Before we begin, we should note that we are not here speaking on behalf of either the United Nati... more Before we begin, we should note that we are not here speaking on behalf of either the United Nations (UN) generally or the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) specifically. As researchers at UNIDIR, we are afforded both a valuable space to generate ideas for the improvement of UN operations or practices, and a chance to look and comment upon its performance with an interest in doing so. If at any point we seem less than fully impressed by UN conduct, you should think of our comments less as criticism and more as … tough love. This event is quite exciting for us. It is the first time that we have had the opportunity to talk about design to a room full of actual designers and people concerned with design questions. Normally, the people that we talk to about program design are diplomats, practitioners in security, development, or humanitarian action, academic researchers, or field staff of the United Nations. The response we often get, when speaking of design, is akin to the look one makes when handed unfamiliar food: alternatively respectful, skeptical, or suspicious, and sometimes a bit put off. Yet, we speak about it often, and we think about it even more. The reason is that we think design looks promising for addressing some of the challenges faced in the international public policy domains of security, development, and humanitarian action. And we now believe that a new agenda needs to be formed around the investigation of the capabilities and limitations of design as a tool for public policy. This event is also a bit intimidating for us precisely because it is the first time we have had a chance to talk to a room full of designers. In many of our lectures, we argue for the benefits of design processes and techniques. We advocate for the conceptual and procedural value of design space at the nexus between defining problems and taking programmatic action. But ultimately, we need to learn from designers, from you, whether our suspicions about the power of collaboration here may prove as fruitful as we suspect. In international public policy, design is the dark space between knowledge and action. It is where the murky terms, metaphors, and conventional wisdom lurk that are often antagonistic to design as a professional activity. Design, after all, requires a
This study offers an explicit theory of media pressure - what it is, how it works, how it can be ... more This study offers an explicit theory of media pressure - what it is, how it works, how it can be measured - based in part on the 'positioning theory' in discursive psychology. This offers the first independent and comparative history and analysis of media pressure vs. coverage, through the lens of the insurrection against Saddam Hussein in 1991.
This document is a completed Ph.D. dissertation for the University of Geneva, Switzerland in connection with the Graduate Institute. It was awarded the highest grade of Tres Bien in 2004. [THÈSE présentée à l’Université de Genève pour l’obtention du grade du Docteur en relations internationales].
This dissertation would later inform the published book (Palgrave) Media Pressure on Foreign Policy (2007).
Cooperative ethics is introduced as a model for conducting cultural research on peace and securit... more Cooperative ethics is introduced as a model for conducting cultural research on peace and security for the benefit of designing situated action. It is contrasted to two extant models for legitimating cultural research on peace and security, namely the Science Model and the Mandate Model. Each model is traced to lessons learned from the Nuremburg trials and shown to be insufficient to providing guidance when research is characterized by A) the repositioning of studied people from "human subjects" to cooperative agents; B) the findings being used for social change rather than scientific discovery, and C) mandated action in the pursuit of cooperatively devised peaceful interaction rather than unilateral security measures.
One of the core questions in the research programme on media-government relations — with implicat... more One of the core questions in the research programme on media-government relations — with implications for democratic theory, journalism, governance, and international relations generally — is HOW the media can be influential. I argue here that the government (deliberately) and the media (as a function of their communicative acts) are involved in a never-ending conversation with moral implications that affect the government's capacity to lead or act. This theory is validated through empirical research, is falsifiable, and has explanatory force. It also supports or otherwise does not contradict key theories in political science about media-government relations including the rally-around-the-flag effect and the honeymoon period for new presidents. By contrast, the theory does take the research agenda away from the complexities of causality and the seeming importance of public opinion in that dynamic, while taking the field towards the study of communicative force in both inter-personaly and inter-institutional relations.
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the Un... more This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group (IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organizatio... more The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organization’s Knowledge Management and Sharing section and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), towards the end of using “evidence-based design” as an innovative method to better move knowledge to action in public health policymaking. Our special concern is with reducing violence against women and children.
The EBD approach was strongly influenced by ongoing work in numerous sectors trying to advance evidence-based policymaking, and also by work taking place in the field of design itself that is exploring (and using) new techniques for social innovation, “design thinking” and design for public policy. EBD is distinct from (but supportive of) best practice approaches that help with decision making and, instead, is treated as a best process approach for building a reasoned and well-grounded case when designing.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that are KNOWLEDGE BROKERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organizatio... more The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organization’s Knowledge Management and Sharing section and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), towards the end of using “evidence-based design” as an innovative method to better move knowledge to action in public health policymaking. Our special concern is with reducing violence against women and children.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015. Answer what you like in the way that makes most sense to you. We understand that many actors are not only knowledge producers but also knowledge brokers and even users. We are not confused by these multiple roles; Please simply explain your work.
