New Report: UK Foreign Policy Goals Cannot Be Achieved by Military Power Alone
Source: Chatham House
Strategic communications should become a more prominent component at the highest levels of government, at an early stage in the development of government strategies, during a crisis response or a contingency operation and generally as a critical component of policy-making, says a new Chatham House report.
Recent operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have underlined that UK foreign policy goals cannot be achieved by military power alone. Increasingly important are non-military means and ‘soft’ power in order to connect with populations both at home and abroad. Strategic communications, correctly defined, are an integral part of this approach.
Strategic Communications and National Strategy, aims to raise awareness of the role of strategic communications and clarify how it can contribute to facing future security challenges.
The report considers the contribution strategic communications can make to national security strategy in its broader sense as directed, managed and delivered not only by the highest levels of government but by all constituent pillars of governance, including the military, diplomacy and trade, throughout the policy process.
Although the UK government clearly has a good understanding of the importance of strategic communications, this understanding is relatively limited in its sophistication and imagination, and policy in turn proves difficult to coordinate and implement.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements
Source: Congressional Research Service (via U.S. Department of State Foreign Press Center)
Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation slowed, however, in the 1990s, and the Bush Administration usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. But the Obama Administration has resumed bilateral negotiations with Russia and pledged its support for a number of multilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts.
The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship. At the same time, however, the two sides began to cooperate on securing and eliminating Soviet-era nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Through these cooperative efforts, the United States now allocates more than $1 billion each year to threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union.
The United States is also a prominent actor in an international regime that attempts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. This regime, although suffering from some setbacks in recent years in Iran and North Korea, includes formal treaties, export control coordination and enforcement, U.N. resolutions, and organizational controls. The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) serves as the cornerstone of this regime, with all but four nations participating in it. The International Atomic Energy Agency not only monitors nuclear programs to make sure they remain peaceful, but also helps nations develop and advance those programs. Other measures, such as sanctions, interdiction efforts, and informal cooperative endeavors, also seek to slow or stop the spread of nuclear materials and weapons.
The international community has also adopted a number of agreements that address non-nuclear weapons. The CFE Treaty and Open Skies Treaty sought to stabilize the conventional balance in Europe in the waning years of the Cold War. Other arrangements seek to slow the spread of technologies that nations could use to develop advanced conventional weapons. The Chemical Weapons and Biological Weapons Conventions sought to eliminate both of these types of weapons completely.
This report will be updated annually, or as needed.
Source: Congressional Research Service (via U.S. Department of State Foreign Press Center)
Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation slowed, however, in the 1990s, and the Bush Administration usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. But the Obama Administration has resumed bilateral negotiations with Russia and pledged its support for a number of multilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts.
The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship. At the same time, however, the two sides began to cooperate on securing and eliminating Soviet-era nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Through these cooperative efforts, the United States now allocates more than $1 billion each year to threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union.
The United States is also a prominent actor in an international regime that attempts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. This regime, although suffering from some setbacks in recent years in Iran and North Korea, includes formal treaties, export control coordination and enforcement, U.N. resolutions, and organizational controls. The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) serves as the cornerstone of this regime, with all but four nations participating in it. The International Atomic Energy Agency not only monitors nuclear programs to make sure they remain peaceful, but also helps nations develop and advance those programs. Other measures, such as sanctions, interdiction efforts, and informal cooperative endeavors, also seek to slow or stop the spread of nuclear materials and weapons.
The international community has also adopted a number of agreements that address non-nuclear weapons. The CFE Treaty and Open Skies Treaty sought to stabilize the conventional balance in Europe in the waning years of the Cold War. Other arrangements seek to slow the spread of technologies that nations could use to develop advanced conventional weapons. The Chemical Weapons and Biological Weapons Conventions sought to eliminate both of these types of weapons completely.
This report will be updated annually, or as needed.
