Security privatisation at sea: Piracy and the commercialisation of vessel protection
| Author | Stefano Ruzza,Eugenio Cusumano |
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0047117817731804 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117817731804
International Relations
2018, Vol. 32(1) 80 –103
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0047117817731804
journals.sagepub.com/home/ire
Security privatisation
at sea: Piracy and the
commercialisation of
vessel protection
Eugenio Cusumano
Leiden University
Stefano Ruzza
University of Turin
Abstract
In 2011, the growing number of pirate attacks prompted several flag states to authorise the use of
armed guards aboard vessels. Despite facing the same threat, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands
and Italy have adopted three distinct approaches to securing their merchant ships, ranging from
the exclusive use of private security companies (PSCs) to the employment of military personnel
only. This article conducts a congruence testing of the main theoretical explanations for the use
of PSCs on land against UK, Dutch and Italian vessel protection policies. By relying on sequencing
as a technique for theoretical synthesis, we develop a multicausal explanation of states’ vessel
protection arrangements, showing the varying influence of functionalist, ideational, organisational
and political drivers of security privatisation at different phases of the policy process.
Keywords
maritime security, piracy, private security, private security companies, privatisation, shipping,
vessel protection
By the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, the sharp increase in pirate
attacks in the Western Indian Ocean raised strong concerns within the shipping industry,
which in 2011 abandoned its traditional opposition against the boarding of armed person-
nel on commercial vessels. In the wake of this change, a large number of flag states have
authorised the deployment of armed guards, either military or private, aboard merchant
Corresponding author:
Eugenio Cusumano, Institute for History, Leiden University, Doelensteeg 16, 2311 VR Leiden, The
Netherlands.
Email: e.cusumano@hum.leidenuniv.nl
731804IRE0010.1177/0047117817731804International RelationsCusumano and Ruzza
research-article2017
Article
Cusumano and Ruzza 81
ships. The majority of European states, including Germany, Greece, the United Kingdom
and Scandinavian countries, allowed for the boarding of private security guards. Few
other countries, such as the Netherlands, adopted vessel protection policies based on the
boarding of military personnel only. Other states, such as Belgium and Italy, fell in
between these two extremes, adopting a dual approach that allows for the use of either
military personnel or private guards aboard merchant ships.
This article examines the rationale underlying the choosing of different vessel protec-
tion policies by conducting a controlled comparison of the British, Dutch and Italian
cases. The United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy possess comparable merchant
fleets, which has resulted in a similar exposure to the threat of pirate attacks. Still, they
adopted three different approaches to vessel protection, ranging from the exclusive use
of private security companies (PSCs) to the employment of military vessel protection
detachments (VPDs) only. Consequently, this case selection allows for both maximising
variance in the dependent variable and controlling a key factor shaping states’ security
policies, namely, their varying exposure to external threats.
Controlled comparisons have been identified as crucial to assess the explanatory
power of different theories.1 Within-case observation is primarily based on process trac-
ing, identified as the key method for investigating whether the timing and evolution of
certain policy decisions coincide with prior, theoretically derived expectations.2 By trac-
ing the policy processes underlying the evolution of vessel protection policy in three
different countries, our study offers a systematic congruence testing3 of existing explana-
tions of security privatisation and their applicability to vessel protection. We rely on the
technique of sequencing4 to combine existing theories into a thick, multicausal explana-
tion of vessel protection, assessing the relative importance of each of the factors identi-
fied by the existing literature as drivers of security privatisation at each stage of the
decision-making process.
The evidence collected in this study is based on document analysis and a set of semi-
structured interviews with government officials, military officers and representatives of
shipping and private security industry associations conducted between May 2014 and
February 2017. Due to the sensitivity of the subject matter, we accepted most of our
interviewees’ request to remain anonymous as recommended by the scholarship on the
ethics of qualitative research.5 The role performed by each interviewee and the date when
the interview was conducted, however, are indicated in endnotes.
While the causes of the increasing use of PSCs on land have received considerable
attention,6 there is little comparative research focusing specifically on the factors under-
lying the increasing involvement of the private sector in merchant vessel protection. By
developing a thick, multicausal explanation of vessel protection decisions and showing
the interplay of functionalist, ideationalist, organisational and political factors in inform-
ing the choice to resort to either PSCs or VPDs, this article provides an important contri-
bution to private and maritime security studies. Vessel protection decisions are not only
foreign policy choices of intrinsic importance but also provide broader insight into con-
temporary shifts in the management of violence and the institution of sovereignty. Owing
to the dual nature of merchant vessels – both fragments of state territory and private
assets owned by ship owners – the policies undertaken to protect the shipping industry
from piracy offer an ideal example of the growing hybridisation between public and
To continue reading
Request your trial