Questioning the "Sanctity" of long-term defense planning as practiced in Central and Eastern Europe

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Thomas-Durell
dc.contributor.corporateNaval Postgraduate School (U.S.)en_US
dc.contributor.departmentNational Security Affairs (NSA)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-29T17:22:38Z
dc.date.available2019-01-29T17:22:38Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.descriptionThe article of record as published may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2018.1497445en_US
dc.description.abstractIt is an article of faith amongst many defense officials that long-term defense planning constitutes the gold standard in the development and management of modern armed forces. That such a method has become central to the U.S. and other countries’ defense planning systems it is surprising that there is so little questioning of its contemporary relevance, let alone an understanding of its provenance, original intent, and its highly nuanced nature. Rather, what one finds on closer examination of long-term defense planning methods is that they have contributed to producing sub-optimal defense plans. In order to provide greater clarity and understanding of the utility of long-term defense plans, this essay argues that as a key element of PPBS, this planning method has been a failure when measured against the ability of defense institutions in Central and Eastern Europe to produce viable defense plans. To produce cost-informed and implementable defense plans, these defense institutions need to return to the original intend of this planning tool: to inform officials of long-term financial obligations and to enable informed decision-making to fund the current force.en_US
dc.format.extent18 p.en_US
dc.identifier.citationThomas-Durell Young (2018) Questioning the "Sanctity" of long-term defenseplanning as practiced in Central and Eastern Europe, Defence Studies, 18:3, 357-373.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10945/61096
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis
dc.rightsThis publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.
dc.subject.authorCentral/Eastern Europeen_US
dc.subject.authorpost-communismen_US
dc.subject.authordefense planningen_US
dc.subject.authorlong-term defense planningen_US
dc.subject.authorPlanningen_US
dc.subject.authorProgrammingen_US
dc.subject.authorBudgetingen_US
dc.subject.authorExecution system (PPBE)en_US
dc.titleQuestioning the "Sanctity" of long-term defense planning as practiced in Central and Eastern Europeen_US
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Questioning_the_Sanctity_of_long_term_defense_planning_as_practiced_in_Central_and_Eastern_Europe.pdf
Size:
278.1 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.18 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Publications