Amen. I would only insert a phrase into your statement:Originally Posted by Steve the Planner
It would be good, at some level, to improve acuity on the basics like geography, demographics, trade patterns, basic structure and function of internal governments, and key infrastructure - and the interactions and interdependencies between and among those factors - for the purpose of possible conflict analysis.
See Edward Ullman, Human Geography and Area Studies, published in 1953. In the paper, Ullman describes how the discipline of geography is more than just physical geography or maps. He goes on to differentiate specific geographic studies between other social science disciplines, and sums up with an advocacy for a multi-disciplined team approach to area studies:
...By spatial interaction I mean actual, meaningful human relations between areas on the earth's surface, such as the reciprocal relations and flows of all kinds among industries, raw materials, markets, culture and transportation-not static location as indicated by latitude, longitude, type of climate etcetera, nor assumed relations based on inadequate data and a priori assumptions.....
I won't comment on the Agency specifically, but in general I do believe that an over-reliance on technology is destroying true analytic capabilities in many areas. I believe I've mentioned before on this board the story of the terrain team NCOIC in Afghanistan who had no clue how to develop a real terrain analysis narrative product supporting the imagery, but instead kept insisting that the imagery itself was all that was necessary.
Bookmarks