (Estonia) on the June 15–18, 2015. Appreciations to the two conference participants whose comments (on the presentations) eventually became the initial feedback on this study. We also thank the relevant personnel in the Language Services of the University of Helsinki for their efforts. This paper would not have attained this status without the resourcefulness of all these persons.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel O. Adebayo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adebayo, G.O., Mansikka, JE. Human Security and Citizenship in Finnish Religious Education: Rethinking Security Within the Human Rights Horizon. Hum Rights Rev 19, 447–469 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-018-0502-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-018-0502-x

Keywords

Navigation