International Relations

FSI researchers strive to understand how countries relate to one another, and what policies are needed to achieve global stability and prosperity. International relations experts focus on the challenging U.S.-Russian relationship, the alliance between the U.S. and Japan and the limitations of America’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

Foreign aid is also examined by scholars trying to understand whether money earmarked for health improvements reaches those who need it most. And FSI’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center has published on the need for strong South Korean leadership in dealing with its northern neighbor.

FSI researchers also look at the citizens who drive international relations, studying the effects of migration and how borders shape people’s lives. Meanwhile FSI students are very much involved in this area, working with the United Nations in Ethiopia to rethink refugee communities.

Trade is also a key component of international relations, with FSI approaching the topic from a slew of angles and states. The economy of trade is rife for study, with an APARC event on the implications of more open trade policies in Japan, and FSI researchers making sense of who would benefit from a free trade zone between the European Union and the United States.

Paragraphs

The inaugural U.S.-Japan security workshop, held in Tokyo, Japan, on May 19, 2016, convened senior Japanese and American policymakers, scholars and regional experts to discuss Japan's security policy and alliance between Japan and the United States, hosted by Stanford's U.S.-Asia Security Initiative at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Authors
Paragraphs

"Ungoverned spaces" are often cited as key threats to national and international security and are increasingly targeted by the international community for external interventions—both armed and otherwise. This book examines exactly when and how these spaces contribute to global insecurity, and it incorporates the many spaces where state authority is contested—from tribal, sectarian, or clan-based governance in such places as Pakistani Waziristan, to areas ruled by persistent insurgencies, such as Colombia, to nonphysical spaces, such as the internet and global finance. Within this multiplicity of contexts, the book addresses a range of security concerns, including weapons of mass destruction, migrants, dirty money, cyberdata, terrorists, drug lords, warlords, insurgents, radical Islamist groups, and human privacy and security.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford University Press
Authors
Harold Trinkunas
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Stanford students are applying lean start-up techniques to some of the world’s most difficult foreign policy issues.

The fall 2016 quarter class, Hacking for Diplomacy: Tackling Foreign Policy Challenges with the Lean Launchpad, is a first-of-its-kind course for studying statecraft, created as a reflection of the best that Stanford and Silicon Valley offers in the way of pioneering paradigms. Hacking for Diplomacy is co-taught by Joe Felter, a senior researcher at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). It is based on the Lean LaunchPad methodology, created by course designer Steve Blank, a Stanford lecturer and entrepreneur.

The teaching team also includes Jeremy Weinstein, a political science professor at the Freeman Spogli Institute; Zvika Krieger, the U.S. Department of State's Representative to Silicon Valley; and Steve Weinstein, the CEO of MovieLabs.

'Breaking free'

The class is based on cultivating ideas and imagination, breaking free of the traditional “business plan” approach to rolling out new products and solutions. In the case of diplomacy, the lean start-up method is fast and flexible above all. It has three key principles based on concepts such as "mission model canvas," "beneficiary development," and "agile engineering,” according to Felter, also a research fellow at the Hoover Institution.

“The first principle is accepting that any proposed solution to a problem whether in the commercial world or public sector is initially just a set of untested hypotheses – at best informed guesses – as to what may solve the needs of a customer or beneficiary,” said Felter.

Regarding beneficiary development, he said, experiential learning is central.

“There are no answers to complex challenges ‘inside the building,’ if you will, and students must ‘get out of the building’ to find out –in as intimate detail as possible – the various pains and gains experienced by the various beneficiaries, stakeholders and end users that must be addressed to find viable and deployable solutions to their problems,” Felter said.

The last principle, “agile development,” is based on the view that proposed solutions are generated and constantly updated through a collecting of data and feedback. This in turn, Felter explained, is rapidly tested and new solutions are designed based this iterative process.

Overall, he noted, the core idea is that entrepreneurs are everywhere, and that lean startup principles favor experimentation over elaborate planning, offering a faster way to get a desired product or solution to market.

