Stanford University

Natural Resources

Locating the Oil Wars

-

Emily Meierding is a Ph.D. Candidate in the University of Chicago Department of Political Science. Her dissertation examines the role of natural resources in interstate conflict and cooperation. She is a participant in the Center for International Studies' Project on Environmental Conflict at the University of Chicago.

James Fearon is the Theodore and Frances Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences, a professor of political science and CISAC affiliated faculty member at Stanford University. His research interests include civil and interstate war, ethnic conflict, the international spread of democracy and the evaluation of foreign aid projects promoting improved governance. He is presently working on a book manuscript (with David Laitin) on civil war since 1945. Recent publications include "Iraq's Civil War" (Foreign Affairs, March/April 2007), "Neotrusteeship and the Problem of Weak States" (International Security, Spring 2004), and "Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War," (APSR, February 2003). Fearon won the 1999 Karl Deutsch Award, which is "presented annually to a scholar under the age of forty, or within ten years of the acquisition of his or her Doctoral Degree, who is judged to have made, through a body publications, the most significant contribution to the study of International Relations and Peace Research." He was elected as a fellow of the American Academy of the Arts and Sciences in 2002.

CISAC Conference Room

Emily Meierding PhD Candidate, Political Science, University of Chicago Speaker

James D. Fearon

CISAC
Stanford University
Encina Hall
Stanford, CA 94305-6165

(650) 725-1314
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Theodore and Frances Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences
Professor of Political Science
james_fearon_2023.jpg
PhD

James Fearon is the Theodore and Frances Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences and a professor of political science. He is a Senior Fellow at FSI, affiliated with CISAC and CDDRL. His research interests include civil and interstate war, ethnic conflict, the international spread of democracy and the evaluation of foreign aid projects promoting improved governance. Fearon was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 2012 and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2002. Some of his current research projects include work on the costs of collective and interpersonal violence, democratization and conflict in Myanmar, nuclear weapons and U.S. foreign policy, and the long-run persistence of armed conflict.

Affiliated faculty at the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Affiliated faculty at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
CV
Hide publication sections
Off
Date Label
James D. Fearon Theodore and Frances Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences; Professor of Political Science; CISAC Faculty Member Commentator
Seminars
Conflict Resolution

Biofuels and Food Security in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa: Pathways of impacts and assessments of investments

Biofuel development contributes most effectively to rural income growth when you can have vertical integration. People all along the value chain have to be making money. The emerging connections between agriculture and energy markets are complex, but can be advantageous if handled carefully - Siwa Msangi

Creating a New Europe

-

Professor Hedlund explores a shift in focus in Europe away from the 'Brussels vs. Moscow' attitude by proposing strategic interaction in what he calls the 'corridor countries.' He discusses why there is a variety of outcomes in terms of economic success in these countries, in particular the strain of rapid deregulation in 1991 in the Soviet Union. Professor Hedlund also examines the challenges for these countries in Europe now.

Synopsis

In 'Creating a New Europe,' Professor Hedlund begins by discussing the choice the European Union had when they met in the Netherlands in 1991. He argues policymakers could have widened the concept of European integration through free trade and economic cooperation which would have led to unlimited expansion options towards the East. However, Prof. Hedlund argues they decided instead to deepen this notion of 'the United States of Europe' through a currency, flag, and constitution leading to an exclusionary approach. Now, in 2008, there is new opportunity with new members in the EU. Problems such as Russia's interaction with its neighbors which were formerly seen as external issues are now internal issues affecting Brussels. Rather than being 'grateful children' as Jacques Chirac infamously put it, these 'corridor states' are decentralising the game between Brussels and Moscow. Prof. Hedlund argues we must look for more substantial success in internal dynamics in these 'corridor states,' states which were formerly part of the U.S.S.R. and are now part of the EU or are hoping to be in the near future. To Prof. Hedlund, these states are in a good position to act as credible brokers for strategic interaction between the EU and Russia, as well as between each other, such as Lithuania's intervention during the Orange Revolution.

Prof. Hedlund explains how these ‘corridor countries’ were seen as homogenous in 1991 but now have a great diversity in economic outcomes. Much of this can be attributed to the over eager embracement of a market economy by Russia in 1991 and the hardship it caused. In addition, Prof. Hedlund identifies the corrupted markets which exploited the natural resources available following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund cites that the ‘rent seeking’ attitude of the Russian government was not reciprocated in all former Soviet states. Some were arguably lured by the prospect of EU membership while others might have drawn in by the examples of the successful and democratic Western countries.

