![]() How this is done depends on whether the purpose is to effect structural or operational prevention. The process of early warning involves developing recommendations and sharing the warning message. This can create tensions and pose questions with regards to the legitimacy of their mandate. Thirdly, civil society organisations at times find themselves in a position of both warners and implementers of response measures. Secondly, shifting from macro-level political early warning to micro citizen-based warning and response systems has been too slow. Firstly, attracting attention to low-profile conflicts is problematic. ![]() Moreover, early warning methods have not demonstrated how they can engage with current high profile threats such as organised crime, drugs or terrorism.įrom a civil society perspective, early warning and early response presents a number of challenges. This is because predictions have not been accurate in the past (or important events were not foreseen) and operational responses have been inadequately linked to warnings. ![]() The value of early warning is still unproven. There needs to be a community of practice where the issues and dilemmas of early warning and response can be refined, experiences shared and empirical theory built from practice. ![]() How can early warning and response systems be improved? This study from the European Centre for Conflict Prevention suggests that although a rich literature exists on how early warning and response should be carried out, little is known about how early warning actually happens. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |