Entry Content and Organization
Global Strategies Project
- / -
Ordering of entries
Entry numbers have been allocated randomly; they have no significance
other than as a permanent point of reference to facilitate indexing, cross-
referencing, and updating between editions. Entries in the book version
are in numeric order.
Index access to entries
In the book, the location of an entry in this sub-section may be determined
from the Index (Section SX) on the basis of keywords in the name
of the entry or its alternate titles.
Structure of entries
Entries may be composed of the following descriptive elements:
Cross-referencing of entries
Entry number: This number has no significance, except as
a convenient method of identifying the entry (particularly for indexing
purposes), of filing information on it, and as an identifier to which cross-references
from other entries (possibly in other Encyclopedia sections) may
refer in the current and future editions. The first letter of the entry
number refers to the section of this volume in which the sub-section, denoted
by the second letter, is located.
Strategy name: The
name selected as best indicating the nature of the strategy. This
is printed in bold characters. It may be followed by alternative strategy
Unless unambiguously a strategy (eg Capitalism,
Moral rearmament), a strategy name must include a word establishing
its action orientation. Most often this is best achieved by the use of
the gerund form (eg Decentralizing, Discriminating
against ethnic groups).
When other information is lacking, "name-only strategies"
provide a location for future descriptive information; a name also enables
cross-references to be made from and to other strategies, even in the absence
Alternative names are included to hold keyword synonyms through
which the strategy may also be known. These may include colloquial or shorthand
Both "positive" and "negative" strategies are included (as
Different constituencies have different views of appropriate and inappropriate
strategies. A seemingly "positive" strategy may be seen as "negative",
just as a seemingly "negative" strategy may have its role for some under
See extended comments on
strategy naming, as well as on
challenges of language games.
Websites: A selection
of relevant websites containing further information (where available).
Priorities should be given to international organizations
specifically employing or advocating the strategy except where the
organization is already cross-referenced in the entry.
Other useful websites provide fact sheets, URL indexes, web
resource pages, treaty texts, bibliographies and online references.
Website references can provisionally substitute for absent
attempting to define the generic core of the strategic processes involved.
The information included here and in following paragraphs
is compiled directly, to the extent possible, from available published
documents in the public domain. Much of it is reproduced, in a minimally
edited form, from the publications of international organizations, such
as those of the United Nations or its Specialized Agencies.
Descriptions emphasise the essential strategic action focus
of the strategy, sharply focussed, rather than discursive theoretical,
philosophical or administrative ways of approaching the strategy.
Where the strategy is in a hierarchy, care must be taken
that information common to the entire hierarchy is placed in the broadest
strategy and not repeated in each narrower strategy; conversely, that details
of specific strategies are not lost in vague and unfocused descriptions
at higher levels. No attempt should be made to develop a vague description
at a broader level when the strategy can be better explicated through descriptions
of its narrow strategies.
Length of description may vary considerably. It is
a function of the importance of the strategy and the quality of the available
text: namely, no matter how important the strategy, avoid extensive,
unfocused descriptions; conversely no matter how good the text, avoid length,
especially if the strategy is very specialized. Exceptions may be
made for strategies that are rarely documented elsewhere or poorly understood.
Widely experienced, complex or multi-dimensional strategies,
such as Making decisions, Saving souls, Thinking globally,
and Making friends, do not lend themselves to useful descriptions.
Context: Provides supplementary
information, notably on the history of how the strategy's importance was
recognized initially and how this recognition has evolved over time.
This paragraph may also present the strategy's raison d'être
in the form of the problematic setting or challenge from which the strategy
If the description under "Description"
is rather long, consider transferring portions of it into "Context".
how the strategy is used or could be used, who is using it and otherwise
concerned with it, together with specific examples of the strategy as implemented.
Implementation should preferably reflect world-wide scope.
However, good information on world-wide implementation may be rare, or
out of date, expecially in the case of strategies that are difficult to
articulate in conventional programmatic terms (eg Making love, Praying,
This paragraph may also be used to provide some statistical,
geographical or other information indicative of the scope of application
of the strategy.
