0
CDDRL Honors Student, 2024-25
grace_e_geier.png

Major: Sociology
Minor: Neuroscience
Hometown: Shaker Heights, Ohio
Thesis Advisor: Adam Bonica

Tentative Thesis Title: The American Defense Sector and Disaster Capitalism Complex

Future aspirations post-Stanford: After completing my master's in Sustainability, I'd like to continue my education with law school and work in international climate litigation.

A fun fact about yourself: I had the same high school band teacher as Kid Cudi and MGK.

Date Label
0
CDDRL Honors Student, 2024-25
seamus_allen.jpg

Major: Public Policy
Hometown: Carnation, Washington
Thesis Advisor: James Fishkin

Tentative Thesis Title: Force of the Better Argument: Mechanisms of Persuasion in Deliberative Polling

Future aspirations post-Stanford: I could see a lot of paths forward from here. Heading to law school, working as a legislative aide, running for local office, and fleeing from modernity to a cabin in the wilderness are all ideas I'm currently considering.

A fun fact about yourself: I design games. If you're a nerd like me and you like the sound of fighting giant monsters, check out Trail of the Behemoth on DriveThruRPG!

Date Label
Paragraphs

Lawyers represent a significant threat to the integrity of the U.S. sanctions regime. This report analyzes that threat in the context of Russia’s aggressive war against Ukraine. Sanctions, particularly individual sanctions, are a central weapon in the United States’ national security arsenal. This report recommends that Congress, federal agencies, and state bar associations implement a comprehensive regulatory regime for lawyers engaging in certain transactional work to ensure U.S. lawyers are no longer enablers of sanctions evasion.

This report recommends amending the Banking Secrecy Act (BSA) to subject financial transactional work completed by lawyers to the same anti-money laundering and anti-sanctions evasion requirements to which banks are subject. Lawyers would be required to verify the true identity of their clients when completing financial transactions on their behalf and file reports with the government on suspicious client activity. This requirement would prevent oligarchs from gaming the U.S. anti-money laundering (AML) system by using lawyers instead of banks for these transactions. Congress must also fully fund the agencies that would implement this new law: the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), and the Department of Justice (DOJ). FinCEN must issue comprehensive rules clarifying lawyers’ obligations under the BSA, and OFAC must amend its regulations to plug a critical gap in the current sanctions implementation framework. Finally, state bar associations must require that lawyers be trained on their new obligations.

This report begins with a description of the problem: oligarchic wealth, how that wealth supports Putin’s regime, and how U.S. lawyers enable sanctions evasion (Part I). It then gives an overview of the current regulatory landscape (Part II). Next, it presents how six other countries regulate lawyers as potential enablers of sanctions evasion and other crimes, including money laundering (Part III). Finally, it proposes a comprehensive legislative and regulatory regime to solve the lawyers-as-enablers problem (Part IV).

About the Law and Policy Lab

Under the guidance of faculty advisers, Law and Policy Lab students counsel real-world clients in such areas as education, copyright and patent reform, governance and transparency in emerging economies, policing technologies, and energy and the environment. Policy labs address problems for real clients, using analytic approaches that supplement traditional legal analysis. The clients may be local, state, or federal public agencies or officials, or private non-profit entities such as NGOs and foundations. Typically, policy labs assist clients through empirical evidence that scopes a policy problem and assesses options and courses of action. The methods may include comparative case studies, population surveys, stakeholder interviews, experimental methods, program evaluation or big data science, and a mix of qualitative and quantitative analysis. Faculty and students may apply theoretical perspectives from cognitive and social psychology, decision theory, economics, organizational behavior, political science or other behavioral science disciplines.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Reports
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford Law School Law and Policy Lab, 2023-24 Spring
Authors
Erik Jensen
Kyrylo Korol
Sarah Manney
Katherine Viti
Lexi Curnin
Bryce Tuttle
Nathaniel Quigley
Tengqin (Max) Han
Garrett Walker
Frishta Quigley
Danny Sharp
Gabriel Bernardes
Moira Lieto
Gretchen Knaut
Book Publisher
Policy Practicum: Regulating Professional Enablers of Russia’s War on Ukraine (Law 809M)
Paragraphs

