Download Free Measuring Progress In Conflict Environments Mpice A Metrics Framework For Assessing Conflict Transformation And Stabilization Version 10 Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Measuring Progress In Conflict Environments Mpice A Metrics Framework For Assessing Conflict Transformation And Stabilization Version 10 and write the review.

There has been a long standing need for "Measures of Effectiveness," as they are often called in the private sector, focused on diplomatic, military and development efforts in places prone to conflict. Traditionally, U.S. Government agencies have tended to measure outputs, such as the number of schools built, miles of roads paved, or numbers of insurgents killed. Outputs, however, measure what we do and not what we achieve. Outcomes, or "effects" as they are known in the military's glossaries, indicate the success or failure of project or mission efforts, since they seek to measure the attainment of conditions that engender stability and self-sustaining peace. The US government (particularly Department of Defense, US Institute of Peace, US Agency for International Development (USAID) and Department of State) has been actively working with a broad array of partners (multinational, NGOs and academia) to develop new capabilities for stability operations. The Measuring Progress in Conflict Environments (MPICE 'pronounced' M-Peace) project has developed an overarching framework of indicators that measure outcomes over time and across five sectors (Governance, Economics, Security, Rule of Law and Social Well-Being). The MPICE Framework is structured around determining conflict drivers and state/society institutional capacity, as conceptualized by USIP (Quest for Viable Peace), the Fund for Peace, and others. The premise states that if conflict stabilization and societal reconstruction is a process continuum spread between violent conflict and sustainable security at opposite ends, viable peace should be considered the middle or "tipping point" where external intervention forces can begin to hand over driving efforts to local forces and capacities. The MPICE Framework is intended to provide assessment teams with a capability to generate substantial insight into conflict environments and gauge progress with respect to this continuum.
This document constitutes the Measuring Progress for Conflict Environments (MPICE) Framework. The Framework is a hierarchical metrics system of outcome-based goals, indicators and measures. Once collected, the measures can be aggregated to provide indications of trend toward the achievement of stabilization goals over time. Its purpose is to establish a system of metrics that will assist in formulating policy and implementing operational and strategic plans to transform conflict and bring stability to war-torn societies. These metrics provide both a baseline operational- and strategic-level assessment tool for policymakers to diagnose potential obstacles to stabilization prior to an intervention, and an instrument for practitioners to track progress from the point of intervention through stabilization and ultimately to a self-sustaining peace. This metrics system is designed to identify potential sources of continuing violent conflict and instability and to gauge the capacity of indigenous institutions to overcome them. The intention is to enable policymakers to establish realistic goals, bring adequate resources and authorities to bear, focus their efforts strategically, and enhance prospects for attaining an enduring peace.
The MPICE framework is a hierarchical metrics system of outcome-based goals, indicators, and measures that offers a comprehensive process for measuring progress during stabilization and reconstruction operations.
The primary focus of the Cross Cultural Decision Making field is specifically on the intersections between psychosocial theory provided from the social sciences and methods of computational modeling provided from computer science and mathematics. While the majority of research challenges that arise out of such an intersection fall quite reasonably
This book covers the design, evaluation, and learning for international interventions aiming to promote peace. More specifically, it reconceptualises this space by critically analysing mainstream approaches – presenting both conceptual and empirical content. This volume offers a variety of original and insightful contributions to the debates grappling with the adoption of complexity thinking. Insights from Complexity Thinking for Peacebuilding Practice and Evaluation addresses the core dilemma that practitioners have to confront: how to function in situations that are fast changing and complex, when equipped with tools designed for neither? How do we reconcile the tension between the use of linear causal logic and the dynamic political transitions that interventions are meant to assist? Readers will be given a rare opportunity to superimpose the latest conceptual innovations with the latest case study applications and from a diverse spectrum of organisational vantage points. This provides the myriad practitioners and consultants in this space with invaluable insights as to how to improve their trade craft, while ensuring policy makers and the accompanying research/academic industry have clearer guidance and innovative thinking. This edited volume provides critically innovative offerings for the audiences that make up this broad area’s practitioners, researchers/academics/educators, and consultants, as well as policy makers.
With contributions from an international group of authors with diverse backgrounds, this set comprises all fourteen volumes of the proceedings of the 4th AHFE Conference 21-25 July 2012. The set presents the latest research on current issues in Human Factors and Ergonomics. It draws from an international panel that examines cross-cultural differences, design issues, usability, road and rail transportation, aviation, modeling and simulation, and healthcare.
This book identifies some of the main lessons for civil-military interactions that can be derived from the experiences of Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Afghanistan. The book has three main themes. Firstly, the volume analyses why the ways in which civil and military actors interact in theatres of operations such as Afghanistan matter — for both those categories of actors, and for the ordinary people who their interactions serve. Second, the book highlights that these interactions are invariably complex. The third theme, which arises specifically from ‘the PRT experience’ in Afghanistan, is that such teams vary significantly in their roles, resourcing, and operational environments. Consequently, to appraise the value of ‘the PRT experience’, it is necessary to unpack the experiences of different PRTs, which the use of case studies allows one to do. The volume comprises an introduction, identifying some key questions to which the PRT experience gives rise, and case studies of the experiences of the United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, The Netherlands, Australia, Germany and France; chapters dealing with the roles played by NGOs and the UN system and a discussion from an Afghan perspective of the implications of civilian casualties. It is the combination of the diverse cases discussed in this book with a focus on the broad challenges of optimising civil-military interactions that makes this book distinctive. This book will be of much interest to students of the Afghan War, civil-military relations, statebuilding, Central Asian politics and IR in general.
This book describes issues in modeling unconventional conflict and suggests a new way to do the modeling. It presents an ontology that describes the unconventional conflict domain, which allows for greater ease in modeling unconventional conflict. Supporting holistic modeling, which means that we can see the entire picture of what needs to be modeled, the ontology allows us to make informed decisions about what to model and what to omit. The unconventional conflict ontology also separates the things we understand best from the things we understand least. This separation means that we can perform verification, validation and accreditation (VV&A) more efficiently and can describe the competence of the model more accurately. However, before this message can be presented in its entirety the supporting body of knowledge has to be explored. For this reason, the book offers chapters that focus on the description of unconventional conflict and the analyses that have been performed, modeling, with a concentration on past efforts at modeling unconventional conflict, the precursors to the ontology, and VV&A. Unconventional conflict is a complex, messy thing. It normally involves multiple actors, with their own conflicting agendas and differing concepts of legitimate actions. This book will present a useful introduction for researchers and professionals within the field.