Advertisement

Governance and Society

  • Corey Lofdahl
Chapter

Abstarct

Countries with collapsed governance – so-called failed states – are common targets of international interventions. Not only do failed states impose enormous suffering on their own populations, often necessitating humanitarian aid and other forms of intervention, but they also constitute a key threat to world security. The National Security Strategy of the United States of America states, in fact, that we are now “threatened less by conquering states than we are by failing ones” (NSC 2002).

Keywords

Effective Governance International Assistance Capacity Investment Government Capacity National Security Strategy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Baard, M. (2007). Sentient World: War games on the grandest scale. The Register. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/23/sentient_worlds/.
  2. Beal, R. S. (1985). Decision Making, Crisis Management, Information and Technology. Program on Information Resources Policy, Technical Report. Cambridge, Mass: Center for Information Policy Research, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  3. Blair, S. A., Eyre, D., Salome, B. & Wasserstrom, J. (2005). Developing a Legitimate Political Economy. In J. Covey, M. J. Dziedzic & L. R. Hawley (Eds.) In The Quest for Viable Peace: International intervention and strategies for conflict transformation (pp. 205–243). Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace.Google Scholar
  4. Choucri, N., Goldsmith, D., Madnick, S. & Mistree, D., Morrison, J. B. & Siegel, M. (2007). Using System Dynamics to Model and Better Understand State Stability. Presented at International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Boston.Google Scholar
  5. Covey, J., Dziedzic, M. & Hawley, L. (Eds.) (2005). The Quest for Viable Peace: International intervention and strategies for conflict transformation. Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, P. K. (2001). Effects-Based Operations: A grand challenge for the analytical community. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, P. K. & Cragin, K. (Eds.) (2009). Social Science for Counterterrorism: Putting the pieces together. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
  8. Dobbins, J. (2003). Nation-Building: The inescapable responsibility of the world’s only superpower. RAND Review, 27(2), 16–27.Google Scholar
  9. Eberlein, R. (2007). Vensim User’s Guide (version 5). Harvard, MA: Ventana Systems.Google Scholar
  10. Effects Based Research (2007). Verification, Validation, and Accreditation Final Report. Vienna, VA: Evidence Based Research.Google Scholar
  11. Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Forrester, J. W. (1971). Counterintutitve Behavior of Social Systems. Technology Review, 73(3), 52–68.Google Scholar
  13. Fukuyama, F. (2004). State-Building: Governance and world order in the 21st century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell.Google Scholar
  14. Fund for Peace. (2005). The Failed State Index. Foreign Policy. This survey has been updated yearly since 2005 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/the_2009_failed_states_index.
  15. Fund for Peace. (2009). The Failed State Index: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) and methodology. Foreign Policy. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/2009_failed_states_index_faq_methodology.
  16. Hawley, L. R. & Skocz, D. (2005). Advance Political-Military Planning: Laying the foundation for a viable peace. In J. Covey, M. J. Dziedzic, & L. R. Hawley (Eds.) The Quest for Viable Peace: International intervention and strategies for conflict transformation, (pp. 37–76). Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace.Google Scholar
  17. JFCOM (2004). Operational Net Assessment: A concept paper for joint experimentation. Norfolk, VA: US Joint Forces Command.Google Scholar
  18. Jones, S. G. (2008). Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
  19. Kristoff, N. D. (1999). Global Contagion Series. New York Times. Four part series: Part 1, “Who sank, or swam, in choppy currents of a world cash ocean.” with E. Wyatt (Feb. 15); Part 2, “How US wooed Asia to let cash flow in.” with D. E. Sanger (Feb. 16); Part 3, “World’s markets, none of them an island.” with S. WuDunn (Feb. 17); Part 4, “The world’s ills may be obvious, but their cure is not.” with S. WuDunn (Feb. 18).Google Scholar
  20. Morecroft, J. D. W. (1983). System Dynamics: Portraying bounded rationality. International Journal of Management Science, 11(2), 131–142.Google Scholar
  21. MSCO (2006). Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VV&A) Recommended Practices Guide (RPG). Alexandria, VA: Modeling and Simulation Coordination Office. http://vva.msco.mil/.
  22. NSC (2002). The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. National Security Council (NSC), Presidential Report.Google Scholar
  23. O’Brien, S. (2001). Analyzing Complex Threats for Operations and Readiness. Technical Report, Center for Army Analysis (CAA-R-01-59), Ft. Belvoir, VA.Google Scholar
  24. O’Brien, S. (2007) Integrated Crisis Early Warning System (ICEWS) Program Description. Arlington, VA: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). http://www.darpa.mil/ipto/Programs/icews/icews.asp.
  25. OSD (2009). Requirements for a Government Owned DIME/PMESII Modeling Suite. Arlington, VA: Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Modeling and Simulation Steering Committee.Google Scholar
  26. Perry, W.L. & Gordon IV, J. (2008). Analytic Support to Intelligence in Counterinsurgencies. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
  27. Pierson, B., Barge, W. & Crane, C. (2008). The Hairball that Stabilized Iraq: Modeling FM3-24. Presented at the Human, Social, Cultural, and Behavioral (HSCB) Modeling Conference, Center for Technology and Security Policy, National Defense University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  28. Popp, R. (2005). Utilizing Social Science Technology to Understand and Counter the 21st Century Strategic Threat. Arlington, VA: DARPA DARPATech.Google Scholar
  29. Prevette, M. & Snyder, D. (2007). Synthetic Environment for Analysis and Simulation (SEAS). Technical brief, United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)/J9, Norfolk, VA for the CCRP Information Age Metrics Working Group (IAMWG).Google Scholar
  30. Randers, J. (1980). Guidelines for Model Conceptualization. In J. Randers (Ed.) Elements of the System Dynamics Method (pp. 117–139). Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
  31. Reddy, R. (1996). The Challenge of Artificial Intelligence. Computer 29(10), 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Richmond, B. (2005). An Introduction to Systems Thinking. Lebanon, NH: ISEE Systems. First published in 1992.Google Scholar
  33. Sterman, J. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  34. Taylor, G., Bechtel, R., Morgan, G. & Waltz, E. (2006). A Framework for Modeling Social Power Structures. Presented at the 14th Annual Conference for the North American Association for Computational Social and Organizational Sciences. Google Scholar
  35. Tufte, E. (2001). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information (2nd ed.). Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  36. US Army (2006). Counterinsurgency (FM3-24). Field Manual. Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  37. Waldrop, M. (1993). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  38. Yergin, D. & Stanislaw, J. (2002). The Commanding Heights: The battle for the world economy. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer US 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IGEN CorporationCarlisleUSA

Personalised recommendations