-

China and the United States both have public needs that far outstrip the abilities of their governments alone to deliver.  Zeckhauser and Donahue will discuss their book (joint with Karen Eggleston) exploring an important, and perhaps surprising, shared feature of efforts by policymakers in China and the United States to forge prosperous, stable futures for their citizens:  public-private collaboration to accomplish some of each society’s most vital collective purposes. Collaborative governance entails private engagement in public tasks on terms of shared discretion. Zeckhauser and Donahue will discuss the two countries’ collaborative approaches to health policy and elder care, comparing and contrasting with approaches to other activities ranging from education and infrastructure to hosting the Olympics.

Image
zeckhauser richard

Richard Zeckhauser is the Frank P. Ramsey Professor of Political Economy, Kennedy School, Harvard University. He graduated from Harvard College (summa cum laude) and received his Ph.D. there. He is an elected fellow of the Econometric Society, the Institute of Medicine (National Academy of Sciences), and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 2014, he was named a Distinguished Fellow of the American Economic Association. His contributions to decision theory and behavioral economics include the concepts of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), status quo bias, betrayal aversion, and ignorance (states of the world unknown) as a complement to the categories of risk and uncertainty. Many of his policy investigations explore ways to promote the health of human beings, to help markets work more effectively, and to foster informed and appropriate choices by individuals and government agencies. Zeckhauser has published over 300 articles and several books.

Image
faculty donahue jack ms18 800x800

John D. Donahue is the Raymond Vernon Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Kennedy School, Harvard University. He is also Faculty Chair of the Master in Public Policy (MPP) Program and the SLATE Curriculum Initiative Co-Chair for Cases and Curriculum. His teaching, writing, and research mostly deal with public sector reform and with the distribution of public responsibilities across levels of government and sectors of the economy, including extensive work with the HKS-HBS joint degree program. He has written or edited twelve books, most recently Collaborative Governance (with Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2011) and Ports in a Storm (with Mark H. Moore, 2012). He served in the first Clinton Administration as an Assistant Secretary and then as Counselor to the Secretary of Labor. Donahue has consulted for business and governmental organizations, including the National Economic Council, the World Bank, and the RAND Corporation, and serves as a trustee or advisor to several nonprofits. A native of Indiana, he holds a BA from Indiana University and an MPP and PhD from Harvard.

Philippines Conference Room Encina Hall, 3rd Floor 616 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305
Richard Zeckhauser Frank Plumpton Ramsey Professor of Political Economy, Kennedy School, Harvard University
John Donahue Raymond Vernon Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Kennedy School, Harvard University
Seminars
-

Abstract:

Today, nearly 9% of people in Latin America identify as Indigenous, ranging from 2% in Argentina to 30% in Guatemala with high within-country variation. Levels of Indigenous self-identification have also increased in the last decades in the region. Using a multi-method approach that combines surveys, archival research, text analysis, and machine learning, I study how different institutional frameworks have shaped the persistence of language, Indigenous last-names, and local governance from the colonial times to the 21st century. I also provide a novel theoretical framework to understand Indigenous agency and their capacity to resist, survive and adapt to colonial rule.

 

Speaker Bio:

I am

Image
edgar vivanco
a PhD candidate in Political Science at Stanford University with an interest in the political economy of development and comparative politics. I was born and raised in Mexico City where I also attended college at ITAM, majoring in Economics and Political Science. After graduating college, I worked for two years at a policy think-tank in Mexico City. Before starting the PhD I completed a masters at Stanford in educational policy and public policy.

