Does India have what it takes to be a military player in Asia?
CISAC Fellow Vipin Narang and Paul Staniland are doubtful; India's bureaucracy and domestic politics overshadow its ambitions.
Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) is pleased to announce that undergraduate senior honors student, Anna Barrett Schickele, received the Firestone Medal for Excellence in Undergraduate Research. This university award is given to the top ten percent of honors theses in social science, science, and engineering.
Schickele's thesis entitled, "One Drop At A Time," examines the factors that inform farmers' decisions to use modern irrigation systems in the Lurín Valley of Peru, where she spent several months conducting fieldwork with a Lima-based NGO. Schickele — a public policy major —was able to collect primary data through interviews with farmers and fieldworkers to inform her research study that includes policy recommendations to the NGO community and government officials.
 |
| Anna Schickele (center) with Francis Fukuyama (left) and Larry Diamond (right). |
Martin Carnoy, the Vida Jacks Professor of Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, served as Schickele's thesis advisor together with Rosamond L. Naylor, the director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment at FSI.
"Ana's thesis is an important contribution to our understanding of the barriers and openings for stimulating agricultural development among subsistence farmers," said Carnoy. "Her original insights make the thesis particularly valuable for those addressing development issues in the world’s poorest regions."
In August, Schickele will begin a research position at the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
CDDRL's best thesis award was given to Kabir Sawhney, a management science and engineering major, who wrote his thesis on the effect of regime type and the propensity to default on sovereign debt. Advised by Professor of Political Science Gary Cox, Swahney cited the cases of Romania in the 1980s and more recently of Greece to conclude that the quality of government — rather than regime type alone — determines whether a country chooses to default.
After graduation. Sawhney will join the consulting firm Accenture as an analyst in their San Francisco office.
Three honors students' received fellowships from Stanford's Haas Center of Public Service to pursue public service-related work after graduation. Keith Calix and Imani Franklin both received the Tom Ford Fellowship in Philanthropy and will be working in New York for grant-making foundations, and Lina Hidalgo received the Omidyar Network Postgraduate Fellowship to work with an international organization.
The CDDRL Undergraduate Senior Honors Program is an interdisciplinary honors program led by Francis Fukuyama, the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at FSI. The program recruits a diverse group of talented students interested in writing original theses on topics impacting the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law. During the year-long program, students write their thesis in consultation with a CDDRL faculty member, participate in research workshops, and travel to Washington, D.C. for "honors college."
The nine members of the graduating class of 2013 CDDRL undergraduate honors students include:
|
Keith Calix
|
International Relations |
Wie is ek? Coloured Identity and Youth Involvement in Gangsterism in Cape Town, South Africa Advisor: Prudence Carter |
|
Vincent Chen
|
Earth Systems; Economics |
Advisor: Larry Diamond |
|
Holly Fetter
|
Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity |
Advisor: Jean Oi |
|
Imani Franklin
|
International Relations |
Advisor: Allyson Hobbs |
|
Mariah Halperin
|
History |
Religion and the State: Turkey under the AKP Advisor: Larry Diamond |
|
Thomas Hendee
|
Human Biology |
The Health of Pacification: A Review of the Pacifying Police Unit program in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Advisors: Beatriz Magaloni & Paul Wise |
|
Lina Hidalgo
|
Political Science |
Tiananmen or Tahrir? A Comparative Study of Military Intervention Against Popular Protest Advisors: Jean Oi & Lisa Blaydes |
|
Kabir Sawhney
|
Management Science and Engineering |
Repayment and Regimes: The Effect of Regime Type on Propensity to Default on Sovereign Debt Advisor: Gary Cox |
|
Anna Schickele
|
Public Policy |
One Drop at a Time: Diffusion of Modern Irrigation Technology in the Lurín Valley, Peru Advisors: Martin Carnoy & Roz Naylor |
The Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at Stanford University is pleased to announce the 2014 class of undergraduate senior honors students.
Honors students will spend four quarters participating in research seminars to refine their proposed thesis topic, while working in consultation with a CDDRL faculty advisor to supervise their project. In September, the group will travel to Washington, D.C. for honors college where they will visit leading government and development organizations to witness policymaking in practice and consult with key decision-makers.
Please join CDDRL in congratulating the 2014 Senior Honors students and welcoming them to the Center.
Below are profiles of the nine honors students highlighting their academic interests, why they applied to CDDRL, and some fun facts.
Major: History, minor in East Asian Studies
Hometown: Dallas, TX
Thesis Title: How do the concepts of law and morality in China reflect and impact the development of private property rights, specifically urban land-use rights, in the post-Mao era?
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? In the Western tradition, clarification of property rights is an essential catalyst for economic development and foundation for the rule of law. China’s unparalleled economic growth and rapid urbanization since the beginning of the reform era offers a counterpoint experience, which I hope to examine through the lens of land use rights, since, historically and currently, land ownership has played a crucial role in determining social security and wealth in Chinese society. My thesis will combine historical and qualitative analysis and examination of the current real property situation in China’s urban areas, which should contribute perspective to the broader study of China’s development as well as urban property rights in emerging countries.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? An opportunity to work under the guidance of the CDDRL faculty and alongside fellow honors students in an interdisciplinary program provides an ideal and challenging intellectual environment. In addition, CDDRL’s focus on development and its inextricable ties to good governance offers a unique insight into various development situations, their associated successes, shortcomings, and consequences for social improvement.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: I hope to attend law school after Stanford, work and live abroad, and pursue a career related to China.
What are your summer research plans: I will be working in a law firm in Shanghai this summer and conducting research in both Shanghai and Beijing.
Fun fact about yourself: I can consume more ice cream than a Ben and Jerry’s factory tour group.
