We’re hosting two major workstreams at the moment:
1: Stabilisation Done Smarter. How to bolster public security and political resilience, in ways that are much more pragmatic and context- appropriate.
2: Protracted Crises Project. How to adapt and re-think humanitarian response in areas where it’s been going on much too long, and failing to adapt.
For each we’re keeping it simple. We’re posting a few Calls for Ideas over the coming months. We’ll organise interesting people to get involved, and to contribute a few thoughts or a useful reference. At the end, we’ll compile the “up-voted” content as a community-authored product.
We’re focused on the good intentions crowd.* That’s the people who are committed, in their various organisational contexts and with their different approaches, to help mitigate serious crises and eventually rise out of them.
( * This term was used a bit sarcastically in a recent book on international intervention in the Central African Republic. But we like it, so we’re appropriating it.)
Our moderators are Ian D. Quick (Stabilisation Done Smarter) and Tariq Riebl (Protracted Crises Project). Both have worked for a decade-plus in tough contexts under various institutional hats, and now do independent consulting work.
Fine, but will this work?
It should do. Over the last ten years we’ve watched similar approaches evolve and succeed in a range of different areas.In each case, the technology has been an enabler for more people to get involved than previously dreamed possible.
That’s how you find the answer to a ridiculously specific coding problems within a few minutes (see: Stack Overflow); play “the greatest game in the history of chess” with a gaggle of strangers (according to Gary Kasparov!); or crack once-thought-impossible mathematical proofs (Polymath Projects).
Are we somehow less collaborative than all of these folks, in our public-spirited, damn-the-odds, altruistic sector? We don’t believe that for a second. The potential out there is extraordinary.