Governance

FSI's research on the origins, character and consequences of government institutions spans continents and academic disciplines. The institute’s senior fellows and their colleagues across Stanford examine the principles of public administration and implementation. Their work focuses on how maternal health care is delivered in rural China, how public action can create wealth and eliminate poverty, and why U.S. immigration reform keeps stalling. 

FSI’s work includes comparative studies of how institutions help resolve policy and societal issues. Scholars aim to clearly define and make sense of the rule of law, examining how it is invoked and applied around the world. 

FSI researchers also investigate government services – trying to understand and measure how they work, whom they serve and how good they are. They assess energy services aimed at helping the poorest people around the world and explore public opinion on torture policies. The Children in Crisis project addresses how child health interventions interact with political reform. Specific research on governance, organizations and security capitalizes on FSI's longstanding interests and looks at how governance and organizational issues affect a nation’s ability to address security and international cooperation.

-

About the Event: Despite much current talk about “America First,” the United States has a vital interest in global health that is rooted in both practical necessity and humanitarian traditions.  There is growing recognition of the complex problem of direct and indirect threats to the health and security of U.S. populations and people around the globe related to the state of health in all countries, the risk of disease spread into this country, the reality of emerging or resurging infections, most recently Ebola, Zika or a pandemic flu, and the growing possibility that biological agents might be deliberately used to do harm.  Perhaps less well-recognized are the significant health and safety risks posed by the growing number of products that flow across borders. In our increasingly globalized world, the benefits of a global marketplace can be seen in greater choice for consumers and new opportunities for business and innovation, but it has also created many new challenges for product oversight and protection of complex supply chains. Harmful products result from poor quality manufacturing, production, and distribution, contamination, and even from intentional adulteration, fraud and counterfeiting. Success in protecting the public now depends on reaching beyond our borders, and working effectively with regulatory authorities, industry, and intergovernmental and international organizations to build a global product safety net for consumers and patients around the world.  

About the Speaker: Dr. Hamburg is an internationally recognized leader in public health and medicine. As Foreign Secretary of the National Academy of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, Dr. Hamburg serves as senior advisor on international matters and is the liaison with other Academies of Medicine around the world. She is also President-elect of the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Dr. Hamburg earned her A.B. from Harvard College, her M.D. from Harvard Medical School and completed her medical residency at Weill Cornell Medical Center. Following completion of her formal medical training, Dr. Hamburg went to Washington to explore the world of health policy. She soon took on the role of Assistant Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

In 1991, Dr. Hamburg was named Commissioner of the New York City Department of health. During her six-year tenure there, she implemented rigorous public health initiatives that tackled the city’s most pressing crises head-on — including improved services for women and children, an internationally recognized tuberculosis control program, a needle-exchange program to combat HIV transmission, and the nation’s first public health bio-terrorism preparedness program.       

In 1997, President Clinton named Dr. Hamburg Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the lead policy position in the Department. She later became founding Vice President for Biological Programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a foundation dedicated to reducing the threat to public safety from nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.

In 2009, President Obama nominated Dr. Hamburg for the post of FDA Commissioner. In that role, Dr. Hamburg emphasized the critical need for innovation in meeting medical care and public health needs. As Commissioner, she provided leadership on many groundbreaking activities, including: new authority to regulate tobacco products; implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act designed to transform food safety to a preventive system rather than simply responding when outbreaks occur; and modernization of the system for the evaluation and approval of medical products. Dr. Hamburg also worked hard to reposition FDA as an agency prepared for the challenges of globalization and was very active in efforts to establish new mechanisms for global governance of regulatory systems, including enhanced communication, collaboration and regulatory harmonization.

Dr. Hamburg currently sits on a number of Boards, including for the Commonwealth Fund, the Simons Foundation, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy,  the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, the Urban Institute, and the American Museum of Natural History. She is also a member of the Harvard University Global Advisory Council, the Harvard Medical School Board of Fellows, the World Dementia Council and the Global Health Scientific Advisory Committee for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Dr Hamburg formerly served on the Boards of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller University, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, Conservation International and Henry Schein Inc. Dr. Hamburg is an elected member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Academy of Medicine, and a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American College of Physicians. She is the recipient of multiple honorary degrees and numerous awards.

 

Encina Hall, 2nd floor

Margaret A. Hamburg Foreign Secretary National Academy of Medicine
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

A new book published by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) explores the future of China’s urbanization. Addressing the complex challenges facing Chinese cities will require updated institutions and unparalleled innovation, researchers say.

China’s growth in cities has been unprecedented over the past decade, and the urbanization policies the government put in place, while achieving notable successes, continue to face systemic obstacles that challenge the effectiveness of central and local governments. How the government will resolve the complex sets of conflicting interests will considerably shape Chinese society and politics for decades.
 
