Military Adaptation and Civil-Military Unity of Effort: A Historical Institutional Analysis of the American, British and Canadian Armed Forces in Afghanistan, 2001 -2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Western governments have increasingly adopted comprehensive approaches to overseas missions, involving civilian, political and military elements. In Afghanistan, comprehensive policies introduced by national governments created new imperatives for unity of effort between government departments/agencies and armed forces. Using the lens of the historical institutional theory of gradual change, this research examines the American, British and Canadian militaries’ adaptation to unity of effort requirements identified by governments for missions in Afghanistan in the period 2001 to 2011. Each case examines how the armed forces’ existing institutional rules, forged from past experiences and operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the domestic context of national missions, led to specific changes in formal doctrine, in-country command arrangements, and Civil-Military Cooperation capabilities. The study identifies institutional and political factors that influence militaries’ role in the delivery of the comprehensive approach. It finds that armed forces’ contribution to the approach depends on: the level of discretion afforded institutional leaders to interpret rules guiding interagency efforts; and the ability of national governments to create a formal civilian entity to coordinate and deploy qualified personnel to work alongside armed forces overseas. Understanding these factors is key to further developing military capacities to work with civilian entities in future overseas missions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".