 

PhD candidate in Political Science at Stanford University
Seminars

Abstract:

In electoral autocracies, why do some citizens view the state as autocratic, while others see it as democratic and legitimate? Traditionally, indicators such as income and education have been the most important factors to explaining why different types of citizens understand politics. This paper argues that in electoral autocracies, we must also take into account the role of political geography. Opposition parties are often one of the only actors that provide information about the authoritarian nature of the regime, but their message tends to get quarantined within their strongholds. I argue that regardless of income, education, ethnicity, or access to government spending, citizens living in opposition strongholds should be far more likely to view the state as autocratic and illegitimate than citizens living in ruling party strongholds. I find evidence for this theory using Afrobarometer survey data paired with hand-coded constituency-level electoral returns from five electoral autocracies in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
natalie letsa 1
Natalie Wenzell Letsa is a political scientist and the Wick Cary Assistant Professor of Political Economy in the Department of International and Area Studies at the University of Oklahoma. Her work focuses on public opinion and political behavior in authoritarian regimes, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa. She is also interested in macro-issues of regime stability and legitimization in non-democratic and transitioning regimes. Her work has appeared in Comparative Politics, The Journal of Modern African Studies, and Democratization.

Assistant Professor of Political Economy in the Department of International and Area Studies at the University of Oklahoma
Seminars
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

"The nature of modern identity, however, is to be changeable. Some individuals may persuade themselves that their identity is based on their biology and is outside their control. But citizens of modern societies have multiple identities, ones that are shaped by social interactions. People have identities defined by their race, gender, workplace, education, affinities, and nation. And although the logic of identity politics is to divide societies into small, self-regarding groups, it is also possible to create identities that are broader and more integrative. One does not have to deny the lived experiences of individuals to recognize that they can also share values and aspirations with much broader circles of citizens. Lived experience, in other words, can become just plain experience—something that connects individuals to people unlike themselves, rather than setting them apart. So although no democracy is immune from identity politics in the modern world, all of them can steer it back to broader forms of mutual respect," writes CDDRL Mosbacher Director Francis Fukuyama. Read here

 
Hero Image
protest 1567028 1920
All News button
1
(650) 723 3591
0
Fairleigh S. Dickinson, Jr. Professor in Public Policy.
Professor of Political Science
paul.sniderman_photo.jpg

Paul M. Sniderman is the Fairleigh S. Dickinson, Jr. Professor in Public Policy.

Sniderman’s current research focuses on the institutional organization of political choice; multiculturalism and inclusion of Muslims in Western Europe; and the politics of race in the United States.

Most recently, he authored The Democratic Faith and co-authored Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe and the Danish Cartoon Crisis (with Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager).

He has published many other books, including The Reputational Premium: A Theory of Party Identification and Policy Reasoning, Reasoning and Choice, The Scar of Race, Reaching beyond Race, The Outsider, and Black Pride and Black Prejudice, in addition to a plethora of articles. He initiated the use of computer-assisted interviewing to combine randomized experiments and general population survey research.

A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, he has been awarded the Woodrow Wilson Prize, 1992; the Franklin L. Burdette Pi Sigma Alpha Award, 1994; an award for the Outstanding Book on the Subject of Human Rights from the Gustavus Meyers Center, 1994; the Gladys M. Kammerer Award, 1998; the Pi Sigma Alpha Award; and the Ralph J. Bunche Award, 2003.

Sniderman received his B.A. degree (philosophy) from the University of Toronto and his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of California, Berkeley.

 

Affiliated faculty of The Europe Center
CV
Authors
Beth Duff-Brown
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

There are a billion guns in the world today. Those firearms took the lives of about 251,000 people in 195 countries in 2016, according to new research. 

That’s a lot of guns and fatalities, mostly by homicide, suicide and accidents with firearms.

About 35 percent of those gun deaths were by Americans committing suicide.

In the most comprehensive investigation of its kind, the findings, published this week in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), show 64 percent of firearm-related deaths were homicides, 27 percent were suicides and 9 percent were unintentional deaths.

And in all but one year of the 27-year study period — 1994 due to the Rwandan genocide — firearm deaths were more common along sidewalks than on the battlefields.

“This constitutes a major public health problem for humanity,” said Stanford Health Policy’s David Studdert, a professor of medicine and professor of law.

In an accompanying editorial alongside the research by a consortium of public health experts, the Global Burden of Disease 2016 Injury Collaborators, Studdert and his co-authors write:

“Injuries and deaths from firearms are increasingly part of modern consciousness, particularly in some countries. In the United States, gun-related massacres at schools, places of worship, workplaces, night clubs, and recreational venues have seared images of innocent victims in the minds of the populace. In the United States and elsewhere, acts of terrorism committed with firearms and other lethal means have changed the way people live, work, travel, and play.”

