-

Image
banner2 1280x426

From May 13-15, the Center on Food Security and the Environment and the Lenfest Ocean Program welcomed leading Chinese and international scientists to the Stanford Center at Peking University in Beijing, to share research and insights on the role of ocean fisheries, aquaculture, and marine ecosystems for improving food security in China.

Given China’s demographic changes, evolving nutritional requirements, and dominant role in global fisheries, the key question of the symposium was whether marine ecosystems can be managed adequately to support the country’s future vision for domestic food security.

Nearly 30 participants from around the world shared research on the provision of wild fish for direct human consumption and for animal feeds. Participants also shared insights on China’s aquaculture sector, including the tradeoffs involved in using wild fish in aquaculture feed.

Agenda

Session I – Food security and marine ecosystems

Session II – Aquaculture, feeds and fisheries

Session III - Coastal fisheries & impacts on marine ecosystems

Session IV – Economies of the global marine fish trade

Session V - Critical issues and challenges 

Stanford Center at Peking University

(650) 723-5697
0
Senior Fellow, Emerita, Stanford Woods Institute and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies,
William Wrigely Professor, Emerita, Department of Environmental Social Sciences
Roz_low_res_9_11_cropped.jpg PhD

Rosamond (Roz) Naylor is the William Wrigley Professor, Emerita, of Global Environmental Policy in the Doerr School of Sustainability; and founding Director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment (FSE) at Stanford University. Her research focuses on policies and practices to improve global food security and protect the environment on land and at sea. She has been involved in numerous field-level research projects around the world with her students and has published widely on issues related to global food systems, food policy, and aquaculture. She is the co-chair of The Blue Food Assessment, an international initiative aimed at providing a comprehensive scientific evaluation of the sustainability, nutrition, equity, and justice dimensions of aquatic foods cultured and captured in freshwater and marine environments within the global food system. She is a Member of the National Academy of Sciences, a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Fellow of the Ecological Society of America (ESA), a Pew Marine Fellow, and a Leopold Leadership Fellow. She is also the Chair of the Board of Directors for the Aspen Global Change Institute and a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee for Oceana. At Stanford, she teaches courses on The World Food Economy, Human Society and Environmental Change, and Food and Security.
 

CV
Date Label
Rosamond L. Naylor Moderator
Symposiums
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

At the May 13-15 symposium on Fisheries and Food Security in China, 27 leading scientists and scholars from around the world gathered in Beijing to share research on the role of ocean fisheries, aquaculture, and marine ecosystems for improving food security in China.

Given China’s demographic changes, evolving nutritional requirements and dominant role in global fisheries, the key question of the symposium was whether marine ecosystems can be managed adequately to support the country’s future vision for domestic food security.

Image
From left: Roz Naylor, Ling Cao and Charlotte Hudson

The symposium highlighted new research on the provision of wild fish for human consumption and for animal feeds. Scholars also shared insights on China’s aquaculture sector, including the tradeoffs involved in using wild fish in aquaculture feed.


The three-day meeting focused on critical questions about the future of fisheries and food security in China:

  • How will China's seafood consumption evolve with a population that is growing in both size and wealth?
     
  • How can China manage its seafood industry to maximize its own food security now and in the future?
     
  • Can aquaculture take pressure off of wild fisheries, or does the inclusion of wild fish in aquaculture feed put more pressure on wild fish stocks?
     
  • Can marine ecosystems be managed to protect both ocean health and food security?
     
  • How does the global fish trade, including demand for luxury and medicinal seafood products, shape China's fish production industry, and vice versa?

Among the 26 participants were researchers and policy experts from Stanford University, Ocean University of China, University of Stirling, Shanghai Ocean University, University of Maine, South China Sea Fisheries Research Institute (CAFS), Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute (CAFS), Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, Stony Brook University, Xiamen University, Hainan University, Shandong University, Asia Pacific Fish Watch, Hong Kong University, International Institute of Sustainable Development, James Cook University, China Policy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and University of British Columbia Fisheries Centre.
 