We will soon be posting a second questionnaire for KNOWLEDGE BROKERS and a final one for KNOWLEDGE USERS. Thank you for taking the time to read this and perhaps becoming involved. We welcome the opportunity to better understand your work, the barriers to moving knowledge to action, and your solutions for doing so for the betterment of public health, peace and security.
This is an introduction to UNIDIR’s new prototype of the Evidence-Based Programme Design Tool. It... more This is an introduction to UNIDIR’s new prototype of the Evidence-Based Programme Design Tool. It was developed in response to the goal of the United Nation’s Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration, to create an evidence-based approach to achieving more positive results in reintegration programming.
Towards that end, UNIDIR and its project partner The Policy Lab launched a three-phase, multi-year research and development initiative. Our overarching goal is to assist United Nations field staff and their operational partners to achieve greater impact by design.
The EBD prototype is the product of two years of research, development, and testing and meets all three “solution criteria” established in the 2011 Framework Document. Namely, the prototype:
• will contribute to the creation of more effective programming (i.e. social impact) in local contexts;
• may facilitate results-based management processes for the benefit of greater accountability, transparency, and effectiveness; and
• can provide a new basis from which to build and facilitate interagency cooperation on shared strategic goals.
The IAWG’s member organizations are the primary audience for this document. A key secondary audience is the national governments and partner organizations that are concerned with:
• maximizing political opportunities for local and national impact through better designed interventions;
• increasing value for money;
• creating new systems for the progressive improvement of professional conduct in post-conflict stabilization; and
• working to build internal mechanisms to collaborate on strategic goals across (or among) different bureaus (i.e. departments, sections, thematic areas, etc.).
THE PURPOSE OF THIS FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegrat... more THE PURPOSE OF THIS FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group(IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The general task of a Conceptual Framework is to lay out the central concern to be addressed, provide a way of thinking about that concern (in the sense of a theoretical orientation), and identify ways of treating, engaging or addressing that concern (in the sense of both practical and methodological requirements). A Conceptual Framework sets up the foundations for a shared vocabulary and orientation to complex phenomena and provides direction and focus to practices developed in response.
Taking direction from both the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS) and the IAWG’s strategic priority areas as established for 2012–2014,1 this framework is designed to support locally effective implementation of existing (and developing) policy on reintegration programming by directing attention to the operational needs of reintegration practitioners involved with programme design and strategic planning. As such, it is a highly pragmatic endeavour to advance the means by which policy is implemented.
Because these tasks inherently involve negotiating the complex space between local realities on the one hand, and the strategic objectives set out by high-level political actors on the other (such as national governments, existing peace treaties, United Nations Security Council resolutions, United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers etc.) the framework developed here treats evidence-based programme design as both a diagnostic and a design process.
It is a diagnostic process in that it is used for identifying and learning about local reintegration contexts, and that learning can directly contribute to crafting locally effective programming activities that serve strategic goals, but which are not always known a priori or are identified by predetermined assessments. It is a design process in that it facilitates both adaptation and innovation in programming through the use of evidence as a way of addressing problem-solving tasks.
The primary audience for this document is practitioners of the IAWG’s member organizations. This is a diverse group of organizations and professionals. Therefore, the framework developed here is intended to provide broadly applicable and practical assistance relevant to tasks and requirements involved in programme design at various levels and junctures. A secondary audience is the wider community of peace, security and development professionals concerned with how to better move knowledge to action in order to achieve greater success in their efforts. A key objective in this Framework Document is to create an approach to evidence-based programme design that is responsive to the central challenge of negotiating field-level realities with strategic objectives (in the form of policies etc.) in a manner that is pragmatic, practical and productive.
In addressing this goal, the Framework Document focuses on two procedural steps central to evidence-based programme design, namely the identification of evidence, and the application of evidence to the design of activities that serve strategic goals in a local context.
Media pressure is often implicated in changes to foreign policy. It is at once hailed as a check ... more Media pressure is often implicated in changes to foreign policy. It is at once hailed as a check on the abuse of power and then reviled for undermining the roles and responsibilities of democratic institutions. But we are still left to wonder what media pressure is. This question is explicitly answered here, and in doing so it shows how the never-ending conversation between the media and executive creates social imperatives to which the executives "must" respond or else threaten their needed moral positions required to lead or act in international affairs.
