Search

Begin New Search Topic Monitoring Political Geography Global Focus

11. Taking Stock of Early Warning for Atrocity Prevention: Report from the 2021 Sudikoff Interdisciplinary Seminar on Genocide Prevention

Author:
Mollie Zapata
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
This report compiles essays from several leading experts who participated in the seminar series. We asked them to reflect on one or more key themes and offer recommendations for research and/or policy initiatives that could help current and future leaders address mass atrocities. The collection of essays comprises diverse perspectives and spans reflections on everything from technical approaches to forecasting to practical recommendations on communicating risk to the overall efficacy of forecasting projects. Quscondy-Mohamed Abdulshafi provides recommendations for how mass atrocity monitoring and preventive interventions can make use of social media-generated big data and artificial intelligence (AI), and suggests the need for a strategic collaboration between social media companies and mass atrocity research institutions. Chiara De Franco discusses warning as persuasion, including the importance of clarity and specificity in the content of the warnings, the relationship between the warners and those expected to act on the warning, and the importance of developing a warning strategy that fits into the “swirl of intelligence” continuously confronting policy makers. Håvard Hegre outlines and weighs the benefits of different prediction targets. He argues that the field should move towards “continuous multi-period incidence” (CMPI) targets to avoid arbitrary coding thresholds, enable models to better use available information, and allow for a more nuanced approach to uncertainty in evaluating and describing results. Victor Okorie addresses the role of researchers in situations where atrocity risk is present, and describes the ethical and logistical challenges of those seeking to conduct research where gatekeepers and conditions demand loyalty to the state. In such circumstances, Okorie argues that researchers are obligated to take on an activist role, portray both victims and perpetrators, and strive for objectivity and reflexivity. Clionadh Raleigh questions the assumption of many early warning and prediction models that more accurate, timely warnings will result in the prevention of conflict. She argues that global models attempt to create consistency across cases where none actually exists, and that projects' focus on catastrophic events misses the need for response to low-level threats. She recommends a revised approach to early warning focused on studying each unique environment. Paul Slovic provides an overview of three psychological mechanisms that impede the impact and effectiveness of early warnings: psychic numbing, pseudoinefficacy, and the prominence effect. He concludes with recommendations for those who have been (or may become) victims of atrocity crimes, government officials, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the public.
Topic:
Political Violence, Social Media, Risk, Atrocities, and Monitoring
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. Lessons of lessons: A window into the evolution of the humanitarian sector

Author:
Jessica Alexander and Emmeline Kerkvliet
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
Monitoring and evaluation is critical for assessing performance and maintaining accountability in the humanitarian sector. For 25 years, ALNAP Lessons Papers have brought together findings and recommendations from a range of different contexts and disaster types, laying out lessons from previous responses in concise and readable ways. This paper looks at a selection of ALNAP Lessons papers across 20 years, aiming to identify where and how the humanitarian system has evolved over time, as well as the areas where progress has been weaker and stronger attention is still needed. It identifies four interesting trends: Structural, system-wide themes appear more frequently in the Lessons Papers. Lessons related to technical learning showed the most change from ‘observational’ to ‘instructional’ over time. Lessons related to structural and system-wide issues don’t change has much over time, staying more ‘observational’. Lessons related to localisation and community engagement and accountability (CEA) show least progress over time.
Topic:
Humanitarian Aid, Community Engagement, Planning, Monitoring, and and Evaluation (PME)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Beyond the Numbers: How qualitative approaches can improve monitoring of humanitarian action

Author:
Amelie Sundberg
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
This paper looks at potential ways to improve the capture and uptake of qualitative data in monitoring of humanitarian programmes. The first section of the paper dispels three pervasive myths about the use of qualitative approaches in the humanitarian sector. The second section of the paper identifies promising practice used by humanitarian agencies when monitoring their programmes. This section should provide readers with ideas on how they can improve their qualitative approaches to monitoring within their own organisation. They should be considered as a menu of options to try depending on the varying context, capacities and monitoring needs of organisations, projects and teams. This is one of a three-part series of ALNAP papers about monitoring in humanitarian action. These three papers address specific challenges to monitoring humanitarian action as identified by ALNAP Members in the previous Scoping Paper. The series of papers look to inform humanitarian practitioners interested in using qualitative approaches for programme results monitoring, including M&E advisors and managers, technical sectoral leads and programme decision-makers.
Topic:
International Organization, Qualitative Research, Monitoring, and Humanitarian Response
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. Back to the Drawing Board: How to improve monitoring of outcomes