[[{"fid":"218247","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"Professor Rosamond Naylor of Stanford and Professor Guifang Xue of Shanghai Jiao Tong University at Beijing's Jing Shen fish market during the May 2014 symposium \"Fisheries and Food Security in China.\"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":"","field_credit[und][0][value]":"Rachel Brittin","field_caption[und][0][value]":"Professor Rosamond Naylor of Stanford and Professor Guifang Xue of Shanghai Jiao Tong University at Beijing's Jing Shen fish market during the May 2014 symposium \"Fisheries and Food Security in China.\"","field_related_image_aspect[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"},"type":"media","attributes":{"width":"870","class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto"}}]]


In between meetings held at the Stanford Center at Peking University, participants traveled to Beijing's largest fish market, where they observed local offerings and discussed trends in the global seafood trade with fish vendors. 

The symposium, funded by the Lenfest Ocean Program and chaired by FSE director Rosamond Naylor, kicks off a multi-year series of research papers and international meetings aimed at advancing the science around Chinese fisheries and food security. This ongoing international project will be coordinated by Professor Naylor and by Dr. Ling Cao, a postdoctoral fellow at FSE.

 

 

 

Hero Image
14   49
From left to right: Stanford professor Rosamond Naylor, Stanford postdoctoral scholar Ling Cao, and Lenfest Ocean Program director Charlotte Hudson at the May 2014 symposium "Fisheries and Food Security in China" at the Stanford Center at Peking University in Beijing, China. | Rachel Brittin
All News button
1
Authors
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

President Barack Obama announced this week that the United States would complete its pullout of troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2016, leaving 9,800 troops by the end of this year and cutting that in half by 2015. A small force will remain to protect the U.S. embassy in Kabul and help with local security. The president said this would free up combat troops for emerging terrorism threats in the Middle East and North Africa and effectively put an end to the longest war in U.S. history.

Ret. U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, who was U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2009-2011, answers a few questions about the way forward. Eikenberry is the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC.

Critics say the drawdown is too dramatic and rapid and could seriously diminish the progress NATO and its allies have made in the country. What is your view?

I think the drawdown schedule is militarily sound and responsible. First, the commander on the ground has indicated his support for the timelines. Second, by the end of 2016 – the announced target date for completion of the military drawdown – our armed forces will have operated in Afghanistan for over 15 years. It will be time for the Afghan government, with continued U.S. and international material and security assistance support, to take full responsibility for the defense of its country. In fact, the president's announcement represents the culmination of combined U.S., NATO, and Afghanistan planning that began in 2010.

Third, militant extremists in distant lands often effectively exploit the presence of U.S. armed forces serving in their county to rally support for their cause. At some point, large scale U.S. military deployments can become counterproductive, undermining efforts to develop accountable responsible governance and security forces.     


 

Are the Afghans ready to take over the security operations in their country?

U.S. and NATO military forces have been complimentary about the performance of the Afghan National Army and Police since they began in 2012 to assume greater responsibility for securing their country. Certainly, the Afghan security forces did well protecting the recent April 5th presidential election. Their major challenges will be ensuring adequate international monetary support (perhaps $3 billion a year for some years to come) and adapting to a tactical environment in which they will not have access to U.S. and NATO firepower, logistics, communications, and intelligence. Combat against the Taliban will be more equal contests.

There are concerns that the Taliban is sitting in the wings, just waiting for the withdrawal of American troops. Are those concerns valid?  

I have heard this argument since I first served in Afghanistan in 2002. I don't buy it. By 2016 we'll be in the 15th year of a military mission that began in 2001. Will another 15 years be adequate to prove we can "wait them out?" It is time for the Afghans to take charge of their own destiny. Furthermore, the Taliban are not a cohesive movement; there is not a centralized Taliban command "waiting in the wings." Last, the Taliban are not the primary threat to Afghan stability.The greater challenges are Pakistan's policies towards Afghanistan, Afghanistan national political reconciliation, and massive government corruption. 

What is the legacy that the United States leaves behind?

Most Afghans have told me over the years that the greatest U.S. legacy will be democracy and all that has brought. If Afghanistan is able to strengthen its political institutions and stabilize the country in the years after foreign forces return to their homes, I would agree that the introduction of democracy will be what we are remembered for. 

 

All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Sociologist Xueguang Zhou is no stranger to Stanford. He studied here as a doctoral student and returned to campus in 2006. He is now the Kwoh-Ting Li Professor in Economic Development and a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

Zhou says it is a joy to be teaching in the very place he himself was intellectually trained. Recently, he spoke with the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center about his route to the Farm and his research focus on China’s urbanization and bureaucracy. 

