Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Timothy Josling, a professor emeritus at the former Food Research Institute and an affiliate of The Europe Center known for his encyclopedic knowledge of international agricultural policy, died on Nov. 27.

Timothy Josling, a Stanford professor emeritus of agricultural economics, died at his home in Davis, California, on Nov. 27 after a two-year battle with cancer. He was 78.

Josling, professor emeritus at the former Food Research Institute, was a prolific scholar in agricultural economics. He was known for his humor, patience and devotion to his work and family, according to his relatives and colleagues.

“My dad was one of those people who had an answer to every question,” said his daughter, Catherine Josling. “I loved asking him questions because I knew whether he knew the answer or not, he would confidently answer the question. He also had a wonderful sense of humor – you could always count on him for a witty retort.”

Tim Josling portrait

A walking encyclopedia

Originally from London, England, Josling joined Stanford in 1978 to teach at the former Food Research Institute, which was founded in 1921 by Herbert Hoover to investigate the issues of food production, distribution and consumption.

Josling’s research interests centered on agricultural policies and international trade regulations – and he was admired by his colleagues for his wide breadth of knowledge on these topics.

“Tim Josling was a walking encyclopedia of international agricultural institutions, and he made lasting contributions in the fields of international trade and policy analysis,” said Walter P. Falcon, who directed the Food Research Institute from 1972 to 1991 and recruited Josling to join the faculty. “He was also uncommonly broad. We used to jokingly – but seriously – say that if one wanted 10 pages overnight of really good analysis on any economics topic, best to call Tim.”

Among his many contributions to the field of agricultural economics, Josling is most known for developing the “producer subsidy equivalent approach,” a measure that helps countries understand how much of a farmer’s earnings was created by agricultural policy. Josling initially developed the formula, also known as the “PSE,” for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and it has since been adopted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States Department of Agriculture and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

“The Josling PSE is used to this day,” said his colleague Scott Pearson, who served on the Stanford faculty as a professor of agricultural economics from 1968 until his retirement in 2002 and as director of the Food Research Institute from 1991 to 1996. “The PSE helps governments understand the costs of agricultural protection and support.”

Dedicated scholar

From 1993 to 1996, Josling served as the director for the Center for European Studies at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI). When the Food Research Institute closed in 1996, he went on to co-convene the European Forum, now The Europe Center, until he retired in 2003.

Throughout retirement, Josling remained active on campus as a senior fellow, by courtesy, at FSI. Until 2016, he taught a course on the economics of the WTO for the Program in International Relations and would regularly meet with his students at the Europe Center’s offices, said program administrator Karen Haley.

Josling’s recent publications include the three-volume Handbook on International Food and Agricultural Policies, which was published in 2018. In 2015, he co-authored Transatlantic Food and Agricultural Trade Policy: 50 Years of Conflict and Convergence with his long-time collaborator, Stefan Tangermann of the University of Göttingen in Germany.

“One could discuss the most crazy ideas with him and develop them jointly into workable hypotheses and proposals,” said Tangermann, who first met Josling in 1973. Over the next 40 years, the pair developed a close professional partnership and wrote more than 50 publications together, including two major books.

“From the 1980s on, Josling and Tangermann were considered the profession’s leaders in explaining European agricultural policy and in discussing its implications for policymakers,” said Pearson.

Josling was a member of the International Policy Council on Food and Agricultural Trade and former chair of the executive committee of the International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium. He also held a visiting professorship at the University of Kent, in the United Kingdom, and was a past president of the UK Agricultural Economics Association. In 2004, he was made a Fellow of the American Agricultural Economics Association.

Despite his accomplishments, Josling was “very self-effacing,” said his colleague and friend Christophe Crombez, a senior research scholar at the Europe Center. “Tim was not someone who sought the spotlight.”

Quintessential English professor; avid sports fan

Prior to joining Stanford, Josling taught at the London School of Economics and the University of Reading in England.

Josling received a BSc in agriculture from the University of London (Wye College), an MSc in agricultural economics from the University of Guelph, Canada, and a PhD in agricultural economics from Michigan State University.