In many cases, good information on a strategy may only be
available in one or two countries where research and reporting have been
undertaken, or where its use has first been explored. When it is
acknowledged that the strategy is also used in other countries, such single
country data may be used as an example to clarify wider implementation.
Where a strategy is applied in different ways or to different
degrees in different regions of the world, then the description of implementation
can usefully be done in separate paragraphs under appropriate regional
or geopolitical headings.
It is not useful to give too many statistics, particularly
if they are dated or date quickly. Indicative information is better
that none where authenticated information is not available.
Exaggerated or unsubstantiated reporting from interested
parties should preferably be used in the "Claim/Counterclaim".
Claim: Stresses, in the
language of protagonists and vested interests, the special importance of
this strategy and why its implementation is particularly urgent.
This text may deliberately exaggerate claims for the unique
importance of the strategy, as found in statements generated for public
relations, press release, fundraining and budget protection purposes, for
Claims should preferably be pithy, for example "Paying taxes
is proof of civic responsibility".
Numbering claims conveys appreciation of their heterogenous
the relative insignificance or erroneous conception of the strategy, or
the dangers of its implementation.
Use for well-reasoned statements showing how the strategy
is a false strategy, non-existent, poorly formulated or analyzed by its
protagonists, unsusbstantiated or merely subjective or misunderstood.
Can also be a critique of the strategy as described, drawing
attention to hidden assumptions or blind spots in its formulation.
This is expecially valuable in the case of perceptions arising from alternative
This text may deliberately exaggerate the arguments refuting
the relevance of the strategy.
Counter-claims are not easy to locate since they are seldom
given in the documents of those most preoccupied by the strategy.
Absence of such arguments from the text does not mean that they do not
At the end of any entry, there may be cross-references to other entries.
These indicate the number and name of the cross-referenced entry, whether
within this section of the Encyclopedia or in other sections (eg
There are 3 types of hierarchical cross-references between strategies:
Broader: More general
strategy of which the strategy described may be considered a part.
The described strategy may be considered an aspect of one or more broader
strategies. (In the example below, Protecting marine birds has two
broader strategies: Protecting birds and Protecting marine animals,
shown). Care is taken to ensure that a strategy is not linked directly
to a strategy that is too broad (see example below: Protecting birds
is not the preferred broader strategy of Protecting the spotted
owl -- when Protecting birds of prey is a direct intermediary
link). Another example: Establishing safe traffic flow might
be an aspect of both
Improving traffic systems (notion of efficiency)
and Making safer cities (security notion).
Narrower: More specific
strategy which may be considered a part of the described strategy.
Care is taken to ensure that a strategy is not linked directly to
a strategy that is too narrow (see example below: Protecting whales
is not the preferred narrower strategy of Protecting mammals
Protecting marine mammals is a direct intermediary link).
Related: A strategy
that is associated in a hierarchically undefined way with the described
strategy. Care is taken to ensure that a strategy is not
linked directly to a strategy that is too distantly related (see example
below: Protecting marine mammals is related directly to Protecting
marine birds --
not directly related to Protecting freshwater
birds). The related category may also be used as a temporary catch-all
in those exceptional cases when the relationship cannot immediately be
expressed through any of the other cross-reference types.
An example of a hierarchy is:
Clarifying complex hierarchies may usefully serve to point to absent strategies.
The number of levels it is worth including in the hierarchy is a matter
of judgement. Clearly the more there are, the greater the risk of
"opening up" excessively detailed strategies for which no descriptive information
is readily available. Hierarchies are indicative but not definitive;
relationships are subject to change in the light of further information.
Protecting birds of prey
Protecting the spotted owl
Portecting marine birds
Protecting freshwater birds
Protecting marine mammals
There are 4 types of functional
cross-references between strategies:
constrained or undermined by the described strategy: a forward or
subsequent negative causal link indicative of a negative feedback loop.
Strategies that are checked, blocked or limited by the described strategy.
