Recent advances in security research and management. Analytical concepts determining paradigm shift in security policy agenda in the 2000's.

Olimid, Anca Parmena

Security research has evolved over the last decade with a variety of concepts and patterns such as: data security, information security, data system management, risk management, security administration and governance, political security, political decision-making process (Cai, 2013: 755-795; Kivimaki, 2012: 419-447). These conceptualized tools are reflective of the emergent resource reallocation of the security system. Whatever conceptualizing structure is organized and employed, the primary focus of the security research is to recognize and extent the dominant patterns of the security policy agenda. Furthermore, a mutual consensus maps the relationships between the security policy agenda, the national/ international security and the international relations namely, and the policy-making process which applies in the context of constructive redefinition of the concepts of power and peace (Emmerson, 2008: 135-154; Blokker, 2000: 135-154).

In this direction, the study aims to identify the shortcomings in the recent theories and concepts of security research leading to proposing alternative interpretations and extents meeting the causality between research-decision-explanation. This system cycle is a formal approach to look at the indicators of security research reconsidered and depending on security policy agenda since 2001. The issue of causality must of course be analyzed in relation to the challenges of international security system and the sources of security methodology and scientific method.

The analysis of the standard items and indicators on security policy agenda reveals a variety of phases and formal approaches beginning with the information evaluated during the monitoring and investigation phase. In the literature on security policy, this indicator of analysis refers to the ability of an organization to a feasibility analysis (Barnard-Wills, 2013: 170-180; Munoz, Gonzalez, Mana, 2012: 979-994).

Through a qualitative analysis of the security research methodology and information, the study examines the variety of research squaring the security policy agenda in the last twenty years, aiming to categorize the types of the proposed principles and its contributions to a better understanding of the role of security research, techniques and functions for the political environment. With special reference to the security risk management framework, the research is conducted with the expectation that applied research is required to provide conclusive political decisions. While focusing on basic and applied security research, the article discusses the various implications of the descriptive research focusing on describing the characteristics of the security phenomena.

The scope of the security research is squared by one's definition of "security". In last few years emerging security research evidence has indicated that basic and applied research in the field of policy arena is often within the scope of "international security" (Robinson, 2008: 1-4). Each definition gives researchers the opportunity to expand scientific knowledge about theories on security implying "the absence of threat". Other security research findings about the international security system point out the dilemma facing 2000's of the causal and objective investigation of security strategies and environment (David, 2006: 2-3). The analytical approach of the study may be employed to indicate basic and applied research and to compare the defining characteristics of contemporary literature.

Security research covers a wide range of paradigms and research methods aiming to fulfill the function of knowledge and prediction in the security policy agenda. The development and implementation of plans, strategies and methods is conducted within Recent Advances in Security Research and Management. Analytical Concepts ... different theoretical and functional areas. This assumption suggests that the task of security research is to provide accurate information and tools for effective decision making. As mentioned above, the security research shifts from predictive analysis assumptions gathering to ongoing security settings (Robinson, 2008: 3). This argumentation is significant because it highlights the importance of security research engagement in last twentz years. Past researches on these issues have focused on evaluations of how much security challenges influence the actors behaviour, largely ignoring the changing parameters of needs, perceptions, understandings, attitudes of subgroups. Although the security research engenders the distinction between many organizational behavior on security policy agenda issue, the conclusive evidence on te preliminary data selection is yet to be collected (Kostakopoulou, 2008: 317-342; Thomas, Dhillon, 2012: 1148-1156).

Security research can be defined as the ongoing process of investigating, gathering, enabling and reassessing facts and data required by the making policy decisions. This definition points that the primary research data is neither subjective nor spontaneous included. As previously noted, security policy agenda can take various forms, but systematic security inquiry is a common, objective and important tool for decision- making facts and activities.

This definition is not squared to the need for objectivity, but it cleverly states that security research may generate and provide the accurate information upon which policy decisions makers' shift from subjective and preconceived area of decision entering to objective course of action. By reducing the proportion of subjectivity of decision, security research process is associated and connected with the systematic analysis and thematic interpretation of "international security".

Basic and applied security research

Designing the basic and applied research in security studies means dealing with questions and answers of analysis and interpretation beyond the simple identification of cause-and-effect relationship between various variables viewed as "normally cause- and-effect relationship security studies".