A burgeoning literature considers the domestic causes and consequences of democratic backsliding for public perceptions of democracy but has yet to fully examine the role of international factors in explaining these perceptions. Specifically, the effect of democratic backsliding in one democracy on public support for democratic principles in other countries has, thus far, defied theoretical and empirical investigation. Addressing this gap, we propose and test a theory of the effects of backsliding on global opinion in which information about democratic decline in one country can lead to increased support for authoritarian governance in another country. To test this, we use an original survey experiment in Israel where we test the effect of two narratives regarding the 2020 U.S. elections—one signaling democratic decline and one signaling democratic resilience—on support for authoritarian governance. We find that respondents exposed to the narrative of U.S. democratic decline were more supportive of authoritarian governance compared to respondents exposed to the narrative of democratic resilience. We further find marginal evidence that the respondents’ ideological preferences condition the effect of narrative exposure. Our findings suggest that the democratic backsliding literature has insufficiently explored the global consequences of domestic events and processes on democratic decline worldwide.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
International Journal of Public Opinion Research
Authors
Amnon Cavari
Amichai Magen
Benjamin Yoel
Number
Issue 2
Authors
Nora Sulots
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Francis Fukuyama, Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, is leading an effort to protect and reform the U.S. public service. He has organized a Working Group to Protect and Reform the Civil Service in response to plans elaborated in the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 to strip civil service protections from all federal workers and replace them with political loyalists in a future administration.

The Need for Reform


A group of nonpartisan experts and scholars recently convened at the National Academy of Public Administration to discuss civil service reform. This discussion is critical in light of plans to revive "Schedule F," an executive order that would reclassify many federal positions, remove civil service protections, and allow political loyalty to dictate hiring and firing.

A Better Vision


The Working Group proposes an alternative vision for a more effective federal workforce based on five principles:

  1. Agility: Modernizing outdated systems to adapt to technological, economic, and social changes.

  2. Accountability: Ensuring federal employees remain loyal to the Constitution while being responsive to elected officials.

  3. Collaboration: Leveraging skills and knowledge across various sectors, including private industries and universities.

  4. Outcomes: Focusing on producing real-world results valued by the public and simplifying government procedures.

  5. Capacity: Providing federal workers with the skills, training, and education needed to fulfill their missions effectively.
     

Risks of “Schedule F”


Reviving “Schedule F” would undermine these goals, promoting politicization over merit-based results. Government workers might avoid necessary risks and innovation if judged on political loyalty. The Working Group plans to detail further how the federal government can evolve to meet these challenges and become a 21st-century government.

Fukuyama and the Working Group call for support in protecting and reforming the civil service to ensure a competent, non-partisan, and effective federal workforce. Click here to read their statement in full.

Read More

Francis Fukuyama
News

Francis Fukuyama Honored with Lifetime Achievement Award

The Fred Riggs Award for Lifetime Achievement in Public Administration is an academic award given annually by the Section on International and Comparative Administration of the American Society for Public Administration.
Francis Fukuyama Honored with Lifetime Achievement Award
Solving Public Policy Problems
News

Reimagining Public Policy Education at Stanford and Beyond

The Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law is proud to announce the launch of a new free massive open online course aimed at providing participants with a foundational knowledge of the best means for enacting effective policy change in their home countries.
Reimagining Public Policy Education at Stanford and Beyond
All News button
1
Subtitle

A new working group led by Francis Fukuyama seeks to protect and reform the U.S. civil service by promoting nonpartisan, effective, and adaptable workforce practices while opposing politicization efforts like "Schedule F."

Authors
Heather Rahimi
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The evolving dynamics of technological leadership and the increasing strain on U.S.-China relations pose significant challenges for global innovation and economic stability, Craig Allen, President of the U.S.-China Business Council, told an audience at Stanford University on May 3, 2024. His speech delved into China's ambitious technological goals, the impact of U.S. export controls, and the future landscape of global innovation amidst rising geopolitical tensions.

Allen began with an anecdote about a conversation with the governor of one of China's poorest agricultural provinces. When asked about his economic priorities, the governor cited advanced technologies such as semiconductors and biotechnology, mirroring the sectors highlighted in the Made in China 2025 plan. This response underscored China's government's relentless focus on technological advancement across all levels of government, which Allen described as a "techno-utopian quest."