Real-world instruction

In the class, student teams analyze real-world foreign policy challenges. They then use lean startup principles to find new approaches to seemingly intractable or very complex problems that have bedeviled the foreign policy world. The teams actually work with mentors and officials in the U.S. State Department and other civilian agencies and private companies.

Each week, the teams present their findings (“product”) to a panel of faculty and mentors, who will critique their solutions. The outcomes will range, as they vary from problem to problem. Examples include human rights, food security, refuges and labor recruitment, and mosquito disease threats, among others.

On Oct. 10, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited the class. “Brilliant minds are applying technology to world’s toughest problems. Their perspective will inform,” Kerry tweeted after the class.

Kerry’s State Department gave the students seven challenges to address – human trafficking, avoiding space collisions, tracking nuclear devices, and countering violent extremism. The students will explore and analyze these issues through the rest of the quarter.

One student, Kaya Tilev, later asked Kerry what the students should be striving for to make their “solutions” a reality for national policymakers.

Kerry said, “Well, you’re doing it. You’re in it. You’re in the program. And I have absolute confidence if you come up with a viable solution it is going to be implemented, adopted, and institutionalized.”

Zvika Krieger, the state department official, told the students that Kerry was impressed with them and the class.

“He (Kerry) brought up our class in all of his meetings that day, including at a lunch with the CEOs/founders of Google, Airbnb, and Lyft; in a podcast interview with Wired magazine, and in remarks at the Internet Association's conference,” Krieger wrote in an email to them.

Global flashpoints are proliferating around the globe – the Syrian War, conflict and civil wars across the Middle East and in parts of Africa; the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction by states and non-state groups; the most significant flow of refugees since World War II; North Korea nuclear testing; Russian adventurism on its borders; China’s forays into the South China Sea; and a changing climate.

In other words, there is no shortage of thorny problems for young minds to solve as they embark on their careers.

‘Hungry to apply their energy’

Jeremy Weinstein, the political science professor, described the students as “hungry to apply their energy and talents to real-world problems, and to use hands-on experiences as a way of accelerating their learning.”

The class taps into that motivation by bringing together data scientists, engineers, and social scientist, he noted. In the end, the idea is for students to learn how to “innovate inside government.”

Weinstein is optimistic that this class – and a stronger connection between the State Department and Stanford’s technical and policy expertise – can drive more innovation inside government.

“Technology can play a critical role in addressing many of today’s foreign policy challenges, and this class is one new way for senior U.S. officials to tap into the passion, creativity and talent of Silicon Valley,” he said.

Hacking for defense

Last year, Felter and Blank also led a Hacking for Defense class based on the same lean start-up principles. Hacking for Diplomacy is co-listed as both an International Policy Studies and a Management Science and Engineering course – it counts for international relations and political science majors as well.

Blank, a consulting associate professor in engineering, told the Stanford News Service in a recent story that he seeks to cultivate in students a passion for giving back to society and their world.

“We’re going to create a network of entrepreneurial students who understand the diplomatic, policy and national security problems facing the country and get them engaged in partnership with islands of innovation in the Department of State,” said Blank, who also wrote about the new hacking for Diplomacy course in the Huffington Post.

“Teams must take these products out to the real world and ask potential users for feedback,” he noted.

 

Hero Image
29612136363 923bc390c7 o
The new Stanford class, "Hacking for Diplomacy," gives students the opportunity to analyze global challenges and apply "lean start-up" methods to solving them. On Oct. 10, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited the class, which is co-taught by CISAC senior research scholar Joe Felter.
Courtesy of Zvika Krieger
All News button
1
Paragraphs

In American Crossings, nine scholars consider the complicated modern history of borders in the Western Hemisphere, examining borders as geopolitical boundaries, key locations for internal security, spaces for international trade, and areas where national and community identities are defined.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Johns Hopkins University Press
Authors
Harold Trinkunas
Paragraphs

Aspirational Power examines Brazil as an emerging power. It explains Brazil’s present emphasis on using soft power through a historical analysis of Brazil’s three past attempts to achieve major power status. Though these efforts have fallen short, this book suggests that Brazil will continue to try to emerge, but that it will only succeed when its domestic institutions provide a solid and attractive foundation for the deployment of its soft power abroad. Aspirational Power concludes with concrete recommendations for how Brazil might improve its strategy, and why the great powers, including the United States, should respond positively to Brazil’s emergence.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Brookings Institution Press
Authors
Harold Trinkunas
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

An in memoriam event recognizing the legacy of Stephen W. “Steve” Bosworth was held last week. Organized by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC), the event drew Stanford faculty, students and community members, paying tribute to the foreign affairs scholar and three-time U.S. ambassador.