But Studdert and his co-authors — firearms and public health experts Frederick P. Rivara at the University of Washington and Garden J. Wintemute at the University of California, Davis — argue that the deaths from these headline-generating mass shootings and terrorist attacks are only a fraction of the public health burden of firearm-related murders and suicides.

“Mass shootings and terrorism perpetrated with guns are the most visible forms of firearm violence,” Studdert told SHP. “But most firearm deaths are private tragedies. They are homicides and suicides that occur behind closed doors, leaving families and communities devastated.”

 
 
 
 

The global burden of firearm mortality is highly concentrated, according to the research. In 2016, six countries in the Americas — Brazil, the United States, Mexico, Columbia, Venezuela and Guatemala — accounted for slightlymore than 50 percent of all deaths.

An estimated 32 percent of the deaths occurred in just two countries, Brazil and the United States, with Brazil accounting for one-fourth of all firearm homicides and the United States 35 percent of all firearm suicides.

“For individuals living in the United States, where the national policy debate has focused largely on interpersonal violence, the study provides a reminder of the importance of firearm suicide. In 2016, there were 2 firearm suicides for every firearm homicide, a margin that has widened over the past decade as suicide rates have increased and homicide rates have been relatively flat. Older white non-Hispanic men are at greatest risk of firearm suicide. Research and prevention efforts in the United States should proceed from a more inclusive definition of firearm violence.”

The authors believe more robust methods for estimating the number and distribution of firearms — as well as a better understanding of access — are critically important in determining which policies and prevention strategies are most effective and how best to implement them.

Studdert and his fellow researchers said research on firearm violence and public health has been impeded by the Dickey Amendment, the 1996 bill that mandated “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control  at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”

“In the absence of this funding, several private foundations have stepped in to fill the void," they wrote. "However, real progress in addressing the vast public health problem that the Global Burden of Injury Collaborators document will depend on sustained action from governments in both research and policy.”

Hero Image
getty images bullets
Getty Images
All News button
1
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Colin H. Kahl will serve as co-director of the social sciences for Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC).

Kahl, a top international security expert and veteran White House advisor, is the Steven C. Házy Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI) for International Studies. He begins his new position on September 1, following Amy Zegart, the previous co-director for the social sciences. Rodney Ewing is the CISAC co-director for science and engineering.

Prior to Stanford, Kahl was an associate professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. From 2014 to 2017, he was deputy assistant to the U.S. president and national security advisor to the vice president. In that position, he served as a senior advisor to President Obama and Vice President Biden on all matters related to U.S. foreign policy and national security affairs, and represented the Office of the Vice President as a standing member of the National Security Council Deputies’ Committee.

Kahl’s research is focused on American grand strategy and a range of contemporary international security challenges, particularly digital and nuclear security, which are core CISAC research areas.  He also leads the Middle East Initiative at FSI. The Initiative seeks to improve understanding of how developments in the Middle East impact people in the region and security around the globe.

In the Winter Quarter, Kahl will teach a course, “Decision Making and U.S. Foreign Policy,” in the Ford Dorsey Master’s in International Policy program; he will also co-teach CISAC’s introductory class, “International Security in a Changing World.”

“For more than three decades, CISAC has been one of the nation’s premier centers for interdisciplinary research on international affairs,” Kahl said. “The Center has a long tradition of bringing together social scientists and hard scientists to conduct cutting edge, policy-relevant research on some of the most pressing security challenges we face,” Kahl said. “I look forward to working with Rod Ewing and my other CISAC colleagues to continue and expand upon this tradition of excellence.”

“Colin Kahl, who has both academic and extensive policy experience through his work in government and think tanks, will be a terrific co-director and asset to CISAC,” said Ewing.

“We are thrilled that Colin will be leading CISAC with Rod Ewing. Colin’s extensive experience in both theory and policy will enhance CISAC’s work in all areas,” said FSI Director and Senior Fellow Michael McFaul.

Kahl received his B.A. in political science from the University of Michigan (1993) and his Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University (2000).

