Romano provides an article that indicates that he knows his facts and is familiar with the subject matter that he is writing about. The main limitations with the article are poor grammar, stylistic form, and disorganization. The article would have profited from an outline that would have helped Romano better present his ideas, a review by a skilled, objective outsider, and better presentation of photographs.
Logistic Planning and Collaboration in Complex Relief Operations by Steven J. Romano
It seems to me that Romano is addressing his article to the Department of Defense (DOD) pointing out various issues in their humanitarian missions that he thinks need addressing. I found the article heavy and intense, although it is lightened up, to some extent, by photographs. Nonetheless, I wondered how the photographs were related to the issue at hand.
Romano is unhappy with the way that the DODF conducts its humanitarian missions saying that the DOD violates many logistical concerns in their operations:
Most humanitarian assistance/disaster relief (HA/DR) operations are characterized by rapidly changing circumstances and a lack of clear and accurate information; they are also distinguished by substantial pressure to quickly provide relief supplies and materiel to an affected area.
Romano maintains that DOD does have "the airlift capacity, disaster funding, critical supplies, and logistics systems to be an effective interagency partner in responding to these crises" and that they need to only exert more effort in meeting the challenges that are inherent in their humanitarian assistance/disaster relief (HA/DR) operations. He concludes that the experience of U.S. European Command in bringing relief in the Georgia crisis of 2008 contains significant lessons for improving humanitarian response.
Critique of Article
If not for the abstract, I would have had a harder time understanding Roman's content and drift.
The positive aspects of the article are that Romano uses photographs to substantiate and add interest to his essay. He also categorizes his points according to headings and provides a summary that informs us of the essay's intentions. The summary is clear, crisp, and to the point. Romano also explains why he intends to use the Georgia humanitarian assistance crisis as example and, equally important, foresees possible criticism that the Georgian operation was "a relatively small operation compared to DOD's support to the Indonesian tsunami in 2004." His reasons for, nonetheless, employing this model include the fact that the Georgian incident serves as microcosm for UN humanitarian missions as well as pointing to ways of improving the missions.
Romano bullets his article with facts and each one is thoroughly explained. Details are substantiated with facts and figures. This, too, is a positive point.
On the other hand, the photographs that Romano provides, although interesting, omit details as to why they are included in the essay. Reference to the photograph in the body of the work and reason or its inclusion would have been helpful. I also found photographs to be inserted in incongruent places in the essay resulting in a jarring response. For instance, the first photograph (U.S. And Georgian forces unload humanitarian aid at Tbilisi International Airport) breaks the first paragraph of the Summary. We have no idea why the photograph is included aside from which photographs are more helpful to our digestion of the article when they are appended to the body of the essay itself. Inserting it where Romano did is disturbing.
Furthermore, the headings (or subheadings -- I am unclear about what they are) seem, in parts, to be disconnected from the essay. My recommendation would have been that Roman style his headings according to the critical points mentioned in his summary. For instance, Romano informs us that he will "[focus] on the U.S. European Command's (USEUCOM's) efforts to support disaster relief operations with logistics in the country of Georgia during August and September 2008" and that he will "[conduct] analysis and [develop] recommendations for improving DOD's future response capabilities" His headings should have followed this format. Some of them do, such as the headings entitled "problems" and "solutions," but the very first heading entitled "Crisis Timeline" is confusing.
Some of his sections, too, would have been clearer by Romano preceding with the point of the section and then numbering his points. For instance, the section entitled "problems" leaps directly into the problems without Romano previously explaining that these are the problems that the UN mission encounters and labeling them x, y, z. The "solutions' section would have benefited from the same treatment.
You’re 82% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.