Indonesia promotes its economic and political strengths
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.
Edmund J. Malesky will argue that openness to foreign investment can have differential effects on corruption, even within the same country and under the same domestic institutions over time. Rather than interpreting bribes solely as a coercive “tax” imposed on business activities, he allows for the possibility that firms may themselves be complicit in using bribes to enter protected sectors or gain access to lucrative procurement contracts. The propensity to bribe across sectors should vary with expected profitability related to investment restrictions. Thus, the linkage of foreign investment to corruption should increase dramatically as firms seek to enter restricted and uncompetitive sectors that offer higher rents. Malesky demonstrates this effect using a nationally representative survey of 10,000 foreign and domestic businesses in Vietnam. He also shows how the impact of domestic reforms and economic openness is affected by policies that restrict competition by limiting entry into a given sector.
Edmund Malesky is an associate professor of political science at the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego. He has published in leading political science and economic journals, including the American Political Science Review and the Journal of Politics, and has been awarded the Harvard Academy Fellowship and Gabriel Almond Award for best dissertation in comparative politics. Malesky serves as the lead researcher for the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index and Cambodian Business Environment Scorecard.
For more information please see the event web page.
Graham Stuart Lounge
The Europe Center has launched its series addressing the European and global economic crisis. The Europe Center is hosting research and outreach programming and podcast interviews on such key elements as the depth of sovereign and private sector debt, public sector reform, and the policies and political constraints on leadership on both sides of the Atlantic.
Programming open to the public includes the following talks by senior analysts visiting and in residence at The Europe Center at FSI:
Additional research and policy analysts will be added to the series throughout the year.
Details on this series, including dates of the talks are available on the European and Global Economic Crisis Series page.
Video and podcast interviews are available at the Europe Center and FSI home pages.
Congratulations to CISAC Co-Director Siegfried S. Hecker for winning the 2012 Leo Szilard Lectureship Award from the American Physical Society. The selection committee cited in particular "his leadership in developing international science and technology cooperation in areas critical to global security resulting in real reductions in the dangers of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism."
Web tracking is pervasive: the average popular website incorporates over fifty third-party tracking mechanisms. And web tracking is unpopular: a majority of Americans oppose the practice. Do Not Track is a technology and policy response that would provide users with a simple, universal web tracking opt out. Both the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Commerce have signaled support. This talk explores central questions in the ongoing web privacy debate:
* What information do third parties collect about users?
* What technologies do third parties use to track users?
* What limits does the online advertising industry's self-regulation impose?
* What should Do Not Track prohibit?
* Who should enforce it, and how?
* What would the economic impact be?
* Could it actually happen?
To learn more, visit http://donottrack.us and follow @donottrack.
Speaker Biography:
Jonathan Mayer is a computer science Ph.D. student and 3L at Stanford University. He graduated from Princeton University in 2009 with a concentration in the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Jonathan's area of study encompasses the intersections of policy, law, and computer science - with particular emphasis on national security and international relations. Jonathan works extensively with the Stanford Security Laboratory within the Computer Science Department and the Center for Internet and Society within the Stanford Law School.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
The price of corn recently hit an all time high, a departure from a long-term trend that has seen the cost of corn decline with each passing decade. Price spikes have happened before, and some experts viewed the latest jump as part of this familiar cycle. Stanford food policy economists Rosamond L. Naylor and Walter P. Falcon alternatively argue in a new paper released in The American Interest that we have entered a new era where agricultural commodity prices are increasingly driven by U.S. biofuel policies. This food and fuel linkage has, and will continue to have, major implications for global food prices and the world’s poor.
Over the last decade, the U.S. ethanol industry experienced a major increase in production and consumption as a result of beneficiary of tax breaks, tariffs and government mandates. In 2005, MTBE was phased out as a gasoline additive because of environmental and health risks, and ethanol became the preferred MTBE substitute. Production was further supported with a mandate to reach a minimum target of 15 billion gallons by 2015.
A jump in the price of crude oil gave a further boost to ethanol as a potential replacement for petroleum. As a result, 40% of the U.S. corn crop is now devoted to ethanol production. These policies have been promoted under the banner of protecting the American farm industry, securing energy independence, and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, and they have succeeded on a number of these fronts.
However, as a major global producer and exporter of corn, the rapid rise of ethanol production in the U.S. during such a short period of time has produced a fundamental change in the structure of demand for corn. Increased demand has led to higher and more volatile food prices, not only for corn but other agricultural commodities. If the United States, along with the rest of the G-20, is serious about stabilizing global food prices, U.S. domestic biofuels policy in its entirety will need to be re-examined.