Bosworth, who died in January 2016, was the Payne Distinguished Lecturer at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies in 2014. During that time, he delivered three lectures at Stanford that highlighted lessons from his tenure in public service and in academia as dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

Bosworth had also been a key participant over the years at Shorenstein APARC. He was active with the New Beginnings project that sought to bolster the U.S.-South Korea alliance and the Koret Workshop series focused on dialogue about North Korea.

Shorenstein APARC Distinguished Fellow Michael Armacost described him as a “longtime friend and colleague” and a mentor, having both worked to lay groundwork for the restoration of democracy in the Philippines as U.S. ambassador there.

“I admired Steve as a consummate diplomat, but he was a lot more than that,” Armacost said. “He was a man of intellectual acuity. He was a man of moral fortitude. He had a wry sense of humor. And, he had that remarkable ability of being able to stand-up and speak thoughtfully about almost any subject.”

Armacost was followed by remarks from Kathleen Stephens, the William J. Perry Distinguished Fellow and former U.S. ambassador to South Korea, and Sung Kim, the U.S. special envoy for North Korea, and discussion with the audience.

The collection of Bosworth’s Payne lectures has been published as a booklet. The booklet can be viewed here.

Hero Image
bosworth Reuters
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Japan Program held the fourth annual Stanford Juku on Japanese Political Economy from September 29 – October 1. Over 40 scholars from various parts of the US and Japan participated in the conference, which took place at the Oksenberg Conference Center at Encina Hall. The first portion of the program (9/29 and morning of 9/30) focused on research in political science/political economy and international relations, and the latter portion of the program (afternoon of 9/30 and 10/1) focused on research in economics.

The main goal of the program is to attract young researchers who will go on to become leaders in the study of Japanese politics and Japanese economy in the near future.  Distinctive features of the Juku are the long times allotted to each paper to allow for two in-depth discussants and discussion among participants, as well as ample time for informal discussions and interactions among participants allowing for collaborations and expansion of the network of researchers on Japan in political science and economics. We received a large volume of quality paper submissions this year, which made the selection process very competitive. 

The first day included four papers in political science/political economy and international relations. Daniel Smith from Harvard University presented a paper co-authored by Yusaku Horiuchi (Dartmouth College) and Teppei Yamamoto (Massachusetts Institute Technology) entitled, "Identifying Voter Preferences for Politicians' Personal Attributes: A Conjoint Experiment in Japan," with discussants Ethan Scheiner (University of California, Davis) and Mike Tomz (Stanford University).

Amy Catalinac (New York University) presented a paper co-authored by Frances Rosenbluth (Yale University) and Hikaru Yamagishi (Yale University) entitled "Party Strategies and Foreign Policy in Post-Electoral Reform Japan." The Discussants for the paper were Gary Cox (Stanford) and Teppei Yamamoto (MIT).

Jacques Hymans from University of Southern California presented his paper on “The Limits of Japan's Energy Angst: The Case of Geothermal Power.” Mark Thurber (Stanford) and Steve Vogel (University of California, Berkeley) were the discussants.

The fourth paper was “Democratic Community and Its Consequences: Evidence from Japan” by Jonathan Chu (Stanford), discussed by Christina Davis (Princeton University) and Megumi Naoi (University of California, San Diego).

Christina Davis (Princeton) started off the second day by presenting her paper “Joining the Club: Accession to the GATT/WTO." Discussants were Jonathan Chu (Stanford) and Phillip Lipscy (Stanford).

