We teach Americans about China. Or Japanese about the United States. Or Chinese about Silicon Valley. Our student cohorts are often very diverse, but usually share a similar national perspective. What if we mixed that up? What if we put students from different countries in the same program and asked them to learn together—and from each other? What if we then put them to work on a common problem, sharing common goals?

[Image above: Part of one group’s final project, “Buzzing Biodiversity: The Vital Role of Pollinators in Enhancing Ecosystems,” aimed at local Beijing, Suzhou, and Irvine, CA, communities. Poster designed by Jimmy Qiyuan Zhang (Suzhou). Other group members: Annie Meitong Song (Irvine) and Xinyi Nancy Zhao (Beijing).]

This past spring, Carey Moncaster and I decided to try it. We created a joint program, the U.S.–China Co-Lab on Climate Solutions, combining the Stanford e-China Program for high school students in China, which Moncaster runs, with my China Scholars Program for high school students in the United States. Sixteen students in each country spent 14 weeks online together, exploring collaborative solutions to the climate crisis.

The U.S.–China Co-Lab (as in both “collaboration” and a hands-on “lab” done together) has two goals:

• To learn about current and potential solutions to climate change and its impacts, through a transnational lens; and
• To learn about and practice the cross-cultural collaboration skills necessary to achieve those solutions.

Climate issues were an obvious choice for the theme of the course. Not only is it the most urgent issue facing all of humanity, it is also one that avoids some of the stickier political issues between the United States and China. Chinese and American students could easily find common ground and common inspiration.

We chose to emphasize climate solutions—as opposed to problems—as a counter to discouraging narratives of crisis that surround this young generation, to instead emphasize the tools we have to correct course and heal.

“Solutions” also provided the structure for the course. Each module of the course was centered on a different area of climate solutions: Global Governance and Climate Diplomacy; Biodiversity; Green Finance; Clean Energy; Food and Agriculture. We were honored to draw on the expertise of Stanford faculty, as well as leaders from institutions like the Wilson Center and the Paulson Institute.*

In addition, we spent one week reading about cross-cultural skills. Stanford’s Scott Rozelle spoke with the students about his decades of practical experience running the Rural Education Action Program (REAP), a highly collaborative research and policy project involving transnational researchers, Chinese villagers and educators, and government officials. One student emphasized that it was Rozelle’s example in particular that “allowed me to see the ways professionals have worked together and made important findings.”

U.S.–China Co-Lab students had to work together for every assignment. The most straightforward were the in-class discussions on Zoom and the weekly, written discussion boards—which nonetheless required teaching and interpretation, with each student explaining a reading that other students had not done.

We used a design thinking approach for another assignment, the “Collaborative Prototype Challenge” developed by our SPICE colleague Mariko Yang-Yoshihara, in which each student was paired with a classmate from the other country. Through interviews, the students identified a key environmental need in their partner’s local community and brainstormed a creative prototype solution, using only materials at hand to represent it. Feedback and revision amplified this exercise in cross-cultural empathy, and the results were thoughtful, technical, artistic, and even goofy—ranging from Chinese paper lanterns made from repurposed packaging waste to a wearable air-conditioning suit to electricity generated by hamster wheels.

For our final project, the “Bilateral Media Campaign,” we stepped up the teamwork and the cross-cultural empathy. In groups of four (2 U.S., 2 China members), students created a media campaign targeting a specific climate solution, tailoring two versions for parallel audiences: one in China and one in the United States. Together, each group needed to agree on a message to inspire specific public action and two specific audiences for that message—which involved both academic and local, community-based research. With the resulting data, they had to choose medium, means, and strategy, and finally, create the materials themselves.

One group tackled invasive species and challenged teens in Arizona and Beijing to weed them out of their local ecosystems, with informative slides on buffelgrass and ragweed, respectively. A second group imagined schoolwide carbon footprint competitions between group members’ high schools in California and Shanghai. Another group sought to encourage families to adopt solar energy—for their own homes in North Carolina, or by using solar-charging personal devices in Beijing, where single-family homes are rare.