Review
"Derek Miller offers an original and compelling argument for greater intellectual cross-fertilization among political communication theorists, on the one hand, and international affairs scholars, particularly those working in the constructionist approach, on the other. Not afraid to offer impressively original and unorthodox ideas, Miller takes the reader on an erudite review of great European political philosophers and how they can contribute to a modern understanding of media and political pressure. He has written a thoroughly enjoyable and stimulating book."
--Steven Livingston, Professor, School of Media and Public Affairs, The George Washington University
"This fascinating book opens up quite new directions in the study of key political processes. Focusing on the alleged influence that the media are supposed to exercise on the political process, Derek Miller brings two novel sets of considerations to bear. Turning to the history of discussions of media influence he brings to light the profundity of discussions of this very issue in the period during which the Western democratic tradition was being forged. Perhaps more importantly he asks the fundamental question: how could the media influence the political process? To answer this question he makes use of one of the most recent developments in social psychology, positioning theory. This is an original and powerful study, and deserves to be very widely read."
--Rom Harré, Psychology Department, Georgetown University, Washington DC and Linacre College, Oxford
This paper, co-authored by Derek Miller and Lisa Rudnick at the SNAP project at UNIDIR, and Tore ... more This paper, co-authored by Derek Miller and Lisa Rudnick at the SNAP project at UNIDIR, and Tore Rose, former UN Resident Coordinator, is a "scholar/practitioner" insight into the need for, and approaches towards, designing community security programs. Though brief, it takes the conversation beyond banalities about needs to be done and into some techniques for doing it.
A provocative presentation that reviews cultural education in the U.S. military since the 1950s a... more A provocative presentation that reviews cultural education in the U.S. military since the 1950s and suggests a new way to mobilize cultural knowledge as a strategic asset in the design of local solutions. Led to an invitation in 2010 to address culture and maritime security in Kiel, Germany at the Maritime Security Conference.
Before we begin, we should note that we are not here speaking on behalf of either the United Nati... more Before we begin, we should note that we are not here speaking on behalf of either the United Nations (UN) generally or the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) specifically. As researchers at UNIDIR, we are afforded both a valuable space to generate ideas for the improvement of UN operations or practices, and a chance to look and comment upon its performance with an interest in doing so. If at any point we seem less than fully impressed by UN conduct, you should think of our comments less as criticism and more as … tough love. This event is quite exciting for us. It is the first time that we have had the opportunity to talk about design to a room full of actual designers and people concerned with design questions. Normally, the people that we talk to about program design are diplomats, practitioners in security, development, or humanitarian action, academic researchers, or field staff of the United Nations. The response we often get, when speaking of design, is akin to the look one makes when handed unfamiliar food: alternatively respectful, skeptical, or suspicious, and sometimes a bit put off. Yet, we speak about it often, and we think about it even more. The reason is that we think design looks promising for addressing some of the challenges faced in the international public policy domains of security, development, and humanitarian action. And we now believe that a new agenda needs to be formed around the investigation of the capabilities and limitations of design as a tool for public policy. This event is also a bit intimidating for us precisely because it is the first time we have had a chance to talk to a room full of designers. In many of our lectures, we argue for the benefits of design processes and techniques. We advocate for the conceptual and procedural value of design space at the nexus between defining problems and taking programmatic action. But ultimately, we need to learn from designers, from you, whether our suspicions about the power of collaboration here may prove as fruitful as we suspect. In international public policy, design is the dark space between knowledge and action. It is where the murky terms, metaphors, and conventional wisdom lurk that are often antagonistic to design as a professional activity. Design, after all, requires a
This study offers an explicit theory of media pressure - what it is, how it works, how it can be ... more This study offers an explicit theory of media pressure - what it is, how it works, how it can be measured - based in part on the 'positioning theory' in discursive psychology. This offers the first independent and comparative history and analysis of media pressure vs. coverage, through the lens of the insurrection against Saddam Hussein in 1991.
This document is a completed Ph.D. dissertation for the University of Geneva, Switzerland in connection with the Graduate Institute. It was awarded the highest grade of Tres Bien in 2004. [THÈSE présentée à l’Université de Genève pour l’obtention du grade du Docteur en relations internationales].
This dissertation would later inform the published book (Palgrave) Media Pressure on Foreign Policy (2007).