Monday, October 3, 2011
India’s Contemporary Security Challenges (PDF)
Source: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
India is the world’s largest democracy, and one of its fastest-growing economies. The country is celebrated for its educated professional class, its urban-based prosperity, and its Bollywood-fueled cultural influence abroad. Commentators wax effusive about its extraordinary “growth story” and rising global clout. A 2010 joint study by the U.S. National Intelligence Council and the European Union declared it the world’s third-most powerful nation.
India, to borrow a government slogan first coined in 2003, is indeed “shining.” This cheery narrative, however, masks a parallel reality about India. While parts of the country bask in the glow of new-found affluence, others continue to toil in the gloom of abject poverty. This other side of India is also riven by violence and unrest, which increasingly targets the government. Meanwhile, even as India takes on the trappings of a global power, it remains deeply concerned about security developments beyond its borders. Lurking beneath India’s recent triumphs are internal and external security challenges that may well intensify in the years ahead.
Source: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
India is the world’s largest democracy, and one of its fastest-growing economies. The country is celebrated for its educated professional class, its urban-based prosperity, and its Bollywood-fueled cultural influence abroad. Commentators wax effusive about its extraordinary “growth story” and rising global clout. A 2010 joint study by the U.S. National Intelligence Council and the European Union declared it the world’s third-most powerful nation.
India, to borrow a government slogan first coined in 2003, is indeed “shining.” This cheery narrative, however, masks a parallel reality about India. While parts of the country bask in the glow of new-found affluence, others continue to toil in the gloom of abject poverty. This other side of India is also riven by violence and unrest, which increasingly targets the government. Meanwhile, even as India takes on the trappings of a global power, it remains deeply concerned about security developments beyond its borders. Lurking beneath India’s recent triumphs are internal and external security challenges that may well intensify in the years ahead.
Friday, September 23, 2011
China-Latin America Military Engagement: Good Will, Good Business, and Strategic Position
China-Latin America Military Engagement: Good Will, Good Business, and Strategic Position
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
This monograph examines Chinese military engagement with Latin America in five areas: (1) meetings between senior military officials; (2) lower-level military-to-military interactions; (3) military sales; (4) military-relevant commercial interactions; and, (5) Chinese physical presence within Latin America, all of which have military-strategic implications. This monograph finds that the level of PRC military engagement with the region is higher than is generally recognized, and has expanded in important ways in recent years: High-level trips by Latin American defense and security personnel to the PRC and visits by their Chinese counterparts to Latin America have become commonplace. The volume and sophistication of Chinese arms sold to the region has increased. Officer exchange programs, institutional visits, and other lower-level ties have also expanded. Chinese military personnel have begun participating in operations in the region in a modest, yet symbolically important manner. The monograph also argues that in the short term, PRC military engagement with Latin America does not focus on establishing alliances or base access to the United States, but rather, supporting objectives of national development and regime survival, such as building understanding and political leverage among important commercial partners, creating the tools to protect PRC interests in the countries where it does business, and selling Chinese products and moving up the value-added chain in strategically important sectors. It concludes that Chinese military engagement may both contribute to legitimate regional security needs, and foster misunderstanding. It argues that the U.S. should work for greater transparency with the PRC in regard to those activities, as well as to analyze how the Chinese presence will impact the calculation of the region’s actors in the context of specific future scenarios.