His family described him as the “quintessential English professor,” and according to Falcon, “He never lost all of his English ways. If he were to walk in the door you would think he belonged in a Shakespeare play – he looked the part of an English actor.”

Josling also loved sports, including cricket and thanks to Pearson, baseball as well.

Pearson remembers taking Josling to his first game at Stanford’s Sunken Diamond in the late 1970s: “At his first game, Tim offered a suggestion. He noted that it would be much more difficult for the batter to hit the baseball if only the pitcher – no, Tim, he was not called the hurler – would bounce the ball in front of home plate. I had to tell him that, alas, this would not work in American baseball.”

For years, Josling and his wife, Anthea, also had season tickets for Stanford football as well as for women’s and men’s basketball.

Josling was devoted to his family and garden. In 2003, he and Anthea moved to the hills in Los Gatos. There, he grew a variety of vegetables and tended to goats and chickens, as well as caring for several cats and dogs. His also enjoyed sailing, photography and travel. In early 2018, the Joslings moved to Davis to be closer to his daughter and grandchildren.

“What I liked most about Tim was his good nature,” Falcon said. “Tim could find the bright side of things, when the rest of us had trouble.”

Josling is survived by his wife, Anthea; his children, Catherine, BS ’03, and John Mark, BS ’99, and their spouses, Amiel Sagpao and Jessica Smith, as well as two grandchildren, Claire Sagpao and Andrew Sagpao. Plans for a celebration of life in the new year are pending. In lieu of flowers, the family request donations in Josling’s name to the Cancer Research Institute.

 

All News button
1
-

Abstract:

Russia has evolved into an autocracy under Putin's 18-year long rule. The political landscape resembles a desert with just a few oases of relatively strong civil initiatives and political movements. Under these circumstances, people who are eager to continue their activities inside Russia - be it cultural or philanthropic projects - face hard moral choices to either collaborate with the regime or refuse to do so and sacrifice many opportunities along the way. In light of these circumstances, is there any ground for optimism? What are the necessary pre-conditions for strong movements in Russia? What are the visions for post-Putin Russia? Zhanna Nemtsova, the founder of the Boris Nemstov Foundation for Freedom and a news show/anchor for the Deutsche Welle broadcaster shares her insights into the current state of affairs in Russia during this special lunchtime event hosted by the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law together with the Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
zhanna nemstova1
Zhanna Nemtsova is a Russian journalist currently working at Deutsche Welle, a German international broadcaster. At Deutsche Welle, Nemtsova hosts the weekly Russian-language program "Nemtsova.Interview," which features discussions on current events. Nemtsova founded the Boris Nemtsov Foundation for Freedom to promote the ideas of freedom and education and to preserve her father's liberal political legacy after he was assassinated in 2015. The Foundation awards the Boris Nemtsov Prize to courageous Russians for their demonstrated dedication to fighting for democratic rights in Russia, hosts the annual Boris Nemtsov Forum in Berlin and supports Russian political prisoners and asylum seekers. On May 10 the Boris Nemtsov Foundation, in cooperation with Charles University in Prague, launched the Boris Nemtsov Center for Russian Studies. Nemtsova holds a bachelor’s of science degree in economics with a minor in foreign languages from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.

 

 

 

 

Zhanna Nemtsova Founder of the Boris Nemstov Foundation for Freedom
Seminars
Paragraphs

Our Report draws attention to a complex but understudied issue: How will climate warming alter losses of major food crops to insect pests? Because empirical evidence on plant-insect-climate interactions is scarce and geographically localized, we developed a physiologically based model that incorporates strong and well-established effects of temperature on metabolic rates and on population growth rates. We acknowledged that other factors are involved, but the ones we analyzed are general, robust, and global (13).