The present discussion starts from the assumption that in security research it is typical to establish an expectation of the relationship to be offered, such as identifying the influence of actors and organizational behavior, political-decision making process and conclusive decisions. To analyze the linking between basic and applied research means to broadly conceptualize the three above archetypes using the elements of "political influence" and the challenges of the inferring causality between research subject-causal factors-alternative plausible explanations (Hasegawa, 2007: 1-20; Deakin, Wilkinson, 1991: 125-148).

One reason for investigating and analyzing pattern theories and definitions for security research is to generate and develop new finding aimed to enrich the potential of research knowledge in the field. The above assumption does not point out that the basic research is applied exclusively in the field scientific knowledge. Basic research is developed and conducted to investigate the objectivity of a given theory and the acceptability of a base decision (Blockmans, Wessel, 2009: 265-308; Wessel, 2003: 265-288; King, 1999: 313-337).

In common with most fields of scientific research, security studies seem to face a crisis of analysis and "discourse" focusing only on monitoring, evaluation and investigation of recent political events. It is easy to notice why talk of a "crisis of discourse" has abounded since September 2001. In particular, placing the 2001events in the context of the security research reveals a complex environment in which one criterion that must be established is that appropriate causal order causes behavior change and sequence of events.

The past decade, however, has been a marked increase of researches concerning the concomitant variation between the presumed cause in the security system and the assumed effects. For several reasons, recent papers have alternatively analyzed an occurrence of two phenomena or events: the presence or absence of explanations and the exploratory relationship between actors-organization-system. At the same time, all these studies conceptualize the influence of inferring causality in security research, involving: (1) the causal order; (2) the cause-and-effect political alternation; (3) the alternative explanations. More important, the issue of inferring causality is particularly significant to security research requiring causal definitions and explanations.

A more important feature of the recent literature deals with issues of the stages in security research. At the same time, we may consider the relationships between the backward security linkages implied to influence the applied research. Applied research is identified and conducted regardless a current of recent problem or opportunity. Applied research encompasses a particular action, fact or policy determining the nature of a situation and identifying and implementing a particular course of information and action, and evaluating and analyzing the generated actions occurrences.

Scientific method and evaluation research in security research

The article deals also with the security methodology and settings due to the fact that there is still a lack of analytical and empirical approach with regard how scientific method and evaluation research influence the security policy agenda. The procedures and tools utilized by basic and applied security research focus on political inquiry, causal functions and particular factors explaining particular types of mechanisms and outcomes. This reasoning raises and increases general correlations and findings in the security policy agenda. However, the exclusion of additional variables (such as subjective and discursive conceptions) generates ineffective decision-making process. In basic security research, first implementing the general correlations and findings and then testing and managing the particular observations about the applied research lead to the problem- solving of security policy agenda paradigm (Bourne, Bulley, 2011: 453-471; John, 2006: 975- 986).

Other accounts of the different strategies and points of view in security policy agenda comes from the historians and analysts which preferred the management approach and description of the decision-making process as subjects of analysis of the particular item of rights and obligations in the policy agenda (Gherghe, 2005: 58-62). Use of scientific method in applied security research gains insight into the development and implementation of a decision-making that will contribute in evaluating the opportunity for alternative security conceptions or hypothesis.

Once security research identifies the challenges and opportunities, an important aspect is to determine the nature of situation and the planning information required for evaluation research in that particular field of study. Security research is essentially process of monitoring, analyzing and implementing information security data and policies as increasing higher levels of general propositions and principles of explanation.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

A key element of the empirical research of the security field is the "course of action" as a new dimension of the conceptualization of reality. Thus, concepts and operational definitions in the field of security research become the basic units of security theory development engendering a categorical course of action. The security theories require that the relationship between its concepts and operational definitions be understood and inter-related. In this direction, scientific method is the use of assumed procedures in order to establish and acknowledge theoretical statements about security policy agenda.

Nevertheless, the concepts and operational definitions in the field of security research are required to develop the theoretical framework and the hypothetic and deductive process on certain phenomena and their relationship with others. Both the concepts and operational definition flow logically from the hypothesis area in research method area (the link between the concepts and operational definitions in the field of security research).

Security methodologies may be evaluated through the use of various "security business proposals" or "security master plans" criteria. A major course of action to develop and provide a security program or plan is through planned activities. Planned activities have various meanings, interpretations and explanations. In its most basic definitions and implementing, planned activities and operations are evaluated through empirical validity which is the formal and objective measurement and appraisal of a given project, program or master plan. In other words, security research may provide completed plans and programs according to their objectives or major factors influencing the integrative aspect security strategies.