To Prof. Hedlund, the challenge now is to develop forward movement in the areas of the ‘corridor countries’ that have become stalled. In addition, some of the markets in those areas must be developed away from their, as he puts it, ‘3rd world’ manners of operating. Accountability is crucial to a functioning economy to Prof. Hedlund. Finally, these ‘corridor countries’ can help in democracy building.

In taking questions, Prof. Hedlund further reiterates his belief in the necessity of accountability. In addition, he touches on his sense that European education is waning, and that this is setting back innovation. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund addresses the merits of a variety of diplomatic approaches.

About the speaker

Stefan Hedlund is an Anna Lindh Research Fellow at the Stanford Forum on Contemporary Europe. He is professor of Soviet and East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. Before 1991, his research was centered on the Soviet economic system. Since then, he has been focusing on Russia's adaptation to post-Soviet realities. This has included research on the multiple challenges of economic transition as well as the importance of Russia's historical legacy for the reforms. With a background in economics, he has a long-standing interest in problems related to the Soviet economic system, and the attempted transition that followed in the wake of the Soviet collapse. More recently, his research has revolved around neo-institutional theory, and problems of path dependence. Among sixteen authored and coauthored titles in English and Swedish, he is the author of Russian Path Dependence (2005), and the forthcoming co-edited volume Russia Since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge, 2009.) Professor Hedlund has received numerous awards including fellowships at the Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University; the Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University; and at the Kennan Institute, Washington DC.

Download pdf

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Stefan Hedlund

Department of East European Studies
Uppsala University
Gamla Torget 3, III
Box 514, 751 20 UPPSALA
Sweden

0
Professor of East European Studies, Uppsala University
Visiting Scholar, Forum on Contemporary Europe (December 2008)
Hedlund_photo.JPG
PhD

Stefan Hedlund is Professor of East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. A long-standing specialist on Russia, and on the Former Soviet Union more broadly, his current research interest is aimed at economic theories of institutional change. He also has a devouring interest in Russian history, which he has sought to blend with more standard theories of economic change. He has been a frequent contributor to the media, and has published extensively on matters relating to Russian economic reform and to the attempted transition to democracy and market economy more generally. His scholarly publications include some 20 books and close to 200 journal and magazine articles. His most recent monographs are Russian Path Dependence (Routledge, 2005), and Russia since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge University Press, 2008), the latter co-authored with Steven Rosefielde.

 

Stefan Hedlund Professor of Soviet and East European Studies Speaker Uppsala University, Sweden
Seminars

Institutional Biosafety Committees: A System in Need of Overhaul

-
Institutional Biosafety Committees (IBCs) have been charged with the oversight and review of biosafety at thousands of biocontainment labs nationwide, hundreds of which are high level BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs.  In light of the recent rapid proliferation of BSL-3 and BSL-4 facilities and the increases in biodefense, select agent, recombinant DNA, synthetic biology, and dual use research, questions have been raised about whether IBCs are fulfilling their oversight responsibilities.  This presentation will review information on the responsibilities and expectations of IBCs as currently constituted, and provide an analysis of IBC performance from survey data of hundreds of research institutions over the past 4-5 years.  The findings highlight serious ongoing problems with IBCs adhering to the NIH Guidelines. This does little to reassure that the current voluntary governance framework is an effective system to monitor and oversee US research facilities, including high-containment facilities, and their research activities. The findings strongly suggest the need for immediate improvement or replacement of the IBC system.

Margaret Race is an ecologist working with NASA through the SETI Institute in Mountain View CA and a former CISAC Science Fellow. She recently completed a study on public decision making and risk communication associated with the construction of BSL-3 and BSL-4 biocontainment labs nationwide.  The study, which was begun during her fellowship at Stanford University and CISAC, reflects her longstanding interest in risk perceptions, legal and societal issues, public communication and education associated with controversial science and technological proposals.  In her work with NASA, she focuses on planetary protection and the search for extraterrestrial life--which will someday involve construction of a BSL-4 biocontainment lab for handling and testing scientific samples returned from Mars and other solar system locations. During the past decade, she has been a lead member of an international team of researchers that helped NASA develop a protocol for the quarantine, handling, and testing of extraterrestrial samples from Mars. She has served on numerous National Resource Council studies analyzing risk communication and societal issues associated environmental protection on Earth and in space. Dr. Race received her BA degree in Biology and MS degree in Energy Management and Policy from the University of Pennsylvania, and her PhD in Ecology/Zoology from the University of California at Berkeley. Her teaching and research work has included positions at Stanford University (Human Biology Program), UC Berkeley (Assistant Dean, College of Natural Resources), and Office of the President, University of California (Senior Science Policy Analyst and Director of Planning). She was also a Postdoctoral Fellow in Marine Policy and Ocean Management at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Margaret Race Speaker SETI Institute
Seminars

