Civil-Military Coordination Practices and Approaches Within United Nations Peace Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper argues that the bi-polar civil-military coordination concept is no longer adequate to describe the system-wide coordination needs of contemporary UN peace operations, at the strategic level, in the context of the UN Integrated Mission concept. However, the civil-military coordination concept is still appropriate and meaningful at the operational and tactical levels, both from a humanitarian and military perspective. UN Civil-Military Coordination (UN CIMIC) is the function within the military component of a UN peace operation responsible for facilitating liaison and coordination between the military component of the UN mission and its civilian counterparts and partners. In the UN Integrated Mission context the military component is one of many UN mission components, and function as part of the overall UN System. As such it participates in a wide network of coordination mechanisms that, taken together, constitute mission-wide coordination. UN CIMIC is not responsible for all aspects of civil-military coordination, but it has a very specific role to play in the context of Mission Support and Community Support, and the overall Liaison and Information Management function required to sustain these two types of military support to civilian partners in a UN peace operations context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".