 

MEDIA CONTACTS:

Colin H. Kahl, Center for International Security and Cooperation: ckahl@stanford.edu
Katy Gabel, Center for International Security and Cooperation: (650) 725-6488, kgabel@stanford.edu

 

Hero Image
colin kahl
All News button
1
-

Abstract:

State repression is used in many countries by unpopular regimes. Why does repression deter dissent in some cases, but encourage it in others? I argue that repression is most effective against the poor because they are both physically and psychologically more vulnerable to violence. I test this prediction using data on pre-election repression in Zimbabwe and two empirical strategies at the constituency and individual level that draw on exogenous variation in poverty and exposure to repression. Across multiple analyses, I find evidence that the poor are less likely to dissent after repression. I also rule out several important alternative explanations including changes in preferences, differences in the type of repression, or differences in the effectiveness of clientelism. These results may help explain why poverty is associated with authoritarian, non-responsive institutions, and why we see little redistribution to the poor in non-democratic states.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
lauren young website pic
Lauren is an assistant professor of political science at UC Davis. Lauren's research aims to understand how people behave in violent or coercive environments. Her primary research topics include why people participate in violence and how exposure to violence affects people in the short and long term. Much of her past research and policy work is in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly Zimbabwe. Prior to coming to Davis, she was a postdoctoral scholar at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University and a non-resident postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Global Development. She completed her PhD in political science with distinction in 2016 at Columbia University.

Assistant professor of political science at UC Davis
Seminars
-

Abstract:

While numerous studies examine the relationship between social media and political behavior, scholars continue to debate its effects on political polarization. To inform this debate, we measure the effect of social media echo chambers on public opinion by evaluating 40,000 tweets around major breaking news stories, and comparing pre-and post-event policy positions amongst far and moderate right, and far and moderate left groups on Twitter. Our research improves on current approaches of measuring polarization by combining network analysis with supervised machine learning to examine what sampled individuals within different social media networks actually say about political topics. We find that individuals’ opinions on a variety of political issues converge on the modal opinion of media elites within their echo chamber following large-scale media events. We use this evidence to argue that people become more ideologically sorted—rather than more ideologically polarized—vis-à-vis social media echo chambers.  

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
jakli headshot

Laura Jakli is a Predoctoral Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University, and a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. Her dissertation draws on digital survey and ad experiments, machine learning, and qualitative fieldwork to examine the relationship between digital politics and political radicalization. Her related research examines how digital networks shape migration patterns and refugee behavior. Her research appears in International Studies Quarterly and the Virginia Journal of International Law. Her co-authored book chapter is forthcoming in Democratization (Oxford University Press).
 
 
 

Encina Hall, C147 616 Jane Stanford Way Stanford, CA 94305-6055
0
CDDRL Predoctoral Fellow, 2018-20
Fellow, Program on Democracy and the Internet, 2018-20
jakli.jpg

​I am a Junior Fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows. Starting in 2023, I will be an Assistant Professor at Harvard Business School's Business, Government and the International Economy (BGIE) unit.

My research examines political extremism, destigmatization, and radicalization, focusing on the role of popularity cues in online media. My related research examines a broad range of threats to democratic governance, including authoritarian encroachment, ethnic prejudice in public goods allocation, and misinformation. 

​My dissertation won APSA's Ernst B. Haas Award for the best dissertation on European Politics. I am currently working on my book project, Engineering Extremism, with generous funding from the William F. Milton Fund at Harvard.

My published work has appeared in the American Political Science Review,  Governance,  International Studies QuarterlyPublic Administration Review, and the Virginia Journal of International Law, along with an edited volume in Democratization (Oxford University Press). My research has been featured in KQED/NPRThe Washington Post, and VICE News.

I received my Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley in 2020. I was a Predoctoral Research Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University and the Stanford Program on Democracy and the Internet. I hold a B.A. (Magna Cum Laude; Phi Beta Kappa) from Cornell University and an M.A. (with Distinction) from the University of California, Berkeley.

CV
Predoctoral Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University
Seminars
Subscribe to The Americas