|
|
notion of pooling intelligence resources or expecting states to submit to the UN their stock of intelligence assets as and when they deem fit. Collective intelligence is worthy of being understood as a system of decision making, a product as well as a process. As a product, the stock of information is in terms of knowledge; and as a process, its function is located in the decision-making structure of the group.9 This means that information and decisions are both complementary and integral. Independently, they are only partially intelligible as distinct concepts. So when one talks of information analysis, it means its decisional value. This definition is also dependent upon a conception of collective action as a process of maximising individual utility through (a system of) collective efforts.
Collective decision-making systems, organisations, or groups by definition would consist of more than one individual making decisions that reflect the desires and interests of every member of the group. Thus, the UN, in whichever way its decision-making processes are defined, is a system of collective decisions. If this argument is accepted, then, a second assumption is that collective intelligence can be complementary with the UN system. Acknowledging this compatibility is a first step towards the development of a theory of a viable UN intelligence capability. Developing such a concept will aim to include the following: exploring the extent to which the notion of intelligence, largely conceived as a strategic tool for states in a competitive environment, can be transformed and applied to nonconflicting and noncompetitive ends and proposing a theoretical framework that would provide an insight into a viable intelligence capability within the UN system, in other words, to explore and suggest necessary and acceptable conditions for collective intelligence in an environment characterised by conflicting objectives among sovereign states.
Methodological Approach
A study of this kind, which straddles two distinct and arguably contradicting entities, cannot achieve its goals if the investigation is to