International trade in meat - The tip of the pork chop

Paragraphs

This paper provides an original account of global land, water and nitrogen use in support of industrialized livestock production and trade, with emphasis on two of the fastest growing sectors, pork and poultry. Our analysis focuses on trade in feed and animal products, using a new model that calculates the amount of "virtual" nitrogen, water and land used in production but not embedded in the product. We show how key meat importing countries, such as Japan, benefit from "virtual" trade in land, water and nitrogen, and how key meat exporting countries, such as Brazil, provide these resources without accounting for their true environmental cost. Results show that Japan's pig and chicken meat imports embody the virtual equivalent of 50% of Japan's total arable land, and half of Japan's virtual nitrogen total is lost in the US. Trade links with China are responsible for 15% of the virtual nitrogen left behind in Brazil due to feed and meat exports, and 20% of Brazil's area is used to grow soybean exports. The complexity of trade in meat, feed, water and nitrogen, is illustrated by the dual roles of the US and the Netherlands as both importers and exporters of meat. Mitigating environmental damage from industrialized livestock production and trade depends on a combination of direct pricing strategies, regulatory approaches and use of best management practices. Our analysis indicates that increased water and nitrogen use efficiency and land conservation resulting from these measures could significantly reduce resource costs.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Ambio
Authors
Jim Galloway
Marshall Burke
Marshall Burke
Eric Bradford
Rosamond L. Naylor
Rosamond L. Naylor
Walter P. Falcon
Harold A. Mooney
Joanne Gaskell
Kirsten Oleson
Ellen McCollough
Henning Steinfeld
Henning Steinfeld
External URL

Courting Disaster: The Fight for Oil, Water and a Healthy Planet

-

Global population increases, surging economic growth in new economies, and an unabated appetite for fossil fuels all are driving huge demand for the world's natural resources. At the same time, climate change is upon us.

Add to that instability across the Middle East--the world's oil epicenter--and the growth of extremism and international terrorism.

The complexities of today's world are confounding and frightening, but there are still reasons for hope:

-Groundbreaking research on alternatives to fossil fuels

-Breakthroughs in energy efficiency

-Progress in addressing threats to ocean and freshwater resources

-Increased understanding of terrorism, poverty, and extremism--threats to the stability of current energy sources

In the face of such extraordinary circumstances, how do we understand the complex interconnections among these issues? What can we do as individuals and as a nation to address them? And what is the way forward when violence and the threat of terrorism put us on a razor's edge?

Sponsored by the 2007 Roundtable at Stanford and Stanford Reunion Homecoming.

Maples Pavilion
655 Campus Drive
Stanford, CA 94305

Carlos Watson (Moderator) Former CNN Political Analyst Moderator
Thomas Friedman Columnist, New York Times Panelist
Pamela Matson Dean, School of Earth Sciences, Stanford University Panelist
Stephen Breyer U.S. Supreme Court Justice Panelist
General John Abizaid Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution Panelist
John Hennessy (Host) President, Stanford University Speaker
Panel Discussions

Conservation of Crop Genetic Resources in the Face of Climate Change

Conference report

Agriculture is the human enterprise most dependent on climate and natural resources, and is thus the sector that has the most to gain or lose from short- or long-run changes in the level or variability of climate. A growing literature seeks to understand the probable effects of climate change on agriculture, and improvements in our understanding of climate dynamics and crop response has begun to reduce some of the uncertainties inherent in projecting future impacts on agriculture. Nevertheless, there has been scant research conducted on the climate impacts on various crops and agroecosystems of central importance to the global poor. Furthermore, much of the existing literature assumes that farmers will automatically adapt to climate change and thereby lessen many of its potential negative impacts, taking for granted the monumental past efforts at the collection, preservation, and utilization of plant genetic resources on which much of farmer adaptation has historically depended.