Cooperative ethics is introduced as a model for conducting cultural research on peace and securit... more Cooperative ethics is introduced as a model for conducting cultural research on peace and security for the benefit of designing situated action. It is contrasted to two extant models for legitimating cultural research on peace and security, namely the Science Model and the Mandate Model. Each model is traced to lessons learned from the Nuremburg trials and shown to be insufficient to providing guidance when research is characterized by A) the repositioning of studied people from "human subjects" to cooperative agents; B) the findings being used for social change rather than scientific discovery, and C) mandated action in the pursuit of cooperatively devised peaceful interaction rather than unilateral security measures.
One of the core questions in the research programme on media-government relations — with implicat... more One of the core questions in the research programme on media-government relations — with implications for democratic theory, journalism, governance, and international relations generally — is HOW the media can be influential. I argue here that the government (deliberately) and the media (as a function of their communicative acts) are involved in a never-ending conversation with moral implications that affect the government's capacity to lead or act. This theory is validated through empirical research, is falsifiable, and has explanatory force. It also supports or otherwise does not contradict key theories in political science about media-government relations including the rally-around-the-flag effect and the honeymoon period for new presidents. By contrast, the theory does take the research agenda away from the complexities of causality and the seeming importance of public opinion in that dynamic, while taking the field towards the study of communicative force in both inter-personaly and inter-institutional relations.
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the Un... more This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group (IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organizatio... more The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organization’s Knowledge Management and Sharing section and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), towards the end of using “evidence-based design” as an innovative method to better move knowledge to action in public health policymaking. Our special concern is with reducing violence against women and children.
The EBD approach was strongly influenced by ongoing work in numerous sectors trying to advance evidence-based policymaking, and also by work taking place in the field of design itself that is exploring (and using) new techniques for social innovation, “design thinking” and design for public policy. EBD is distinct from (but supportive of) best practice approaches that help with decision making and, instead, is treated as a best process approach for building a reasoned and well-grounded case when designing.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that are KNOWLEDGE BROKERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organizatio... more The Policy Lab® is pleased to be working on a project jointly run by the World Health Organization’s Knowledge Management and Sharing section and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), towards the end of using “evidence-based design” as an innovative method to better move knowledge to action in public health policymaking. Our special concern is with reducing violence against women and children.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015. Answer what you like in the way that makes most sense to you. We understand that many actors are not only knowledge producers but also knowledge brokers and even users. We are not confused by these multiple roles; Please simply explain your work.
We will soon be posting a second questionnaire for KNOWLEDGE BROKERS and a final one for KNOWLEDGE USERS. Thank you for taking the time to read this and perhaps becoming involved. We welcome the opportunity to better understand your work, the barriers to moving knowledge to action, and your solutions for doing so for the betterment of public health, peace and security.
This is an introduction to UNIDIR’s new prototype of the Evidence-Based Programme Design Tool. It... more This is an introduction to UNIDIR’s new prototype of the Evidence-Based Programme Design Tool. It was developed in response to the goal of the United Nation’s Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration, to create an evidence-based approach to achieving more positive results in reintegration programming.
Towards that end, UNIDIR and its project partner The Policy Lab launched a three-phase, multi-year research and development initiative. Our overarching goal is to assist United Nations field staff and their operational partners to achieve greater impact by design.
The EBD prototype is the product of two years of research, development, and testing and meets all three “solution criteria” established in the 2011 Framework Document. Namely, the prototype:
• will contribute to the creation of more effective programming (i.e. social impact) in local contexts;
• may facilitate results-based management processes for the benefit of greater accountability, transparency, and effectiveness; and
• can provide a new basis from which to build and facilitate interagency cooperation on shared strategic goals.
The IAWG’s member organizations are the primary audience for this document. A key secondary audience is the national governments and partner organizations that are concerned with:
• maximizing political opportunities for local and national impact through better designed interventions;
• increasing value for money;
• creating new systems for the progressive improvement of professional conduct in post-conflict stabilization; and
• working to build internal mechanisms to collaborate on strategic goals across (or among) different bureaus (i.e. departments, sections, thematic areas, etc.).
THE PURPOSE OF THIS FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegrat... more THE PURPOSE OF THIS FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group(IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The general task of a Conceptual Framework is to lay out the central concern to be addressed, provide a way of thinking about that concern (in the sense of a theoretical orientation), and identify ways of treating, engaging or addressing that concern (in the sense of both practical and methodological requirements). A Conceptual Framework sets up the foundations for a shared vocabulary and orientation to complex phenomena and provides direction and focus to practices developed in response.