Parmesan and colleagues argue that our model is overly simplistic and that any general model is premature. They are concerned that our model does not incorporate admittedly idiosyncratic and geographically localized aspects of plant-insect interactions. Some local effects, such as evidence that warmer winters will harm some insects but not others, were in fact evaluated in our sensitivity analyses and shown to be minor (see the Report's Supplementary Materials). Other phenomena, such as plant defenses that benefit some insects and threaten others, are relevant but are neither global nor directional. Furthermore, because Parmesan et al. present no evidence that such idiosyncratic and localized interactions will outweigh the cardinal and universally strong impacts of temperature on populations and on metabolic rates (13), their conclusion is subjective.

We agree with Parmesan and colleagues that the question of future crop losses is important and needs further study, that targeted experimental data are needed (as we wrote in our Report), and that our estimates are likely to be conservative (as we concluded, but for reasons different from theirs). However, we strongly disagree with their recommendation to give research priority to gathering localized experimental data. That strategy will only induce a substantial time lag before future crop losses can be addressed.

We draw a lesson from models projecting future climates. Those models lack the “complexity and idiosyncratic nature” of many climate processes, but by building from a few robust principles, they successfully capture the essence of climate patterns and trends (4). Similarly, we hold that the most expeditious and effective way to anticipate crop losses is to develop well-evidenced ecological models and use them to help guide targeted experimental approaches, which can subsequently guide revised ecological models. Experiments and models should be complementary, not sequential.

 
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Science
Authors
Rosamond L. Naylor
Paragraphs

Reconciling higher freshwater demands with finite freshwater resources remains one of the great policy dilemmas. Given that crop irrigation constitutes 70% of global water extractions, which contributes up to 40% of globally available calories (1), governments often support increases in irrigation efficiency (IE), promoting advanced technologies to improve the “crop per drop.” This provides private benefits to irrigators and is justified, in part, on the premise that increases in IE “save” water for reallocation to other sectors, including cities and the environment. Yet substantial scientific evidence (2) has long shown that increased IE rarely delivers the presumed public-good benefits of increased water availability. Decision-makers typically have not known or understood the importance of basin-scale water accounting or of the behavioral responses of irrigators to subsidies to increase IE. We show that to mitigate global water scarcity, increases in IE must be accompanied by robust water accounting and measurements, a cap on extractions, an assessment of uncertainties, the valuation of trade-offs, and a better understanding of the incentives and behavior of irrigators.

 
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Science
Authors
Quentin Grafton
Paragraphs
Handbook of International Food and Agricultural Policies is a three-volume set that aims to provide an accessible reference for those interested in the aims and implementation of food and farm policies throughout the world. The treatment is authoritative, comprehensive and forward looking. The three volumes combine scholarship and pragmatism, relating academic writing to real-world issues faced by policy-makers. A companion volume looking at the future resource and climate challenges for global agriculture will be published in the future.

Volume I covers Farm and Rural Development policies of developed and developing countries. The volume contains 20 country chapters together with a concluding comprehensive synthesis of lessons to be drawn from the experiences of the individual countries.

Volume II examines the experience of countries with food policies, including those dealing with food safety and quality and the responsibility for food security in developing countries. The chapters address issues such as obesity, nutritional supplements, organic foods, food assistance programs, biotech food acceptance, and the place of private standards.

Volume III describes and explains the international trade dimension of farm and food policies — both at the bilateral and regional level — and also the multilateral rules that influence and constrain individual governments. The volume also looks at the steps that countries are together taking to meet the needs of developing and low-income countries.

The volumes are of value to students and researchers interested in economic development, agricultural markets and food systems. Policy-makers and professionals involved in monitoring and regulating agricultural and food markets would also find the volumes useful in their practical work. This three-volume set is also a suitable source for the general public interested in how their food system is influenced by government policies.

Readership: Students and researchers who are interested in economic development, agricultural markets and food systems; and policy-makers and professionals involved in monitoring and regulating agricultural and food markets.