Students found the logistical coordination necessary to complete this multi-step project quite challenging and sometimes frustrating. But we considered that a realistic aspect of all collaborative problem-solving—all the more so when dealing with national boundaries, the international date line, and internet firewalls!

Feedback from the class suggests that the project was worthwhile. “I learned about the nuances and similarities between both audiences, which helped me appreciate the common ground we shared despite our diverse backgrounds,” commented one student. “The synergy that emerged from our collaboration was remarkable.”

Overall, Moncaster and I took extra care to represent a wide range of perspectives in the speakers and readings and other course materials, representing diversity in profession, academic discipline, strategy, personal background, etc. Several students commented on how their future plans had changed as a result: students who joined the program interested in policy now wanted to study climate tech as well; STEM-oriented students now understood the need for culturally informed messaging; a humanities student now felt confident in exploring environmental sciences as well.

Most importantly, friends were made, and almost all of the students plan to stay in touch with one another. Anfeng Wilson Xie, of Shanghai, China, was thankful for the opportunity to meet so many “passionate youths in the environmental field, as I have truly learned a lot from my peers.”

Feedback from the students on our first iteration of the U.S.–China Co-Lab has been overwhelmingly positive. “Its transformative journey surpassed my prior expectations,” Raiden Smith, of Tucson, Arizona, told us. He added that it “strengthened my interest in climate studies and broadened my perspective on the importance of cross-cultural communication as I’ve become more hopeful for our collaborative future.”

For our part, Moncaster and I were heartened and inspired by the intelligent, open-minded, and imaginative young people we got to know in the program and look forward to watching them forge their own future. Who knows what new solutions for our planet they may dream up together?

*We would like to offer our thanks and appreciation to all of our guest speakers for the Spring 2024 U.S.–China Co-Lab on Climate Solutions:

Thomas Fingar, Senior Scholar, Shorenstein APARC Fellow, Affiliated Scholar at the Stanford Center on China’s Economy and Institutions, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University

Darrin Magee, Director, Institute for Energy Studies, Western Washington University

Rose Niu, Chief Conservation Officer, Paulson Institute

Scott Rozelle, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China’s Economy and Institutions, Helen F. Farnsworth Endowed Professorship, Senior Fellow at FSI, Senior Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research

Mark Thurber, Associate Director for Research, Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, FSI, Stanford University

Jennifer L. Turner, Director, China Environment Forum, Wilson Center

For more information about the U.S.–China Co-Lab on Climate Solutions, please visit https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/fellowship/uschinacolab. The application for the spring 2025 session is open now.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

The United States remains a leader in the global economy, yet over the past decade, it has taken a sharp turn away from its traditional support of free, rules-based trade. Since 2016, Washington has withdrawn from international trade agreements it once championed, opting for a more unilateral approach and pivoting from many of the obligations and norms it had shaped and insisted others honor to make trade fair, equitable, and mutually beneficial. How did the United States arrive here, and what steps should it take to leverage its strengths in the global trade system moving forward?

APARC visiting scholar Michael Beeman addresses these questions in his new book Walking Out: America’s New Trade Policy in the Asia-Pacific and Beyond (published by APARC, distributed by Stanford University Press). As a former Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Japan, Korea, and APEC, Beeman brings an insider’s perspective to the recent transformation of U.S. trade policy. He provides a timely analysis of the forces driving this shift, examines its implications for America’s role in the global economy, and offers prescriptions for a robust U.S. trade policy that still serves American interests while allowing for compromise among competing ones.

Join Dr. Beeman on campus for our book launch event on October 17. Reserve your spot today >

Beeman joined APARC Communications Manager Michael Breger to discuss his new book. Listen to the conversation on our SoundCloud or YouTube channels. You can also download a transcript of the conversation.