Allen traced the roots of China's techno-utopianism back over a century ago to the May 4th Movement, which called for a new culture based on science and democracy. He argued that this vision aligns perfectly with Marxist ideology and the Communist Party's current policies. "China’s leaders have long believed in the transformative power of technology," Allen noted, "a belief that is deeply embedded in their political and ideological fabric."

China’s leaders have long believed in the transformative power of technology, a belief that is deeply embedded in their political and ideological fabric.

Allen emphasized that China is not just an "innovation sponge" but has also become a leader in its own right. "China’s definition of innovation is tailored to its needs," he said, "differing significantly from the Silicon Valley model." He outlined five key points about the new productive forces that may distinguish Shenzhen from Silicon Valley:

  1. China recognizes that it is facing an acute labor shortage and is thus focusing on factory automation and efficient production in mature industries.
  2. China wants to spur innovation and create new industries at almost any cost.
  3. There is an overwhelming mandate for self-reliance and import substitution. 
  4. There is plenty of government money.  
  5. China plans to turn “data” into the “fifth factor of production”, behind – land, capital, labor, and entrepreneurship. 
     

China’s innovation is evident in its ambitious industrial policies, which are supported by substantial government funding and a strategic focus on self-reliance and import substitution.

Allen continued to discuss the implications of the U.S. export controls aimed at decoupling from China, highlighting the unintended consequences for American companies. He pointed out that unilateral export controls often harm U.S. firms more than their intended targets by reducing their customer base and long-term competitiveness. "We must recognize that these controls can backfire, hurting our own industries while China accelerates its push for technological independence," Allen warned.

We must recognize that these [export] controls can backfire, hurting our own industries while China accelerates its push for technological independence.

Another critical issue raised by Allen was the regulation of data flows. China's Cyber Administration has introduced stringent controls over cross-border data transfers. "The regulatory environment is becoming increasingly complex," Allen explained, "making it challenging for companies to maintain operational connectivity and compliance across borders."

From a corporate perspective, Allen urged companies to recognize the political realities and prepare for potential conflicts that could disrupt international trade. Many American firms are already scenario planning for severe sanctions, similar to those imposed on Russia, to ensure business continuity. "Strategic foresight is essential," he advised, "as geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China show no signs of abating."

Craig Allen's remarks were a reminder of the far-reaching implications of the competition for technology leadership between the U.S. and China. His insights underscored the need for a nuanced understanding of China's ambitions and the strategic adjustments required for American businesses to navigate this complex landscape. As the world witnesses unprecedented techno-economic competition, the stakes for both nations and the global economy could not be higher.

All views Craig Allen shared are his own and do not reflect the positions of the US-China Business Council.
 



Watch the Recorded Event   



Discover more from the inaugural SCCEI China Conference which brought together over 20 expert panelists from around the world and from across Stanford’s schools and disciplines, as well as experts and business leaders from Silicon Valley and the Bay Area to share insights on China's economic prospects. 
 


Read More

Lessons of History: The rise and fall of technology in Chinese history event on Thursday, 9/28/23 at 4:30pm with MIT prof. Yasheng Huang.
News

Lessons of History: The Rise and Fall of Technology in Chinese History

MIT Professor Yasheng Huang joined SCCEI and Stanford Libraries to deliver a talk examining the factors behind the rise and the fall of Chinese historical technology and lessons for today’s China.
Lessons of History: The Rise and Fall of Technology in Chinese History
Washington DC capital building
News

2023 China Business Conference: Washington’s View of China

SCCEI’s Impact Team attended the 13th Annual China Business Conference held in Washington, D.C. in May 2023. The team shares insights from the conference on issues raised surrounding the troubled U.S.-China relationship.
2023 China Business Conference: Washington’s View of China
All News button
1
Subtitle

Craig Allen, the President of the U.S.-China Business Council, spoke on the evolving dynamics of technological leadership between the U.S. and China and their implications for the rest of the world.

Authors
Kiyoteru Tsutsui
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

On March 6, 2024, we lost Professor Makoto Iokibe, a giant in U.S.-Japan relations. Iokibe was 80 years old, but he could easily have passed for 60,  starring in a senior baseball league and playing active roles in Japan’s foreign policy debates until that fateful March day. His sudden passing due to acute aortic dissection has been met with tremendous sadness and surprise, particularly since he had just attended a meeting a few hours earlier.