Taking direction from both the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS) and the IAWG’s strategic priority areas as established for 2012–2014,1 this framework is designed to support locally effective implementation of existing (and developing) policy on reintegration programming by directing attention to the operational needs of reintegration practitioners involved with programme design and strategic planning. As such, it is a highly pragmatic endeavour to advance the means by which policy is implemented.
Because these tasks inherently involve negotiating the complex space between local realities on the one hand, and the strategic objectives set out by high-level political actors on the other (such as national governments, existing peace treaties, United Nations Security Council resolutions, United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers etc.) the framework developed here treats evidence-based programme design as both a diagnostic and a design process.
It is a diagnostic process in that it is used for identifying and learning about local reintegration contexts, and that learning can directly contribute to crafting locally effective programming activities that serve strategic goals, but which are not always known a priori or are identified by predetermined assessments. It is a design process in that it facilitates both adaptation and innovation in programming through the use of evidence as a way of addressing problem-solving tasks.
The primary audience for this document is practitioners of the IAWG’s member organizations. This is a diverse group of organizations and professionals. Therefore, the framework developed here is intended to provide broadly applicable and practical assistance relevant to tasks and requirements involved in programme design at various levels and junctures. A secondary audience is the wider community of peace, security and development professionals concerned with how to better move knowledge to action in order to achieve greater success in their efforts. A key objective in this Framework Document is to create an approach to evidence-based programme design that is responsive to the central challenge of negotiating field-level realities with strategic objectives (in the form of policies etc.) in a manner that is pragmatic, practical and productive.
In addressing this goal, the Framework Document focuses on two procedural steps central to evidence-based programme design, namely the identification of evidence, and the application of evidence to the design of activities that serve strategic goals in a local context.
Media pressure is often implicated in changes to foreign policy. It is at once hailed as a check ... more Media pressure is often implicated in changes to foreign policy. It is at once hailed as a check on the abuse of power and then reviled for undermining the roles and responsibilities of democratic institutions. But we are still left to wonder what media pressure is. This question is explicitly answered here, and in doing so it shows how the never-ending conversation between the media and executive creates social imperatives to which the executives "must" respond or else threaten their needed moral positions required to lead or act in international affairs.
Review
"Derek Miller offers an original and compelling argument for greater intellectual cross-fertilization among political communication theorists, on the one hand, and international affairs scholars, particularly those working in the constructionist approach, on the other. Not afraid to offer impressively original and unorthodox ideas, Miller takes the reader on an erudite review of great European political philosophers and how they can contribute to a modern understanding of media and political pressure. He has written a thoroughly enjoyable and stimulating book."
--Steven Livingston, Professor, School of Media and Public Affairs, The George Washington University
"This fascinating book opens up quite new directions in the study of key political processes. Focusing on the alleged influence that the media are supposed to exercise on the political process, Derek Miller brings two novel sets of considerations to bear. Turning to the history of discussions of media influence he brings to light the profundity of discussions of this very issue in the period during which the Western democratic tradition was being forged. Perhaps more importantly he asks the fundamental question: how could the media influence the political process? To answer this question he makes use of one of the most recent developments in social psychology, positioning theory. This is an original and powerful study, and deserves to be very widely read."
--Rom Harré, Psychology Department, Georgetown University, Washington DC and Linacre College, Oxford
This paper, co-authored by Derek Miller and Lisa Rudnick at the SNAP project at UNIDIR, and Tore ... more This paper, co-authored by Derek Miller and Lisa Rudnick at the SNAP project at UNIDIR, and Tore Rose, former UN Resident Coordinator, is a "scholar/practitioner" insight into the need for, and approaches towards, designing community security programs. Though brief, it takes the conversation beyond banalities about needs to be done and into some techniques for doing it.
A provocative presentation that reviews cultural education in the U.S. military since the 1950s a... more A provocative presentation that reviews cultural education in the U.S. military since the 1950s and suggests a new way to mobilize cultural knowledge as a strategic asset in the design of local solutions. Led to an invitation in 2010 to address culture and maritime security in Kiel, Germany at the Maritime Security Conference.
A discussion of moral hazards that will need due consideration as the practices of design and int... more A discussion of moral hazards that will need due consideration as the practices of design and international peace and security converge.