Major: Science, Technology & Society
Hometown: New York City, NY
Thesis Title: Blended ROI? Analyzing the economic and social returns of private equity investment in emerging markets
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? For my honors thesis I plan to research private equity investments in sub-Saharan Africa. I hope to investigate whether private equity investments (and partnerships with international financial institutions such as the IFC and World Bank) generate robust returns for the investors as well as catalyze development in their communities. I hope that my thesis, while adding to the literature in the field, will more importantly serve as support for further investment in developing economies and promote the power of impact investing.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? The people! I am thrilled to have the opportunity to be mentored by some of Stanford’s most renowned faculty and I am excited to learn from my fellow undergraduates in the CDDRL.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: For my career, I would love to be able to combine my interest in finance and my interest in development. I hope to travel, attend business school, and be a socially responsible investor.
What are your summer research plans: First I will be interning in investment banking in New York and then I hope to head to South Africa to conduct some field research for my thesis!
Fun fact about yourself: I spent this past summer working in Dubai and had the opportunity to ride a camel and play with penguins!
Major: International Relations, minor in Economics
Hometown: Jaffna, Sri Lanka
Thesis Title: The impact of civil war on food production in Sri Lanka
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? War can pose serious threats to food security within a country. These threats stem from disruption of the economy and institutions as well as from policy changes. It is through understanding the impacts of these factors on food security that food insecurity and hunger can be alleviated or avoided. The understanding gained from this work can guide development work.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? My research on the impact of war cannot be understood using concepts drawn only from economics or politics. CDDRL views issues using a broader, integrated lens of economics, politics, and law, and it provides a wonderful forum that brings senior scholars and student researchers pursuing a wide variety of topics together for discussions. This interdisciplinary environment offers the perfect academic home for me.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: I hope to pursue doctoral studies either in international economics or development economics. I would like to become a professor and pursue research and development work in Asia.
What are your summer research plans: I will be collecting and analyzing food production data and interviewing policy experts and farmers in Sri Lanka so that I can better understand the changes in food economy that results from the civil war in Sri Lanka.
Fun fact about yourself: I grew up learning sword fighting in the ancient tradition of Tamil kingdom. I also enjoy listening to carnatic music, and playing Veena.
Major: International Relations
Hometown: Charlotte, NC
Thesis Title: How is the Media Used to Advocate for Land Rights in Vietnam?
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? Civil society actors are using the media network in Vietnam - from the state-owned press to the increasingly vocal blogosphere - to advocate for policy change on land rights. My research will contribute to the literature on how information technology is affecting the media and how it can be directed towards positive social impact.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? I want my undergraduate education to culminate in a project in which I take ownership of my learning and contribute to scholarly knowledge on a topic that is meaningful to me. I am not sure if grad school lies in the future, and the honors program is a wonderful opportunity to have the resources of the university and the mentorship of the CDDRL community to ask these questions.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: I hope that the process of completing a thesis will connect me with the resources to pursue my interest in democratic development and liberation technology.
What are your summer research plans: I will be in Vietnam collecting data for my research. I also have plans to travel to Cambodia, Thailand, and Singapore!
Fun fact about yourself: I coincidentally saw Professor Larry Diamond in Hue, Vietnam when I was traveling there. I believe it was fate, and I knew I had to join the CDDRL community and return to Vietnam to work with him on my thesis!
Major: International Relations, minor in Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity
Hometown: San Jose, CA
Thesis Title: How the Chain of Command Structure of the U.S. Military Affects the Reporting and Prosecution of Internal Sexual Assault Cases
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? Though the Department of Defense observes a “zero tolerance policy,” in the year 2011 alone 3,191 military sexual assaults were reported. Because most assaults are not reported, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta estimates that the number is closer to 19,000, translating into a 16.7% reporting rate. Some legislation has suggested developing joint jurisdiction between the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice to prosecute sexual assault cases. Through my thesis, I hope to explore the "rule of law" aspect of the zero tolerance policy, and assess the effects of internal prosecution.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? So far, I have enjoyed deepening my understanding of research methods through the CDDRL weekly seminar. I am drawn to the program because of its interdisciplinary nature that will allow me to blend both quantitative and qualitative approaches to research.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: I hope to study human rights law and spend considerable time studying and working abroad.
What are your summer research plans: I will be interviewing members of the military in different regions of the United States, including California and Washington, DC.
Fun fact about yourself: I enjoy cooking vegetarian food and experimenting with new recipes!
Major: International Relations
Hometown: Fremont, CA and Bangalore, India
Thesis Title: Anti-Americanism in Pakistan
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? I believe that the general American narrative on anti-American perceptions lacks nuance, and I hope to present a more complex picture with a framework of the various anti-Americanisms, particularly in Pakistan, a critical geo-political partner to the U.S. I hope such a study can help inform U.S. foreign policy for future relationships with Pakistan and other strategic conflict-ridden states in the non-Western world, to minimize levels of distrust and promote mutual respect and sustainable relations.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? I have always been a fan of the work of CDDRL and its fellows throughout my time at Stanford. As a research assistant for international human rights expert Helen Stacy, I understood the value of close interactions and guidance from scholars at CDDRL. The honors program provided the perfect opportunity to pursue my research passion, along with the guidance of some of the world's most respected scholars in the field.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: To work in the foreign policy and international human rights space in Washington D.C. and abroad
What are your summer research plans: I will conduct virtual interviews with individuals in Pakistan, and prepare for a research trip to Islamabad in December. I will also be interning at the Ashoka Foundation in Caracas, Venezuela on social entrepreneurship projects, and the Ford Foundation in New Delhi, India, on governance projects.
Fun fact about yourself: I've visited 23 countries, speak four languages, and grew up in India and the US. I was voted "most likely to be a future leader" in fourth grade.