How did you come to Stanford and the Center?

I completed my PhD in sociology at Stanford so it was a very easy and natural decision to come back as a professor. After graduating, I went to Cornell University and Duke University as well as spending two years in Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, but I always missed the exciting intellectual environment at Stanford. I have a lot of admiration for the faculty and research that takes place here. In 2006, the sociology department and Shorenstein APARC recruited me. I began to focus on China as a major research area after I had completed my Ph.D. My dissertation was actually centered on American universities. My joint appointment as a professor and as a senior fellow at Shorenstein APARC has been very complimentary. I teach in my trained area of sociology and explore my substantive interests in Chinese bureaucracy. I combine my teaching and research nicely to bridge the two sides. Additionally, this year, I will teach a summer graduate seminar at Stanford Center at Peking University.

What are the most pressing issues of China’s urbanization?

Urbanization processes in China have been underway for the last 10-20 years, in particular, the government is pushing very hard to accelerate this process. Suddenly, people have been pushed from rural to urban areas. Many are being forced to abandon their land and assume a new life away from their farming activities. This process raises many important questions, and is a main area of what I study. Chinese culture (way of life, organization, problem solving) is heavily drawn from rural tradition. Inherently urbanization has created tensions between tradition and the modern idea of Chinese society. Now we see a lot of contentious politics in China. Resistance, revolt and social movements are in part caused by this disruption of the social norms and tradition that had historically held the Chinese society together. Patterns of interaction between social groups have changed. So, what does this mean for society? And further to that, what is the new governance structure that emerges out of this? In rural China, governance in the past was based on kinship and local institutions, but the future is unclear. We need to research and understand the emergent governance structure in China. 

What impact has recent bureaucratic restructuring had on Chinese society? 

Right now, it is hard to say what effects the recent changes put forth at the Third Plenum will have on society. It is too soon to see any major effects on the long-term trend. My research focuses on the fundamental basis of Chinese structures and bureaucracies. Over the past two years, I have pursued analyzing Chinese bureaucracy through a historical lens. If we take a step back and observe these recent policy shifts in a greater timeline, we can see that local-level fluctuations are only temporary phenomena. For example, China’s new leadership recently launched a huge anti-corruption campaign. As a result, people in local-level bureaucracies have suddenly become much more careful about their behavior. But, how long will this behavior last? It is unlikely to last for very long. If we look at it from a longer perspective, we can see clear policy rhythms between centralization and decentralization over time. There may be short-term policy efforts to strengthen the central authority, but systematic institutional shifts are less likely.

Can you tell us about your methods and approach to your research on Chinese personnel structures?

I analyze archival data and conduct fieldwork in China to understand changes in bureaucracy. A primary way I conduct my fieldwork is participatory observations in a township-level government in China. When I visit this township government, I stay in a guestroom in the government building, and interact with local officials on a daily basis, observe their work and eat meals with them. Basically, I get to know them, their views and way of life. I also go to the nearby villages to interact with locals to gather their opinions about bureaucracy and the policy implementation processes. I also meet with other Chinese colleagues who conduct research on government behaviors, and we share and discuss our observations. Often times, they take me to different localities to visit government bureaus and to chat with local officials. All of these interactions give me great opportunities to learn about the Chinese bureaucracy. Close observations are key for me to identifying current issues in governance and bureaucratic structures, which I then compare to the historical legacy. This line of research is also connected to a project in collaboration with graduate students, analyzing the flow of bureaucrats in an entire province using public data. 

Tell us something we don’t know about you.

One aspect of my personal experience that I cherish is that, like many in my generation, I was sent to work in rural China after high school during the Cultural Revolution.  There I became a “team leader” in a village, responsible for organizing collective activities of over 200 villagers (about 50 households) and several hundreds “mu” of farming land, when I was only 17. This experience gave me a much deeper understanding of rural life in China.

The Faculty Spotlight Q&A series highlights a different faculty member at Shorenstein APARC each month giving a personal look at his or her scholarly approaches and outlook on related topics and upcoming activities.

Hero Image
Headshot for Xueguang Zhou
All News button
1
Date
Paragraphs

Rod Ewing, chairman of the federal Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, recently led a delegation of five board members and staff to China to learn about Beijing’s efforts to develop a deep-mined geologic repository for high-level radioactive waste.