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
This monograph examines Chinese military engagement with Latin America in five areas: (1) meetings between senior military officials; (2) lower-level military-to-military interactions; (3) military sales; (4) military-relevant commercial interactions; and, (5) Chinese physical presence within Latin America, all of which have military-strategic implications. This monograph finds that the level of PRC military engagement with the region is higher than is generally recognized, and has expanded in important ways in recent years: High-level trips by Latin American defense and security personnel to the PRC and visits by their Chinese counterparts to Latin America have become commonplace. The volume and sophistication of Chinese arms sold to the region has increased. Officer exchange programs, institutional visits, and other lower-level ties have also expanded. Chinese military personnel have begun participating in operations in the region in a modest, yet symbolically important manner. The monograph also argues that in the short term, PRC military engagement with Latin America does not focus on establishing alliances or base access to the United States, but rather, supporting objectives of national development and regime survival, such as building understanding and political leverage among important commercial partners, creating the tools to protect PRC interests in the countries where it does business, and selling Chinese products and moving up the value-added chain in strategically important sectors. It concludes that Chinese military engagement may both contribute to legitimate regional security needs, and foster misunderstanding. It argues that the U.S. should work for greater transparency with the PRC in regard to those activities, as well as to analyze how the Chinese presence will impact the calculation of the region’s actors in the context of specific future scenarios.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010
Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010
Source: World Health Organization
Of the 57 million global deaths in 2008, 36 million, or 63%, were due to NCDs, principally cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, cancers and chronic respiratory diseases. As the impact of NCDs increases, and as populations age, annual NCD deaths are projected to continue to rise worldwide, and the greatest increase is expected to be seen in low- and middle-income regions.
While popular belief presumes that NCDs afflict mostly high-income populations, the evidence tells a very different story. Nearly 80% of NCD deaths occur in low-and middle-income countries and NCDs are the most frequent causes of death in most countries, except in Africa. Even in African nations, NCDs are rising rapidly and are projected to exceed communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional diseases as the most common causes of death by 2030.
Source: World Health Organization
Of the 57 million global deaths in 2008, 36 million, or 63%, were due to NCDs, principally cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, cancers and chronic respiratory diseases. As the impact of NCDs increases, and as populations age, annual NCD deaths are projected to continue to rise worldwide, and the greatest increase is expected to be seen in low- and middle-income regions.
While popular belief presumes that NCDs afflict mostly high-income populations, the evidence tells a very different story. Nearly 80% of NCD deaths occur in low-and middle-income countries and NCDs are the most frequent causes of death in most countries, except in Africa. Even in African nations, NCDs are rising rapidly and are projected to exceed communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional diseases as the most common causes of death by 2030.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Resolving Insurgencies
Resolving Insurgencies
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
Understanding how insurgencies may be brought to a successful conclusion is vital to military strategists and policymakers. This study examines how past insurgencies have ended and how current ones may be resolved. Four ways in which insurgencies have ended are identified. Clear-cut victories for either the government or the insurgents occurred during the era of decolonization, but they seldom happen today. Recent insurgencies have often degenerated into criminal organizations that become committed to making money rather than fighting a revolution, or they evolve into terrorist groups capable of nothing more than sporadic violence. In a few cases, the threatened government has resolved the conflict by co-opting the insurgents. After achieving a strategic stalemate and persuading the belligerents that they have nothing to gain from continued fighting, these governments have drawn the insurgents into the legitimate political process through reform and concessions. The author concludes that such a co-option strategy offers the best hope of U.S. success in Afghanistan and in future counterinsurgency campaigns.
Source: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College
Understanding how insurgencies may be brought to a successful conclusion is vital to military strategists and policymakers. This study examines how past insurgencies have ended and how current ones may be resolved. Four ways in which insurgencies have ended are identified. Clear-cut victories for either the government or the insurgents occurred during the era of decolonization, but they seldom happen today. Recent insurgencies have often degenerated into criminal organizations that become committed to making money rather than fighting a revolution, or they evolve into terrorist groups capable of nothing more than sporadic violence. In a few cases, the threatened government has resolved the conflict by co-opting the insurgents. After achieving a strategic stalemate and persuading the belligerents that they have nothing to gain from continued fighting, these governments have drawn the insurgents into the legitimate political process through reform and concessions. The author concludes that such a co-option strategy offers the best hope of U.S. success in Afghanistan and in future counterinsurgency campaigns.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Loving the Cyber Bomb? The Dangers of Threat Inflation in Cybersecurity Policy
Loving the Cyber Bomb? The Dangers of Threat Inflation in Cybersecurity Policy
Source: Mercatus Center (George Mason University)
Over the past two years there has been a steady drumbeat of alarmist rhetoric coming out of Washington about potential catastrophic cyber threats. For example, at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last year, Chairman Carl Levin said that “cyberweapons and cyberattacks potentially can be devastating, approaching weapons of mass destruction in their effects.” Proposed responses include increased federal spending on cybersecurity and the regulation of private network security practices.
