Sign for Notice Everyday    Sign Up| Sign In| Link| English|

Our Sponsors

    Receive Latest News

    Feedburner
    Share Us


    IAFIE – EUROPE 2019 - IAFIE – EUROPE 2019 CONFERENCE

    View: 236

    Website www.iafie-europe.org | Want to Edit it Edit Freely

    Category Social sciences; Interdisciplinary; Intelligence; Education

    Deadline: January 30, 2019 | Date: January 30, 2019-February 08, 2019

    Venue/Country: Bucharest, Romania

    Updated: 2018-11-03 18:56:56 (GMT+9)

    Call For Papers - CFP

    About IAFIE Bucharest 2019

    While the practice of intelligence has to adapt to challenges such as transnational threats and the unprecedented expansion of information technology, the academic study of intelligence and the way it is taught in schools are also under constant pressure. What began as practitioner reflection in the CIA’s classified journal has now morphed into a large-scale enterprise, involving both practitioners, instructors and traditional social scientists. This determined a contestation of these new forms of knowledge: while practitioners demand that knowledge be for intelligence, academics are intent on creating knowledge about the practice of intelligence. This perpetuates the tug-of-war between the two “tribes” and leads to a series of misunderstandings which need a permanent translation between the “different languages” spoken in the field.

    “Mihai Viteazul” National Intelligence Academy (MVNIA) is perfectly suited to address these challenges as it is in a unique position. Given its status as a university, it is connected to the academic flow of knowledge. Conversely, MVNIA is an integral part of an intelligence service, and is involved in the education of practitioners, to whom it also provides a platform for reflection. This double-faced status grants MVNIA the possibility to act as a forum for debate between the two seemingly unconnected groups.

    Marking the Romanian Presidency of the Council of the European Union as well as building on the previous IAFIE conferences in Breda, Athens and Leicester, MVNIA will organize the 4th edition of the IAFIE-EUROPE Conference in Bucharest from 14th to 17th April 2019. This edition aims to contribute to the above mentioned debate and to bring together practitioners and academics. Indeed, it will represent a possibility for each group to present their views to a wider audience and to attempt to find common ground and mutual understanding, as well as to discuss the best way to improve the education of future generations.

    The conference format will be multifaceted and will include panels, workshops, roundtables and poster sessions.

    Topics

    Best models in developing intelligence studies curricula

    National approaches are still the rule when it comes to intelligence teaching and education, with little consideration given to means of creating a commonly shared body of knowledge that would be able to reunite under one umbrella the burgeoning field of intelligence studies. In today’s world marked by fragmentation as much as by globalization, harmonization of intelligence training methods and instruments can no longer be sent to the realm of wishful thinking, but it has become an imperative for both academia and practitioners. In trying to go beyond the formal styles of academic and governmental cooperation in place today in the field of intelligence, research in this direction will focus on capitalizing on the best practices in developing curricula in intelligence studies as an alternative means of building bridges between the different stakeholders, be them academic, governmental or private entities and on identifying pragmatic solutions for the institutional challenges crippling partnership-development.

    The use of historical case studies as an effective pedagogical device

    It aims at exploring different theoretical paths and methods of how to effectively select and deliver historical case studies for academic and professional intelligence education. Given the inescapable secrecy which surrounds the field of intelligence, we could argue that the study and teaching of intelligence rely mainly on historical case studies rather than on contemporary events. In this sense, are historically accurate case studies more efficient than the use of scenarios/ hypothetical cases when teaching intelligence studies? Which are the conditions for a relevant historical event to be considered suitable as a case study in intelligence teaching? If it is too recent it may not be covered consistently by a primary and secondary literature for instance. In other words, how to avoid poor case study selection when teaching intelligence studies should also be investigated.

    Exploring intelligence at the intersection between sciences

    Previously considered the “missing dimension of both international affairs and diplomatic history”, the practice, history and theory of intelligence are slowly being integrated in the academic mainstream. Aspects such as intelligence cooperation, European integration of intelligence, intelligence theory and the institutionalization of oversight mechanisms have been approached from different lenses, and the use of social science theories to understand phenomena related to intelligence is increasing consistently. Traditionally a field in which states acted by themselves and the realist dictum of raison d’etat ruled, the field of intelligence is witnessing increasing cooperation and even, to some limited extent supra-national integration. At the same time, practitioner’s literature is also burgeoning. The use of advanced methods derived from both natural and social sciences have revolutionized the practice of intelligence. The Cambridge Analytica revelations show only an inkling of what the power of big data can create if harnessed efficiently. While, at the global level, a slow, but irreversible, process of regulating surveillance is being manifested, the power of technology is always advancing faster than that of regulation. Given all these considerations, is there a need to reconsider the relation between intelligence, international relations and the advancing power of technology?