The political science/political economy section ended with Megumi Naoi (UC, San Diego) presenting a paper co-authored by Chun-Fang Chiang (National Taiwan University), Jason Kuo (Post-doc, Georgetown University), Jing-tan Liu (National Taiwan University) entitled, "What Do Voters Learn from Foreign News? Experimental Evidence on PTA Diffusion in Japan and Taiwan." Discussants were Kenji Kushida (Stanford) and Yuki Takagi (Stanford). 

After lunch, two economics papers were presented.  Wataru Miyamoto (Bank of Canada) presented a paper co-authored by Thuy Lan Ngyuen (Santa Clara University) and Dmitriy Sergeyev (Bocconi University) entitled, "Government Spending Multipliers under the Zero Lower Bound: Evidence from Japan" with discussants Yuriy Gordonichenko (UC, Berkeley) and Johannes Wieland (UC, San Diego).

The second paper was “Government Spending Multipliers under the Zero Lower Bound: Evidence from Japan”, by Robert Dekle (USC), Nobuhiko Kiyotaki (Princeton) and Tsutomu Miyagawa (Gakushuin University).  Huiyu Li (Federal Bank of San Francisco) and Shuichiro Nishioka (West Virgina University) were the discussants.  A group dinner followed the second day.

The final day included four papers in economics.  The first was “Will the Sun Also Rise? Five Growth Strategies for Japan by Yoko Takeda (Mitsubishi Research Insitute).  Discussants were Michael Hutchison (US, Santa Cruz) and Ryo Kambayashi (Hitotsubashi University).

The second paper was "Natural Disaster and Natural Selection" by Hirofumi Uchida (Kobe University), Daisuke Miyakawa (Hitotsubashi), Kaoru Hosono (Gakushuin), Arito Ono (Chuo University), Taisuke Uchino (Daito Bunka University) and Iichiro Uesugi (Hitotsubashi).  Discussants were Nobuhiko Hibara (Waseda University) and Johannes Wieland (UC, San Diego).

Koichiro Ito (University of Chicago) presented a paper co-authored by Takanori Ida (Kyoto University) and Makoto Tanaka (GRIPS) entitled “Information Frictions, Switching Costs, and Selection on Elasticity: A Field Experiment on Electricity Tariff Choice.”  Karen Eggleston (Stanford) and Hitoshi Shigeoka (Simon Fraser University) were the discussants.

The final paper was “Good Jobs and Bad Jobs in Japan: 1982-2007” by Ryo Kambayashi (Hitotsubashi) and Takao Kato (Colegate University), discussed by Takeo Hoshi (Stanford) and David Vera (California State University, Fresno).

Hero Image
photo juku 2016
All News button
1
-

Image
Click here to register

For more information contact Mr. Brian Graf

Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA, 202-296-6694, bgraf@spfusa.org

This event is free and open to the public.

Innovative new technologies, from components like batteries to systems such as airplanes, demand the specific properties of a growing number of rare metals used in complex combinations and in increasingly refined amounts. Technology now relies on an entirely new set of critical materials, namely rare metals, for products manufactured today that are very different from those produced just twenty years ago.

While the world is not running out of rare metals, developing new supply lines can take a decade or more. Advanced economies are approaching a point where the speed of development and number of new devices will outpace the ability to secure the materials this new industrial age requires. As new devices proliferate, advanced countries like the United States and Japan are linking their economic futures to rare metals, with production often dominated by one mine or one country.

On November 30, Sasakawa USA will partner with the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Cetner at Stanford University to hold a conference to discuss and lay out the challenges, opportunities, and limitations of creating resilient supplies of critical materials. This will be the first conference to bring together companies from the entire the rare metal supply chain, including experts and officials from both Japan and the United States, countries that both rely on the entire spectrum of these resources for manufacturing. 

 

Image

 

 

 

Conferences
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

CISAC nuclear scientist Siegfried S. Hecker earlier this year released a book, Doomed to Cooperate, about how American and Russian scientists joined forces to avert some of the greatest post-Cold War nuclear dangers. Physics Today and Arms Control Today recently ran reviews on the work. Below is a Nov. 1 article that Hecker wrote on this subject for Russia Matters:

By Siegfried S. Hecker

Recalling why U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation was essential during the late 1980s, Russia’s then-First Deputy Minister of Atomic Energy Lev D. Ryabev said: “We arrived in the nuclear century all in one boat—a movement by any one will affect everyone… [Russian and American nuclear scientists] were doomed to work on these things together, which pushed us toward cooperation.”