Risk analysis and security methodology

There are many informal, subjective methodologies and measurements to which a given risk analysis has applied its objectives. Variations and extensions exist among practitioners, academics and researchers regarding the risk analysis, the definition of terms, procedures and methodology, definitions of concepts, metrics and reporting performance levels. Whatever type of security methodology and risk-analysis methodology may be used to describe a specific security problem, performance- monitoring processes should be considered in this exploratory-monitoring action. For the security research management, the term "exploratory-monitoring action" provides feedback for the monitoring, evaluation and control of actions, programs and plans.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Apart from the traditional monitoring, evaluation and control of actions, programs and plans, the management of security risks embodies the fact the security risk must focus on integrating protective measures and crisis management planning. In some circumstances, risk-management framework requires considerable regulation and reliance on information and environmental conditions (Bourne, Bulley, 2011: 453-471).

Performance-monitoring action, as source of security covers topics ranging from high-range planning to the most interdependent decisions and operations such as: the threat of terrorism, globalization and transnational risks, technologies research and information condition etc. The fundamental paradigm shifts from the systematic and progressive process of gathering and collecting, and analyzing data to selecting data for final decision. The objective of risk-management framework is not an objective itself but rather a tactical decision which supports and generates the tactical decisions. Given the similarities between concepts and theories in recent literature, we should adopt the idea that the basic or primary security research is also a conducting security research in all stages if the performing security (John, 2006: 975-986). We identify four main features of a performing security that seem problematic for their analysis of the practice of the concepts such as: decision alternatives, problem identification and definition, direction of monitoring and evaluation, area of research and advertising themes.

Essentially, security methodology engenders all decision-making stages: to define and integrate the security issue, to explore standards and requirements and the effectiveness of methods used. As part of this process, one task of security research is to focus on a particular form of proposed theoretical propositions.

To maintain a suitable set of based security guidelines, organization and institutions involved in risk management should review and evaluate the standards and responsibilities of public awareness, including: security planning, particulars of priorities, objectives and management system, allocation of tasks and duties, information on targets and performance indicators; common activities and procedures for monitoring and evaluation of the security system.

For much of the past twenty years analysts and academics have debated whether the decision alternatives in research process suffers from a "crisis of discourse" combined analysis and tabular stages (Luthi, 2011: 207-214). Security research methods provide reliable information if security data are collected and analyzed in a systematic and correct manner. Security research becomes the "management tool" that institutional actors use to avoid or reduce uncertainty.

This situation is considered to play two key roles for security. Firstly, it is part of the security decision-making plan. Security data provide effectiveness of current security strategies and it also provides insights for fundamental changes in security policy agenda. Secondly, data security is the principal instrument for identifying and empowering new availabilities and opportunities in security policy agenda and identifying potential risk situations.

Data security uptake

Data security also serves other purposes. It delineates a research area that combines an analytical concept--data--with a fundamental concept of the international security policy agenda--security. It conceptualize security as a relation between two components: "data" and "security policy agenda".

Data security has been a central concept in recent literature, and it often is conceived and defined as privacy measures and protection of data from unauthorized access (Walter, 2006: 105-135). Other authors have made a brief reference with regard to the concepts of "power" and "international power hierarchy" (Smith, 2010: 51-54).

In an extension of data security theory and argumentation, Tipton and Krause (eds.) have developed an information security and risk management multilevel framework. Instead of exploring one direction of research focused on building an effective program of information security policy, the data security system consists of a series of parallels between information security, security management, change control process and management data classification and custody of data, security management risk, security management planning, access control and evaluation (Tipton, Krause (eds.), 2007). Information security management function according to the same argumentation as a structure of processes, relationships, measures, standards and procedures appropriately directed to determine the effectiveness of security governance. (Tang, 2011: 511-536).

