Making security has been Leviathan's home turf and its prime responsibility. Yet, while security states in advanced democracies share this uniform purpose, there is vast variation in how they legitimize and how they make security policies. First, the political authority of elected policy‐makers is sometimes superseded by the epistemic authority of experts. Second, states make security, in some instances, by drawing on their own capacities, whereas in other fields they rely on rules to manage non‐state actors. Based on this variation in authority foundations and policy instruments, we disentangle Leviathan into different types of (i) positive, (ii) managing, (iii) technocratic, and (iv) regulatory security states. Our typology helps better understand contemporary security policy‐making; it advances regulatory governance theory by conceptualizing the relationship between expertise and rules in a complex and contested issue area; and it provides insights into the “new economic security state” and the domestic underpinnings of weaponized interdependence.

中文翻译：

---

解开利维坦的主场：权威基础、政策工具和安全保障

安全保障已利维坦的主场及其首要责任。然而，尽管先进民主国家的安全国家有着这一统一的目标，但它们在如何合法化以及如何制定安全政策方面却存在巨大差异。首先，民选决策者的政治权威有时会被专家的认知权威所取代。其次，在某些情况下，国家通过利用自身能力来确保安全，而在其他领域，它们则依靠规则来管理非国家行为体。基于权威基础和政策工具的这种差异，我们理清了利维坦分为不同类型的（i）积极的，（ii）管理的，（iii）技术官僚的，和（iv）监管安全国家的。我们的类型有助于更好地理解当代安全政策制定；它通过概念化复杂且有争议的问题领域的专业知识和规则之间的关系来推进监管治理理论；它提供了对“新经济安全国家”和武器化相互依存的国内基础的见解。