Russia mattered then and it matters now. Today, like 30 years ago, the size of its nuclear program—namely its nuclear weapons, facilities, materials, experts—and its safety, security and environmental challenges are rivaled only by the United States. They dwarf all others in the world combined.

The dangerous difference between then and now is that the hard-won cooperation that amazingly prevented nuclear weapons, materials and technologies from spilling out of the disintegrating Soviet empire and into the hands of actors bent on deploying them has been replaced with animosity, tension and a freeze on substantive collaboration. Within the past month two U.S.-Russian agreements—on plutonium disposition and on cooperation in nuclear- and energy-related scientific research and development—have been suspended. Another one—on conversion of Russian research reactors—has been terminated altogether. Meanwhile, officials in Europe and the United States have tracked a number of disturbing activities suggesting that the Islamic State and its sympathizers may be pursuing nuclear and radiological terrorism as the group has been pushed on the defensive.

I must add that Russia also matters to me personally: It has been inextricably intertwined with my life. I was born during World War II in Europe. My father, a conscript in the German army, never returned from the Russian front. I grew up in post-war Austria, which until 1955 was under divided Allied and Soviet occupation. In 1956, I immigrated to the United States with my mother and siblings.

For the first 20 years after I received my bachelor’s degree in metallurgy and materials science from Case Institute of Technology in 1965, Russia also mattered because I spent most of that time employed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Our job was to deter the Soviet Union, which was in intense ideological, economic and military competition with the United States.

I became director of the laboratory in 1986 shortly after Mikhail Gorbachev took over leadership of the Soviet Union and dramatically changed geopolitics with his outreach to U.S. President Ronald Reagan and the West. At the end of 1991 the Soviet Union dissolved into 15 independent states. Remarkably and unexpectedly, the Cold War was over.

Mutually assured destruction was replaced by an acknowledgement of mutual nuclear interdependency. The West, rather than being threatened by the enormous nuclear might in the hands of Soviet leaders, was now threatened by Russia’s weakness and the potential for its new government to lose control of the nuclear assets it had inherited from the Soviet Union. The safety and security of Russia’s nuclear assets—its tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, over a million kilograms of fissile materials, a huge nuclear infrastructure and some one million employees of the once-powerful Soviet nuclear establishment—posed an unprecedented risk for Russia and the world.

Fortunately, collaboration replaced confrontation 25 years ago. President George H.W. Bush reached across the political divide to lend a helping hand during times of Soviet political and economic chaos to help Moscow manage its huge nuclear complex. Senators Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar pioneered the visionary landmark Cooperative Threat Reduction legislation (appropriately called Nunn-Lugar) to provide rationale and financial support to that helping hand. The nongovernmental community—led by academics at U.S. universities, foundations such as the Carnegie Corporation of New York, groups such as the Federation of American Scientists, the U.S. National Academies and the Natural Resource Defense Council—paved the way by reaching out to courageous Soviet/Russian organizations, such as its Academy of Sciences and other leading thinkers.

The role of the American and Russian nuclear weapons laboratories changed as well. They had become acquainted during the 1988 Joint Verification Experiment, underground nuclear tests conducted at each other’s nuclear test sites with on-site monitoring by the other side to develop confidence in nuclear test verification so as to facilitate ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty, which had lingered unratified since its signing in 1974. That acquaintance and subsequent interactions at the Geneva TTBT negotiations prompted both sides, but led by the Russian nuclear weapons scientists, to push their governments to allow scientific collaboration between former adversaries.

In February 1992, less than two months after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Washington and Moscow approved exchange visits of the directors of their nuclear weapon design laboratories: Vladimir Belugin, director of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center VNIIEF, and Vladimir Nechai, director of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center VNIITF, visited the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories; John Nuckolls, director of LLNL, and I, director of LANL, visited the formerly secret cities of Sarov and Snezhinsk, home to VNIIEF and VNIITF, respectively.