Iokibe was a renowned diplomatic historian best known for his pioneering studies on the United States’ post–World War II occupation of Japan. But he was so much more. He wrote broadly about Japan’s modern history, focusing on its international relations, from how Meiji leaders learned from the West to how Showa leaders misdirected the Japanese Empire in the 1930s and 40s but rebuilt post-WWII Japan into an economic superpower (The History of US-Japan Relations: From Perry to the Present). 

Having experienced the 1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake at his home in Kobe, he got involved in post-disaster policymaking and disaster management efforts, chairing the government committees for reconstruction after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake as well as after the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake. These issues became his second major focus, culminating in a recent publication, The Era of Great Disasters: Japan and Its Three Major Earthquakes

His influence extended beyond the scholarly world, as many leaders in recent decades sought his guidance in foreign policymaking. He was openly critical of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, but Koizumi, being a big fan of Iokibe’s works, listened to his advice on other foreign policy matters and appointed him the president of Japan’s National Defense Academy. Seeing that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was veering toward revisiting Japan’s official stance on World War II, particularly its victimization of Asia, he did everything he could to council Abe about the follies of disempowering Japan in the international community and empowering forces that sought to undermine Japan’s credibility as a global leader.

He was particularly close to Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, who, among recent prime ministers, has been most committed to managing challenging relations with the rising China. Iokibe played a leading role in Fukuda’s cabinet in mending Sino-Japanese ties and continued to attend to this increasingly important but thorny relationship. His stance about prioritizing the U.S.-Japan security alliance while maintaining China-Japan cooperation in the economic realm should continue to guide Japan’s foreign policy in the years and decades to come. 

On a personal note, Iokibe-sensei was a mentor and family friend who has helped and supported me in many important ways. Our grandparents knew each other as fellow economists. My father and Iokibe-sensei had been friends since graduate school. He and his late wife were always kind to my family, and I’ve known most of his children, most closely Kaoru Iokibe, a leading historian and political scientist of modern Japan at the University of Tokyo. 

Iokibe-sensei was always generous with his time with everyone around him, including myself, guiding me when I was not sure about my career direction and counseling me on contemporary political issues that Japan faces. Even though he was one of the most respected scholars with access to leaders of the highest echelon in Japan and in the US, he treated everyone with the same respect, humility, and infectious smile. 

I fondly remember hosting him for a talk multiple times at the University of Michigan where I was director of the Center for Japanese Studies, as well as at Stanford in 2005-06 when I was a visiting assistant professor at APARC. Always a sports fan and player, we would go out to watch a football game at a major stadium and he would also play baseball with our daughter in a neighborhood park. 

I never imagined that talking to him a few months ago at an award event in Tokyo would be the last time I’d see him, and I deeply regret that I couldn’t welcome him to Stanford again. His voice of reason will always whisper in my ears and, hopefully, in the ears of Japan’s policymakers. Thank you, Iokibe-sensei; I’m sure that you’re enjoying your time with your beloved wife up above. 
 

Read More

Portrait of Kiyoteru Tsutsui and a silhouette of the Toyko Syline at night.
News

Decoding Japan's Pulse: Insights from the Stanford Japan Barometer

The Asahi Shimbun is publishing a series highlighting the Stanford Japan Barometer, a periodic public opinion survey co-developed by Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui and Dartmouth College political scientist Charles Crabtree, which unveils nuanced preferences and evolving attitudes of the Japanese public on political, economic, and social issues.
Decoding Japan's Pulse: Insights from the Stanford Japan Barometer
Panelists discuss the US-Japan alliance
News

A Pivotal Partnership: The U.S.-Japan Alliance, Deterrence, and the Future of Taiwan

A panel discussion co-hosted by Shorenstein APARC and the Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA examined the key dynamics at play in the unfolding regional competition over power, influence, and the fate of Taiwan.
A Pivotal Partnership: The U.S.-Japan Alliance, Deterrence, and the Future of Taiwan
Prime Minister of Japan, Kishida Fumio (right), and the President of the Republic of Korea, Yoon Suk Yeol (left)
News

Korea, Japan Leaders Call for Global Cooperation in Advancing New Technologies, Clean Energy at Summit Discussion

At a historic meeting held at Stanford, the leaders of Japan and Korea discussed the perils and promises of new innovations and the importance of collaboration.
Korea, Japan Leaders Call for Global Cooperation in Advancing New Technologies, Clean Energy at Summit Discussion
Hero Image
All News button
1
Subtitle

Makoto Iokibe was an esteemed diplomatic historian best known for his pioneering studies on the U.S. post-World War II occupation of Japan, but his influence extended beyond the scholarly world.

