Hybrid threats and human security: the impact of hybrid war and hybrid interference on civilians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper examines the evolving landscape of hybrid warfare and hybrid interference and the impact of these hybrid threats on the lives of civilians. Design/methodology/approach This paper outlines the origins of the concept of hybrid warfare, its strengths and limitations and the push for conceptual refinement, leading to the introduction of the concept of hybrid interference. The key characteristics of hybridity are addressed, particularly in relation to actors and strategies. Key domains of hybrid attacks are explored. Findings Drawing on a human security lens, this paper reveals the profound ways in which the people’s daily lives are affected by hybrid threats in the realms of information, cyber and economics. It highlights the importance of moving beyond macro-level understandings of hybrid threats to include the security of everyday people. Social implications The implications of hybrid threats are examined, alongside key strategies for tackling hybrid threats, including resilience building and a whole-of-society approach to countering hybrid threats. Originality/value While the issue of hybrid threats has been explored extensively, as well as its macro implications, little attention has been paid to micro-level implications. This paper addresses the impact of hybrid threats on the daily lives of civilian populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".