Major: Political Science
Hometown: Newbury Park, CA
Thesis Title: The Origins of Political Gridlock- Institutional and Societal Mechanisms that Inhibit Government Productivity in the United States
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? Gridlock has become a paralyzing constraint to our current American political institutions, but little has been done in an attempt to overcome such a significant strain to our democratic system. Legislative productivity and representation in government have been compromised by our government's inability to make, pass and execute laws. In many ways, political gridlock blocks the government from affecting the will of the people and effectively addressing its constituents needs.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? The interdisciplinary nature of the program was truly key for the thesis I wanted to write. I appreciate the freedom to use different methods to approach relevant questions about society and government, and the CDDRL faculty is the best resource any Stanford student could ask for.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: I plan to attend law school after Stanford, but also hope to do some campaign work during the 2014 midterm elections. I hope to pursue a career in national politics and eventually be in a position to implement the ideas and theories my thesis and CDDRL endorses for better democracy and governance.
What are your summer research plans: I will be in Washington D.C. this summer working for Congressman Xavier Becerra, and hope to use my time in D.C. to conduct interviews with prominent political thinkers and actors.
Fun fact about yourself: I was a Stanford Dollie 2011-2012.
Belina Tang
Major: Economics & Public Policy
Hometown: San Jose, CA
Thesis Title: The Implications of Women Policymakers in a Natural Experiment in Lesotho
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? A lot of previous research has shown that, when it comes to making decisions on how to allocate resources, women, at both the household and government-level, make different decisions than males do, particularly for health and education-related public goods. If that's also a result of giving women power in local government in an African country, then increasing the institutional power of women could represent a strong mechanism through which we can improve development indicators in the world's poorest region.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? The inspiring cohort of students I will be able to work with and learn from (and the abundance of free lunches!).
Future aspiration post-Stanford: To do research with implications for the lives of individuals in poverty.
What are your summer research plans: I will be doing fieldwork in Lesotho in July and August.
Fun fact about yourself: My name in Chinese tells a story of how many small and seemingly insignificant streams can flow together to form a large and powerful one - I like to think this is a metaphor for my life!
Major: International Relations
Hometown: Kathmandu, Nepal
Thesis Title: The role and importance of political parties in consolidating democracy with a focus on Nepal and potentially South Africa and Ghana
Why is this topic important to the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law? Political parties are an integral part of democracies anywhere, but even so in countries undergoing democratic transition. Nepal has already had two failed "experimentations" with democracy in the past fifty years. The historic elections of 2008 have paved the way for Nepal to move forward and consolidate democracy. Going forward, it will be crucial for political parties to play their part in strengthening democracy in Nepal and to represent the people of the country to the best of their abilities.
What attracted you to the CDDRL undergrad honors program? Other than the free lunches, it would have to be the faculty and the interdisciplinary aspect of the program. The faculty as well as inter-student engagement makes the program very unique and appealing.
Future aspiration post-Stanford: Pursue further studies in business and public policy as well as have a chance to travel extensively within Nepal.
What are your summer research plans: I will be doing some preliminary research in Nepal during the two weeks I am there this summer. I also hope to gather data and learn about the political parties in Ghana during my time as a Stanford in Government (SIG) Fellow at the Center for Democratic Development.
Fun fact about yourself: I enjoy playing and watching cricket and would be down to watch a Hindi film any time of day.
| Image
|
| Dr. Moretti's book, The New Geography of Jobs, was described by Forbes magazine as “easily the most important read of 2012.” |
Americans frequently debate why wages are growing for the college-educated but declining for those with less education. What is less well-known is that communities and local labor markets are also diverging economically at an accelerating rate.
A closer look at the 300-plus metropolitan areas of the United States shows that Americans with high school degrees who work in communities dominated by innovative industries actually make more, on average, than the college graduates working in communities dominated by manufacturing industries, according to research by University of California, Berkeley economist Enrico Moretti, the author of The New Geography of Jobs, a book that Forbes magazine called “easily the most important read of 2012.” In the San Jose metropolitan area, for example, a high school graduate averages $68,009, compared with the $65,411 that is average for a college graduate in Bakersfield, Calif.
Some places have always been more prosperous than others, but these differences have increased more rapidly over the last 30 years as the gross domestic product and patents for new technologies have concentrated in two to three dozen communities that Moretti identifies as “brain hubs” or “innovation clusters.”
In these clusters, highly specialized innovation workers, such as engineers and designers, generate about three times as many local jobs for service workers ― such as doctors, carpenters, and waitresses ― as do manufacturing workers, Moretti said recently when speaking at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Here are edited excerpts from Moretti’s answers to questions from the Stanford audience.
What causes clusters to emerge?
This is a very active area of research, but I think fundamentally, there are three major reasons why clustering takes place. One is the thick labor market effect. If you are in a very highly specialized position, you want to be in a labor market where there are a lot of employers looking for workers, and a lot of workers looking for employers. The match between employer and employee tends to be more productive, more creative and innovative in thicker labor markets.
It is the same thing for the vendors, the providers of intermediate services. Companies in the Silicon Valley will find very specialized IP lawyers, lab services, and shipping services that focus on that niche of the industry. And because they are so specialized, they're particularly good at what they're doing.
The third factor is what economists call human capital spillovers ― the fact that people learn from their colleagues, random encounters in a coffee shop, at a party, from their children, and so on. There's a lot of sociological evidence that this is one of the attractions of Silicon Valley. You're always near other people who are at the frontier, so you tend to exchange information. Sometimes it's information about job openings. Sometimes it’s information about what you're doing, what type of technology you're adopting, what type of research you are doing. And this, as you can imagine, is important for R&D, for innovation.
So these three forces are crucial, and that means that localities that already have a lot of innovation tend to attract even more workers and even more employers. That further strengthens their virtuous circle.
| Image
|
| Dr. Enrico Moretti leading a seminar organized by the Stanford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) of the Stanford Graduate School of Business as part of its Silicon Valley Project. |
Are these clusters sustainable forever?