The rhetoric of “cyber doom” employed by proponents of increased federal intervention, however, lacks clear evidence of a serious threat that can be verified by the public. As a result, the United States may be witnessing a bout of threat inflation similar to that seen in the run-up to the Iraq War. Additionally, a cyber-industrial complex is emerging, much like the military-industrial complex of the Cold War. This complex may serve to not only supply cybersecurity solutions to the federal government, but to drum up demand for them as well.
Part I of this article draws a parallel between today’s cybersecurity debate and the run-up to the Iraq War and looks at how an inflated public conception of the threat we face may lead to unnecessary regulation of the Internet. Part II draws a parallel between the emerging cybersecurity establishment and the military-industrial complex of the Cold War and looks at how unwarranted external influence can lead to unnecessary federal spending. Finally, Part III surveys several federal cybersecurity proposals and presents a framework for analyzing the cybersecurity threat.
Source: Mercatus Center (George Mason University)
Over the past two years there has been a steady drumbeat of alarmist rhetoric coming out of Washington about potential catastrophic cyber threats. For example, at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last year, Chairman Carl Levin said that “cyberweapons and cyberattacks potentially can be devastating, approaching weapons of mass destruction in their effects.” Proposed responses include increased federal spending on cybersecurity and the regulation of private network security practices.
The rhetoric of “cyber doom” employed by proponents of increased federal intervention, however, lacks clear evidence of a serious threat that can be verified by the public. As a result, the United States may be witnessing a bout of threat inflation similar to that seen in the run-up to the Iraq War. Additionally, a cyber-industrial complex is emerging, much like the military-industrial complex of the Cold War. This complex may serve to not only supply cybersecurity solutions to the federal government, but to drum up demand for them as well.
Part I of this article draws a parallel between today’s cybersecurity debate and the run-up to the Iraq War and looks at how an inflated public conception of the threat we face may lead to unnecessary regulation of the Internet. Part II draws a parallel between the emerging cybersecurity establishment and the military-industrial complex of the Cold War and looks at how unwarranted external influence can lead to unnecessary federal spending. Finally, Part III surveys several federal cybersecurity proposals and presents a framework for analyzing the cybersecurity threat.
Monday, June 20, 2011
India’s Developing International Role
India’s Developing International Role
Source: Chatham House
Within a short time, India has evolved from a country with a marginal role to a key participant in global decision-making. But many agree that India’s ability to play a greater global role would evolve more naturally were the country’s domestic development challenges met.
In recent years Western countries have encouraged India to play a more active global role, as have other emerging powers. India has attempted to do so in many areas, and it has sought to be recognized as a global actor, not least by campaigning for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
A new Chatham House report, For the Global Good: India’s Developing International Role, explores India’s growing influence on international affairs, trade and investments, security and democracy, and the environment, including climate change.
Given its size and population, India has potential to make a significant contribution in tackling climate change through its domestic policies on renewable energy, adopting low-carbon technology and forest conservation.
The report also assesses its role in Afghanistan, by far the most important example of Indian overseas assistance today. India, the fifth larges provider of aid to Afghanistan, sees a stable, pro-Indian government in Afghanistan as a strategic benefit and the country remains a ‘special case’ in India’s foreign policy thinking.
Source: Chatham House
Within a short time, India has evolved from a country with a marginal role to a key participant in global decision-making. But many agree that India’s ability to play a greater global role would evolve more naturally were the country’s domestic development challenges met.
In recent years Western countries have encouraged India to play a more active global role, as have other emerging powers. India has attempted to do so in many areas, and it has sought to be recognized as a global actor, not least by campaigning for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
A new Chatham House report, For the Global Good: India’s Developing International Role, explores India’s growing influence on international affairs, trade and investments, security and democracy, and the environment, including climate change.