This issue of She Ji opens with reflections on the nature and meaning of the modern research univ... more This issue of She Ji opens with reflections on the nature and meaning of the modern research university for the 110th anniversary of Tongji University. The first article considers the work of the late John Heskett on the economic role of design. Cameron Weber applies Heskett’s theory to the 2009 GM bailout in “What Is Good for General Motors Is Bad for America.” Following this nuts-and-bolts examination of design economics, Jordan Beck and Erik Stolterman stake out a theoretical position “Examining the Types of Knowledge Claims Made in Design Research.” University rankings are one of the most prevalent and hotly debated topics in higher education today – this issue of She Ji features two examinations of the theme. Meredith Davis asks “Can College Rankings Be Believed?” and Scott Thompson-Whiteside writes on “Zen and the Art of University Rankings in Art and Design.” Four commentators respond: Peter Murphy on “University Rankings and the Coming of the Auto-Industrial Age,” Pradeep Sharma with “Outstanding in Your Field,” Ninghua Zhong that “University Rankings Need Improvement,” and Carma Gorman with “College Rankings: Can’t Love ’Em, Can’t Leave ’Em.” Finally, Maria Camacho talks with Christian Bason in a conversation on “Design for Public Service.” Design firms, consulting firms, and public agencies use design methods to create more effective services and better systems. Christian Bason was at the cutting edge of this trend as director of Denmark’s MindLab. Now director of the Danish Design Centre, Bason discusses the key issues of design for public service.
This issue we address is “The Design Continuum from Simplicity to Complex Systems.” Articles incl... more This issue we address is “The Design Continuum from Simplicity to Complex Systems.” Articles include: 1) “From Autonomous Systems to Sociotechnical Systems: Designing Effective Collaborations” by Kyle J. Behymer and John M. Flach with commentary by Derek Miller, Hugh Dubberly, Paul Pangaro, and Susu Nousala. 2) “Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research” by Jordan Beck and Erik Stolterman with commentary by Danah Henriksen, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Deirdre Barron. 3) “Design Innovation Catalysts: Education and Impact” by Cara Wrigley. 4) “De-Colonizing Design Thinking” by Jerry Diethelm. There are also book reviews by Luke Feast and Don Norman, and an exchange of letters between Stuart Walker, Gerda Gemser, and Cees de Bont.
Uploads
Papers by Derek B Miller
This document is a completed Ph.D. dissertation for the University of Geneva, Switzerland in connection with the Graduate Institute. It was awarded the highest grade of Tres Bien in 2004. [THÈSE présentée à l’Université de Genève pour l’obtention du grade du Docteur en relations internationales].
This dissertation would later inform the published book (Palgrave) Media Pressure on Foreign Policy (2007).
The EBD approach was strongly influenced by ongoing work in numerous sectors trying to advance evidence-based policymaking, and also by work taking place in the field of design itself that is exploring (and using) new techniques for social innovation, “design thinking” and design for public policy. EBD is distinct from (but supportive of) best practice approaches that help with decision making and, instead, is treated as a best process approach for building a reasoned and well-grounded case when designing.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that are KNOWLEDGE BROKERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
Answer what you like in the way that makes most sense to you. We understand that many actors are not only knowledge producers but also knowledge brokers and even users. We are not confused by these multiple roles; Please simply explain your work.
We will soon be posting a second questionnaire for KNOWLEDGE BROKERS and a final one for KNOWLEDGE USERS.
Thank you for taking the time to read this and perhaps becoming involved. We welcome the opportunity to better understand your work, the barriers to moving knowledge to action, and your solutions for doing so for the betterment of public health, peace and security.
Towards that end, UNIDIR and its project partner The Policy Lab launched a three-phase, multi-year research and development initiative. Our overarching goal is to assist United Nations field staff and their operational partners to achieve greater impact by design.
The EBD prototype is the product of two years of research, development, and testing and meets all three “solution criteria” established in the 2011 Framework Document. Namely, the prototype:
• will contribute to the creation of more effective programming (i.e. social impact) in local contexts;
• may facilitate results-based management processes for the benefit of greater accountability, transparency, and effectiveness; and
• can provide a new basis from which to build and facilitate interagency cooperation on shared strategic goals.
The IAWG’s member organizations are the primary audience for this document. A key secondary audience is the national governments and partner organizations that are concerned with:
• maximizing political opportunities for local and national impact through better designed interventions;
• increasing value for money;
• creating new systems for the progressive improvement of professional conduct in post-conflict stabilization; and
• working to build internal mechanisms to collaborate on strategic goals across (or among) different bureaus (i.e. departments, sections, thematic areas, etc.).
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group(IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The general task of a Conceptual Framework is to lay out the central concern to be addressed, provide a way of thinking about that concern (in the sense of a theoretical orientation), and identify ways of treating, engaging or addressing that concern (in the sense of both practical and methodological requirements). A Conceptual Framework sets up the foundations for a shared vocabulary and orientation to complex phenomena and provides direction and focus to practices developed in response.