During the visit to Beijing, the delegation met with officials at the China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA) and the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP). They also met with scientist and engineers at four scientific organizations and research institutes: the Chinese National Nuclear Organization (CNNC), Beijing Research Institute for Uranium Geology (BRIUG), the China National Nuclear Engineering Company (CNPE), and the Chinese Institute for Atomic Energy (CIAE).

“We had very complete summary presentations of the Chinese approach to nuclear waste management and the status of their present research and siting program for a geologic repository for high-level nuclear waste,” said Ewing, who is a senior fellow at FSI and CISAC’s Frank Stanton Professor in Nuclear Security.

Ewing was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2012 to serve as the chair of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, which is responsible for the technical review of Department of Energy activities related to transporting, packaging, storing and disposing of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

The delegation had an extended discussion with Xu Dazhe, Ewing’s counterpart as chairman of the CAEA. The visit in Beijing ended with a full-day technical exchange between scientists and engineers from both countries, as well as participants from institutes outside of Beijing and members of the NWTRB

The U.S. delegation visited a museum of uranium mineral, including a specimen of the first uranium ore discovered in Guangxi in 1954. The specimen had been presented to Chairman Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai – marking the beginning of China’s nuclear industry.

The delegation heads to the remote northwestern region of Beishan to see China's proposed site for a nuclear waste repository.
Photo Credit: Rod Ewing

The delegation then traveled to Beishan to examine the granite host rock in the remote northwestern Gansu Province, which is a potential site for an underground research laboratory and geologic repository for nuclear waste.

“Both countries can learn from one another, saving time and money for each country,” said Ewing, a professor of Geological and Environmental Sciences in the School of Earth Sciences at Stanford. “Nuclear waste management is an international effort in which cooperation is essential.”

China is pursing an aggressive campaign to expand its nuclear energy capacity and as part of an effort to meet growing energy demands, as well as to reduce air pollution from coal-fired plants. There are some 20 nuclear power reactors in China and another 28 under construction, according to the World Nuclear Association.

China has a policy of reprocessing its nuclear fuel and will be disposing of vitrified, high-level radioactive waste. The U.S. delegation was particularly interested in work on the properties of the vitrified waste in a disposal environment and understanding the Chinese strategy for disposal of HLW in a granitic host rock.

The Chinese are investigating a number of sites in granite in the Beishan region, located along the ancient Silk Road. Once a suitable site is located, the first step would be to establish an underground research laboratory for detailed scientific and engineering studies that will be required for a final geologic repository.

Mary Lou Zoback, a seismologist and consulting professor in the Geophysics Department at Stanford, was one of five board members on the trip. She was impressed that China intends to take five years to build an underground research laboratory and then conduct 20 years of testing before opening a repository.

The United States has been stalled for years in its proposed plan to build a similar deep geological repository for spent nuclear reactor fuel and radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, adjacent to the Nevada Test Site. Environmentalists and local residents have opposed the project – factors that China routinely ignores.

“I think the most valuable thing in making the visit to China and visiting the site is really to gain an understanding of their program and also their general philosophy toward siting what, in this country, has been an extremely controversial project,” Zoback said. “They chose a remote area and they really haven’t even consulted with any of the surrounding towns – and that’s not what we do here. But I was extremely impressed that they recognized the need for this lab and would allow 20 years for all the scientific investigation that would be carried out to make sure it was safe.”

The Beishan region has five granitic sites that are being investigated as potential host rocks for the underground laboratory and possible repository. Board members discussed the geology and characteristics of the site with Chinese scientists and examined rock core and data that have been generated by their research program.

In addition to detailed investigations of granite, the Chinese also consider clay as a medium for a geologic repository and very deep borehole disposal, reaching proposed depths of up to 3 miles. One of the important issues is the methodology for the comparison of sites within a single type of geology or across different types of geology. The U.S. has a wide variety of geologies that may be suitable for disposal, including granite, clay, salt and volcanic tuff.

“The U.S. approach can be informed by the Chinese strategy,” Ewing said.

You can see more photos on the CNNC website.

All News button
1
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Military interventions have traditionally been a source of controversy in the United States. But America’s appetite for the dispatch of armed forces has been diminished greatly by factors that have primarily emerged in the 21st century. These include, most painfully, the protracted campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have made US political and military leaders more cautious about waging wars to end tyranny or internal disorder in foreign lands.

