We invite you to a special event with Nandan Nilekani, co-founder of Infosys, one of the world's largest IT services companies.  Nilekani is also Chairperson of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), an ambitious government program designed to issue biometric identity cards to all citizens of India, with goals such as of reducing corruption in government transfers and increasing financial inclusion for the poor.  The event will give us the opportunity to hear Nilekani's view on the potential of the UID project as well as the vigorous debate it has engendered.   Nilekani will also reflect on business,the economy, and philanthropy in India.  

Matt Bannick, Managing Partner of Omidyar Network, the philanthropic investment firm founded by eBay's Pierre Omidyar, will lead the discussion. Gerhard Casper, former President of Stanford University will make a special introduction.

** We are currently experiencing some problems with our online RSVP system.  If you have any difficulty registering for this event, please send an email directly to the organizer, Denise Masumoto, via email masumoto@stanford.edu.  Thank you for your cooperation.  **

In this session of the Shorenstein APARC Corporate Affiliate Visiting Fellows Research Presentations, the following will be presented:

Yasuaki Hanai, "Are Japanese Electric Companies Becoming Obsolete? –  Rethinking Strong Points for Japanese Electric Companies

In recent years, it has become very common to take pictures using a smart phone or tablet, such as an iPad, and to share this information via social media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.  Japanese electric companies and products have been noticeably absent from this area, except for the single-lens reflex camera.  How has this happened?  Why have Japanese electric companies suffered a decline?  In his research, Hanai tries to answer these questions by analyzing the financial reports of various Japanese companies after the bubble economy collapse.  Hanai also considers strong points for Japanese electric companies and what the next actions should be to reverse the decline.

Saiko Nakagawa,  "Systemic Risks in the Japanese Banking Sector"

“Systemic risk” has become a buzzword after the global financial crisis in 2007-08.  Due to its elusive nature, there have been active discussions among scholars, international organizations and national regulators on how to measure and address the risk in order to prevent the next crisis.  In her presentation, Nakagawa will introduce these recent discussions and argue the implications to Japan’s financial sector.

Masashi Suzuki, "Dismal Software Industry in Japan – Will It Be Disrupted or Will It Discover Its Own Way like U.S. Players?"

In his research, Suzuki provides an historical analysis of the software market in Japan and the United States as well as a comprehensive analysis of the status quo of these two countries. Are there ways to improve the unfavorable situation in Japan?  Suzuki attempts to provide an answer to this question in his research presentation. 

Bin Wang, "Innovation and New Venture Strategies in China"

In recent years, entrepreneurship has played an increasing role in promoting economic growth in China.  The Chinese government began to pay more attention to encourage entrepreneurship in order to reform the economic structure.  Wang’s research examines the characteristics of the emerging industry and reveals a positive relationship between innovation capabilities and growth of new venture.  He developed a framework to classify new venture strategies based on market characteristics and innovation capabilities, identified ten strategic types, and reviewed their impact on performance in new ventures in China.  Wang’s research attempts to provide important guidelines for venture capital to identify potential investment opportunities.  These guidelines will also help entrepreneurs to identify an appropriate strategy to pursue business opportunities in given situations. 

How do we know that a person is what she claims to be? Or how do we make others believe that we are the person that we claim to be? Sociologists have explored these questions by focusing on face-to-face interaction in various everyday settings. This talk concerns the micropolitics of identification in a more formalized and institutionalized setting, specifically in immigration proceedings. Drawing on the literature on bureaucracy, presentation of self, migrant sending communities, and deviance, the speaker examines how immigration bureaucrats seek to establish migrants’ identities in contemporary immigration proceedings; how migrants challenge these dominant identification practices, notably through their involvement in various “illegal” schemes; and what consequences these micropolitical struggles have for both receiving and sending states. The talk is based on a study of the contestations over family-based immigration in South Korea, which have focused on efforts to establish the kinship and marital status of co-ethnic migrants from China (Korean Chinese migrants). The speaker will show how bureaucrats and migrants mobilize various types of “identity tags,” how migrants combine strategic and moral reasoning as they engage in these micropolitical struggles, and how these struggles influence not only immigration policies in the receiving state but also migration brokerage networks and gender and family relations in the sending states. The talk is based on Kim’s award-winning article in Law and Social Inquiry.

Jaeeun Kim is a postdoctoral fellow at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University (2012-2013). Before joining Stanford, she received her PhD degree in sociology from UCLA (2011) and was a postdoctoral research associate at the Center for the Study of Religion at Princeton University (2011-2012). Her dissertation entitled Colonial Migration and Transborder Membership Politics in Twentieth-Century Korea examines diaspora politics in twentieth-century Korea, focusing on colonial-era ethnic Korean migrants and their descendants in Japan and northeast China. Her dissertation has recently been awarded the Theda Skocpol Best Dissertation Award from the Comparative-Historical Sociology Section of the ASA. Kim’s work has appeared in Theory and Society, Law and Social Inquiry, and European Journal of Sociology. Her article in Law and Social Inquiry, entitled “Establishing Identity: Documents, Performance, and Biometric Information in Immigration Proceedings,” has won the graduate and law students best paper award in 2011. After completing her fellowship term at Stanford, Kim will be Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at George Mason University beginning in the fall 2013. 

Professor Ezra Vogel, Henry Ford II Research Professor of the Social Sciences, Emeritus, at Harvard University and former Director of Harvard’s Fairbank Center for East Asian Research and the Harvard University Asia Center

Professor Qin Hui, Professor of History, Tsinghua University

Professor Andrew Walder, Denise O'Leary and Kent Thiry Professor, Department of Sociology, Stanford University 

Date:               Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Time:              10:15 am – 12:00 pm

Venue:            Stanford Center at Peking University, Langrun Yuan, Peking University

Language:      Chinese/English simultaneous translation will be provided. 