Taking direction from both the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS) and the IAWG’s strategic priority areas as established for 2012–2014,1 this framework is designed to support locally effective implementation of existing (and developing) policy on reintegration programming by directing attention to the operational needs of reintegration practitioners involved with programme design and strategic planning. As such, it is a highly pragmatic endeavour to advance the means by which policy is implemented.
Because these tasks inherently involve negotiating the complex space between local realities on the one hand, and the strategic objectives set out by high-level political actors on the other (such as national governments, existing peace treaties, United Nations Security Council resolutions, United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers etc.) the framework developed here treats evidence-based programme design as both a diagnostic and a design process.
It is a diagnostic process in that it is used for identifying and learning about local reintegration contexts, and that learning can directly contribute to crafting locally effective programming activities that serve strategic goals, but which are not always known a priori or are identified by predetermined assessments. It is a design process in that it facilitates both adaptation and innovation in programming through the use of evidence as a way of addressing problem-solving tasks.
The primary audience for this document is practitioners of the IAWG’s member organizations. This is a diverse group of organizations and professionals. Therefore, the framework developed here is intended to provide broadly applicable and practical assistance relevant to tasks and requirements involved in programme design at various levels and junctures.
A secondary audience is the wider community of peace, security and development professionals concerned with how to better move knowledge to action in order to achieve greater success in their efforts.
A key objective in this Framework Document is to create an approach to evidence-based programme design that is responsive to the central challenge of negotiating field-level realities with strategic objectives (in the form of policies etc.) in a manner that is pragmatic, practical and productive.
In addressing this goal, the Framework Document focuses on two procedural steps central to evidence-based programme design, namely the identification of evidence, and the application of evidence to the design of activities that serve strategic goals in a local context.
Review
"Derek Miller offers an original and compelling argument for greater intellectual cross-fertilization among political communication theorists, on the one hand, and international affairs scholars, particularly those working in the constructionist approach, on the other. Not afraid to offer impressively original and unorthodox ideas, Miller takes the reader on an erudite review of great European political philosophers and how they can contribute to a modern understanding of media and political pressure. He has written a thoroughly enjoyable and stimulating book."
--Steven Livingston, Professor, School of Media and Public Affairs, The George Washington University
"This fascinating book opens up quite new directions in the study of key political processes. Focusing on the alleged influence that the media are supposed to exercise on the political process, Derek Miller brings two novel sets of considerations to bear. Turning to the history of discussions of media influence he brings to light the profundity of discussions of this very issue in the period during which the Western democratic tradition was being forged. Perhaps more importantly he asks the fundamental question: how could the media influence the political process? To answer this question he makes use of one of the most recent developments in social psychology, positioning theory. This is an original and powerful study, and deserves to be very widely read."
--Rom Harré, Psychology Department, Georgetown University, Washington DC and Linacre College, Oxford
This document is a completed Ph.D. dissertation for the University of Geneva, Switzerland in connection with the Graduate Institute. It was awarded the highest grade of Tres Bien in 2004. [THÈSE présentée à l’Université de Genève pour l’obtention du grade du Docteur en relations internationales].
This dissertation would later inform the published book (Palgrave) Media Pressure on Foreign Policy (2007).
The EBD approach was strongly influenced by ongoing work in numerous sectors trying to advance evidence-based policymaking, and also by work taking place in the field of design itself that is exploring (and using) new techniques for social innovation, “design thinking” and design for public policy. EBD is distinct from (but supportive of) best practice approaches that help with decision making and, instead, is treated as a best process approach for building a reasoned and well-grounded case when designing.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that are KNOWLEDGE BROKERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
In support of these efforts, we have put together a brief questionnaire for individuals or organizations that KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS for practitioners. It is one page long. It could be finished in a few minutes or else can form the basis for an organization-wide discussion.
We ask that you email your answers in your own format (clearly labeled) to [email protected] no later than APRIL 15, 2015.
Answer what you like in the way that makes most sense to you. We understand that many actors are not only knowledge producers but also knowledge brokers and even users. We are not confused by these multiple roles; Please simply explain your work.
We will soon be posting a second questionnaire for KNOWLEDGE BROKERS and a final one for KNOWLEDGE USERS.
Thank you for taking the time to read this and perhaps becoming involved. We welcome the opportunity to better understand your work, the barriers to moving knowledge to action, and your solutions for doing so for the betterment of public health, peace and security.