High prices are a boon to the U.S. farm sector, but can be devastating for poor consumers with minimal income to spend on food. Food riots have broken out in several countries suggesting the new volatility in the price of staple crops has had a severe impact on developing economies. Where once the policies of the U.S. helped keep agricultural prices on an even keel, current support for the production of corn-based ethanol has reversed this stabilizing role.
Given the bullish financial outlook for the U.S. agricultural sector, this is an ideal time to begin dismantling both ethanol and corn (and other major commodity) subsidies. Corn-based ethanol tax and tariff provisions together cost the federal government around $6 billion annually. Cutting these subsidies would help reduce the Federal budget deficit without harming the rural economy.
The trickier political and economic questions relate to reassessing mandates, and are likely off the table with the 2012 elections approaching. This is unfortunate, for these policies will continue to cause unrest in food markets far beyond American shores.
Schwab Residental Center
Vidalakis Room (Across from the Graduate School of Business)
The 11th Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam was significant in several respects. It placed diplomacy in the forefront of Vietnam’s efforts to maintain peace, stability, and national security, including naming more diplomats as full members of the Central Standing Committee. For the first time, the Party officially identified protecting national interest as the top priority of Vietnam’s foreign policy. The Party continued to push for broader horizons in policymaking to facilitate Vietnam’s integration in the larger world. The Party also agreed that Vietnam should anchor itself to ASEAN and promote its relations with China and the United States. Prof. Tuan will discuss these and other aspects and implications of Vietnam’s foreign policy.
Ta Minh Tuan is a member of Vietnam’s Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP Vietnam), CSCAP’s Study Group on Countering the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Asia Pacific, and Pacific Forum CSIS’s Young Leaders Program. He has been a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and the University of South Carolina. His degrees are from the Polish Academy of Sciences’s Institute of Political Studies (PhD), Mahatma Gandhi University’s School of International Relations (MA), and the Hanoi University of Foreign Studies (BA).
Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room
In September 2011 the U.S. bilateral alliance system in the Asia-Pacific—the “San Francisco System” (SFS)—turned 60 years old. Against the expectations of theorists who argue that alliances cannot be sustained in the absence of a commonly perceived mutual external threat, the SFS remains operative and viable. It remains so even as multilateral approaches to regional order-building in the Asia-Pacific have proliferated. Although the identity and functions of the SFS have evolved, the speakers will argue that it remains—and will remain—a critical security mechanism in the likely absence of a comprehensive and consensual regional security arrangement that could supersede it. Their remarks will convey the findings and projections of a recent study of Asia-Pacific security undertaken by Australian National University (ANU) and supported by the MacArthur Foundation’s Asia Security Initiative.
John Ravenhill returned to ANU in 2004, after holding the chair of politics at the University of Edinburgh from 2000. He currently directs the School of Political Science and International Relations at ANU’s College of Arts and Social Sciences. Before joining ANU in 1990, he was an associate professor at the University of Sydney, and assistant professor at the University of Virginia, after completing his PhD at the University of California, Berkeley. He has held visiting professorships at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies; Nanyang Technology University, Singapore; the University of Geneva; the International University of Japan; and the University of California, Berkeley. His many articles have appeared in leading journals including World Politics, International Organization, Review of International Political Economy, Review of International Studies, New Political Economy, World Policy Journal, World Development, and International Affairs. His research interests include global political economy, especially the fields of trade and production, and Australian foreign policy.
William T. Tow came to ANU in early 2005, having been a professor of international relations (IR) at the University of Queensland and at Griffith University, and an assistant professor of IR at the University of Southern California. His visiting-scholar positions have included APARC (1999) and the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London. Among his many writings are Politics in the Asia-Pacific: A Regional–Global Nexus? (edited, Cambridge University Press, 2009); Asia Pacific Strategic Relations: Seeking Convergent Security (Cambridge University Press, 2001); and articles in the China Journal, Review of International Studies, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, China Quarterly, International Affairs, Survival, and Asian Survey. He also heads the ANU IR component of the Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security, was editor of the Australian Journal of International Affairs, has held positions with the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Australian Fulbright Commission, and received an Australian Award for University Teaching in the Social Sciences Category.
Brendan Taylor’s writings include Sanctions as Grand Strategy (2010); American Sanctions in the Asia-Pacific (2010); and articles in Asian Security, the Australian Journal of International Affairs, International Affairs, and Survival. In addition to leading the ANU-MacArthur Asia Security Initiative Focus Group (since 2009), he has served as associate investigator, Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security; graduate studies convenor, Political Science and International Relations, ANU; and lecturer and post-doctoral fellow, SDSC.
David Envall is a Japan specialist with an interest in how foreign policy is made. He edits the ANU-MacArthur Project’s policy papers. His essays will appear in the Asian Journal of Political Science and in volumes on Australian-Japanese politico-security relations and on strategic and structural changes in the Asia-Pacific security environment.
Philippines Conference Room