Those visits marked the beginning of a remarkable period spanning more than two decades of scientific and technical nuclear cooperation that we called lab-to-lab cooperation—the story told in a book called “Doomed to Cooperate” by dozens of Russian and American scientists, engineers and officials. The book demonstrates how the camaraderie and the interpersonal relationships among the scientists and engineers helped them overcome the radically different views of the nuclear challenges as seen by the two governments.

To the U.S. government, Russia’s nuclear complex was considered an inheritance from hell: the danger of loose nukes, loose nuclear materials, loose nuclear experts and loose nuclear exports. The Russian government considered its nuclear complex part of its salvation in that it would provide a basis to help the country achieve a competitive, modern industrial base and economy. In “Doomed to Cooperate,” we, the scientists and engineers, describe how we confronted the unprecedented safety and security challenges, and how we collaborated to discover new science and help Russia’s vastly oversized nuclear workforce use their talents in civilian and commercial pursuits.

Russia’s nuclear complex has mattered enormously over the past 25 years. It has survived the four nuclear dangers mentioned above to a large extent because of the Russian nuclear community’s dedication, professionalism and patriotism—and their ability to persevere during difficult times. But it also had the benefit of innovative U.S. government programs, collaborations championed by U.S. NGOs and the many hundreds of nuclear lab-to-lab collaborations. These efforts helped the huge Soviet nuclear complex transition those in Russia and several other former Soviet republics in a safe and secure manner.

Unfortunately, whereas a convergence of our governments’ interests immediately following the end of the Cold War allowed for innovative nuclear cooperation, growing political differences during the past 10 to 15 years have done the opposite. The current differences over Crimea, eastern Ukraine and Syria have all but brought meaningful nuclear collaboration to an end.

Yet, Russia continues to matter—and cooperation between Moscow and Washington on common nuclear challenges is essential. They must take steps to reverse what appears to be a return to an arms race and potential nuclear confrontation. They must continue to share experiences and best practices to keep their huge nuclear complexes safe and secure. Although Russia has made enormous improvements in these areas, lessons from the United States nuclear complex demonstrate that this job is never done. Together, Moscow and Washington have a greater stake than anyone in ensuring that the nuclear nonproliferation regime is strengthened rather than crippled. And more than anyone in the world they have a responsibility to join their technical, professional and military talents to help the world avoid nuclear terrorism.

The stakes couldn’t be higher: Russia matters; nuclear cooperation is essential; isolation invites catastrophe.

 

Hero Image
9937212185 e977270dbd o 2
CISAC nuclear scientist Siegfried S. Hecker, second from the right, says that American and Russian scientists need to work together on averting nuclear dangers – as they have done so in the past.
Courtesy of Siegfried Hecker
All News button
1
-

Stanford Juku on Japanese Political Economy 2016

September 29 - October 1, 2016

Oksenberg Conference Room

Stanford Japan Program at Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center

The Japan Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (S-APARC) at Stanford University started Stanford Summer Juku (SSJ) in 2013.  In SSJ, researchers on Japanese politics and Japanese economy get together and discuss their research in a relaxed setting. The fourth annual meeting is held at Stanford on September 29 - October 1, 2016.  The first portion of the program focuses on research in political science/polilitcal economy and international relations, and the latter portion of the program focuses on research in economics.

Takeo Hoshi, Kenji E. Kushida, Phillip Lipscy

 

Report - Stanford Juku 2016

 

Program

9/29/2016

8:30-9:00    Breakfast

9:00-10:15  Session I:

"Identifying Voter Preferences for Politicians' Personal Attributes: A Conjoint Experiment in Japan", Yusaku Horiuchi (Dartmouth College), Daniel Smith (Harvard University) and Teppei Yamamoto (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Discussants:
Ethan Scheiner (University of California, Davis)
Mike Tomz (Stanford University)
 

10:15-10:45  Break

10:45-12:00  Session II:

Party Strategies and Foreign Policy in Post-Electoral Reform Japan, Amy Catalinac (New York University), Frances Rosenbluth (Yale University), Hikaru Yamagishi (Yale University)