Towards that end, UNIDIR and its project partner The Policy Lab launched a three-phase, multi-year research and development initiative. Our overarching goal is to assist United Nations field staff and their operational partners to achieve greater impact by design.
The EBD prototype is the product of two years of research, development, and testing and meets all three “solution criteria” established in the 2011 Framework Document. Namely, the prototype:
• will contribute to the creation of more effective programming (i.e. social impact) in local contexts;
• may facilitate results-based management processes for the benefit of greater accountability, transparency, and effectiveness; and
• can provide a new basis from which to build and facilitate interagency cooperation on shared strategic goals.
The IAWG’s member organizations are the primary audience for this document. A key secondary audience is the national governments and partner organizations that are concerned with:
• maximizing political opportunities for local and national impact through better designed interventions;
• increasing value for money;
• creating new systems for the progressive improvement of professional conduct in post-conflict stabilization; and
• working to build internal mechanisms to collaborate on strategic goals across (or among) different bureaus (i.e. departments, sections, thematic areas, etc.).
This is a Framework Document on evidence-based reintegration programme design, prepared by the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the Inter-agency Working Group(IAWG) on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR). The purpose of this Framework Document is to develop and introduce a Conceptual Framework for working with evidence in the design of reintegration programmes to support efforts towards greater local impact at the field level. This is critical to achieving strategic goals at both the national and the international levels.
The general task of a Conceptual Framework is to lay out the central concern to be addressed, provide a way of thinking about that concern (in the sense of a theoretical orientation), and identify ways of treating, engaging or addressing that concern (in the sense of both practical and methodological requirements). A Conceptual Framework sets up the foundations for a shared vocabulary and orientation to complex phenomena and provides direction and focus to practices developed in response.
Taking direction from both the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS) and the IAWG’s strategic priority areas as established for 2012–2014,1 this framework is designed to support locally effective implementation of existing (and developing) policy on reintegration programming by directing attention to the operational needs of reintegration practitioners involved with programme design and strategic planning. As such, it is a highly pragmatic endeavour to advance the means by which policy is implemented.
Because these tasks inherently involve negotiating the complex space between local realities on the one hand, and the strategic objectives set out by high-level political actors on the other (such as national governments, existing peace treaties, United Nations Security Council resolutions, United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers etc.) the framework developed here treats evidence-based programme design as both a diagnostic and a design process.
It is a diagnostic process in that it is used for identifying and learning about local reintegration contexts, and that learning can directly contribute to crafting locally effective programming activities that serve strategic goals, but which are not always known a priori or are identified by predetermined assessments. It is a design process in that it facilitates both adaptation and innovation in programming through the use of evidence as a way of addressing problem-solving tasks.
The primary audience for this document is practitioners of the IAWG’s member organizations. This is a diverse group of organizations and professionals. Therefore, the framework developed here is intended to provide broadly applicable and practical assistance relevant to tasks and requirements involved in programme design at various levels and junctures.
A secondary audience is the wider community of peace, security and development professionals concerned with how to better move knowledge to action in order to achieve greater success in their efforts.
A key objective in this Framework Document is to create an approach to evidence-based programme design that is responsive to the central challenge of negotiating field-level realities with strategic objectives (in the form of policies etc.) in a manner that is pragmatic, practical and productive.
In addressing this goal, the Framework Document focuses on two procedural steps central to evidence-based programme design, namely the identification of evidence, and the application of evidence to the design of activities that serve strategic goals in a local context.
Review
"Derek Miller offers an original and compelling argument for greater intellectual cross-fertilization among political communication theorists, on the one hand, and international affairs scholars, particularly those working in the constructionist approach, on the other. Not afraid to offer impressively original and unorthodox ideas, Miller takes the reader on an erudite review of great European political philosophers and how they can contribute to a modern understanding of media and political pressure. He has written a thoroughly enjoyable and stimulating book."
--Steven Livingston, Professor, School of Media and Public Affairs, The George Washington University
"This fascinating book opens up quite new directions in the study of key political processes. Focusing on the alleged influence that the media are supposed to exercise on the political process, Derek Miller brings two novel sets of considerations to bear. Turning to the history of discussions of media influence he brings to light the profundity of discussions of this very issue in the period during which the Western democratic tradition was being forged. Perhaps more importantly he asks the fundamental question: how could the media influence the political process? To answer this question he makes use of one of the most recent developments in social psychology, positioning theory. This is an original and powerful study, and deserves to be very widely read."
--Rom Harré, Psychology Department, Georgetown University, Washington DC and Linacre College, Oxford