ABSTRACT
A couple of decades ago, it was still necessary to make the case that early warning of genocide or mass atrocities was both necessary and possible. Many observers looked back at past atrocities, saw warning signs from early stages straight through to onset, and concluded, "Early warning is not the problem". A serious problem exists regarding expectations of risk assessment and early warning models, especially quantitative ones. The utility of any global risk assessment depends on two factors: the frequency of the phenomenon being forecasted and the accuracy of the model. As policy interest in the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide has increased, so has the call to discover "what works". Scott Straus, for one, has observed that "the international community is long on approaches and short on clear knowledge about what works and what does not". It is inarguable that knowledge about the effectiveness of different options should influence how governments devise strategies to prevent atrocities.