    Intelligence and higher education: looking for the right balance

    Professional doctorates have been extending as an alternative to PhDs for almost three decades now, as a result of a keener interest of students' advancing their professional practice and expertise to develop their careers. While research PhDs focus on critically acquiring and furthering knowledge, professional doctorates offer the premise of a more immediate and pragmatic immersion into the problem solving practical field activities. The implementation of professional doctorates in the field of intelligence and national security would ensure that the already existing knowledge of the specialists is connected to the enhancement of practical skills and development of specific tools and techniques that could pragmatically and efficiently be applied. Alternatively, organizing a PhD focused on research would contribute to knowledge, mostly theoretical, in the field of study. Given the global security context, pragmatism should go hand in hand with knowledge and the higher education programs in intelligence studies ought to benefit from both professional expertise and advanced knowledge.

    How to teach intelligence methods wisely? Case studies and lessons learned

    Scientific research at large requires that one uses structured methods in order to obtain objective knowledge. Similarly, in intelligence and particularly in intelligence analysis, specific methods are used to take empirical or intuitive knowledge further into objective and reflective understanding. Laying at the crossroad of sciences, intelligence analysis has adopted and adapted a series of methods from social, economic or political sciences, while developing its own techniques and methods. Once developed, tested and appropriated, this methodological apparatus needs to be transferred, explained and ”translated” to the new generations of analysts. Papers are expected to address the challenge of teaching analytic methods in an attempt to discuss the best solutions and lessons that can be learned.

    What should intelligence studies learn from other disciplines?

    This research area addresses the issue of interdisciplinarity which characterizes intelligence studies. Other disciplines have also experienced the need to open their frames to interdisciplinary findings in their process of transformation and development. For example, in the case of political sciences, as Mattei Dogan states, “(…) The patrimony of political science is full of borrowed concepts, which are hybrid in the sense that they were concocted in other disciplines and replanted skillfully in the garden of political science.” Starting from this, the panel will try to reassess the utility of learning from traditional disciplines (i.e. medicine, journalism, and archeology) and will explore new means of learning from these neighboring disciplines in terms of methodologies, concepts and processes.

    Teaching intelligence with area studies: a natural match?

    Should intelligence studies as a discipline be coupled in its educational pursuit with interdisciplinary area studies and hence with the contextualization provided by in-depth understanding of specific regions and countries? To what extent regional expertise including linguistic skills could help us to better understand the particularities of the intelligence and security cultures in a certain country/region? As the former CIA senior staff Mark M. Lowenthal put it “I never hired a prospective analyst because he or she knew intelligence – whatever that means. I hired them because they had a subject matter expertise – a language, a knowledge set – that was required at that moment’’. Does intelligence as a taught discipline especially at degree level need to be supplemented in its educational endeavor by area studies (e.g. Chinese Studies, Russian Studies, Latin American Studies etc.) or by other disciplines and which are the best ways to do it?

    The role of critical thinking in intelligence teaching

    Critical thinking involves questioning that forces broader consideration of issues and problems. Its role in enhancing the explanatory capability of intelligence operatives and analysts needs no further arguments. Still, which are the best ways of integrating critical thinking in the process of teaching intelligence and which are the most appropriated areas and topics that can benefit from the critical thinking skills? How can it be used fruitfully as a pedagogical approach in examining past intelligence successes and failures?

    Successes and failures as lessons learned for intelligence education

    Teaching intelligence via examples from the past is one of the most recurrent educational techniques. Knowing the past and analyzing its successes and failures may help in better understanding the present. However, besides its practical benefits, the historical approach has certain epistemological limits in itself that may lead to controversial effects. To what extent historical analogies may affect the lens through which one interpret current phenomena? How can one avoid misinterpretations of past events shaped by widely disseminated narratives?