Deng Xiaoping, one of the most important figures in modern Chinese history, was instrumental in China’s economic reconstruction following the Great Leap Forward in the early 1960s.  As the architect of China’s post-Mao path of economic reform and opening to the outside world, his legacy continues to shape the country’s present and future.  Ezra Vogel, Henry Ford II Research Professor of the Social Sciences, Emeritus, at Harvard University and former Director of Harvard’s Fairbank Center for East Asian Research and the Harvard University Asia Center, will talk about Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China, which has just been published in Chinese.  Professor Qin Hui, a leading historian and public intellectual will join Professor Vogel in a dialogue on “The Deng Xiaopeng Era: Historical Transformation and the Shaping of China’s Present and Future”.  The event will be moderated by Professor Andrew Walder, Stanford University Professor of Sociology and specialist on modern Chinese society and politics. 

Abstract:

The U.S. and the E.U. are often seen as fundamentally different democracy promoters. It has been argued that the U.S. has a more political approach, which is confrontational vis-à-vis host governments and promotes democracy bottom-up via civil society. The E.U., on the other hand, is perceived as more developmental, focusing on non-confrontational projects that are mostly top-down or focused on civil society organizations not critical of the government. The U.S.’s political approach has been criticized for being too donor-led, unilateral, and hardly respecting country ownership. But should American democracy assistance become more European?

Based on research on E.U. and U.S. democracy assistance programs in Ethiopia, CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Karen Del Biondo explains the causes and consequences of a political and developmental approach to democracy assistance. She argues that the E.U. has indeed taken a more developmental approach, which can be explained by the European Commission’s commitment to the Paris Declaration principles on aid effectiveness, including ownership, alignment and, harmonization. This was possible because of the relatively autonomous position of the Commission vis-à-vis the Member States and the European Parliament. In contrast, USAID does not enjoy this bureaucratic autonomy, and has therefore paid lip service to aid effectiveness. Del Biondo discusses the advantages and disadvantages of a political and developmental approach in a semi-authoritarian regime such as Ethiopia. She finds that, although the impact of E.U. democracy assistance in Ethiopia can be questioned, the E.U.’s developmental approach has made the government of Ethiopia more open to E.U. democracy assistance, while the U.S.’s political approach led to a backlash.

Speaker Bio:

Karen Del Biondo is a 2012-2013 postdoctoral fellow at the CDDRL. Her research is funded with a Fulbright-Schuman award and a postdoctoral grant from the Belgian-American Educational Foundation (BAEF). She holds an MA in Political Science (International Relations) from Ghent University and an MA in European Studies from the Université Libre de Bruxelles. In 2007-2008 she obtained a Bernheim fellowship for an internship in European affairs at the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Permanent Representation to the EU. 

Karen Del Biondo obtained her PhD at the Centre for EU Studies, Ghent University in September 2012 with a dissertation entitled ‘Norms, self-interest and effectiveness: Explaining double standards in EU reactions to violations of democratic principles in sub-Saharan Africa’. Her PhD research was funded by the Flemish Fund for Scientific Research (FWO). Apart from her PhD research, she has been involved in the research project ‘The Substance of EU Democracy Promotion’ (Ghent University/University of Mannheim/Centre of European Policy Studies) and has published on the securitisation of EU development policies. In January 2011 she conducted field research in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Her postdoctoral research will focus on the comparison between EU and US democracy assistance in sub-Saharan Africa.

Abstract:

The U.S. and the E.U. are often seen as fundamentally different democracy promoters. It has been argued that the U.S. has a more political approach, which is confrontational vis-à-vis host governments and promotes democracy bottom-up via civil society. The E.U., on the other hand, is perceived as more developmental, focusing on non-confrontational projects that are mostly top-down or focused on civil society organizations not critical of the government. The U.S.’s political approach has been criticized for being too donor-led, unilateral, and hardly respecting country ownership. But should American democracy assistance become more European?

Based on research on E.U. and U.S. democracy assistance programs in Ethiopia, CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Karen Del Biondo explains the causes and consequences of a political and developmental approach to democracy assistance. She argues that the E.U. has indeed taken a more developmental approach, which can be explained by the European Commission’s commitment to the Paris Declaration principles on aid effectiveness, including ownership, alignment and, harmonization. This was possible because of the relatively autonomous position of the Commission vis-à-vis the Member States and the European Parliament. In contrast, USAID does not enjoy this bureaucratic autonomy, and has therefore paid lip service to aid effectiveness. Del Biondo discusses the advantages and disadvantages of a political and developmental approach in a semi-authoritarian regime such as Ethiopia. She finds that, although the impact of E.U. democracy assistance in Ethiopia can be questioned, the E.U.’s developmental approach has made the government of Ethiopia more open to E.U. democracy assistance, while the U.S.’s political approach led to a backlash.

This event celebrating Sweden's diverse cultures began with a reception at 5pm, followed by the showing of the award winning film Harbour of Hope (2011, Sweden / Poland / Germany / Norway / Denmark; Dir. Magnus Gertten; 76 min) with filmmaker Magnus Gertten. Ozan Sunar, the artistic director of Moriska Paviljongen (also known as "Moriskan"), rounded out the evening with a multi-media presentation on bridging communities through culture.

The Islamic Republic of Iran continues to defy UN Security Council resolutions calling for an end to its uranium enrichment program. Is Iran trying to develop nuclear weapons, as many fear, or does it just want to produce nuclear energy, as the Tehran government claims? What would be the likely consequences if Iran does get the bomb? What diplomatic and military options are available to address this serious crisis? Four expert panelists will discuss this issue.