International Development

FSI researchers consider international development from a variety of angles. They analyze ideas such as how public action and good governance are cornerstones of economic prosperity in Mexico and how investments in high school education will improve China’s economy.

They are looking at novel technological interventions to improve rural livelihoods, like the development implications of solar power-generated crop growing in Northern Benin.

FSI academics also assess which political processes yield better access to public services, particularly in developing countries. With a focus on health care, researchers have studied the political incentives to embrace UNICEF’s child survival efforts and how a well-run anti-alcohol policy in Russia affected mortality rates.

FSI’s work on international development also includes training the next generation of leaders through pre- and post-doctoral fellowships as well as the Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program.

-

Image
banner2 1280x426

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

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

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

Agenda

Session I – Food security and marine ecosystems

Session II – Aquaculture, feeds and fisheries

Session III - Coastal fisheries & impacts on marine ecosystems

Session IV – Economies of the global marine fish trade

Session V - Critical issues and challenges 

Stanford Center at Peking University

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

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

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

The electoral eruption of anti-European Union populism is a reflection of structural flaws in that body but does not represent a fatal political blow, according to Stanford scholars.

In the May 25 elections for the European Parliament, anti-immigration parties won 140 of the 751 seats, well short of control, but enough to rattle supporters of the EU, which has 28 member nations. In Britain, Denmark, France and Greece, the political fringe vote totals stunned the political establishments.

Stanford political scientist Francis Fukuyama said the rise of extremism and anti-elitism is not surprising in the wake of the 2008 economic downturn and subsequent high levels of unemployment throughout Europe. In one sense, the EU elites have themselves to blame, he said.

"The elites who designed the EU and the eurozone failed in a major way," he said. "There was a structural flaw in the design of the euro (monetary union absent fiscal union, and the method of disciplining countries once in the zone)," said Fukuyama, the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, and Research Afflilate at The Europe Center.

Some have argued that the European Union should adopt a form of fiscal union because without one, decisions about taxes and spending remain at the national level.

As Fukuyama points out, this becomes a problem, as in the case of a debt-ridden Greece, which he believes should not have qualified for EU membership in the first place. In fact, he said, it would have been better for Greece itself to leave the euro at the outset of the 2008 crisis.

Still, Fukuyama said the big picture behind the recent election is clear – it was a confluence of issues and timing.

"It is a bit like an off-year election in the U.S., where activists are more likely to vote than ordinary citizens," he said.

Fukuyama believes the EU will survive this electoral crisis. "I think the EU will be resilient. It has weathered other rejections in the past. The costs of really exiting the EU are too high in the end, and the elites will adjust, having been given this message," he said.

Meanwhile, the populist parties in the different countries are not unified or intent on building coalitions with each other.

"Other than being anti-EU, most of them have little in common," Fukuyama said. "They differ with regard to specific positions on immigration, economic policy, and they respond to different social bases."

Ongoing anger

Dan Edelstein, a professor of French, said the largest factor for success by extremist candidates was "ongoing anger toward the austerity policy imposed by the EU," primarily by Germany.

Edelstein estimates that a large majority of French voters are still generally supportive of the EU. For the time being, the anti-EU faction does not have a majority, though they now have much more representation in the European Parliament.

Edelstein noted existing strains among the anti-EU parties – for example, the UK Independence Party in Britain has stated that it would not form an alliance with the National Front party in France.

Immigration remains a thorny issue for some Europeans, Edelstein said.

"'Immigration' in most European political debates, tends to be a synonym for 'Islam.' While there are some countries, such as Britain, that are primarily worried about the economic costs of immigration, in most continental European countries, the fears are cultural," he said.

As Edelstein put it, Muslims are perceived as a "demographic threat" to white or Christian Europe. However, he is optimistic in the long run.

"It seems a little early to be writing the obituary of the EU. Should economic conditions improve over the next few years, as they are predicted to, we will likely see this high-water mark of populist anger recede," said Edelstein.

Cécile Alduy, an associate professor of French, writes in the May 28 issue of The Nation about how the ultra-right-wing National Front came in first place in France's election.

"This outcome was also the logical conclusion of a string of political betrayals, scandals and mismanagement that were only compounded by the persistent economic and social morass that has plunged France into perpetual gloom," she wrote.

