Fallo de la Tercera Sala de la Corte Suprema que acoge la prescripción:

Having established the theoretical foundations of this thesis, the following chapter will focus on discussing the chosen research design and methodology, as well as explaining what empirical indicators will be used to assess whether or not certain policy issues have been securitised within Russia’s Arctic discourse. Throughout this chapter, specific attention will also be paid on the impact these choices have on the validity and reliability of the study.

5.1 Single-case study analysis

In order to provide an answer to the central research question, this thesis will follow a qualitative methodology based on an embedded single case-study design. Case-study research is known to be especially suitable for the study of complex social or political phenomena, especially when it concerns explorative research driven by how and why questions (Yin, 2003, p. 1). It is an approach in which one (or a selected few) particular instance of a broader development or overarching type of event is studied intensively and in great detail. Rather than evaluating this single case through simplified causal models or quantitatively measuring a certain variation, the aim is to “illuminate a set of decisions: why they were taken, how they were implemented and with what result” (Yin, 2003, p. 12). Therefore, a case study is considered the preferred strategy to explore a subject area in which very little prior knowledge exists or that would benefit from a more holistic understanding (Kumar, 2011, p. 126). Owing to the above, the decision to opt for a case- study design logically follows from the set out objective of this research, namely to provide an in-depth exploration of Russia’s Arctic militarisation, which ultimately culminates in a plausible explanation

The choice of Russia as the single case in this study is motivated by several factors. Not only is Russia’s behaviour considered a representative example of Arctic militarisation, comparative multiple-case analyses would prove difficult to achieve due to the fact that Russia is the only non-western, non-NATO member among all five littoral state. To a certain extent, the case selection was also driven by the personal interests and prior knowledge of the researcher, given that the language, but also the political, cultural and historical context of the Russian Federation are most familiar to me. This ensures that I will be able to easily access and understand all the documents necessary to carry out this analysis. The research design is embedded, meaning that several different units of observation will be studied within the context of a single case. In light of this thesis, it implies that the overall securitisation of Arctic issues will be analysed separately for the five earlier-mentioned sectors of security. Figure 2 shows a schematic visualisation of the selected research design.

Like any other approach, the single case-study design has some obvious flaws, most notably its low external validity. Although it is true that it is impossible to make any meaningful generalisations based on the analysis of one individual case, the intention to do so is never claimed with this type of explanatory research - its goal is to provide ‘particularising’, rather than generalising insights. More and more scholars have started to point out that general, causal theories are not the only source of academic progress; depending on the research goal, concrete and context-dependant knowledge can be just as valuable (Flyvbjerg, 2006, p. 7).

5.2 Methodology and data collection

Since securitisation takes place through linguistic processes and materialises itself in the rhetoric of policy actors, it has to be studied through “discourse and political constellations” (Buzan, De Wilde & Waever, 1998, p. 25). Consequently, the designated scientific approach to conduct the present research is discourse analysis - a method broadly defined as “a rigorous study of writing, speech and other communicative events in order to understand political, social or cultural dynamics” (Salter & Mutlu, 2013, p. 263). The data necessary to conduct such analyses can stem from a variety of textual and visual primary sources, including newspaper articles, government publications and memos, policy documents, speeches, interviews and even video footage of official addresses. In order to assess whether the dynamics of

securitisation have been present in the framing of the Arctic in the Russian policy discourse, I draw primarily on the official Arctic Development Strategy of the Russian Federation published in 2013 and the 2008 Policy Concept outlining the main provisions of Russia’s intentions in the Arctic region. Other official documents, including (but not limited to) the National Security Strategy, the State Military Doctrine and the Energy Strategy of the Russian Federation are however also consulted in order to provide the necessary background information on the issues discussed. While this research does not include data derived from first-hand interviews with actors directly involved in Russia’s Arctic policymaking (i.e. the President, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs-, Defence- and Energy, members of the Security Council and State Duma), it does rely on transcripts of their commentaries, addresses and speeches published on the government website of the Russian Federation, as well as in reputable Russian newspapers such as Kommersant, Vzglyad and Rossiiskaya Gazeta. The time frame in which Russia’s official discourse towards the Arctic is studied has been delimited to the period between 2007 and 2015. As mentioned earlier, there is a widespread belief in the international community that the planting of the Russian flag on the North Pole seabed in 2007 symbolised the growing geopolitical and strategic important of the region in the policies of the Russian Federation, making this event a logical starting point for this research. Since the militarisation of the Arctic is still an on-going development, the information cut-off date has been set at 31 December 2015, meaning that more recent data sources were not taken into consideration for the purposes of this research.

Using a wide variety of different sources of evidence is of vital importance when opting for a qualitative singe case-study design, since there is an increased risk that the data used in this kind of research permits too many different interpretations and hence gives the researcher too much freedom in drawing conclusions that fit his or her predetermined objectives (Swanborn, 2010, p. 108). This occurrence is somewhat mitigated by using a so-called ‘triangulation’ of data-collection methods, which complement each other and allow for the comparison of results from different perspectives, thereby increasing their reliability. It goes without saying that any finding or observation is likely to be “much more convincing and accurate if it is

5.3 Operationalisation

As the previous chapter has made clear, the collected data will be analysed through the conceptual framework of securitisation. In order to do so, it is first necessary to convert this abstract analytical tool into easily recognisable variables and establish what linguistic cues can be relied on to recognise the securitisation process. Therefore, the below table will present the empirical indicators that will be employed to classify the various statements made in relation to the Arctic and eventually assess whether or not the discourse can be classified as securitised:

Framing of the issue

 The issue is presented as a threat to Russia’s (national)

security interests or linked to other previously recognised threats.

 The issue is referred to using confrontational rhetoric-,

metaphors- or analogies.

 Arguments are made concerning the priority or urgency of

the issue.

Framing of the solution

 A case is made for the necessity of extraordinary measures

(which fall outside the range of policy options normally considered in this sphere) to mitigate the negative effects of the issue.

 The use of force is presented as a legitimate means to

tackle the issue.

Table 1: Selected empirical indicators of securitisation (derived from the conceptualisation presented in Buzan, De Wilde & Waever, 1998, p. 23 - 26).

It is important to keep in mind that even with the help of concrete indicators, the assessment of securitisation remains a subjective process. To name just a few examples, one could question how many of the above characteristics need to be present in order for an issue to be considered securitised, and whether the rhetoric has to be replicated across different sources. Therefore, the abovementioned linguistic cues should merely be considered as signs of various degrees of securitisation, which then need to be carefully examined and evaluated in their given context.