“This Research Paper first provides information by country on the intelligence communities, key mechanisms for oversight of the intelligence community and any recent changes to, or reviews of, the oversight frameworks in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. This is followed by comparative analysis that highlights some of the similarities and differences between those countries (and the US) in the arrangements that exist for intelligence oversight.”
Source: Barker, C. & Petrie, C. (2017). Australian Parliamentary Library Research Paper and available from this link (open access).
Collins Beach, Manly
“The article describes the police intelligence division-of-labour paying specific attention to four different aspects of intelligence activity: the acquisition of intelligence or information; the analysis of information in the production of intelligence; tasking and co-ordination on the basis of intelligence ‘product’; or being tasked on that same basis.”
Source: Sheptycki, J. (2017). Policing and Society, and available from this link (open access).
“The 2017 Independent Intelligence Review found that Australia’s intelligence agencies are highly capable and held in high regard by their international partner agencies. The Review also found that as a result of transforming geopolitical, economic, societal and technological changes, the intelligence community will be faced with challenges that will intensify over the coming decade.”
Source: L’Estrange, M. & Merchant, S. (2017). Dept of Prime Minister and Cabinet and available from this link (open access).
Manly Beach seagulls/Flickr
“This special report argues that Australia’s current arrangements for gathering and disseminating CrimInt overseas are suboptimal. While additional resources are needed to address this condition, there’s also a need to streamline priority setting and associated collection requirements, provide ways to evaluate and better coordinate the collection of information and intelligence product, and expand opportunities to improve training in CrimInt.”
Source: Kowalick, P. & Connery, D. (2016). ASPI Special Report and available from this link.
Tree tails/M. Hardy
Two changes in competitive intelligence are investigated in this paper: 1) the failure of the competitive intelligence system because of reliance on an outdated understanding of the intelligence cycle and the associated concepts of key intelligence topics (KITs) and key intelligence questions (KIQs); and 2) the growth in the production of competitive intelligence by those who actually use it—the do-it-yourselfers, or DIYers.
McGonagle, J., and Misner-Elias, M. (2016). Salus Journal. 4(1), and available from this link.