Probably not. Previous clusters have collapsed in spectacular ways. The Silicon Valley of the 1950s was Detroit. People have researched the rise of Detroit, and it mimics very well the rise of Silicon Valley in terms of the amount of innovation, the type of engineering, the type of salaries they were paying. In the 1950s, if you were a car engineer, there wasn't any better place in the world to be, and if you were a car company, you had to be there. But then, of course, it collapsed.
In my book, I have a chapter on the difference between Detroit and Silicon Valley. This region has kept reinventing itself in ways that are remarkable. It was all orchards, and then it became all hardware, and then it became all software. And now it's becoming something else: social media and biotech and clean tech. Some types of clusters don't survive big negative shocks, and other clusters are able to leverage themselves into the next thing.
Is there a clean energy cluster that is structurally different from an internet or an IT or a biotech cluster? Or are they all intermingled?
Typically, clusters are very specialized. Silicon Valley is the exception in the sense that there are so many different technologies. More typical examples are Boise, Idaho, for radio technology or Portland, Oregon, for semiconductors. Seattle has a combination of software and now a growing body of life sciences. Boston is mostly life science. D.C. is a remarkable story. It's very diversified now in terms of private-sector innovation, but most clusters are going to be small pockets of one industry.
Does your argument hold for high-paid but non-high-tech sectors? I was thinking of New York being a financial sector or L.A. being entertainment, and Houston being oil and gas. Then you mentioned Washington, D.C. That's government.
I would argue that three you mentioned would belong to what I define as innovation sectors in the following sense: Finance in New York is not bank tellers; it’s people who invent new products, new technology, and new ways of making things. They are unique, and you can't easily reproduce the cluster somewhere else. That certainly applies to entertainment, especially the digital part of entertainment that is the fastest-growing part of entertainment jobs.
It also applies to the D.C. cluster. The growth of D.C. over the last 20 years is mostly driven by private-sector headquarters moving there, and an educated labor force. Some of the companies are military contractors. Some companies are life science. They're anchored by the National Institutes of Health being there, and other government agencies. But most of the growth actually comes from the private sector.
Now oil, Houston, I'm not sure. I don't know how strong these clustering forces are for these type of jobs. I would imagine ― and we're not talking about the guy who drills, but it's more like the guy who plans where to drill ― to the extent that there is a high component of innovation that makes something that is unique, I would say it applies.
If I'm a high-tech worker, how am I responsible for creating five other jobs? It’s hard for me to accept there are five.
The way to interpret the multiplier is to imagine dropping 1,000 innovation jobs in one city but not in another, and then going back 10 years later to measure how many additional local service jobs there are in the city that experienced that innovation-sector drop of jobs. So it's a long-run effect, but it’s not impossible for three reasons.
One is that the average high-tech worker tends to do very, very well, and people who are wealthy tend to spend a large fraction of their salary on personal and local services. They tend to go to restaurants and movies, and to use taxis and therapists and doctors on average more than people who are paid less.
The second reason is high-tech companies themselves employ a lot of local services; everything from security guards to IP lawyers, from the janitor to the very specialized consultant. High-tech companies tend to use more services than manufacturing companies.
The third reason is the clustering effect. Once you attract one of those high-tech workers, then in the medium to long run, you're going to be attracting even more of those high-tech workers and companies, which will further increase your multiplier. So it's a long-run number, measured over a 10-year period.
You pointed out that the salaries of the less-educated part of the local population are higher in those places that do have a lot of the innovation. How is that reconciled with the drastic drop over 30 years in their national average compensation?
We don't have enough brain hubs where innovation is concentrated. We have 320 metro areas in the U.S., and probably, by my definition, we have 15 to 20 brain hubs. In those places, you have brisk job creation outside the innovation sector, and you have decent wages for people outside. But we also have a big chunk of the country producing not very much, in part because manufacturing jobs have been shrinking, and innovation hasn't really taken place.
So what hope is there for these areas?
That's a million-dollar question. It's tough because, in some sense, if this clustering effect is particularly strong, it's good news for places like here, but it's terrible news for places like Flint or Detroit. A successful local labor market has a very nice equilibrium, where you have a lot of skilled workers who want to go there and a lot of innovative employers who want to go there. It's really hard to re-create somewhere else.
And it's not like we're not trying. We're spending $15 to $18 billion annually in what economists call place-based policies, which are essentially subsidies to try to attract employers to these areas. The idea being: “They're not coming, so if we just break this vicious circle, if we just bring some, then the clustering effect starts taking off. We can effectively create innovation hubs where they don't exist.”
I haven't found one example of an innovation hub in the U.S. that has been created by deliberate policy that says, "We're going to create an innovation hub here." Taiwan might be a good success story. It’s hard to get data, but Taiwan was an agricultural economy in the 1960s that had very little innovation. Then in the 1970s, it created enormous government subsidies for semiconductors and a lot of other technologies. All the others didn't pan out, but semiconductors worked. Taiwan is still putting money in, so it's not exactly clear whether it's a perfect example. Picking the next big thing is very hard for the venture capitalist. It's virtually impossible for the government worker.
What's the situation in other regions around the world ?
Obviously, India and China are major success stories, but that doesn't mean that this clustering effect is not at play within those countries. A different example is Italy, where I am from. Italy has been the Detroit in this story. It had a very strong pharmaceutical sector in the 1980s, and a smaller computer cluster. Once the pharmaceutical industry started becoming global, you saw mergers and a concentration of the industry’s R&D in a few places. I know because my dad was employed there, and his lab was first moved to Sweden and then to New Jersey.
I think the same is happening throughout many countries in continental Europe, and even in places like China and India, which have success stories but enormous regional differences. The innovative part of the Chinese economy is concentrated in a handful of megalopolises.