That is the premise of a new book co-edited by Karen Eggleston, senior fellow in Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Jean C. Oi, the William Haas Professor in Chinese Politics; and Yiming Wang, deputy director general and senior research fellow at the State Council Development and Research Center.
 
In the book Challenges in the Process of China’s Urbanization, eleven chapters authored by 21 authors feature urbanization challenges ranging from property rights and affordable housing to food security and the environment.

[[{"fid":"225386","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"},"type":"media","field_deltas":{"1":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":false,"field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"}},"link_text":null,"attributes":{"style":"margin-left: 15px; padding: 5px; font-size: 13.008px; float: right; width: 350px; height: 525px;","class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto","data-delta":"1"}}]]

“Urbanization is not merely a process of financial engineering or rational decision-making, but a complicated ‘dance’ of power and politics,” the editors write in the introductory chapter.
 
The book is one of two publications that emerged from a conference in May 2014 at the Stanford Center at Peking University, that was part of a joint five-year research initiative between the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) – a government agency in China that formulates and implements strategies of national economic and social development.  
 
Wang, who was the deputy chief of staff at the NDRC and executive director of its Institute of Macroeconomic Research, facilitated ongoing scholarly exchanges, including workshops and conferences as well as joint fieldwork in China. At one point, the NDRC came to the Bay Area to interview local government officials about urbanization and affordable housing policies.  
 
Eggleston and Oi responded to a few questions about the book.
 
What patterns are shaping urbanization in China?
Oi: A primary pattern shaping China’s urbanization is the movement of people from rural areas to megacities – Beijing, Shanghai and elsewhere.  There also is movement from poorer to richer areas within the countryside. Rural to urban migration has been taking place in China since the 1970s, but the difference now is that the government is encouraging it. The Chinese government has an officially sanctioned program that is advocating migration. A second pattern shaping China’s urbanization is administrative redistricting. Redistricting is a government-led process that changes the administrative makeup of a municipality. For example, areas originally designated as ‘rural’ can be redistricted to qualify as ‘urban.’ Additionally, smaller cities can become larger by absorbing surrounding areas. Counties can also be combined into districts.
 
Why are cities and counties pursuing redistricting?
Oi: One of the main factors driving redistricting in China is the perks and power that are linked to the size of an administrative unit. Government officials in charge of smaller cities or counties have incentives to become larger. The larger the municipality, the more power and resources the municipality has. Smaller cities that become larger cities gain resources; yet on the other hand, counties that become part of a district lose certain local-level rights. Municipalities are essentially competing with each other. The book dives into the incentive structures at play and other political economy issues embedded in the urbanization process.
 
What kind of disciplinary approaches are undertaken in the book?
Eggleston: One of the book’s strengths is its array of disciplinary approaches. Drawn primarily from the social sciences, the book includes theoretical and empirical analyses of evidence gathered from case studies and fieldwork. 
 
Oi: The book is a true collaboration of scholars from the United States and China. About half of the chapter authors are officials from the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), including our co-editor, Yiming Wang, who was NDRC deputy-secretary when we did the work for the volume. Each chapter attempts to offer a balanced perspective of the policy implications of China’s urbanization experience at both national and local levels.

Image
urbanization embed image 1

Karen Eggleston, FSI senior fellow and director of the Asia Health Policy Program, speaks on a panel about demographic change and health at the conference, "Challenges in Process of Urbanization: China in Comparative Perspective," Stanford Center at Peking University, May 2014.


What do you hope the book will achieve?

Oi: The book offers an analysis of the intricacies of and potential solutions to problems related to the process of China’s urbanization. We hope the book taken as a whole gives a sense of the magnitude of these problems, why there are no easy solutions, as well as what will be needed to address them going forward.  Some of the solutions are not just about money. 
 
Eggleston: The book aims to sketch an interesting picture of the varied aspects of China’s urbanization. Each chapter looks at a select issue, for example, land financing, spatial growth and housing security, and sets it in the broader context of urbanization. We purposely decided not to cover everything that falls under the banner of urbanization. Most of the topics could very well be made into a whole book alone. We hope the book will enliven conversation amongst scholars, policy influencers and China and urbanization enthusiasts.
 

What do “people-centered” solutions to urbanization challenges in China include?

Eggleston: “People-centered” is the term used in China’s official urbanization plan, the New National Urbanization Plan, published in 2014. We defined the term “people-centered” to include what makes life in urban areas attractive. “People-centered” urbanization emphasizes well-being and the factors that lead to a good livelihood, including access to public goods. For example, from a health perspective, cities around the world were historically less healthy locations to live in during the industrial revolution, before basic knowledge of how to control infectious disease with clean water and other population health measures. Now, cities can be healthier places to live in compared to rural areas. The Chinese government has a successful record of building basic infrastructure, but faces many challenges in harnessing the requisite resources to innovate and truly achieve people-centered development.