Authors
Deliberative Democracy Lab
Nora Sulots
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab, housed within the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), in collaboration with Meta and the Behavioral Insights Team, has unveiled the results of the Meta Community Forum on Generative AI, based on the method of Deliberative Polling®. This groundbreaking event, part of a series of efforts by Meta to consult the public, engaged 1,545 participants in scientific samples from Brazil, Germany, Spain, and the United States. In each country, it offered the public’s views, both before and after deliberation, about future directions for the development of AI chatbots and how they should interact with humans.

“AI poses novel challenges, and these four national experiments revealed the public’s considered judgments about what it should — or should not — be able to use it for. National samples grappled with the pros and cons of each proposal and had their questions answered by panels of competing experts. This report shows what they concluded,” said James Fishkin, Senior Fellow at FSI and Director of the Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab.

AI poses novel challenges, and these four national experiments revealed the public’s considered judgments about what it should — or should not — be able to use it for.
James Fishkin
Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab

Much of the agenda focused on specific proposals answering ten basic questions, including:

  • Which sources should AI chatbots draw information from?
  • Should AI chatbots use the user’s past conversations to improve user experience?
  • Should AI chatbots use the user’s online activity to personalize interactions?
  • Should AI chatbots be designed to be human-like?
  • Should users be allowed to use AI chatbots for romantic relationships?


The deliberators in each country were convened on the Stanford Online Deliberation Platform, developed by the Stanford Crowdsourced Democracy Team. This platform is AI-assisted and moderates video-based discussions in small groups of ten. 

Participants noted a generally positive impact of AI, with an increase in positive perceptions post-forum. "This shift in viewpoint, especially notable among those previously unfamiliar with AI, underscores the value of informed discussion in shaping public opinion," remarked Alice Siu, Senior Research Scholar at FSI and Associate Director of the Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab.

The forum's methodical approach, with deliberations in 166 small groups and a separate control group for each country, ensured that the outcomes accurately reflected the effects of the deliberative process. Findings indicated that users and non-users of AI began to bridge their differences, aligning closer in their attitudes towards AI after the forum.

Siu also emphasized the significance of the event’s feedback, noting that "the high ratings from participants affirm the forum’s success in making complex discussions accessible and relevant. It is an encouraging sign for the future of democratic engagement with technology."

The Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab is dedicated to deepening our understanding of deliberative democracy processes and their application to critical contemporary issues like AI. The insights from this forum will inform ongoing research and policy recommendations, ensuring that AI evolves in a manner that considers diverse values and voices across the globe.

The project report is available below:

For detailed information on the forum’s conclusions or forthcoming projects, please reach out to James Fishkin (Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab) or Alice Siu (Associate Director, Stanford Deliberative Democracy Lab) or visit the Deliberative Democracy Lab website.

Read More

Collage of modern adults using smart phones in city with wifi signals
News

Results of First Global Deliberative Poll® Announced by Stanford’s Deliberative Democracy Lab

More than 6,300 deliberators from 32 countries and nine regions around the world participated in the Metaverse Community Forum on Bullying and Harassment.
Results of First Global Deliberative Poll® Announced by Stanford’s Deliberative Democracy Lab
A voter casts their ballot in the Kentucky Primary Elections at Central High School on May 16, 2023 in Louisville, Kentucky.
Q&As

New National Deliberative Poll Shows Bipartisan Support for Polarizing Issues Affecting American Democracy

"America in One Room: Democratic Reform" polled participants before and after deliberation to gauge their opinions on democratic reform initiatives, including voter access and voting protections, non-partisan election administration, protecting against election interference, Supreme Court reform, and more. The results show many significant changes toward bipartisan agreement, even on the most contentious issues.
New National Deliberative Poll Shows Bipartisan Support for Polarizing Issues Affecting American Democracy
Alice Siu delivers a TEDxStanford talk
News

Deliberative Polling: A Path to Bridging Divides

In a TEDxStanford talk, Alice Siu discusses how applying and spreading deliberative democracy can better engage us all in our shared public problems.
Deliberative Polling: A Path to Bridging Divides
All News button
1
Subtitle

A multinational Deliberative Poll unveils the global public's nuanced views on AI chatbots and their integration into society.