Sign up for APARC newsletters to receive our event invitations and scholar updates >

A Departure From the Norm

In Beeman's analysis, the tactic of "walking out" as a means to renegotiate international agreements reflects a fundamental shift in U.S. trade policy, marked by a rejection of established conditions, obligations, and norms that had previously facilitated global trade and reduced conflict. This shift has had significant repercussions, as Washington has increasingly distanced itself from the principles it once championed, such as non-discrimination, transparency, openness, and reciprocity in trade. The change represents more than the inability to agree to a specific trade deal. According to Beeman, it is a rejection of Washington's long-held principles in pursuit of new goals.

Beeman attributes the collapse of the decades-long bipartisan consensus supporting free trade to a domestic political climate, where “the emergence of America’s zero-sum-centered politics [is] the new, defining feature of its political system.” In this new system, trade is viewed not as mutually beneficial but as a competition for limited resources. This transformation began gaining traction during the 2007-2008 financial crisis, which galvanized new political movements, like the Tea Party and the so-called New Right, that simultaneously criticized free trade agreements.

Acknowledging the effects of domestic politics on trade policy, Beeman explores how the current political landscape, marked by extreme division, shapes trade decisions and reflects broader societal tensions. The author draws parallels between historical trade policy and the contemporary environment, noting that just as the 1930s saw dramatic swings in U.S. tariff policies, today’s new political geometry is “forged from extreme new levels of domestic political division [...] On trade, it is a geometry of acute angles and no longer one of curves and tangents.”

This political backdrop has resulted in an increasingly politicized trade policy that hampers efforts to find consensus. Beeman emphasizes that the transformation of U.S. trade policy is not merely a reflection of external pressures but a byproduct of internal political dynamics that redefine the goals and assumptions underpinning U.S. trade strategy.

Trade Policy Tensions
 

Among the many trade agreements that the U.S. has recently abandoned was the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). According to Beeman, internal divisions regarding the TPP's stringent rules and demands — especially concerning auto manufacturing — highlighted a rift between America's expectations of its trading partners and its willingness to accept compromise.

Various rules and regulations dictated by the TPP stoked domestic contention and “had scrambled the usual pathways to achieve the vote margins needed for these agreements. [They] also revealed the sharp new tension between what America expected and wanted from others and what it was willing to agree upon and accept for itself.” The Biden administration's decision to abandon its Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) trade agreement in late 2023 further illustrated ongoing tensions in U.S. trade policy, underscoring a lack of coherent strategy following the TPP's collapse.

The book explores how the Trump and Biden Administrations have grappled with the contradictions in their trade policies. While Robert Lighthizer, the former trade representative under Trump, embraced a confrontational approach, Beeman criticizes the fallout from these decisions, arguing they often left established commitments unfulfilled and damaged international relationships. But Beeman also maintains that the Biden Administration's attempts to repair and redefine trade relationships have resulted in a series of inconsistent policies, reflecting internal domestic tensions yet to be resolved.

“As a set of social values and domestic priorities in search of a means to express themselves through America’s external trade policies, [the Biden] Administration attempted to explain its approach in ways that often only raised contradictory distinctions.” Once these “became harder to explain and justify, [it] began developing what amounted to a new theory of global trade disorder and dysfunction in an attempt to more convincingly frame its decisions.”

According to Beeman, disruptions from Covid-19 were a “helpful backdrop,” but, he argues, “if set against the vastly more immense challenges of the late 1940s and early 1950s, when America made an intentional policy choice to work with other countries to commit to open, rules-based trade to lead the world out of crisis, the problems of 2020-21 were challenges that policymakers from that time undoubtedly would have preferred.”

Barriers to Progress
 

The current political landscape has made it challenging for Congress to reach a consensus on trade issues. The failure to renew the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which provided tariff relief to developing countries, exemplifies the paralysis in U.S. trade policy. Beeman remarks upon how, “after the bipartisan mainstream that advanced open and freer trade […] was swept away by America’s New Right and progressive Left, their shared interest in adding new and ever more conditions to America’s imports was insufficient to overcome their sharp disagreements over which conditions to add.” For Beeman, the inability to agree on new conditions for trade reflects broader ideological divides that hinder progress.