Given its size and population, India has potential to make a significant contribution in tackling climate change through its domestic policies on renewable energy, adopting low-carbon technology and forest conservation.
The report also assesses its role in Afghanistan, by far the most important example of Indian overseas assistance today. India, the fifth larges provider of aid to Afghanistan, sees a stable, pro-Indian government in Afghanistan as a strategic benefit and the country remains a ‘special case’ in India’s foreign policy thinking.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
United States Peace Index 2011
United States Peace Index 2011
Source: Institute for Economics & Peace
The United States Peace Index (USPI) is the first in a series of national peace indices that will build on the work of the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) in measuring and understanding the fabric of peace. The Institute produces the Global Peace Index which is the first ever study to methodically rank the nations of the world by their peacefulness and to identify potential drivers of peace. The GPI has become a valued resource and is used by academics, think tanks and governments around the world.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Partnership for the Americas: Western Hemisphere Strategy and U.S. Southern Command
Partnership for the Americas: Western Hemisphere Strategy and U.S. Southern Command
Source: National Defense University
Admiral James G. Stavridis, USN, reflects on his tenure as Commander of United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). The first Admiral to command Southern Command, Admiral Stavridis broke with tradition from day one, discarding the customary military staff model and creating an innovative organization designed not solely to subdue adversaries, but, perhaps more importantly, to build durable and lasting partnerships with friends. As he has said often, “We are excellent at launching Tomahawk missiles; in this part of the world, we need to get better at launching ideas.”
From his unique perspective as commander, Stavridis uses his engagingly personal style to describe his vision for the command’s role in the Americas, making the most of limited resources to create goodwill and mutual respect, while taking care of the serious business of countering illegal drug trafficking, overcoming a dangerous insurgency in Colombia, and responding to humanitarian crises.
Source: National Defense University
Admiral James G. Stavridis, USN, reflects on his tenure as Commander of United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). The first Admiral to command Southern Command, Admiral Stavridis broke with tradition from day one, discarding the customary military staff model and creating an innovative organization designed not solely to subdue adversaries, but, perhaps more importantly, to build durable and lasting partnerships with friends. As he has said often, “We are excellent at launching Tomahawk missiles; in this part of the world, we need to get better at launching ideas.”
From his unique perspective as commander, Stavridis uses his engagingly personal style to describe his vision for the command’s role in the Americas, making the most of limited resources to create goodwill and mutual respect, while taking care of the serious business of countering illegal drug trafficking, overcoming a dangerous insurgency in Colombia, and responding to humanitarian crises.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
China’s National Defense in 2010
China’s National Defense in 2010
Source: China State Council, Information Office
From Preface:
In the first decade of the 21st century, the international community forged ahead in a new phase of opening up and cooperation, and at the same time faced crises and changes. Sharing opportunities for development and dealing with challenges with joint efforts have become the consensus of all countries in the world. Pulling together in the time of trouble, seeking mutual benefit and engaging in win-win cooperation are the only ways for humankind to achieve common development and prosperity. China has now stood at a new historical point, and its future and destiny has never been more closely connected with those of the international community. In the face of shared opportunities and common challenges, China maintains its commitment to the new security concepts of mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and coordination. By connecting the fundamental interests of the Chinese people with the common interests of other peoples around the globe, connecting China’s development with that of the world, and connecting China’s security with world peace, China strives to build, through its peaceful development, a harmonious world of lasting peace and common prosperity. Looking into the second decade of the 21st century, China will continue to take advantage of this important period of strategic opportunities for national development, apply the Scientific Outlook on Development in depth, persevere on the path of peaceful development, pursue an independent foreign policy of peace and a national defense policy that is defensive in nature, map out both economic development and national defense in a unified manner and, in the process of building a society that is moderately affluent on a general basis, realize the unified goal of building a prosperous country and a strong military.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
The National Military Strategy of the United States 2011
The National Military Strategy of the United States 2011 (PDF)
Source: U.S. Department of Defense (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)
From press release (Admiral Mike Mullen):
"Today, I released the 2011 National Military Strategy which provides a vision for how our Joint Force will provide the military capability to protect the American People, defend our Nation and allies, and contribute to our broader peace, security and prosperity.