Debates on military intervention are complicated by the network of political, security and economic interests that must be balanced when contemplating this option. In this IISS commentary, Karl Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, talks about how four factors have heavily influence the current calculus.

All News button
1
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Military interventions have traditionally been a source of controversy in the United States. But America’s appetite for the dispatch of armed forces has been diminished greatly by factors that have primarily emerged in the 21st century. These include, most painfully, the protracted campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have made US political and military leaders more cautious about waging wars to end tyranny or internal disorder in foreign lands.

Debates on military intervention are complicated by the network of political, security and economic interests that must be balanced when contemplating this option. In this IISS commentary, Karl Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, talks about how four factors have heavily influence the current calculus.

All News button
1
-

 

Abstract: 

The recently concluded 16th Lok Sabha elections in India was the biggest democratic election in history. It produced the first absolute majority in Indian national elections in thirty years and catapulted BJP and its leader Narendra Modi to power after a sustained presidential style campaign. The election decisively changed the political landscape in India and seemed to reverse a longstanding trend towards fragmentation of Indian politics along lines of region and caste.

What are the underlying dynamics that made this historic vote possible? Can BJP and Modi deliver the economic growth and employment that they promise? What are the necessary reforms and challenges that confront the new government? Will BJP remain focused on development, or will the older cultural and majoritarian agenda of the RSS and its associated organizations re-appear? What is the prospects for India’s multiple minorities in this new dispensation?

These and other questions will be debated by a panel of three Stanford based academics. 

 

Speaker Bios:

Thomas Blom Hansen (Moderator/Speaker) is the Reliance-Dhirubhai Ambani Professor of Anthropology at Stanford University. He is also the director of the Center for South Asia at Stanford. He has worked extensively on Hindu-Muslim relations, communal violence and the rise of Hindu nationalism in India. His books include The Saffron Wave. Hindu Nationalism and Democracy in Modern India (Princeton University Press 1999) and Wages of Violence, Naming and identity in postcolonial Bombay (Princeton University Press 2001).

 

 

Harish S. Wankhede (Speaker) research interest is to imagine theoretical spaces by interconnecting certain approaches and themes of social science mainly, Justice, politics of recognition and redistribution, secularism, nationalism and the Caste identity. The emphasis of his work is on the marginalized communities in India especially the Muslims, Dalits and the Tribals.

Currently, he is a visiting scholar at the Center for South Asia, Stanford University and working on a research project on the Dalit Panthers’ Movement in Maharashtra. He teaches at the Department of Political Science, University of Delhi.

 

Alexander Lee (Speaker) is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. In the fall of 2014 he will be an assistant professor of political science at the University of Rochester. His research focuses on the historical factors governing the success or failure of political institutions, particularly in South Asia and other areas of the developing world. His work has been published in World Politics and the Quarterly Journal of Political Science. Alex earned his PhD from Stanford in 2013. More information on his work can be found on his website.

 

This event is hosted by the Center for South Asia and the Center for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. 

 

CISAC Conference Room

Thomas Blom Hansen Director Moderator Center for South Asia
Harish S. Wankhede Visiting Scholar Speaker Center for South Asia

Encina Hall
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow, 2013-14
Lee_HS.jpg

Alexander Lee's research focuses on the historical factors governing the success or failure of political institutions, particularly in South Asia and other areas of the developing world. His dissertation examined the ways in which colonialism changed the distribution of wealth in Indian society, and the ways in which these changes affected the development of caste identities. Additional research areas include the study of colonialism and European expansion in a cross- national perspective, and the causes of political violence, especially terrorism. His work has been published in World Politics and the Quarterly Journal of Political Science. Alex earned his PhD from Stanford in 2013. More information on his work can be found on his website: https://people.stanford.edu/amlee/

Alexander Lee Postdoctoral Fellow Speaker Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center faculty and scholars have published a variety of publications in early 2014, covering topics from the Japanese fiscal condition to disability policy in North Korea. 

Publications are often products of long-standing research projects led by Center affiliates. New Challenges for Maturing Democracies in Korea and Taiwan, coedited by Shorenstein APARC Director Gi-Wook Shin and Center on Democracy, Development and Rule of Law Director Larry Diamond, emerged from the Stanford Korea Democracy Project, which seeks to understand social movements in South Korea.