Descriptive security research uploading and maintenance

The orientation of the security research towards a broader context of analysis allows the possibility to seek and identify the linkage between the five stages charted by the scientific investigation since 2001: 1) defining the security problem; 2) planning a security research framework; 3) security data collection and investigation; 4) analyzing the data security; 5) formulating conclusions for policy decision-making process.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

The literature argued that the recognition of security "as an industrial tool" structure belongs to a single category of scientific concepts. One may call it the category of "scientific management" required by the system performs and the "technical" analysis of security marketplace. Seen alone, the information security management and the security marketplace emphasize that an orderly definition of the security research framework gives a sense of direction to investigation and monitoring (Ahmad, 1991: 105-127). The question of the information security management and security marketplace is probably the most difficult problem of the security field recently expanded into a more comprehensive list of alternatives characteristics and values including information classification, investigation confidentiality, secure data security storage, investigation and monitoring of security policies. Although these characteristics and stages of the security research process are probably the most important phases, they are frequently the foremost sources of research concern. Security research has proved to be a stumbling block, from the process of achieving objectives between the coordination and completion of tasks, through the process of collecting and processing information up to the alternatives approaches and resolving conflicts, policy dilemmas, or regional challenges (Osano. 1999: 273-302). Pre-eminently, by assembling some of the more significant facts concerned the basic form of security management, we understand the many roles to play within international actors and organizations. Broadly speaking, neither in the practical experience nor in security theory, the three tasks of security management: informational task, inter-organizational role, the decisional role including and the control function of security research and the monitoring process of security organization cannot be absolutely separated (Jeong, Sauveron, Park, 2013: 274-277). Establishing the influence domains of security research in policy decision-making process within the security policy agenda, one therefore admits the principles of information security management. This selection is comprehensive: the knowledge area of security area is driven by the need of rethinking information and policies. The situation in which data security find itself since 2001 necessitates special efforts to explain the fundamental components of information security.

These questions complicate an already complex research, adding a new challenge to the initial stage of the research process. There is in fact a common perception of the preliminary activities undertaken to refine the data security analysis into a researchable one need to be technical or formal: a progressive investigation of the knowledgeable operational and tactical planning of the organizational strategy (Pantazis, Pemberton, 2012: 651-667). Consequently, the specific research objectives on information strategy in creates a strategic plan focusing on a number of secondary or historical variables regarding the impact of research techniques conditions. Above all, in this perspective, the studies design the relevance of secondary security data analysis, pattern cases, case studies and experiences surveys are based on the exploratory conditions of the formal investigation. Most current debate about the security research deficit squares the information-security-alternatives risks, the limits security resources, policy compliance, security methodology, security organizational structure, security standards, signature procedures, and information security implementation (James, 1998: 271-301). In using historical conditionality, many authors set the adoption of the security implementation rules and practices as conditions that the security systems developments have to fulfill a rapid application development (Tupakula, Varadharajan, 2012: 397-409).

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

What conclusions can be drawn if we sum up all arguments? During the security research process, one of the most challenging findings is that the planning phases provide specific frameworks ensuring that all areas of security policies are operational. Moreover, there are many interlinked categories of security research management influencing the security policy agenda.

Information Security Policies

Most fundamentally, the concept of "information security policies" highlights a combination of three dilemmas: first, a broad definition of information security policies, second, the role of information security policies in security decision-making process and third, the facts and factors determining and motivating the organizational behavior to undertake a specific security policy (Hankey, Clunaigh, 2013: 535-547). A real theoretical debate has to concentrate different key themes in the recent literature based on sub-dividing security policies and empirical investigations as a balance between structural differences and the overall framework of formal security policies approach. The lack of accurate security policies application and features appears inadequate in the light of security administration.

Taking into consideration this requirement any security policy has to develop and pursue its plan actions leading to the strengthening of its contribution to all security policies and to the implementation of a new mentality aiming to fulfill the condition of "mutual involvement" of all security information users and organizations. This new information security environment has to explore the relationship between the information security management and information security policy. Recently, a number of authors have emphasized the importance of this linkage uploading and developing (Georgescu, 2014: 250-261). The most reasonable analysis for the information security policy has to estimate the "geometry" of formulation and implementation in an organization. This selection depends on the level of security that an organization considers necessary: the security policies resulting in a new security administration driven by the need of rethinking new tactical applications, policies and capabilities. Consequently, the 2000's exposed the prevalence of "the case", its "discussion" and the best practices. Second of all, to oversimplify, the challenge of the security research was to develop and improve a strategy for constant improvement of purposes and practices.

There is also the support for a link analysis between the security research- information security measure-data security and after-implementation security activities. The implementation process of data security creates a new dimension for information security policy by the continuous improvement of specific links and reflecting the growing interdependence between the research agenda and security management (Niemetz, 2014: 69-88).