This is an interesting paradox of the current economy. Probably the best news of the last 20 years globally is the vast increase in the standard of living in places like China and India and Brazil, so there's certainly been a convergence in the standard of living when you compare nations. But when you look within those developing nations, you see the same great divergence that you see here.
Enrico Moretti is professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he holds the Michael Peevey and Donald Vial Career Development Chair in Labor Economics. He is also director of the Infrastructure and Urbanization Program at the International Growth Centre at the London School of Economics and Oxford University. His talk at Stanford was hosted by the Stanford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, located in the Graduate School of Business.
Professor Enrico Moretti
Kathleen O'Toole is a journalist who frequently writes about social science. She is currently assistant editorial director of marketing and communications at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.
The Program on Human Rights at Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), together with the McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society, are pleased to introduce the 2013 Summer Human Rights Fellows. These four remarkable Stanford undergraduates were selected from a competitive pool of applicants to spend the summer serving in organizations advancing human rights work around the world.
The Summer Human Rights Fellowship enables undergraduate students to gain practical experience at international organizations that promote, monitor, evaluate, or advance human rights work. In order to apply, potential fellows must identify their ideal placement and work with the partner to ensure there is a viable project that allows the student to contribute meaningfully to the organization’s work. This year, the fellows will be working on the ground in India, Jordan, and Guatemala with informal workers, at-risk children, trafficking victims, and using technology to advance social justice worldwide. Upon their return to Stanford next year, each of the Human Rights Fellows will participate in campus events to describe their work.
Below are the profiles of our four fellows highlighting their summer projects, interest in human rights and some fun facts. Click here to learn more about the fellowship program.
Major: Computer Science
Hometown: Plano, Texas
Tell us about your project. I'll be working with Visualizing Justice in Amman, Jordan. The mission of Visualizing Justice is to empower people worldwide to create visual stories for social justice and human rights. My mission for the summer is to exploit new software innovations in web development to augment Visualizing Justice’s data visualization capabilities, thus making their stories more expressive and accessible worldwide.
What first sparked your interest in human rights? I think there is a disconnect between the technologies we develop and the societies we live in, and that gap is most noticeable in the area of human rights. In particular, our innovations in technology have created an information overload problem. We are now inundated with information about various human rights issues, but struggle for a more nuanced or contextualized understanding of those issues. Also, the quality of the information has not kept up with the growth in quantity. If we can invest the time to build better tools and re-couple the quality of information with its quantity, then we, as a society, can make a lot more progress in the field of human rights.
What are your post-Stanford aspirations? I want to develop new tools that make it easier for individuals to create compelling data visualizations, especially those that lie outside the traditional domains of technology.
Fun fact about yourself: I can solve a Rubik's cube in under a minute.
Major: Human Biology
Hometown: Washington, D.C.
Tell us about your project. I’m traveling to Ahmedabad, India to work with Self-Employed Women's Association (SEWA), a union of 1.4 million informal economy workers, which provide community-driven socioeconomic services, including healthcare, local banking, social security, and housing to marginalized groups. Given my interest in public health, I will focus on SEWA’s initiatives responding to people's inherent right to a healthy life, working with the health team to analyze and document the changing role of front-line health workers who deliver care to expecting mothers. I aim to assess the effectiveness of services provided by three unique classes of health workers, and identify how their knowledge and skills can be harnessed to deliver primary health care to a broad swath of the rural and urban population.
What first sparked your interest in human rights? The day of my 16th birthday found me waiting in line at the DMV in Washington, DC. When I reached the front of the line, I was given one final form to fill out. I mindlessly scribbled my name and date of birth before I stumbled upon a question that I did not know the answer to: “Would you like to be an organ donor?” This was my first exposure to a human rights issue that I hope to pursue well into the future. Upon doing some research, I became hooked on the topic of organ donation. The future human biology major in me enjoyed reading about the dire need for kidneys in the US, but the humanitarian in me found another area of the debate more gripping – the black market for organs.
What are your post-Stanford aspirations? Find a job that allows me to combine my interests in medicine and human rights!
Fun fact about yourself: My parents made me take classes in juggling and unicycling growing up in case the whole college thing didn't work out.
Major: Human Biology (planned)
Hometown: Vienna, Austria
Tell us about your project. I will be traveling to Guatemala to work with Kids Alive, a nonprofit that works to rescue orphans and at-risk children. In Guatemala, they run a care home for girls who have been abandoned or abused – often in the form of forced labor and/or physical and sexual abuse. I will be working with the girls in the care home, and also evaluating a program that works to continue supporting the girls who have returned home.
What first sparked your interest in human rights? Throughout high school, I volunteered at a care home in Romania for women and girls who had experienced abuse. This first exposure to drastic poverty sparked my interest in social work and development, and led me to explore different aspects of human rights. Later in high school, I taught summer school in the Dominican Republic to at-risk children, where exposure to obvious injustice solidified my passion to fight for human rights. As a Christian, I believe that I have a responsibility to help those less fortunate – and fighting for human rights is an obvious way to do this!
What are your post-Stanford aspirations? I hope to study international human rights law and eventually work combatting human trafficking around the world.
Fun fact about yourself: I get to spend my vacations in Seoul, South Korea where my family currently lives.
Major: Economics
Hometown: New Delhi, India
Tell us about your project. I am going to be working with Apne Aap: Women Worldwide, an anti-trafficking NGO based in Forbesganj, India. Forbesganj is in close proximity to the Indo-Nepalese border, which has led to its emergence as a source, transit center, and destination for women trafficked for prostitution. I have spent the past two quarters designing an interactive human rights education curriculum focused on sex trafficking, which I will use in Forbesganj to engage with at-risk girls who are the daughters of sex workers in the red light district, as well as 12-14 year-old girls belonging to the Nutt (lower-caste) community. Simultaneously, I will be working with older men, women and community leaders, with the goal of making preliminary headway into a community-wide anti-trafficking strategy.