Postdoctoral fellows who reside at Shorenstein APARC for a year of vigorous study and engagement in Center activities also support research publications. Former visiting scholar Dominik Müller, now at Goethe-University Frankfurt, published Islam, Politics and Youth in Malaysia: The Pop-Islamist Reinvention of PAS. Müller examined the religious bureaucracy of Malaysia at Shorenstein APARC in 2013.

Shorenstein APARC manages an active publishing program with Stanford University Press and the Brookings Institution Press. Center affiliates also publish extensively in external peer-reviewed academic journals and books, as well as in a working paper series led by the Asia Health Policy Program.

Publications released in recent months include: 

Comparative Institutional Analysis: Theory, Corporations and East Asia. Selected Papers of Masahiko Aoki, Masahiko Aoki, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014

The volume is a collection of 22 articles that span the course of Aoki’s 45-year academic career. The essays cover a wide range of topics from the comparative perspective including corporate governance, institutional change and mechanism design in Japan, China and South Korea. The articles suggest policy responses for industry and governments.

 

Confronting Memories of World War II: European and Asian Legacies, Eds. Daniel Chirot, Gi-Wook Shin, Daniel C. Sneider, University of Washington Press, 2014

Comparing the European and Asian legacies, the book provides insight into the influence that World War II continues to have on contemporary politics and attitudes. The collection gathers a variety of perspectives that compare how Europe and Asia handle memories and reflections of guilt, and how wartime experiences are reinterpreted and used for domestic and international purposes.

 

“Defying Gravity: How Long Will Japanese Government Bond Prices Remain High?” Takeo Hoshi, Takatoshi Ito, Economic Policy, January 2014

The article examines the fiscal regime of Japan and considers if the country can withstand its high debt to GDP ratio. The paper shows that Japan’s fiscal situation is unsustainable through various simulations, and suggests that sufficiently large tax increases and/or expenditure cuts would put government debt on a sustainable path.

 

“Facts, Minds, and Formats: Scholarship and Political Change in Indonesia,” Donald K. Emmerson, Cornell University Press, March 2014

Indonesia has changed dramatically in recent decades, and a wealth of literature highlights divergent interpretations and perspectives surrounding those dynamics. The article considers the demise of liberal democracy, the rise of President Sukarno in 1959, and the latter’s replacement by General Suharto in 1965. The essay is part of the larger volume, Producing Indonesia: The State of the Field of Indonesian Studies.

 

“The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster and the DPJ: Leadership, Structures, and Information Challenges During the Crisis,” Kenji E. Kushida, Japanese Political Economy, Spring 2014

The Fukushima nuclear disaster was a critical event that shook Japan’s political economy, society and national psyche, as well as the world’s perspectives on nuclear energy policy. The article examines how the nuclear disaster unfolded and analyzes the response undertaken by the Democratic Party of Japan under Prime Minister Naoto Kan. Kushida is the Takahashi Research Associate at Shorenstein APARC.

  

“Japan-Korea Relations: Time for U.S. Intervention?” Daniel C. Sneider, National Bureau of Asian Research, January 2014

The paper describes current relations between South Korea and Japan, recognizing that their relationship has noticeably deteriorated in recent months. While the United States has attempted to promote dialogue, its hesitant intervention is unlikely to change the overall dynamic of the Japan-Korea relationship. Sneider suggests that a more active U.S. mediation role could encourage reconciliation and normalization of relations.

 

“People with Disabilities in a Changing North Korea,” Katharina Zellweger, Shorenstein APARC, 2014 

The working paper details the environment that people with disabilities face in the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea. Despite its reputation as a repressive, closed society where human rights are routinely abused, there are in fact a number of institutions that work to address the needs of the disabled. Zellweger writes from a perspective of a senior aid worker with over thirty years of experience in Asia; she was the Pantech Fellow at Shorenstein APARC from 2011­–13.

 

To view the full listing of publications, as well as reviews and purchasing information, please consult the Publications page on Shorenstein APARC's website.

Hero Image
aparc publications
Shorenstein APARC affiliates frequently produce and disseminate research. | Shorenstein APARC
All News button
1
Subscribe to Asia-Pacific