Ultimately, Beeman warns that America’s zero-sum approach to trade may lead to a cycle of self-inflicted isolation. He argues that this shift is not solely a reaction to China’s rise but represents a deeper ideological rift in American politics. “International trade adds a foreign, or external, dimension to zero-sum thinking that has facilitated a surprising degree of alignment between the New Right and the progressive Left,” he writes, specifically the “zero-sum belief that America is made worse off by freer trade, which benefits ‘them.’” Such an alignment has created an environment where bipartisan support for trade agreements has eroded, complicating efforts to establish a coherent and effective trade policy moving forward.

An essential read for anyone interested in the international political economy of trade and the future of America’s role in the global economy, “Walking Out” highlights the urgent need for the United States to reconcile its domestic divides to reestablish its role in the global economy. The current trajectory, characterized by a rejection of its foundational principles, risks fostering new conflicts with allies and adversaries alike, contradicting the original goals of the international trading system.

Stanford e-Japan enrolls exceptional high school students from Japan to engage in an intensive study of U.S. society and culture. The Reischauer Scholars Program (RSP) enrolls exceptional high school students from the United States to engage in an intensive study of Japanese society and culture. Both courses underscore the importance of U.S.–Japan relations. The Yanai Tadashi Foundation is the current supporter of Stanford e-Japan, and the Japan Fund at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) is the current supporter of the RSP.

On August 5, 2024, an award ceremony was held at Stanford University to honor SPICE’s Spring and Fall 2023 Stanford e-Japan student honorees and the 2024 RSP student honorees. The honorees performed at the highest levels of their courses as determined by Stanford e-Japan Instructors Waka Takahashi Brown (spring course) and Meiko Kotani (fall course), RSP Instructor Naomi Funahashi, and the research paper review committees. The honorees are:

Spring 2023 Stanford e-Japan 
Asumi Kato, Matsumoto Fukashi High School; home prefecture: Nagano
Luna Kihara, Osaka Jogakuin High School; home prefecture: Osaka
Satoshi Yamamura, Tokyo Metropolitan Fuji High School; home prefecture: Tokyo

Honorable Mentions:
Takuma Kawaguchi, Tokyo Gakugei University International Secondary School; home prefecture: Tokyo
Kanako Miyazaki, Saikyo Municipal High School; home prefecture: Kyoto

Fall 2023 Stanford e-Japan 
Hisataka Kadota, Okayama Prefectural Okayama Asahi Senior High School; home prefecture: Okayama
Shoma Nishida, Canadian Academy Kobe; home prefecture: Hyogo
Rei Ozawa, Keio Girls Senior High School; home prefecture: Tokyo

Honorable Mentions:
Mayu Anzai, Seiun High School; home prefecture: Hyogo
Rihito Kotani, Tokyo Gakugei University International Secondary School; home prefecture: Tokyo

2024 Reischauer Scholars Program
Sophie Ankeles, Polytechnic School; California
Annamika Konkola, West Linn High School; Oregon
Vivian Luo, Mt. Lebanon High School; Pennsylvania

Honorable Mentions:
Maya Swaminathan, Lynbrook High School; California
Catherine Fisher, The Nueva School; California

Image

The program began with welcoming comments from the Honorable Yo Osumi, Consul General of Japan in San Francisco. He commented that the Reischauer Scholars Program and Stanford e-Japan are very important for our two nations and noted that the education of youth has been one of his highest priorities since he assumed his post at the Consulate General of Japan in San Francisco. He extended high praise to the honorees.

Also in attendance from the Consulate General of Japan in San Francisco were Mayu Hagiwara, Director and Consul, Japan Information and Culture Center; Asumi Chikae, Consul for Education, Science, and Technology; and Yuriko Sugahara, Advisor for Cultural and Educational Affairs.