Not surprisingly, information security policy research agenda has been the spotlight of relatively little attention. Indeed, for the past two decades, it has been argued that a "security policy research agenda" is prevailing upon all aspects of the relationships established at the international level. Most recent studies on the concept "information security policy research agenda" commence with a few comments on structure, format and key terms. Other studies indicate that the information security research was formulated on the special conditions and approaches following the 2001's events. These contributions to the debate can be made by research exploring the policies including goals, beliefs, morality and ethics. A third group of studies seek to clarify and categorize the relationship between the primary theory of security as it is applied from in the challenging debate on public vs. private spaces and the post-2001 experience by undertaking the ownership of data security with the view of three approaches: information technology, environmental ethics and security policy research and behavioral ethics.

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

The first set of objective considerations influencing the debate on ownership of data security concerns the balancing link between the information security policy and the ownership of data. It is often argued that the information security system and data- processing must be considered when balancing public-private spaces. To achieve balance that is to operate data security that satisfies the needs of individual behavior and the professional one. From an empirical point of view, it is often argued that a successful information security implementation is likely to result from the system administration, that is, from a bottom-up approach (information technology [right arrow] behavioral ethics [right arrow] public/ private space). In recent years there has been an increased interest in analyzing the effects of information security implementation and the availability of data security in security research. However, in spite of this mounting interest, the absence of adequate information suggests that value of security research depends on the nature of the political decision-making process. However, in the new security policy agenda, where system configuration and its continuous monitoring are still in question, the literature fall into two groups to explain the variation in the security systems development organization and development: features of specific threats and particular types of control (type of action, risk management, security planning, organization's composition and structure) and institutional features (phases of security development, implementation of information security) (Trcek, 2010: 1106-1112).

Advocates of this functionality theory argue that the features of specific threats, the particular types of control and the institutional features enable efficient implementation of security information. To perform effectively, information or data security are primarily concerned with identifying the data classification standards. Taking as a starting point the claim that information security standards provide the basic and fundamental developments, the security research underlines the idea that the data security goals and techniques owes the general and decisive duty to square the organizational design.

Indeed, there is a powerful relationship between the data security goals and purposes and the security management from the decision-making perspective. The answer to this issue composes the beginning of a critical analysis of the new security policy agenda. The diverse standards, purposes and activities undertaken illustrate effective design-to-implementation security policies to which security research is engaged in a new type of information security policy. This pre-planned security policy crucially performs the function of framework for the management and implementation of security information. The central argument in this pre-planned security policy is to find the key issues of the organizational security context by focusing on knowledge and practice areas. The scope and extension of this formulation is required to provide a suitable risk- management framework.

As security policies evolve and risk-management increases, it is needed to face a more complex regulatory framework including the analysis of the social, legal and security practice and the ability of institutions and organizations to reach its purposes. Developments in the evolving security theory and research directly influence the pattern of security information and related regulations. To conclude this approach, there are four important tendencies in the security policy approach since 2001: 1) the security theory fragmentation; 2) high political instability and the ideological challenge; 3) the increasing confidence of the relationship risk management-standards-principles and strategies; 4) the rise of the organizational values and ethics and the improvement of security management system links.

In conclusion, the twofollowing specific hypothesis are related to security policy research agenda: 1) under risk-management challenge, increasing security theories are to be expected; 2) risk-management still may be predicted, given the following analysis: understanding the reasons behind the security policy research agenda, frequently changes of security agenda, are important in the post-2001 international context. The variations of the information security monitoring and investigation have a significant effect on the level of data collection and implementation. In concluding this article it is important to notice that not surprisingly, the trajectory of the security research agenda emphasis a recent re- theorizing of the security course of action rather than a ideological or practical turn.

References

Ahmad E. (1991). Social Security and the Poor: Choices for Developing Countries. World Bank Res. Obs, (6): 105-127.

Barnard-Wills D. (2013). Security, privacy and surveillance in European policy documents. International Data Privacy Law, (3): 170-180.

Blokker N. (2000). Is the authorization authorized? Powers and practice of the UN Security Council to authorize the use of force by 'coalitions of the able and willing' Eur J Int Law, 2000; 11: 541-568.

Blockmans S., Wessel R.A. (2009). The European Union and Crisis Management: Will the Lisbon Treaty Make the EU More Effective? J Conflict Security Law, (14): 265-308.

Bourne, M., Bulley, D. (2011). Securing the human in critical security studies: the insecurity of a secure ethics. European Security. (20): 453-471.