Given potentially large changes in global temperature, regional precipitation patterns, and extreme weather events, we believe it is dangerous to assume that adaptation of cultivars will happen automatically. Extensive crop breeding that relies on access to genetic resources will almost certainly be required for crop adaptation under conditions of global climate change. Furthermore, substantial knowledge and insight is needed to gauge what types of diversity now exist in the gene banks, and what will be needed in the future. Fundamental questions remain to be addressed, for example: How are regional patterns of climate expected to change in the future, and how will these changes affect agro-ecosystems around the world? There are also several strategic investment issues to consider--which traits, which crops and which regions should be central to strategic decisions on ex situ genetic conservation? What steps should be taken to conserve the genetic diversity of the important but neglected minor crops where the number of accessions is currently low? Answers to these questions will be critical for promoting food security and ensuring human survival, and to date have received little or no attention in the scientific literature or broader policy arena.

This conference will seek to answer three main questions:

1) What and where are the largest threats to agro-ecosystems under future climate change? Here we will seek to identify both the nature and the location of the largest probable threats, a topic that to date has not been systematically undertaken for certain areas of interest.

2) Taken individually and together, what do these threats imply for crop genetic diversity on a regional or global level? I.e. which traits, which crops and which regions appear central to strategic decisions on ex situ genetic conservation?

3) What is the current state of genetic conservation with respect to these threats, and what does this imply about the sequencing of future efforts at ex situ conservation focus? For example, are there a set of minor crops important to food security that are both poorly represented in the gene banks and under great threat from future climate change?

Particular attention will be paid to those crops and cropping systems on which food insecure populations currently depend, and who would be least able to adapt in the absence of concerted public action to the contrary. We expect that this effort will be the first serious attempt to link crop genetic resource conservation to climate change and variability.

» A news article on recent investments being made by the Global Crop Diversity Trust, decisions which were informed by the Bellagio meeting.

Bellagio, Italy

Conferences
Climate and Agriculture: Models, Impacts, and Adaptation Strategies

Aquaculture Feeds: Future Demand and Pathways Toward Sustainable Feed Inputs

Most reduction fisheries that produce fishmeal and fish oil have already reached or exceeded sustainable catch levels and will be placed under further pressure as the aquaculture industry grows. At the same time that research into alternative sources of nutrition for piscivorous aquaculture species is progressing, several laws and regulations are taking shape that address the issue of aquaculture feed practices, including the U.S. National Offshore Aquaculture Act (H.R. 2010, S. 1609), the California Sustainable Oceans Act (SB 201), and the development of organic aquaculture standards by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). Other nations with expanding aquaculture industries are also beginning to take notice of this issue and are investigating alternative feed sources.

At this pivotal time, the Stanford meeting will bring together a small group of forward-thinking researchers, environmental non-profits, aquaculture producers, feed developers, and others who are striving toward sustainable feed solutions. The goal is to develop recommendations and a guiding direction for achieving sustainable feed inputs, incorporating current science, economics, and policy. The meeting seeks to:

  • Analyze current and future feed demands in the marine aquaculture sector. What percentage of fishmeal and fish oil inclusion is typical in feeds, and how much can that percentage be reduced?
  • Assess the role of conventional fishmeal and fish oil and alternative sources of nutrition, such as krill, algae, other microbes, terrestrial plants, by-catch, and seafood and poultry processing wastes, both now and in the future. What are the prospects for continued use of wild-caught fish and how can these conventional feed sources be used more responsibly? What are the environmental impacts of each of the resources? What is the state of scientific knowledge, development, and availability of alternatives? How will market dynamics impact the transition from fishmeal and fish oil to alternative proteins and oils?
  • Identify research needs and areas of high promise. Discuss how to encourage the research, development, and use of sustainable, alternative feed ingredients in aquaculture.

We hope the meeting will facilitate the cross-fertilization of ideas on sustainable feeds from people in different sectors and begin to provide some clarity and direction useful to policymakers. Although many experts have acknowledged the problem of increasing feed demands, and while alternative feed sources are a growing research field, there are few specific recommendations on how to achieve sustainable feed inputs. From the discussion at this workshop, we intend to produce specific recommendations to guide legislation and regulation on feeds, with the goal of improving the sustainability of aquaculture feed practices.

FSE - Stanford University

Conferences
Subscribe to Natural Resources