What first sparked your interest in human rights? I cannot count the number of times that I have been verbally harassed, whistled at or sung to by strange men in the course of my fairly “normal” existence as a middle-class girl in India. My passion for wanting to ensure that women are able to demand and access a life of dignity is a consequence of having grown up in a society that normalizes aggression against us. This prompted me to intern at the National Human Rights Commission of India, where I spent my time reading reports on trafficking, examining anti-trafficking legislation, and talking to activists and victims of human rights violations. I realized we critically need to place greater focus on the prevention of violations and develop a true, nuanced appreciation for the concept of human rights – a change I am hoping to effect through this fellowship.
What are your post-Stanford aspirations? A few years down the line, I hope to work as a policymaker advancing women’s rights in India.
Fun fact about yourself: I am one of two—I have a twin sister named Anima, who attends medical school in India.
Comparative, policy-oriented research aimed at improving health care and the overall quality of life across the Asia-Pacific region is at the heart of AHPP’s mission and activities. As a research program within a world-class university, focusing exclusively on comparative health policy in Asia, it is unique. AHPP aims to provide evidence for addressing key health policy challenges in the Asia-Pacific, from links between poverty and ill health, to improving “value for money” and defining appropriate government and market roles in health systems. The program brings researchers to Stanford for on-site collaboration, and creates opportunities for Stanford students to conduct research in and about Asia.
The study of comparative health policy at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) dates back almost a quarter century, with its roots in the Comparative Health Care Policy Research Project inaugurated in 1990. Starting with pioneering research on health economics in Japan, the program has expanded since then to encompass research on health policy and demographic change throughout the region, albeit with a continuing focus on East Asia in comparative perspective.
Collaborative initiatives and global researchers
AHPP is also analyzing evidence on health service delivery and financing in the Asia-Pacific region, such as the impact of expanding insurance coverage, reforming provider payment incentives, and contracting with the private sector. In addition, the program is conducting a comparative analysis of the historical development of health care institutions — like physician drug dispensing and recent reforms to separate prescribing from dispensing. AHPP also sponsors collaborative initiatives to address critical global health issues, including tobacco control, promotion of child health, and control of infectious diseases.
Preparing future health care policy experts
In addition to numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, recent AHPP publications include Aging Asia: The Economic and Social Implications of Rapid Demographic Change in China, Japan, and South Korea and Prescribing Cultures and Pharmaceutical Policy in the Asia-Pacific. AHPP also runs its own working paper series that is open to scholars and health policy experts around the world.
Annual workshops and engaging seminars
Each year, AHPP assembles some of the world’s greatest health policy minds at Stanford to examine focused topics at conferences and workshops, resulting in special issues of journals, edited volumes, and ongoing collaborative research. In this thirtieth anniversary year of Shorenstein APARC, director Karen Eggleston organized a conference on “Economic Aspects of Population Aging in China and India,” co-sponsored by several related research programs at Harvard University.
In addition, AHPP organizes numerous public seminars throughout the academic year. Recent topics have included the battle against HIV/AIDS in Cambodia; immunizations and child health in Bangladesh; population aging in Japan; Vietnam’s health policy challenges; tobacco control in China; air pollution in South Asia; private health insurance in South Korea; and many other important health policy-related issues.
This multiyear project, coordinated by Thomas Fingar, Oksenberg-Rohlen Distinguished Fellow, at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University, looks sequentially and systematically at China’s interactions with countries in all regions and across many issue areas. The project seeks to clarify China’s objectives and policies to achieve them, but it also seeks to identify and explain the goals and policy calculations of other countries that see opportunities and perils associated with China’s greater activism on the world stage.
Phase one of the project examined China’s engagement with Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Scholars and foreign policy practitioners from China, Japan, the ROK, Russia, and the United Stated discussed these questions at a two-day workshop in Beijing in March 2012. Participants from several Southeast Asian countries also attended the workshop to ensure that questions explored were broad enough to facilitate comparisons and the search for patterns and learning across issues and areas at the follow-on regional workshop held in Singapore in November 2012.
The Singapore workshop, phase 2, discussed China's objectives and policies with respect to Southeast Asia, but focused primarily on the ways in which China's approach and actions are perceived by individual countries in the region and what regional countries seek to achieve with respect to China. Implicit in some of the presentations was the notion that China was trying to restore its traditional primacy in the region and to prevent any country inside or outside of Southeast Asia from exercising greater regional influence. Other participants emphasized material goals, including access to resources, markets for Chinese goods, and fostering economic dependence on China. Participants agreed that China's influence and impact are large and growing, and that states in the region are pursuing different strategies to advance their own interests and maximize their own freedom of action.
The third workshop, to be held at Stanford University on June 20-21, 2013, will examine China’s relationship with South and Central Asia. While there is a focus on the bilateral relationship between China and India, the largest and most powerful regional actor, the conference will also look at other key bilateral relationships, such as with Pakistan, and at interactions on a regional level, including in the economic sphere. The workshop will explore the management of cross border issues such as migration flows, water, and energy resource development. The sessions on Central Asia will offer broader understanding of China’s intersection with other powers such as Russia and India in that region.
Bechtel Conference Center
President Barack Obama’s 2014 budget proposal promises significant food aid reform that will enable the United States to feed about 4 million more people without a significant increase of the current $1.8 billion spent on feeding the world's most hungry. Since the food aid program's inception in 1954, the U.S. has helped feed more than 1 billion people in more than 150 countries, and remains the largest provider of international food aid.