Date Label

Encina Hall, C139-c
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

650.497.9354
0
portrait1_-_marissa_berrong.png

Marissa is the Senior Administrative & Finance Associate at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. Marissa joined Stanford in 2017 and has worked in the School of Medicine Facilities, The Hasso Plattner Institute of Design, and the Office of Research Administration. Prior to her time at Stanford, she spent nine years teaching English as a Second Language in South Korea. Marissa holds a Bachelor of Arts in Film Theory from the University of Oklahoma. She loves reading, music, and cuddling her Old English Sheepdog.

Senior Administrative & Finance Associate, CDDRL
Authors
Rachel Owens
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Why do politicians invest in infrastructure projects that will not be completed during their time in office? In a CDDRL seminar series talk, Harvard University Professor of Government Alisha Holland addressed the question, shedding light on how the advent of public-private partnerships (PPPs) has shifted politicians’ orientation toward infrastructure projects.  

According to Holland, infrastructure investment has been on the rise in the developing world despite witnessing a steady decline in advanced industrial democracies. Why? The influx of PPPs has made infrastructure projects appealing to politicians, who have utilized such contracts to raise funds for electoral campaigns and delay project costs.

In the past, infrastructure projects were largely aimed at creating jobs for a given politician’s base of supporters and would-be voters. Thus, politicians were keen on seeing the successful completion of such projects. In contrast, today, infrastructure projects have become vehicles, not for securing votes, but for campaign finance, thanks to the PPP framework and the campaign donations it has helped generate for politicians, albeit indirectly. Thus, the mere launching of such projects (regardless of their completion) has become a political end in and of itself.

Infrastructure, Holland indicated, is at the heart of salient questions surrounding democracy, development, and state capacity. It also plays a central role in campaign finance in many developing democracies.  

Conventional wisdom suggests that politicians want to inaugurate infrastructure projects that employ constituents and future voters. If true, politicians should be signing contracts for such projects early in their terms to allow time for job creation before reelection rolls around. But this does not appear to be the case. In Latin American countries where presidents can run for reelection, two-thirds of contracts occur in the last 18 months before an election. 

Holland argued that this trend is rooted in governments’ shifting role in infrastructure. Whereas the state had long led infrastructure projects and hired directly with the goal of job creation, neoliberal reforms in the 1990s made governments rely more heavily on private contractors. Accordingly, the incentive structure facing politicians has changed. They have become less interested in creating jobs for supporters and more interested in securing campaign donations through the process of contracting private sector entities. The partnership with the private sector, moreover, has allowed politicians to hide project costs and shift liabilities to future administrations. The result is an influx of high-cost infrastructure projects with limited utility.

On a broader level, Holland’s findings help explain the widespread shift from political patronage to vote-buying in many countries. The advent of state-private sector partnerships has enabled politicians to raise the cash needed to fund vote-buying machines at a large scale.

How can the problem be mitigated? Much of the answer revolves around “inhibitory institutions.” These institutions could veto unwieldy projects before their commencement, as distinct from traditional mechanisms of horizontal accountability, like audit courts, which can only intervene after the damage is done.

Read More

Sophie Richardson
News

The Global Dimensions of the Chinese Government Human Rights Abuses

Why have democracies failed in curtailing Xi Jinping’s human rights abuses? And how can they better insulate themselves from Beijing's transnational threats? CDDRL Visiting Scholar and former China Director at Human Rights Watch Sophie Richardson presented her research on the Chinese government’s deteriorating human rights record.
The Global Dimensions of the Chinese Government Human Rights Abuses
Josiah Ober presents during a CDDRL research seminar on February 22, 2024.
News

The Civic Bargain and Democratic Survival

How do democracies arise, and what conditions promote their survival? In a CDDRL seminar series talk, Professor of Political Science and Classics Josiah Ober addressed this question, drawing on his latest book, “The Civic Bargain: How Democracy Survives” (Princeton University Press), co-authored with Brook Manville.
The Civic Bargain and Democratic Survival
Hero Image
All News button
1
Subtitle

Harvard University Professor of Government Alisha Holland explains how the advent of public-private partnerships has shifted politicians’ orientation toward infrastructure projects.

Date Label
Subscribe to United States