Image

Following the welcoming and opening comments, Brown, Kotani, and Funahashi gave overviews of their courses. The student honorees made engaging presentations based on their research papers and were very poised while fielding questions from the audience. Each honoree received a plaque from their instructor. (Photo above: student honorees and their instructors taken at Frances C. Arrillaga Alumni Center; Consul General Osumi, seventh from the right.)

Image

Among the audience members were Stanford student Anna Matsumoto (photo above), a Yanai Tadashi Scholar from Tokushima Prefecture, and Keio Girls High School English Teacher and Global Partnership Coordinator Leon Mueller. Mueller commented,

It was such an honor to see the amazing presentations by this elite group of high school students. The Stanford e-Japan program provided them the opportunity to apply their drive and intellect in a highly academic environment, resulting in a stronger understanding of the U.S.–Japan partnership. It was also encouraging to see the many friendships being forged among the Japanese and American students and the desire to take what they had learned and share it with their peers back in their communities. I think this type of ripple effect is what makes the program so inspiring and unique.

Image

Also in the audience were SPICE supporters, Adrian and Monica Yeung Arima. SPICE is grateful to them all for their unwavering support of SPICE. (Photo above: Mueller standing next to Kotani.)

The RSP is about to enter its 22nd year and Stanford e-Japan is currently in its 10th year. Many of the alumni are engaged in various fields related to U.S.–Japan relations and continue to give back to both programs by being guest speakers or mentors to the current students.

Following the formal event, the student honorees—most having just met each other in person for the first time—had the chance to enjoy lunch and a Stanford campus tour together. It is the hope of Brown, Kotani, and Funahashi that the Japanese and American student honorees will continue to strengthen their budding friendships and ensure that the U.S.–Japan relationship remains strong.

SPICE is grateful to President Tadashi Yanai for his generous support of Stanford e-Japan and to Chikano Shiroma of the Yanai Tadashi Foundation for her regular correspondence and encouragement. SPICE is also thankful to the Japan Fund committee at FSI for its generous support of the Reischauer Scholars Program. These courses and the ceremony would not be possible without them.

The Reischauer Scholars Program is currently accepting applications until October 18, 2024. Stanford e-Japan’s spring 2025 application period will be from November 15 to December 31, 2024.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

My grandfather used to run a kindergarten in Seoul. During one of our summer visits, my brother and I were invited to teach a portion of the English classes with a stern reminder to restrict our vocabulary to basic words. As we stumbled along the lesson plan, juggling our conversational grasp of the Korean language with our grandfather’s wishes, one of the kids cried out “이건 너무 쉽잖아!” — “This is too easy!” The brutal honesty of our student raised a question I didn’t quite know how to answer yet: How Korean am I?

Attending the Sejong Korea Scholars Program was critical in helping me answer that question. Throughout the program, I found that my motivation to understand my ethnic identity was richly rewarded by the many opportunities to study and discuss the historical development of Korea. Quite unlike my unfortunate student(s) earlier, I found myself thoroughly challenged and pushed to grow by the course alongside my highly qualified peers.

I would like to thank our instructor Dr. HyoJung Jang for making this development possible by emphasizing the multiperspectivity of history. The intensive curriculum of reading chapters from Korea: A History by Eugene Y. Park, analyzing historical documents, and conferring in group forum discussions culminated in voice chats where we discussed our findings with our colleagues and experts in the field. Because every unit was focused on a different aspect of Korean history, I was exposed to topics varying from King Kojong’s struggle against imperialism to South Korea’s  postwar economic “Miracle on the River Han” led by the authoritarian Park Chung-Hee.