    Pedagogical methods and tools to critically address propaganda, manipulation and hybrid threats

    Security professionals and the society at large should be able to address in the coming years fake news and propaganda through an increased process of critical thinking and deep reflection. How can, in practice, intelligence practitioners identify fake news and how much can they communicate to the public? Are there any methods and tools that can stand at the base of the practice of spokespersons and institutional communicators that take up the communication front for security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies? This panel seeks to discuss and analyze methods and tools dedicated to intelligence students and practitioners in the process of developing capacities to critically address fake news in relationship to their audience, when it comes to security issues.

    Educating intelligence and security practitioners to counter social polarization, violent extremism and radicalization

    It addresses the challenges and opportunities advanced by interdisciplinary and informal education oriented models of learning with which the training community can address individual and community resilience to ideologies and behaviors specific to violent extremism and radicalization. Integrating essential skills such as critical thinking, anger management, conflict resolution, assertiveness and emotional intelligence into a comprehensive model of individual and community capacity building can prove essential for the strategic communication efforts of the intelligence, security and law enforcement agencies. Hence, what we aim at is to provide a framework for practitioner and academic oriented know-how presentation and proposals of experimental tools with which to create, test, and promote psychological and community behavioral strategies addressing push and pull factors involved in advancing radicalization and violent extremism.

    Intelligence theory – what new in the age of big data and hybrid warfare?

    The theorization of intelligence, as a practice and as an organization, began during the Cold War, when intelligence action was limited to state-on-state information gathering and covert action. The reemergence of great power competition after the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the Syrian Civil war brought the international sphere back to a highly technologically advanced Cold War. The use of cyber weapons, hybrid tactics and covert action forced intelligence organizations to adapt in order to survive and to provide decision-makers with the competitive advantage they required. The early debates on how hybrid warfare impacts intelligence theory were waged around the relation between covert action and intelligence, while post-9/11 writings aimed to justify the use of intelligence methods to a wider set of threats, apart from that of hostile states. However, the expanded space of international competition leaves intelligence practice significantly short of theorization, as the real world evolves at a much faster rate. Papers employing both “grounded theory” (bottom-up) approaches, as well as works employing formal philosophical literature to address the question of theorizing intelligence are expected. It allows for a meaningful practitioner-theorist debate on how intelligence should be defined and understood.

    Intelligence – between Big and Small data

    As technology is developing exponentially, both in terms of innovation degree and availability on a large scale, intelligence organizations often find themselves in needle-in-the-haystack kind of situations. They have to identify, develop and implement efficient instruments that will facilitate the structuring of data in accessible, understandable and actionable information. This research area aims to debate whether the intelligence organizations should direct their efforts into developing efficient Big Data management systems that allow the detection of major patterns of action or focus instead on perfecting their Small Data competencies, focusing on finding correlations and causation between actions on reduced volumes of data. Therefore, both empirical and theoretical papers are expected focusing, but not limited to the following topics: ethics in collecting and storing data, Big Data errors, privacy, Big Data versus Small Data in detecting human behaviors, using data to effect behavior change, application of Big/Small Data in the security sector, etc.

    Hybrid threats and secret services: historical and contemporary perspectives

    The historical perspective over the 20th century demonstrates that the transformation of intelligence threats has inevitably led to a transformation in intelligence practices of prevention and countering. From the classical approach, based on the defense of the nation state, to countering new threats – which are by definition transnational, multidirectional, infra- and inter-state oriented. As a result, legitimate questions are raised about: what should the relevant actors and issues for the intelligence practice and hence for intelligence education be? And what would be the training techniques and the practical strategies that could keep the intelligence services efficient and competitive in countering hybrid threats?

    Get ready for the I Generation: How to successfully teach intelligence to young generations

    The preferences and values to which the young generation adheres are different from any of the previous generations. The younger generations fall under the description of digital natives, coming up in a society where the technology is developing fast and is available on a large scale. The youth is using technology in every day routines, social media and tech devices becoming an integrated part of the social life. Is there a consonance between the goals of intelligence organisations and the expectations of the I generation on work, task distribution, or training formats and methods?

    The panels, workshops and roundtables will be configured according to the interests of the participants. Therefore, suggestions and recommendations in the form of an e-mail (including an indication of the topic along with a short rationale) are welcomed to be sent to iafiebucharestatanimv.ro by January 15th, 2019.

