Nike products, soccer balls, carpets, orange juice, garments, coffee beans--Consumer activists, labor unions and students have launched boycotts and protests against imports that have allegedly been produced by some of the world's 250 million child workers. But exporting countries complain that the vast majority of child workers do not work in export industries, and throwing children out of work in the export sector will not solve the problem. What will really help child laborers? Will globalization help or hurt? Sarah L. Bachman is a visiting scholar at the Asia/Pacific Research Center. She was an editorial writer and reporter for the San Jose Mercury News from 1991-1997. Her work has won or shared awards from the World Hunger Media Awards, the World Affairs Council of Silicon Valley, the Overseas Press Club of America, and InterAction, the consortium of U.S. agencies providing emergency relief. Bachman's series of articles on international child labor (on the web at www.merccenter.com/archives/childlabor) were among the nation's first to point out that well intentioned efforts to end child labor sometimes helped--but also, sometimes harmed thousands of child workers. Her multi-media project - including writing, photography, a school curriculum and two Web sites- explores the benefits and drawbacks of efforts to end child labor.

Japan represents a quintessential "network society" -- permeated by dense webs of formal and informal relationships across all areas of daily life, from the political to the economic. Yet as industrial activity continues to languish along many indicators in the 1990s, what was once considered a source of competitive strength is now viewed as an underlying weakness. Critics of "crony capitalism" in Japan (and the rest of Asia) charge that mutual backscratching has replaced the kind of hard-nosed business decisions needed to make economically efficient decisions about how to allocate capital, weed out poorly performing companies, and shift resources into more productive uses. Based on the forthcoming volume, "The Organization of Japanese Business Networks" (Cambridge University Press), this presentation evaluates these criticisms theoretically and empirically. It also considers efforts now underway in Japan in the area of keiretsu reform. Michael L. Gerlach received his Ph.D. in organizational behavior from Yale University and is currently associate professor at UC Berkeley's business school. His research is focused on cross-national studies of business organizations; entry strategies in foreign markets; strategic alliances, joint ventures, and new organizational forms; interfirm relationships and corporate strategies in Japanese business; business and public policies concerning international competitiveness; the comparative analysis of the institutions of modern market economies as they reflect social and cultural contexts.

Regulations on new drugs, drug prices, and other aspects of the Japan's pharmaceutical industry had in effect protected domestic manufacturers and kept them from inventing a truly innovative new drug. As the deregulation and the international harmonization of the drug market proceed, disintegrated Japanese drug makers will need to ally or integrate with partners in and out of the industry.

M&A will have a positive effect on the marketing, but not necessarily on the research. Possible increase of university TLO and spinouts in Japan can improve the access to the information in Japanese universities, but the access is open to both domestic and international companies. Alliances between drug makers and the local parties with an international competitive edge, such as electronics and precision mechanics, may produce a unique synthesis.

Atsuomi Obayashi is currently a visiting scholar at Stanford University's Asia/Pacific Research Center and associate professor at the Keio University Graduate School of Business Administration. His research topics include application of the game theory, the contract theory and economics of the R&D. He received his Ph. D. in public policy from the University of Chicago in 1996 and an LL.B. from Kyoto University, Japan, in 1983.

For three decades following its establishment in 1967, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) played an important role in managing regional conflicts and nurturing a sense of regional identity in Southeast Asia. Toward the end of the 1990s, however, transnational environmental and economic crises dealt heavy blows to the credibility of the Association. These crises exacerbated tensions and burdens that had already arisen inside ASEAN in the wake of its expansion to include all ten Southeast Asian countries and its involvement in building larger multilateral institutions for the Asia Pacific. Are ASEAN's best years behind it? Or will it recover, perhaps even exceed, its former ability to sustain regional security and strengthen regional identity in Southeast Asia? Why, or why not? Amitav Acharya is an internationally recognized authority on regionalism in Southeast Asia. His latest books are The Quest for Identity: International Relations of Southeast Asia (Oxford, 2000) and Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia (Routledge, 2000). He is on research leave at Harvard for the current academic year as a fellow of the Asia Center and the John F. Kennedy School of Government.

David W. Brady is a political scientist whose work encompasses American politics and legislative bodies, international political trends, and comparative politics. Brady holds the Bowen H. and Janice Arthur McCoy endowed chair at the Graduate School of Business and is a professor of political science in Stanford University's School of Humanities and Sciences. A dedicated and popular teacher, Professor Brady is a past recipient of Stanford's Phi Beta Kappa Distinguished Teacher Award, presented for his work with undergraduates, and of the Robert K. Jaedicke Silver Apple Award, presented by the Stanford Business School Alumni Association for his participation in alumni activities.

Brady recently served as an associate dean for academic affairs at the Business School and continues to serve as director of the School's programs in executive education. He is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and senior fellow by courtesy at the Institute for International Studies, both on campus. David is also co-director of the University's Social Science History Institute and associate director of the University's Public Policy Program. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the advisory council for the Kansai Silicon Valley Venture Forum.

His publications include Change and Continuity in House Elections (eds. with J. Cogan), Stanford University Press (2000), Revolving Gridlock, Westview Press (1998); "Congress in the Era of the Permanent Campaign," Brookings Review, forthcoming 2000; "The Roots of Careerism in the U.S. House of Representatives," Legislative Studies Quarterly, (1999); "The SNTV and the Politics of Electoral Systems in Korea," in Electoral Systems in Asia (University of Michigan Press (1999); "Out of Step, Out of Office: Legislative Voting Behavior and House Election Outcomes," in Change and Continuity in House Elections, Stanford University Press (1999).

In March 2000, Taiwan's voters ended 55 years of Nationalist Party rule by electing Chen Shui-bian to the Presidency, granting power to the Democratic Progressive Party. Now six months into his term, President Chen faces threat of recall, as well as immediate demands to surrender control over foreign policyÑincluding especially negotiations with mainland China. The numerous foreign policy and strategic implications will be discussed in a roundtable format with three panelists.

Throughout the 1990s, Japan muddled through restructuring its economic vitality and social flexibility to cope with an advent of a new era. Represented by the IT Revolution, the new era has changed existing legal frameworks, business practices, and socioeconomic traditions worldwide. Against this backdrop, Japan has embarked, though belatedly, on various reforms, including administrative reform. Can these efforts succeed? Can Japanese bureaucrats change Japan? Or who else will change Japan and what will be an agenda for the newly born Japan? Takeshi Isayama is a former Japanese government official with the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI). While at MITI, he was responsible for drafting and implementing international trade policy including intellectual property policy serving as the Commissioner of the Japanese Patent Office and the Director-General of several bureaus including the International Trade Policy bureau during the Hashimoto and Obuchi administrations (1995-1999). He graduated from Tokyo University in 1967 with a Bachelor of Law degree and received his MPA from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University in 1971. After graduating from Tokyo University, he joined MITI in 1967.