Historian J.P. Daughton said that like elsewhere in the world, immigration often becomes a contentious issue in Europe in times of economic difficulties.  

"High unemployment and painful austerity measures in many parts of Europe have led extremist parties to blame immigrants for taking jobs and sapping already limited social programs," he said.

Anti-immigration rhetoric plays particularly well in EU elections, Daughton said. "Extremist parties portray European integration as a threat not only to national sovereignty, but also to national identity.

Edelstein, Alduy and Daughton are all Faculty Affiliates of The Europe Center.

Wake-up call

Russell A. Berman, a professor of German studies and comparative literature, said many Europeans perceive the EU as "somehow impenetrable, far from the civic politics of the nation states."

As a result, people resent regulations issued by an "intangible bureaucracy," and have come to believe that the European Parliament has not grappled with major issues such as mustering a coherent foreign policy voice, he said.

"The EU can be great on details but pretty weak on the big picture," said Berman, who is the Walter A. Haas Professor in the Humanities, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and Faculty Affiliate of The Europe Center. "It is this discrepancy that feeds the dissatisfaction."

Yet he points out that the extremist vote surged in only 14 nations of the EU – in the other 14, there was "negligible extremism," as he describes it.

"We're a long way from talking about a fatal blow, but the vote is indeed a wake-up call to the centrists that they have to make a better case for Europe," Berman said.

 

All News button
1
-

The presentation summarizes preliminary findings of my research project on Allied policy towards resistance groups during World War II and its impact on post-war political and ideological divisions.

The research is linked with a multiplicity of historical problems: the western Allies’ balance of political and military considerations during World War II; the Anglo-American cooperation and competition in the field of intelligence; the use of special operations as an instrument of foreign policy, especially in regard to countries where the development of resistance movements had a strong impact on post-war settlement (e.g. Yugoslavia, Greece and Poland); the politics of communist movements between war and revolution in Central and Eastern Europe; the relationship between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union and the Allies’ perception of the latter.

The particular contribution of the project is to bring together aspects which are usually addressed separately: the different national scenarios, whose connections and mutual influence will be investigated; the two Western intelligence agencies, which have been researched mostly in separate ways by scholars of the corresponding nationalities; the Soviet and Western allies’ policies.

Tommaso Piffer is a Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellow at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard and at the University of Cambridge. Among his publications is a biography of Alfredo Pizzoni, the political chief of the Italian Resistance (Il Banchiere della Resistenza, 2005), an account of the relationship between the Allies and the Italian Resistance during World War II (Gli Alleati e la Resistenza Italiana, 2010) as well as several essays. He also edited a book in memory of Victor Zaslavsky on Totalitarian societies and democratic transition (Società totalitarie e transizione alla democrazia, 2011, with Vladislav Zubok) and the collection of essays on the political mass murder of Porzus (Porzus. Violenza e resistenza sul confine orientale, 2012). He is an affiliate at the Harvard Center for European Studies and a contributor to the cultural insert of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

Open to Stanford affiliates

Sponsored by the Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies and co-sponsored by The Europe Center

History Corner, Room 307

Tommaso Piffer Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellow, Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Harvard and University of Cambridge Speaker
Seminars

Workshop Goals

On the first day, develop a set of research interventions (surveys, experiments, archival searches, participant observations, etc.) that will gain some leverage in measuring differential policies in Europe and their impact on integration, however specified; or in examining the various immigrant populations to measure their differential success in integration, however specified. Each of the participants (either singly or in collaboration) will write up one or two research proposals that lay out the outcomes of interest and the strategy for explaining variation on those outcomes.  Discuss problems and opportunities for each of the submitted proposals and fulfill this first goal.