The intention of the reform is to make food aid more efficient, cost effective, and flexible. It aims to use local and regional markets to lower the cost of food and speed its delivery, and calls for the use of cash transfers and electronic food vouchers.
The proposed reforms would also end monetization—the sale of U.S. food abroad to be sold by local NGOs for cash. This practice has been criticized for hurting vulnerable communities by depriving local farmers of the incentives and opportunities to develop their own livelihoods. Several studies, including one by the Government Accountability Office, found monetization to be costly and inefficient—an average of 25 cents per taxpayer dollar spent on food aid is lost.
Barry Riley, a food aid expert and visiting fellow at the Center on Food Security and the Environment, discusses his perspective on the importance of these new reforms, their chances of passage, and the country's current role in international food aid.
Why is local procurement such an important addition to food aid reform?
An increase of funding for local and regional procurement is the most important programmatic element of the proposed reforms. It would help managers working in food security-related development programs to determine for each emergency what commodities are most appropriate and where they can be procured most quickly and inexpensively. Some studies have shown local and regional procurement of food and other cash-based programs can get food to people in critical need 11 to 15 weeks faster at a savings of 25-50 percent. Equally important, local procurement is less likely to disrupt local economic conditions, but rather promote self-sufficiency by increasing demand (often for preferred local staples) and incomes of local producers. The move to 45 percent local (and 55 percent tied) procurement is a BIG step, and one to face strong opposition from American commodity interests and U.S.-flag shippers.
How difficult is it to ensure vouchers and electronic cash transfers are getting into the hands of people that really need the aid?
Vouchers (and similar urban coupon shops) have been used many times over the past decades as a food transfer mechanism (also sometimes used in food for work programs) enabling the recipient to trade the voucher(s) for foodstuffs when it is most convenient or when they are most needed. Electronic vouchers are new, and how well they work depends on local situations. In places like urban Latin America, Africa and India, it probably could be made to work quite well; the technology is evolving quickly that would enable this sort of transfer mechanism.
Rural Ethiopia, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Malawi – probably not so well. I’m admittedly skeptical that electronic transfers of purchasing power to remote areas would be sufficient in most cases to motivate traders to move food to these hungry areas. Their risks are extremely high and, in my experience in Africa, traders will only deliver food to remote rural areas (inevitably over very bad roads) if they can command prices considerably higher than costs plus a high risk premium.
Why aren’t international food aid organizations more in favor of direct dollar support for local operating costs?
There is (and has long been) opposition among many of the NGOs to the President’s proposal to replace “monetization” with a promise of on-going direct dollar support for the local operating costs of NGO food security-related projects. They believe it will continue to be easier to get Congress to approve money to buy American food commodities to ship overseas than to get approval for dollars to ship overseas, particularly in light of tightening budgets. These NGOs have tended, over the years, to receive a sympathetic ear from Congress.
The proposal shifts oversight of the food aid program from the Agriculture Committees within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to the Foreign Affairs/Relations Committees of the State Department’s U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). What is the likelihood of Congress approving this transfer?
The chance of that happening, in this of all Congresses, is about the same as winning the Power Ball Lottery. Crusty committee chair-people are extremely sensitive to reductions in their empires and the agriculture committees – especially in the Senate – are powerful committees. On top of that, there are so many elements in the overall 2014 federal budget creating heartburn on the Hill that food aid considerations are far, far, far down the line. The best the President is likely to get in the present divided Congress are hearings and a continuing resolution of some sort.
What did you wish to see in the food aid reform proposal that was not addressed in this budget?
Change, if it ever comes, will likely be incremental and halting. I’ll be happy to see any step, however small, in the right direction. The total end of tied procurement would be at the top of my wish list. Even more important, perhaps, iron-clad, multi-year commitments of funding to food security programs intended to overcome long-term institutional impediments to achieving enduring food security in low income food deficit situations…and sticking with such commitments for 15 years.
What role does food aid play in advancing American foreign policy goals?
Most importantly, by being the single largest source of food commodities to the World Food Program in confronting disaster and emergency situations. Food support to American NGOs has been under-evaluated over the past 40 years. I’ll be talking about this later in the book I am writing, but these small projects were all that kept agricultural development (and early food security efforts) going in many small countries during the “dark decades” when international finance institutions and bilateral donors were not financing agricultural development. There are valuable on-the-ground lessons in that NGO food-assisted experience still waiting to be assessed.
Let me add, given what we know about the onset of serious climate change in the decades to come, the need to supply large amounts of food to populations suffering severe food deprivation will probably grow in the future. Where will the food come from and who will pay for those future transfers?
While the U.S. remains the largest provider of food aid, what can the EU and Canada teach the U.S. about food aid policy?
Donors hate to think that other donors have something to teach them. But, of course, they always do. The Canadian and European experience with food aid is best summed up in the way their objective has come to be restated over the past 15 or so years: not “food aid” but “aid for food.” The purpose of assistance intended to improve food security is to improve either, or both, availability and access over the long term (leave nutrition aside for a moment).
European and Canadian assistance can be much more flexible in choosing the instruments – food, cash, technical assistance, training, institutional strengthening, public policy, public-private cooperation, etc. – required to achieve a realistic food security goal which I would describe as pretty good assurance that most people can get their hands on the food they need most of the time. Commodity food aid, in some form – or the promise of its ready availability when needed – will probably need to be part of the total array of inputs required for the several years needed in particular food insecure countries to achieve that “pretty good assurance.” Europe and Canada are closer to understanding this and have become appropriately flexible in concerting resources to get it done. That’s the lesson.
For more than thirty years, Shorenstein APARC’s Corporate Affiliates Visiting Fellows Program has offered a unique opportunity for affiliate organizations to nominate personnel to spend an academic year at the Center. Since 1982 — one year before the Center even existed — visiting fellows in the program have been sharing ideas, forming connections, and broadening perspectives, from the early years when a handful of visiting fellows were hosted at Galvez House to recent groups of close to twenty visitors each year meeting in Encina Hall’s Okimoto conference room. As a recent visiting fellow observed, “Academically, professionally, and personally, the different perceptions I have now will change the way I approach and understand my future work.”