 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
World Scientific Publishing
Authors
Number
3 volumes
Paragraphs

The 1987 INF Treaty was a landmark arms control and disarmament agreement that eliminated from Europe the most dangerous weapons of the era, and significantly decreased nuclear threats between NATO and the Soviet Union. For NATO, Moscow’s deployment of the SS-20 ballistic missiles, which could carry up to three warheads and hold at risk all Western European capitals, was highly destabilizing. In response, NATO decided to deploy the Pershing II ballistic missiles and fast-flying ground-launched cruise missiles (GLCMs) in Europe. Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev quipped, “it was like holding a gun to our head.” Disarming these weapons was therefore in the interest of both sides, and it created favourable conditions for further arms control measures between Washington and Moscow.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Commentary
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
European Leadership Network
Authors
Anna Péczeli
Paragraphs

The emergence of a global digital ecosystem has been a boon for global communication and the democratization of the means of distributing information. The internet, and the social media platforms and web applications running on it, have been used to mobilize pro-democracy protests and give members of marginalized communities a chance to share their voices with the world. However, more recently, we have also seen this technology used to spread propaganda and misinformation, interfere in election campaigns, expose individuals to harassment and abuse, and stir up confusion, animosity and sometimes violence in societies. Even seemingly innocuous digital technologies, such as ranking algorithms on entertainment websites, can have the effect of stifling diversity by failing to reliably promote content from underrepresented groups. At times, it can seem as if technologies that were intended to help people learn and communicate have been irreparably corrupted. It is easy to say that governments should step in to control this space and prevent further harms, but part of what helped the internet grow and thrive was its lack of heavy regulation, which encouraged openness and innovation. However, the absence of oversight has allowed dysfunction to spread, as malign actors manipulate digital technology for their own ends without fear of the consequences. It has also allowed unprecedented power to be concentrated in the hands of private technology companies, and these giants to act as de facto regulators with little meaningful accountability. So, who should be in charge of reversing the troubling developments in our global digital spaces? And what, if anything, can be done to let society keep reaping the benefits of these technologies, while protecting it against the risks?

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Authors
Eileen Donahoe
0
Eloise Duvillier

Eloise Duvillier is the Program Manager of the Program on Democracy and the Internet at the Cyber Policy Center. She previously was a HR Program Manager and acting HR Business Partner at Bytedance Inc, a rapidly-growing Chinese technology startup. At Bytedance, she supported the globalization of the company by driving US acquisition integrations in Los Angeles and building new R&D teams in Seattle and Silicon Valley. Prior to Bytedance, she led talent acquisition for Baidu USA LLC’s artificial intelligence division. She began her career in the nonprofit industry where she worked in foster care, HIV education and emergency response during humanitarian crises, as well as helping war-torn communities rebuild. She graduated from University of California, Berkeley with a bachelor’s degree in Development Studies, focusing on political economics in unindustrialized societies.

Program Manager, Program on Democracy and the Internet
-

At 11am on November 11, 1918, the armistice that effectively ended the First World War was signed. What came to be known as “The Great War” had a profound and lasting impact on the cultural fabric of the nations involved: as Paul Fussell wrote, “its dynamics and iconography proved crucial to the political, rhetorical, and artistic life of the years that followed; while relying on inherited myth, war was generating new myth.” Over the course of the 20th century, the concept of war evolved beyond historically traceable moments and events to include the consideration of war as site and influence shaping every aspect of lived experience. This conference seeks to examine ways in which literature and the arts have taken up and taken apart war and the myths surrounding it -- grappling with it both as subject and context while also considering the ways in which the experience of war molded, mutilated, and morphed artistic forms. Though the word “centennial” often rings of monolithic celebration, it is equally an opportunity to highlight the attempts of writers and artists to contain, contend, or survive war and to question and problematize preconceptions and existing views of war by investigating their inherently bipolar nature.