Furthermore, the curriculum examined U.S.–Korea relations from a diplomatic, economic, and cultural lens. The historical context helped me not only make sense of current developments such as North Korea’s Juche ideology and South Korea’s Hallyu soft power, but also my own identity at the intersection of Korea and America.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to the many lecturers and guest speakers who shared their knowledge and expertise with us during the program. I particularly enjoyed the visits of Professor Kyeyoung Park, who examined the 1992 Los Angeles riots in the context of tensions between the Korean American and African American communities, and Professor Danny Leipziger, who spoke about his experiences at the World Bank preparing the emergency financial bailout loan to South Korea during the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Having the opportunity to converse with every guest speaker expanded my worldview and opened my eyes to a future in Korean studies.

Inspired by their guidance, I focused my final paper on the unsung role of education in the Korean Independence movement, discussing how conflicting educational philosophies united to resist Japanese colonial rule. During my research, I discovered the fascinating English diary of educator and resistance member Yun Chi-ho written during his travels in the American South, which I later pursued further and won an endowment from my school to study through a year-long research project. Yun’s alienation in a racially polarized America as a Korean man deeply resonates with me, and I would have never found the passion to tell his story if not for the Sejong Korea Scholars Program.

So, how Korean am I now? From this program, I’ve recognized that this is a futile question. All that truly matters is that I am learning about my Korean heritage and growing for it. I highly encourage any interested students to apply for the Sejong Korea Scholars Program, regardless of your roots. Above all else, it will richly reward an open mind and a willingness to truly flower into a global citizen.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

SPICE’s online programs for U.S. high school students have begun accepting applications for the Spring 2025 academic term. The Reischauer Scholars Program (RSP) and the Sejong Korea Scholars Program (SKSP) welcome applications from high school sophomores, juniors, and seniors in the United States. U.S.–China Co-Lab on Climate Solutions brings together 10th–12th graders from the United States and China in the same program to collaborate on solutions to the global climate crisis.

The RSP engages students in an intensive study of Japan and the U.S.–Japan relationship, facilitating discussions with scholars, diplomats, and other guest speakers with personal and professional expertise in Japanese culture, society, and U.S.–Japan relations. The 2025 RSP course dates are February 1 to June 15, 2025. The application deadline is October 18, 2024.

The SKSP provides students an enriching and academically rigorous overview of Korean history and U.S.–Korea relations through online lectures with top scholars and experts and engaging student discussions. The 2025 SKSP course dates are February 3 to June 30, 2025. The application deadline is November 1, 2024.

The U.S.–China Co-Lab program focuses specifically on climate-related issues and U.S.–China cooperation, past and potential, and strategies for global cooperation. High school students from the U.S. and China will get to know each other’s lives and environments and actively work together on projects to develop their expertise on local, bilateral, and global climate action. This is a joint program of SPICE’s Stanford e-China (for students in China) and China Scholars Program (for U.S. students). The Spring 2025 Co-Lab course dates are February 28 to May 30, 2025. The application deadline for U.S. students is November 8, 2024. Applicants from China are accepted on a rolling basis; the first 15 qualified students will be accepted with applications closing around December 1, 2024.

Students who are interested in applying to more than one program may do so and rank their preferences on their applications. Those who are accepted into multiple programs for Spring 2025 will be invited to enroll in their highest-preference course.

Applications for all three programs can be found at https://spicestanford.smapply.io/. Deadlines vary:

• RSP: Oct 18
• SKSP: Nov 1
• U.S.–China Co-Lab: Nov 8 for U.S. students and rolling admissions for students from China

For more information on a specific online course, please refer to its individual webpage at reischauerscholars.org, sejongscholars.org, or https://spice.fsi.stanford.edu/fellowship/uschinacolab.

Note: The China Scholars Program (CSP) for U.S. high school students will next offer “Introduction to Contemporary China” in Fall 2025; applications will open in April.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

To learn more about SPICE’s student programs, visit our Student Programs page.