The present cohort of visiting fellows represents organizations in China, India, Japan, and Korea, and each fellow brings years of practical experience and an international perspective that informs and enriches the intellectual exchange at the Center and at Stanford University. A majority of the current affiliate organizations have participated continuously in the program for the past five years, or even longer.
The program — ideal for mid-career managers who wish to deepen their knowledge on topics relevant to their work — has fellows participating in a structured program, which includes creating an individual research project; auditing classes; attending exclusive seminars; and visiting local companies and institutions. In addition to broadening their views through interaction with world-class scholars, visiting fellows can network with managers from different countries and corporations.
With such an array of activities, every day in the life of a visiting fellow is different, and every year differs as well. The core research goal remains constant, but the changing composition of each group — more female fellows, varied professional backgrounds, and new countries joining the mix — keeps the program exciting and unique. One of the earliest visiting fellows from one of the longest-standing affiliate organizations put it best: “Shorenstein APARC, Stanford University and, more broadly, the Silicon Valley are culturally unique, and this program offers a great opportunity to understand some of the ins and outs and different mindsets that make the region so successful.”
The wide variety of participants has possessed an equally broad range of interests. Over the past three decades, visiting fellows have pursued research on topics ranging from “The Deregulation of Telecommunications Industries in Japan and the United States” to “Northeast Asian Interdependence;” from “Corporate Governance & Energy Management” to “Advanced Tools for Complete Characterization of Biopharmaceutical Products” to “Risk Management in Large Commercial Banks in China.”
Once visiting fellows return to their home institutions, the Corporate Affiliates Program stays connected with alumni, allowing it to maintain close partnerships with not only its affiliate organizations, but also with all of the people who have passed through the program. The alumni network has grown to more than 350, with many individuals holding prominent positions in both the corporate and governmental sectors, working in countries around the world including Russia, France, Indonesia, and Australia. Recent alumni events held in locations like Seoul and Tokyo have kept the program in close contact even with those visiting fellows who came through the Center during the early years.
The Corporate Affiliates Visiting Fellows Program thrives by bringing together a diverse international group, and through the shared experiences of research and study at Stanford University. It creates long-lasting bonds and a new community — one that enriches the university and finds within itself new, constructive perspectives. Ultimately, the hope is that these experiences will over time contribute to stronger U.S.-Asia relations.
» Large gallery: Highlights from Corporate Affiliates Program activities
LOCATION
Philippines Conference Room
Encina Hall
616 Serra St., 3rd floor
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
» Directions/Map
____________________________________________________________________________
The 1950s, the period between the catastrophic Korean War (1950-1953) and Korea’s ambitious industrialization in the 1960s and 70s, has remained relatively "neglected" among historians of modern Korea. The guest speakers will present their studies of this era’s culture, intellectual climate, and politics; and discuss colonial legacy, cold war, and reconstruction in the wake of the Korean War.
Participants:
Carter J. Eckert trained in Western ancient and medieval history at Lawrence College in Wisconsin, and also at Harvard. He subsequently developed a strong interest in Korea and East Asia as a result of his experience as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Seoul in the late 1960s and 1970s. After several years of working and studying in Korea, he returned to the United States for doctoral study in Korean and Japanese history at the University of Washington. Since 1985 he has been teaching modern Korean history at Harvard, including a popular undergraduate course called "The Two Koreas," and working to build up the Harvard Korean studies program.Image
Eckert is the author of a number of books and articles, including Offspring of Empire: The Colonial Origins of Korean Capitalism, and he is also a co-author of Korea Old and New: A History, a widely-used university textbook on Korean history.
Michael Robinson earned a PhD in history at the University of Washington in 1979. He taught at the University of Southern California for sixteen years after which he moved to Indiana University where he is a Professor of East Asian Languages and Cultures and an adjunct Professor of History. He has written extensively on the origins and evolution of Korean nationalism. His first book, Cultural Nationalism in Colonial Korea focused on nationalist ideology formation during the 1920s. More recently he has become interested in popular culture and the origins and development of modernity in Korea. With Gi-Wook Shin his Colonial Modernity in Korea examined a number of nodes of modernity appearing during the period of Japanese occupation. He has just finished a new book, Korea’s Twentieth Century Odyssey: a Short History that was published by the University of Hawaii Press in Spring 2007. He has collaborated with Jonathan Lipman and Barbara Maloney on a new text, East Asia Since 1600, published in 2012 by Littlefield Press in London.Image
Robinson has worked extensively in program development at the university and national level with a special focus on Korean Studies.
Tae Gyun Park is an Associate Professor at the Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University and an Advisor to Minitry of Unification in Korea. He was a Coordinate Researcher at Harvard-Yenching Institute, 2007-2008. He authored An Ally and Empire: Two Myths in Korea-U.S. Relationship (AKS Press,2012) and "Beyond the Myth: Reassessing the Security Crisis in the mid 1960s on the Korean Peninsula" (Pacific Affairs, 2009).Image
Yumi Moon is an Assistant Professor of History at Stanford University where she has taught modern Korean history since 2007. She received her undergraduate degree and an MA in Political Science and International Relations from Seoul National University, and a PhD in East Asian Studies from Harvard University.Image
Moon is the author of Populist Collaborators: The Ilchinhoe and the Japanese Colonization of Korea, 1896–1910 (Cornell University Press, 2013). She is currently working on a new book tentatively titled Toward a Free State: Imperial Shift and the Formation of Post-Colonial South Korea, 1931–1950.
Philippines Conference Room