Discussants:
Gary Cox (Stanford University)
Teppei Yamamoto (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
 

12:00-1:00  Lunch

1:00-2:15    Session III:

The Limits of Japan's Energy Angst: The Case of Geothermal Power, Jacques Hymans (University of Southern Califorrnia) and Fumiya Uchikoshi, Ph.D. (University of Tokyo)

Discussants:
Mark Thurber (Stanford University)
Steve Vogel (University of California, Berkeley)
 

2:15- 3:30   Session IV:

Democratic Community and Its Consequences: Evidence from Japan, Jonathan Chu (Stanford University)

Discussants:
Christina Davis (Princeton University)
Megumi Naoi (University of California, San Diego)

 

9/30/2016

8:30-9:00   Breakfast

9:00-10:15 Session I:

“Joining the Club: Accession to the GATT/WTO”, Christina Davis (Princeton University) and Meredith Wilf (University of Pittsburgh)

Discussants:
Jonathan Chu (Stanford University)
Phillip Lipscy (Stanford University)
 

10:15-10:45  Break

10:45-12:00  Session II:

What Do Voters Learn from Foreign News? Experimental Evidence on PTA Diffusion in Japan and Taiwan”, Chun-Fang Chiang (National Taiwan University), Jason Kuo (Post-doc, Georgetown University), Jin-tan Liu (National Taiwan University), and Megumi Naoi (University of California, San Diego)

Discussants:
Kenji Kushida (Stanford University)
Yuki Takagi (Stanford University)
 

12:00-1:00  Lunch

1:00-2:15    Session III:

Government Spending Multipliers under the Zero Lower Bound: Evidence from Japan”, Wataru Miyamoto  (Bank of Canada), Thuy Lan Ngyuen (Santa Clara University) and Dmitriy Sergeyev (Bocconi University)

Discussants:
Yuriy Gordonichenko (University of California, Berkeley)
Johannes Wieland (University of California, San Diego)
 

2:15-3:30    Session IV:

Product Dynamics and Aggregate Shocks: Evidence from Japanese product and firm level data”, Robert Dekle (University of Southern California), Atsushi Kawakami (Teikyo University), Nobuhiro Kiyotaki (Princeton University) and Tsutomu Miyagawa (Gakushuin University)

Discussants:
Huiyu Li (Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)
Shuichiro Nishioka (West Virginia University)
 

6:30        Group Dinner at Tacolicious
 

 

10/1/2016

8:30-9:00    Breakfast

9:00-10:15  Session I:

Will the Sun Also Rise? Five Growth Strategies for Japan”, Yoko Takeda (Mitsubishi Research Institute)

Discussants:
Michael Hutchison (University of California, Santa Cruz)
Ryo Kambayashi (Hitotsubashi University)
 

10:15-10:45  Break

10:45-12:00  Session II:

Natural Disaster and Natural Selection”, Hirofumi Uchida (Kobe University), Daisuke Miyakawa (Hitotsubashi University), Kaoru Hosono (Gakushuin University), Arito Ono (Chuo University), Taisuke Uchino (Daito Bunka University) and Iichiro Uesugi (Hitotsubashi University)

Discussants:
Nobuhiko Hibara (Waseda University)
Johannes Wieland (University of California, San Diego)
 

12:00-1:00  Lunch

1:00-2:15    Session III:

Information Frictions, Switching Costs, and Selection on Elasticity: A Field Experiment on Electricity Tariff Choice”, Koichiro Ito (University of Chicago), Takanori Ida (Kyoto University) and Makoto Tanaka (GRIPS)

Discussants:
Karen Eggleston (Stanford University)
Hitoshi Shigeoka (Simon Fraser University)
 

2:15-3:30    Session IV:

Good Jobs and Bad Jobs in Japan: 1982-2007”, Ryo Kambayashi (Hitotsubashi University) and Takao Kato (Colegate University)

Discussants:
Takeo Hoshi (Stanford University)
David Vera (California State University, Fresno)

 

 

Subscribe to International Relations