Cai, C. (2013). New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century. Eur J Int Law, (24): 755-795.

David R. A. (2006). Introduction. In Amass S. F., Chaturvedi A. R. E., Peeta S., Guiding future homeland security policy: directions for scientific inquiry, West Lafayettte: Purdue University Press.

Deakin S., Wilkinson F.(1991). Labour law, social security and economic inequality. Camb. J. Econ., (15): 125-148.

Emmerson A. (2008). Conceptualizing Security Exceptions: Legal Doctrine or Political Excuse? J Int Economic Law, (11): 135-154.

Georgescu C. M. (2014). Interpreting Continuity and Change in Post-Communist Policy-Making: Applying the New Historical Institutionalist Approach to the Study of Public Organizations. Revista de Stiinte Politice. Revue des Sciences Politiques, (41): 250-261.

Gherghe C. L. (2005). The Defense of Human Rights in the European Union. Revista de Stiinte Politice. Revue des Sciences Politiques, (8): 58-62

Hankey S., O Clunaigh D. (2013). Rethinking Risk and Security of Human Rights Defenders in the Digital Age. J Human Rights Practice, (5): 535-547.

Hasegawa Y. (2007). Is a Human Security Approach Possible? Compatibility between the Strategies of Protection and Empowerment. Journal of Refugee Studies, (20): 1- 20.

James E. (1998). New Models for Old-Age Security: Experiments, Evidence, and Unanswered Questions. World Bank Res. Obs., (13): 271-301.

Jeong Y.-S., Sauveron D., Park J. H. (2013). Advanced Security Technologies and Services for Future Computing Environments. The Computer Journal, October 2013; 56: 1151- 1153.

John P. (2006). The policy agendas project: a review. Journal of European Public Policy (13): 975-986

King T. (1999). Human rights in European foreign policy: success or failure for post-modern diplomacy? Eur J Int Law, (10): 313-337.

Kivimaki T. (2012), Sovereignty, hegemony, and peace in Western Europe and in East Asia International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, (12): 419-447.

Kostakopoulou D. (2008). How to do Things with Security Post 9/11 Oxford J Legal Studies, (28): 317-342.

Luthi B. (2011). Perspectives on Security in Twentieth-Century Europe and the World. Contemporary European History, (20): 207-214.

Munoz, A., Gonzalez, J., Mana A. (2012). A Performance-Oriented Monitoring System for Security Properties in Cloud Computing Applications. The Computer Journal, (55): 979-994.

Niemetz M. D. (2014). Empowering Civil Society: How to Increase the Input of NGOs into Security Council Deliberation. J Human Rights Practice, (6): 69-88.

Osano. H. (1999). Security Design, Insider Monitoring, and Financial Market Equilibrium. Review of Finance, (2): 273-302.

Pantazis C., Pemberton S. (2012). Reconfiguring Security and Liberty: Political Discourses and Public Opinion in the New Century. Br. J. Criminol, (52): 651-667.

Robinson, P. (2008), Dictionary of International Security, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Smith J. (2010). Getting the Right Balance: Information Security and Information Access. Legal Information Management, (10): 51-54.

Tang S. (2011). The Security dilemma and ethnic conflict: toward a dynamic and integrative theory of ethnic conflict. Review of International Studies, (37): 511-536

Thomas M., Dhillon G. (2012). Interpreting Deep Structures of Information Systems Security. The Computer Journal, (55): 1148-1156.

Tipton H. F., Krause M. (eds.) (2007). Information Security Management Handbook (Sixth Edition), Boca Raton: Auerbach Publications.

Trcek D. (2010). Security Metrics Foundations for Computer Security. The Computer Journal, (53): 1106-1112.

Tupakula U. K., Varadharajan V. (2012). Dynamic State-Based Security Architecture for Detecting Security Attacks in Virtual Machines. The Computer Journal, (55): 397- 409.

Walter B.F. (2006). Information, Uncertainty, and the Decision to Secede. International Organization, (60): 105-135.

Wessel R. A. (2003). The State of Affairs in EU Security and Defense Policy: The Breakthrough in the Treaty of Nice. J Conflict Security Law, (8): 265-288.

Article Info

Received: April 30 2014

Accepted: May 5 2014

Anca Parmena Olimid, Associate Professor, PhD, University of Craiova, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, Political Sciences S pecialization, Phone: 0040251418515, E-mail: parmena2002@yahoo.com