While we continue to refine how we counter violent extremism and deter aggression, this strategy also rightfully emphasizes that our military power is most effective when employed in concert with other elements of power. This whole-of-nation approach to foreign policy, with civilian leadership appropriately at the helm, will be essential as we address the complex security challenges before us.
This strategy also acknowledges that while tough near-term choices must be made during this era of broader economic constraints, we will continue to invest in our people and our families. Working with our government and interagency partners, and our friends and allies, they, most of all, will bring this strategy to life as we meet our 21st century responsibilities in a dynamic, yet uncertain, future."
Source: U.S. Department of Defense (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)
From press release (Admiral Mike Mullen):
"Today, I released the 2011 National Military Strategy which provides a vision for how our Joint Force will provide the military capability to protect the American People, defend our Nation and allies, and contribute to our broader peace, security and prosperity.
While we continue to refine how we counter violent extremism and deter aggression, this strategy also rightfully emphasizes that our military power is most effective when employed in concert with other elements of power. This whole-of-nation approach to foreign policy, with civilian leadership appropriately at the helm, will be essential as we address the complex security challenges before us.
This strategy also acknowledges that while tough near-term choices must be made during this era of broader economic constraints, we will continue to invest in our people and our families. Working with our government and interagency partners, and our friends and allies, they, most of all, will bring this strategy to life as we meet our 21st century responsibilities in a dynamic, yet uncertain, future."
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Africa Portal
Africa Portal
The Africa Portal is an online knowledge resource for policy-related issues on Africa. An undertaking by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), Makerere University (MAK), and the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), the Africa Portal offers open access to a suite of features including an online library collection; a resource for opinion and analysis; an experts directory; an international events calendar; and a mobile technology component—all aimed to equip users with research and information on Africa’s current policy issues.
A key feature to the Africa Portal is the online library collection holding over 2,500 books, journals, and digital documents related to African policy issues. The entire online repository is open access and available for free full-text download. A portion of the digital documents housed in the library have been digitized for the first time as an undertaking of the Africa Portal project. Facilitating new digitization projects is a core feature of the Africa Portal, which aims to improve access and visibility for African research.
The Africa Portal is an online knowledge resource for policy-related issues on Africa. An undertaking by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), Makerere University (MAK), and the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), the Africa Portal offers open access to a suite of features including an online library collection; a resource for opinion and analysis; an experts directory; an international events calendar; and a mobile technology component—all aimed to equip users with research and information on Africa’s current policy issues.
A key feature to the Africa Portal is the online library collection holding over 2,500 books, journals, and digital documents related to African policy issues. The entire online repository is open access and available for free full-text download. A portion of the digital documents housed in the library have been digitized for the first time as an undertaking of the Africa Portal project. Facilitating new digitization projects is a core feature of the Africa Portal, which aims to improve access and visibility for African research.
Monday, January 31, 2011
2010 Global Go To Think Tanks Rankings and Trends
2010 Global Go To Think Tanks Rankings and Trends
Source: Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, University of Pennsylvania
The 2010 Global Go To Think Tank Rankings marks the fourth edition of what has now become an annual report. The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program at the International Relations Program, University of Pennsylvania has created a process for ranking think tanks around the world. It is the first comprehensive ranking of the world’s top think tanks, based on a worldwide survey of close to 1500 scholars, policy makers, journalists and regional and subject area experts.
Source: Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, University of Pennsylvania
The 2010 Global Go To Think Tank Rankings marks the fourth edition of what has now become an annual report. The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program at the International Relations Program, University of Pennsylvania has created a process for ranking think tanks around the world. It is the first comprehensive ranking of the world’s top think tanks, based on a worldwide survey of close to 1500 scholars, policy makers, journalists and regional and subject area experts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)