On July 16, 2024, I had the pleasure of giving a talk to the 2024 LeadNext Fellows from across Asia and the United States. LeadNext is made possible by Amanda Minami, who has provided seed money for the initial three years of the program. LeadNext is led by Nicole Ripley, Senior Program Officer of Leadership and Exchange Programs at The Asia Foundation. Both were present on this day. (Photo of Amanda Minami with LeadNext Fellows below; courtesy LeadNext Fellows Program)

Image

On The Asia Foundation website, the “LeadNext Fellows: Ambassadors for a Global Future” program is described as follows:

LeadNext builds a vibrant network of future leaders aged 18–25 from across Asia and the United States and supports their growth, impact, and capacity to address today’s greatest challenges.

With the profound structural changes that will transform geopolitics, global governance, the global economic order, and social landscape over the next decade, a new generation of globally minded leaders is imperative. The LeadNext program equips emerging leaders across cultures and disciplines with strong international networks, exposure to wide-ranging experiences, and leadership tools to thoughtfully steer the future.

Harnessing the innovation and energy of young leaders is essential. Positive and lasting change will depend on leaders who can move ideas and action forward to address rising inequality, find solutions to climate crises, mitigate conflict, and empower communities most vulnerable and insecure.

There are four components of the LeadNext program: leadership training intensive, monthly virtual masterclasses, mentorship, and the Global Leaders Summit. The LeadNext Fellows’ visit to Stanford was part of the culminating Global Leaders Summit. Prior to my talk on “What does it mean to be a global citizen?,” I had the chance to listen to self-introductions of the 20 2024 LeadNext Fellows, half of whom come from across the Asia-Pacific region and the other half from the United States. I was so impressed with the Fellows and their research projects and the tremendous diversity of the cohort.

The 2024 LeadNext Fellows are listed below.

• Enkhuun Byambadorj, Mongolia
• Max Han Kai Ding, Malaysia
• Sereyvoleak Dy, Cambodia
• Bryanna Entwistle, United States
• Bella Gomez, United States
• Deziree Harmon, United States
• Jorge Hernandez-Perez, United States
• Shannon Yunran Hong, United States
• Maha Husain, Pakistan
• Engel Laisina, Indonesia
• Tashi Lhazom, Nepal
• Surah Marks-Trammell, United States
• Ananya Mathur, Singapore
• Audrey Meigs, United States
• Trần Thảo Nguyên, Vietnam
• Anitvir Singh Taunque, United States
• Michaela Tse, United States
• Leki Tshering, Bhutan
• Laura Vorbach, United States
• Marciano Lopes Zemecas, Timor-Leste

Following my talk—during which I shared eight personal reflections on “What does it mean to be a global citizen?”—I had the opportunity to listen to presentations by five LeadNext Fellows. The LeadNext Fellows and their presentation topics are listed below. Five things really stood out about each presentation: (1) the appreciation that each expressed for the opportunity to participate in the LeadNext online and in-person programs; (2) the passion with which each spoke about their homelands; (3) the enthusiasm for the sense of community that each felt with their LeadNext cohort; (4) the critical importance each placed upon the importance of international perspectives on their research topics; and (5) the importance that each placed upon the leadership of youth.

• Max Han Kai Ding (Malaysia): Environment and Human Rights, Perspective from Malaysia
• Sereyvoleak Dy (Cambodia): Promoting Youth Participation and Policymaking Processes in Cambodia
• Tashi Lhazom (Nepal): The Art of Storytelling as Advocacy, Perspective from Nepal
• Leki Tshering (Bhutan): Jigme Singye Wangchuck (JSW) School of Law in Bhutan
• Marciano Lopes Zemecas (Timor-Leste): Human Rights and Leadership for Community and Youth Development in Rural Communities in Timor-Leste

As noted above in the LeadNext program description, “harnessing the innovation and energy of young leaders is essential” and given that SPICE’s focus is on the empowerment of youth, I feel very grateful for the synergy that is growing between LeadNext and SPICE. I have been fortunate to meet online with several 2023 and 2024 LeadNext Fellows—including Michaela Tse (photo below courtesy Michaela Tse)—since their return home. I hope to expand SPICE’s collaborative work with LeadNext, and am so grateful to Ripley and Minami for the opportunity.
 

Image