Author:
Neil Dillon and Amelie Sundberg
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
How can organisations provide holistic, meaningful analysis of the outcomes achieved by their activities? How can they situate their programming among the changes taking place around them? How can they understand the full set of changes experienced by an individual affected by crisis? This paper aims to encourage humanitarian agencies to step back and reflect on what is currently being done to measure outcomes and how it can be improved in the future. It starts by identifying core assumptions and foundational thinking behind current monitoring systems. It then outlines issues arising from current practice, and concludes by raising questions about to think about this differently.
Topic:
International Organization, Monitoring, and Humanitarian Response
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. Shifting Mindsets | Section 3: Systems for greater flexibility

Author:
Alice Obrecht
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
This standalone section of the ALNAP study 'Shifting mindsets: creating a more flexible humanitarian response' focuses on organisational systems to support flexibility. This is one of the three pillars that flexibility relies upon according to this research and also one of the starting points to make humanitarian responses more flexible. It covers flexible approaches in: logistics, supply chain and procurement systems; programme design and programme cycle management; and monitoring of these systems.
Topic:
Procurement, Logistics, Supply Chains, Monitoring, Humanitarian Response, and Flexibility
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Challenges to Developing a Global Satellite Climate Monitoring System

Author:
Mariel Borowitz
Publication Date:
07-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:
Satellites are critical to the ability to understand and address climate change, due to their unique ability to provide comprehensive global monitoring of the environment. More than 30 nations have been involved in satellite Earth observations, with more than 200 satellite instruments operating in 2014 alone. However, gaps remain in the ability to adequately monitor global climate change, due in part to a lack of international consensus on the definition of an adequate monitoring system. This paper examines ongoing international efforts to identify the requirements of a global satellite climate monitoring system, including high-level efforts by the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and the Committee on Earth Observing Satellites (CEOS), as well as efforts to define more detailed technical requirements being undertaken by GCOS, WMO, and the European Space Agency (ESA). Comparing the distinct processes and interim results of these groups highlights the lack of international consensus on the definition of an adequate global climate monitoring system. Developing such a system is a complex, multifaceted challenge, which requires expert technical knowledge of climate science and satellite capabilities as well as attention to political concerns for sovereignty and long-term international cooperation. The paper examines the adequacy of the current satellite monitoring capabilities by developing a comprehensive dataset including all unclassified Earth observation satellites operating or planned between 1990 and 2020. This analysis shows that within each international effort, gaps in the type of data collected are present. Even when some data is collected on a particular variable, it is not necessarily done in a way that meets technical requirements for climate assessment and forecasting. A lack of free and open data sharing compounds this challenge, further decreasing the amount of data contributing to international climate monitoring efforts. The lack of consensus on the requirements of a global climate monitoring system makes it difficult for nations to use international coordination mechanisms to plan and prioritize future satellite systems. The paper concludes by providing a series of recommended steps to improve harmonization among international efforts. This includes coordinating the bottom-up method used within GCOS with the top-down method used at WMO to identify concrete recommendations that will allow nations to prioritize investments that improve climate monitoring and/or improve the efficiency of the existing system. It recommends consolidating international efforts to define technical requirements to avoid duplication and facilitate prioritization among user groups with regard to which variables should be collected and what technical requirements must be met. A more systematic and integrated approach to system definition will make it possible for nations to shift and/or increase investments in satellite technology to better address agreed-upon needs and priorities.
Topic:
Climate Change, Science and Technology, Governance, Satellite, and Monitoring
Political Geography:
Global Focus