IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v29y1992i3p299-311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

After Consensus, What? Performance Criteria for the UN in the Post-Cold War Era

Author

Listed:
  • Kendall W. Stiles

    (Department of Political Science, Bowling Green State University)

  • Maryellen Macdonald

    (Department of Political Science, Michigan State University)

Abstract

Not since 1945 has the UN enjoyed such support across the East-West divide as today. Cold War standards to evaluate UN performance are now of little value, but there is little general and theoretical discussion of alternative criteria. In an effort to clarify the issues at stake in what is sure to be a lively debate, the authors derive four distinct performance criteria extant in the literature on UN performance. These criteria include (1) declarations found in organic documents (charter-based), (2) medium and short-term objectives established by agency officials (operational), (3) past performance (trend-based), and (4) a scenario following elimination of the agency (absence-based). The strengths and weaknesses of each criteria are discussed theoretically and concretely through use of the four criteria to assess UN peace-keeping operations. The authors conclude that a blending of the operational and trend-based approach offers the most promising avenue for UN evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Kendall W. Stiles & Maryellen Macdonald, 1992. "After Consensus, What? Performance Criteria for the UN in the Post-Cold War Era," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 29(3), pages 299-311, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:29:y:1992:i:3:p:299-311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/29/3/299.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:29:y:1992:i:3:p:299-311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.