November 10, 2018 (Day 2)
SCHEDULE:

  • 9 – 11am - 2nd PANEL
    Chair: Jennifer Scappettone (University of Chicago, Associate Professor)
     
  • Aubrey Knox (CUNY, PhD Student)
    "The Regulated Body: The Grand Palais as Military Hospital in World War I"
  • Joanna Fiduccia (Reed College, Assistant Professor)
    "A Destructive Character: Alberto Giacometti’s Crisis of the Monument"
  • Hadrien Laroche (INHA, France, Philosopher and Researcher)
    "Duchamp's waste: Trauma, Violence and Aesthetics"
     
  • 11 - 11.30am – COFFEE BREAK
     
  • 11.30am - 12.45pm – KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Jay Winter (Yale University, Emeritus Professor)
"All the Things We Cannot Hear: Silences of the Great War"

  • 12.45am – 2pm – LUNCH BREAK
     
  • 2 - 4.30pm - 3rd PANEL
    Chair: Peter Stansky (Stanford University, Emeritus Professor)
     
  • Martin Löschnigg (University of Graz, Austria, Professor)
    "‘The extreme fury of war self-multiplies’: First World War Literature and the Aesthetics of Loss"
  • Ron Ben-Tovim (Ben Gurion University, Israel, Post-Doc), Boris Shoshitaishvili (Stanford University, PhD Student)
    "Re-Enchanting the World after War: J. R. R. Tolkien, David Jones, and the Revision of Epic"
  • Anna Abramson (MIT, Post-Doc)
    "Atmospheric Myths of The Great War"
  • Isaac Blacksin (UC Santa Cruz, PhD Student)
    Senseless Encounter, Immutable Sense: The Contradictions of Reporting War

 

  • 4.30 – 4.45pm – COFFEE BREAK
     
  • 4.45 – 6pm – KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Alexander Nemerov (Stanford University, Professor)
"A Soldier Killed in the First World War"

For more info,  please email: massucco@stanford.edu

Sponsored by:  the Division of Literatures, Languages, and Cultures;  Stanford Department of Art and Art History; Theater and Performance Studies; Stanford Humanities Center; The Europe Center; Dept. of French and Italian; Dept. of History; Dept. of German Studies; and the Dean's Office of Humanities and Sciences.

 

Stanford Humanities Center
424 Santa Teresa Street
Stanford, CA 94305

Conferences
-


At 11am on November 11, 1918, the armistice that effectively ended the First World War was signed. What came to be known as “The Great War” had a profound and lasting impact on the cultural fabric of the nations involved: as Paul Fussell wrote, “its dynamics and iconography proved crucial to the political, rhetorical, and artistic life of the years that followed; while relying on inherited myth, war was generating new myth.” Over the course of the 20th century, the concept of war evolved beyond historically traceable moments and events to include the consideration of war as site and influence shaping every aspect of lived experience. This conference seeks to examine ways in which literature and the arts have taken up and taken apart war and the myths surrounding it -- grappling with it both as subject and context while also considering the ways in which the experience of war molded, mutilated, and morphed artistic forms. Though the word “centennial” often rings of monolithic celebration, it is equally an opportunity to highlight the attempts of writers and artists to contain, contend, or survive war and to question and problematize preconceptions and existing views of war by investigating their inherently bipolar nature.

November 9, 2018 (Day 1)
SCHEDULE:

  • 4 – 4.30pm – OPENING REMARKS
  • 4.30 - 7pm - 1st PANEL

Chair: Russell Berman (Stanford University, Professor)

  • Greg Chase (College of the Holy Cross, Lecturer)
  • ‘Death is not an event of life’: How Wittgenstein’s War Experience Re-Shaped His Philosophy
  • Victoria Zurita (Stanford University, PhD Student)
  • Ironic prospects: hope in Jean Giono’s To the Slaughterhouse
  • André Fischer (Auburn University, Assistant Professor)
  • Politics by other means: War photography in the work of Ernst Jünger
  • Nicholas Jenkins (Stanford University, Associate Professor)

 

For more info,  please email: massucco@stanford.edu

Sponsored by:  the Division of Literatures, Languages, and Cultures;  Stanford Department of Art and Art History; Theater and Performance Studies; Stanford Humanities Center; The Europe Center; Dept. of French and Italian; Dept. of History; Dept. of German Studies; and the Dean's Office of Humanities and Sciences.
 

Stanford Humanities Center
424 Santa Teresa Street
Stanford, CA 94305

Conferences
Subscribe to Europe