The second goal of the workshop, and the subject for the second day, to think through three related issues. The first is how to frame the set of proposals in a way that they all fit into a well-defined framework, as if each proposal were a piece of a coherent puzzle. The second is to think through funding sources for this set of interventions that would allow us to conduct the research we proposed and to continue collaborating across these projects. The third is to explore whether there are scholars whose work we know who should be invited to join our group and become part of the grant proposing team.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014 Agenda

I.  Citizenship (discussant Thad) – [9-11AM]

  • Hainmueller/Hangartner – Return on getting citizenship; encouragement design in Switzerland
  • Gest/Hainmueller/Hiscox – Encouragement design on citizenship in US (Chicago)
  • Hainmueller/Laitin – Encouragement design on citizenship in France
  • Alter/Margalit – Immigration and political participation, where immigrants get immediate rights to citizenship (Israel)
  • Dancygier/Vernby – return on citizenship for labor market success (Sweden)

II. Local Context (Rafaela) [11:15-12:15]

  • Adida/Hangartner – RDD on Sudanese refugees in various US cities; experiment with IRC on Iraqi/Chaldian integration in El Cajon

III. Contracts of Integration (Yotam) [1:30-3PM]

  • Hainmueller/Hangartner – Integration Contracts and Naturalization
  • Hainmueller/Laitin – Integration Contracts in France

IV. Discrimination (Jens) [3:30-5PM]

  • Ortega/Polavieja – Immigrants and Job security in Spain and elsewhere in Europe
  • Margalit – Overcoming employer abuse of immigrant workers
  • Dancygier/Vernby – failure of immigrants to get nominated for political office

Thursday, May 8, 2014 Agenda

Discussion on what investments in collective goods might advance this research perspective productively. We might look at favorable granting institutions and how we might combine our memos into a macro proposal; or we might think about building a common research infrastructure (in the way J-PAL has done for experimental development studies). Working towards a jointly authored volume might be another way to aggregate our research projects. All of this discussion depends on the complementarities that emerge from our discussions on Wednesday. David will chair the Thursday discussion.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Department of Political Science
Stanford University
Encina Hall, W423
Stanford, CA 94305-6044

(650) 725-9556 (650) 723-1808
0
James T. Watkins IV and Elise V. Watkins Professor of Political Science
laitin.jpg PhD

David Laitin is the James T. Watkins IV and Elise V. Watkins Professor of Political Science and a co-director of the Immigration Policy Lab at Stanford. He has conducted field research in Somalia, Nigeria, Spain, Estonia and France. His principal research interest is on how culture – specifically, language and religion – guides political behavior. He is the author of “Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-heritage Societies” and a series of articles on immigrant integration, civil war and terrorism. Laitin received his BA from Swarthmore College and his PhD from the University of California, Berkeley.

Affiliated faculty at the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Affiliated faculty at The Europe Center
David Laitin (Workshop Faculty Organizer) Stanford University Speaker

616 Serra Street
Encina Hall West, Room 100
Stanford, CA 94305-6044

0
Associate Professor of Political Science
Europe Center Affiliated Faculty
101105_JensHainmueller_1583.jpg

Jens Hainmueller's research has appeared in journals such as the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of the American Statistical Association, Review of Economics and Statistics, Political Analysis, International Organization, and the Journal of Statistical Software, and has received awards from the American Political Science Association, the Society of Political Methodology, the Midwest Political Science Association.

Hainmueller received his PhD from Harvard University and also studied at the London School of Economics, Brown University, and the University of Tübingen. Before joining Stanford, he served on the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Jens Hainmueller Stanford University Speaker
Claire Adida UC San Diego Speaker
Dominik Hangartner London School of Economics and Political Science Speaker
Kare Vernby Uppsala University, Sweden Speaker
Yotam Margalit Columbia University Speaker
Francesc Ortega Queens College CUNY Speaker
Thad Dunning UC Berkeley Speaker
Rafaela Dancygier Princeton University Speaker
Simon Ejdemyr Stanford University Speaker
Simon Hix London School of Economics and Political Science Speaker
Workshops

Rapidly changing circumstances continue to shape relations on the Korean peninsula and in East Asia. North Korea has repeatedly engaged in provocative behavior, and the constant flux of political, social, and economic affairs in the region has also created challenges for long-standing alliances.

This research project seeks to examine the interests and policy environments of South Korea, North Korea, and their neighbors. Issues addressed will include the role of North Korea, nuclear proliferation, Japan’s economic future, the rise of China, and Korean reunification.

A central focus of the research efforts at Shorenstein APARC is to analyze the bridges linking Asia and the United States. As the Asian diaspora continues to grow in America and across the world, new possibilities have emerged for migrants who become integrated into their host societies while remaining engaged with their home societies. Such trans-migration creates new innovation and trade opportunities for both Asia and the United States, as a positive-sum game where both sides benefit.

Subscribe to International Development