Rethinking Security: From Conflict to Collaboration. Towards Citizen-Centered Governance

Abstract

This article examines two opposing models of public security: the criminal law of the enemy and participatory security. Its aim is to highlight how different theoretical conceptions produce divergent effects on security governance and on processes of social inclusion. The methodology combines a theoretical analysis of criminological and legal literature with the examination of case studies conducted in Italian urban contexts—such as Terni, Florence, and Milan—and in an international setting like Lyon. The findings show that repressive and selective approaches tend to reinforce processes of stigmatization and social conflict, whereas participatory models foster institutional trust, shared prevention practices, and a greater perception of security. The conclusions, drawn in particular from a research activity carried out in the city of Terni and comparatively assessed alongside other urban contexts, emphasize the need for an inclusive security governance capable of reconciling the protection of fundamental rights, preventive effectiveness, and community participation, as a sustainable response to the contemporary challenges of urban security.