    A final agenda of the event will be available on the official website of the conference, namely www.iafie-europe.org, by March 29th, 2019.

    IMPORTANT DATES

    Participation

    Those interested in participating are invited to submit the title and summary of their papers (abstracts of maximum 300 words) by January 30th, 2019 at iafiebucharestatanimv.ro. Acceptance notifications will be sent by February 15th, 2019.

    Only those interested to be published must submit the final papers by April 5th, 2019. A selection of papers will be published in the 2019 summer edition of the Romanian Intelligence Studies Review (RRSI).

    Anyone interested in attending our conference as a member of the public is required to register by sending an e-mail with the complete name and affiliation (university/ institution/ etc.) at iafiebucharestatanimv.ro by March 20th, 2019.

    Important: all participants need to attach to the e-mail the proof of payment made at the IAFIE – EUROPE Banking Account (IBAN) in the Netherlands:

    European Chapter of the International Association for Intelligence Education

    ING BANK (in the Netherlands)

    The IBAN number is: NL57INGB0007507958

    Registration (fee / author):

    Early registration (15.02-28.02.2019):

    - for the whole conference: IAFIE Members - €180; Non-Members: €220; Students - €120;

    - for one day: IAFIE Members - €100; Non-Members: €120; Students - €70.

    Late registration (01.03-20.03.2019):

    - for the whole conference: IAFIE Members - €200; Non-Members: €250; Students - €130;

    - for one day: IAFIE Members - €120; Non-Members: €150; Students - €80.

    The registration fee includes: Conference Welcome Dinner (April 14th), lunch and coffee breaks (April 15th & April 16th), one conference pack.

    Venue: Novotel Bucharest City Centre Hotel

    Address: Calea Victoriei 37B, Sector 1,010061, Bucharest

    Website: https://www.accorhotels.com/gb/hotel-5558-novotel-bucharest-city-centre/index.shtml

    Accommodation

    Attendees will be responsible for booking their own accommodation. A limited number of rooms are available at Novotel Bucharest City Centre Hotel at preferential rates (single room: 99 Euro / night; double room: 113 Euro / night). In order to access these rates, please contact us at iafiebucharestatanimv.ro by March 1st, 2019.

    Travel

    By plane: “Henri Coandă” Airport (Bucharest) has reasonable connections with most European capitals and with the largest cities in Romania. The city is also reached by a large number of low-costs flights, mainly from destinations in Italy and Spain as well as from some major cities in Germany, France, the UK, Ireland, Belgium, Hungary, Turkey, Austria, Israel etc.

    Airport transfers - there are several options to get from Henri Coandă airport to Bucharest. The most popular are:

    Bus - Express bus 783 goes from the airport to downtown Bucharest. It runs approximately every 20 minutes, daily, including weekends and holidays (every 40 minutes during the night).

    Taxi - with a normal-rate taxi the ride to the city center should cost only €10 (30-50 LEI) and for premium taxis should not exceed €20 (80-90 LEI). Bucharest taxi companies worth trying include Meridian (021 9444), Cristaxi (021 9466) and Cobalcescu (021 9451).

    By bus: Buses are a good option to get to Bucharest if coming from Moldova, Turkey, Greece and to some extent Bulgaria, given the low frequency and speeds of trains between these countries and Romania.

    By train: Bucharest is linked through direct daily trains to most neighboring countries’ capitals (Budapest, Chişinău, Kiev, Sofia), as well as to Vienna, Venice, Thessaloniki, Istanbul, Moscow and of course to main cities in all of Romania’s 41 counties.

    By car: The city’s entrances are from the north (the E60 road coming from Braşov), west (the A1 highway from Piteşti), east (the A2 (Sun) highway from Constanţa) and south (the E20 road from Giurgiu).


    Keywords: Accepted papers list. Acceptance Rate. EI Compendex. Engineering Index. ISTP index. ISI index. Impact Factor.
    Disclaimer: ourGlocal is an open academical resource system, which anyone can edit or update. Usually, journal information updated by us, journal managers or others. So the information is old or wrong now. Specially, impact factor is changing every year. Even it was correct when updated, it may have been changed now. So please go to Thomson Reuters to confirm latest value about Journal impact factor.