Constrained by: Strategies
constraining or undermining the described strategy: a backward or
prior negative causal link indicative of a negative feedback loop. Strategies
checking, blocking or limiting the described strategy.
facilitated by the described strategy: a forward or subsequent positive
causal link indicative of a positive feedback loop.Strategies that are
furthered, assisted, underpinned or strengthened by the described strategy.
Facilitated by: Strategies
that facilitate the described strategy: a backward or prior positive
causal link indicative of a positive feedback loop. Strategies furthering,
assisting, underpinning or strengthening the described strategy.
Most strategies constrain or facilitate some other strategies.
Such links may be difficult to identify, although they may be apparent
in "Counter-claims". As with hierarchical relationships, mentioned
above, care must be taken in indicating such functional cross-relationships.
It may be that the strategy is mentioned as constraining, for example,
another named strategy. The latter may however be one of a
cluster of sub-strategies similarly constrained. Inserting the cross-reference
to one raises the question why the 19 others are not included. Wherever
possible it is better to cross-reference some major strategy of which the
20 are all a part. Example: Empowering workers may be indicated
as facilitating Protecting rights of working women.
It is important
to determine whether this should not preferably be indicated as Protecting
rights of workers, since otherwise there is the question of
how such empowerment affects non-female, non-adult workers.
When a source document does note strategies that are constrained or
facilitated, this may have been done with excessive enthusiasm. Such
lists disguise the fact that the effect on those strategies is via
other strategies which are more directly connected to them. The result
is that such major strategies become too heavily cited. It is not
useful to note that all European cities are linked by rail to Paris.
It is more useful to note that Amsterdam is linked to Brussels which is
linked to Paris. Amsterdam is not directly linked to Paris. Example:
population growth may facilitate Reducing incidence of malnutrition.
But it might be better to indicate it as facilitating
security which in turn facilitates
Reducing incidence of malnutrition.
It is possible to isolate vicious
cycles of problems and corresponding vicious
cycles of strategies. In the case of problems, in the cycle
each problem is aggravating the next -- with the last looping back to aggravate
the first in the chain. The more obvious loops may be composed of only
3 or 4 problems. Far less obvious are those composed of 7 or more. An example
Alienation > Youth gangs > Neighbourhood control by criminals >
stress of urban environment > Substance abuse > Family breakdown
Such cycles are vicious because they are self-sustaining. Identifying
them is also no easy matter and computers are being used for this purpose.
Serendipitous loops of strategies that facilitate one another are also
possible. Clearly identification of serendipitous strategy loops are vital
to sustainable development strategy -- in order to contain and break vicious
Relationships between strategies, other than hierarchical ones, are
included either where they were specifically mentioned in the available
documents or where they could be reasonably inferred from such material.
It is rare for documents to be systematic in their description of the relationships
between strategies. Relationship networks have to be built up from several
different sources. Often it is not clear whether the relationship applies
for the whole of a strategy hierarchy or for only some component part.
There is a continuing effort to refine such networks, but even when a relationship
is contentious the practice is to retain the relationship provisionally
rather than exclude it and lose a potential link. This said,
it is generally easier to criticize errors of commission than to undertake
the extra effort to remedy errors of omission.
There are 3 types of cross-reference to other databases:
Organizations: Used primarily
to cross-reference international organizations (in the parallel
database) specifically advocating or implementing the strategy.
Include: organizations concerned solely
with the strategy (eg International Hospice Insitute) and/or using
that strategy amongst others.
Exclude: organizations claiming concern
without action, temporaily acting, or identifying with rather than actually
implementing the strategy.
If there are numerous organizations
implementing the strategy, it is best to cite an umbrella body rather than
Problems: Used to note
links to problems (in the parallel
database) to which the strategy responds
Bibliographical references: Used
primarily for authorative international publications, preferably produced
by international organizations (listed in a parallel
More recent publications are preferable,
if available. However, publications produced when the strategy was
first advocated or formulated may contain better articulations of the dimensions
of the strategy.
References should be cited within the
entry matching their content, not at a narrower or broader level.
The title of a pertinent publication
may not necessarily correspond to the strategy name.
A seemingly pertinent publication title
may disguise a totally unfocused content.