Clear all

4 results found

reorder grid_view

Governance of Dual-Use Technologies: Theory and Practice

May 10, 2016

The term dual-use characterizes technologies that can have both military and civilian applications. What is the state of current efforts to control the spread of these powerful technologies—nuclear, biological, cyber—that can simultaneously advance social and economic well-being and also be harnessed for hostile purposes? What have previous efforts to govern, for example, nuclear and biological weapons taught us about the potential for the control of these dual-use technologies? What are the implications for governance when the range of actors who could cause harm with these technologies include not just national governments but also non-state actors like terrorists? These are some of the questions addressed by Governance of Dual-Use Technologies: Theory and Practice, the new publication released today by the Global Nuclear Future Initiative of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. The publication's editor is Elisa D. Harris, Senior Research Scholar, Center for International Security Studies, University of Maryland School of Public Affairs. Governance of Dual-Use Technologies examines the similarities and differences between the strategies used for the control of nuclear technologies and those proposed for biotechnology and information technology. The publication makes clear the challenges concomitant with dual-use governance. For example, general agreement exists internationally on the need to restrict access to technologies enabling the development of nuclear weapons. However, no similar consensus exists in the bio and information technology domains. The publication also explores the limitations of military measures like deterrence, defense, and reprisal in preventing globally available biological and information technologies from being misused. Some of the other questions explored by the publication include: What types of governance measures for these dual-use technologies have already been adopted? What objectives have those measures sought to achieve? How have the technical characteristics of the technology affected governance prospects? What have been the primary obstacles to effective governance, and what gaps exist in the current governance regime? Are further governance measures feasible? In addition to a preface from Global Nuclear Future Initiative Co-Director Robert Rosner (University of Chicago) and an introduction and conclusion from Elisa Harris, Governance of Dual-Use Technologiesincludes:On the Regulation of Dual-Use Nuclear Technology by James M. Acton (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)Dual-Use Threats: The Case of Biotechnology by Elisa D. Harris (University of Maryland)Governance of Information Technology and Cyber Weapons by Herbert Lin (Stanford University)

Shared Responsibilities for Nuclear Disarmament: A Global Debate

April 20, 2010

Presents Sagan's 2009 paper calling for rethinking the balance of responsibilities and the relationship between articles in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty with seven response papers by international scholars about how to pursue nuclear disarmament.

Designing the Arts Learning Community: Model Professional Development Programs

February 3, 2009

Dawn Ellis and her team scoured the country for exemplary professional development programs in arts education to inform the content of the handbook and create a searchable database of 50 model programs. The handbook is both a guide and a reference resource for arts coordinators, principals, superintendents of instruction and anyone who designs professional development for K-12 arts education. It synthesizes documents, interviews, responses from outstanding practices in the field as well as literature regarding professional development and arts education. The programs profiled, which cover a wide range of partnership types, were selected because theyAddress the scale, scope, or perspectives of school districtsProvide evidence of evaluation, research, and/or reflective practiceProvide insights into approaches relevant to a variety of communities, students, and arts disciplines, orInvolve education reform that includes a strong arts component

Philanthropy's New Passing Gear: Mission-Related Investing: A Policy and Implementation Guide for Foundation Trustees

January 1, 2008

The goal of this guide is to provide foundation trustees and, where or when appropriate, staff with a process to create both an overall policy for MRI as well as specific paths for implementation. Our mission-related investing roadmap outlines how to:Ground a strategy within the values and mission of your foundation;Understand the various catalysts for MRI within a foundation;Structure a policy discussion in the boardroom;Integrate MRI into existing program and investment processes;Link your investment asset allocation with your program goals;Determine the appropriate MRI investment tools and strategies for the foundation;Select appropriate financial, program and investment consultants;Organize the board, and staff and investment consultants to find, evaluate, approve and execute MRI investment vehicles;Monitor investment performance of an MRI portfolio; and ultimatelyIntegrate social returns into the ongoing investment and program decisions of the foundation.We have also included 12 case studies which reflect the diversity of experiences of foundations active in MRI.