 

"In trying to reach a public goal like low-income housing, the Chinese government is trying to set up an incentive system so that the goal can be reached not just with taxpayer money but also by bringing in the private sector to build housing in a way that includes affordable units and doesn’t lead to segregation."  

     — Karen Eggleston; FSI senior fellow, Asia Health Policy Program director

 
An issue highlighted in the book is China’s household registration system. Why is it an issue and what is being done to address it?
Oi: Because China’s urbanization has been so rapid, institutions have not yet fully caught-up. There is a disjuncture between the institutions that exist and those that are actually necessary. One pressing example is the household registration system. Citizens who live in rural areas have a different kind of residency status than citizens in urban areas. Everyone has rights, but rights differ depending on where primary residence was originally listed. A Chinese citizen is only able to enjoy all of his or her rights where he or she is registered. So migrants tend to lose out as soon as they move away from their home locality. However, the central government has started to make changes to this system. For example, children of migrants now have access to public services such as primary education. Some localities have begun to implement a points-based system wherein families accumulate points over time and, after reaching a certain level, become eligible for citizenship in that place of residence.
 
Can you describe the state of housing in Chinese cities?
Eggleston: Affordable housing is a key issue of urbanization across the world, not just in China. So, the glass is half-full or half-empty depending on how you look at it. China has been remarkably successful in avoiding the development of large urban slums common in lower income countries with rapid urbanization. That said, problems associated with housing are not going to go away quickly. The macro nature of China’s population amplifies the problem, and coincides with a dramatic increase in housing prices. Continued government investment in affordable housing will help address scarcity, and could help tackle interrelated problems such as assisted living for the elderly population in China.
 
Oi: The central government began to offer affordable housing in 2007 with the intention of providing housing for the neediest portion of the population. In theory, it works, but in reality, it has faults. Supply and demand sometimes isn’t in sync. For example, quotas were used as a way to decide the location of its affordable housing, but some cities found that housing units remain unused. The local government builds a number of affordable housing units but then discovers no one wants them because commercial housing is less expensive or factories provide dormitory space. Part of this mismatch in supply and demand is rooted in the issue of resident permits. In most cases, the neediest portion of the population is typically migrants but they are not eligible for affordable housing in the cities where there is most need for low cost housing such as Beijing or Shanghai. As a result, migrants often live in inadequate housing in city centers – small, windowless spaces with many people living together in one room. 
 
One of the chapters in the book focuses on food security. As Chinese migrants continue to move from rural to urban areas, are fears of declining food security founded?
Eggleston: Food security is an important issue. In the book, one chapter written by 9 co-authors applies rigorous methods to understand whether urbanization threatens food security in China. They found that fear of declining food security is mostly overblown. Continued government investment in agricultural production such as irrigation systems can help address those fears, and help enable sustainable food production.

Image
urbanization embed image 2

Jean Oi, FSI senior fellow and director of the China Program, (Center), and Xueguang Zhou, FSI senior fellow and professor of sociology, (Left of Center), take a tour of housing developments during fieldwork with the National Development and Reform Commission in August 2012. Oi is speaking with one of the village leaders about a "new rural community" concept developed in a housing development in Chengdu, where this photo was taken.


Another chapter in the book references pollution. Beijing has faced unprecedented levels of air pollution lately. Does it coincide with urbanization?

Eggleston: Although issues of pollution and “green growth” merit separate book-length treatment and are not central to this book, pollution illustrates the broader issue of concentrations of industry and people living in one area. Everyone has to share public space. Both a migrant and someone working at the top levels of government in Beijing breathe the same air. Things that are less visible like water quality are avoidable by some of the population, but air pollution is not, and therefore, quickly reveals how hard it is for the government to efficiently fix a problem. Policies to mitigate pollution often take awhile to have an effect, and in the mean time, people begin to doubt government accountability. Local governments have made strides within the past few years in revising evaluation structures so that officials are incentivized to react to public problems like air pollution. Historically, an official’s performance was based largely if not solely on GDP growth of his or her municipality, but it has since expanded to include other factors such as health insurance enrollment.
 
Infrastructure spending has been a driver of China’s economic growth. Has China’s rush to build quickly come at the expense of safety?
Oi: Economic growth is intimately tied to the process of China’s urbanization. Growth of cities has been driven by the ambitions of local officials who want to see their municipalities expand. But the question remains over how they’re going to finance rising needs for and costs of public goods. Each municipality receives funding from the central government and it’s based on the quantity of citizens – a number that excludes migrants. Any migrant is then – administratively speaking – a burden on the system. Municipalities have to determine how they’re going to fund public goods. This is where fiscal politics comes in. China’s fiscal system is really the most important institution in need of reform. Each chapter of the book touches upon the issue of public funding in some way.
 
Eggleston: China is generally known for its investment in infrastructure projects, but the goal of rapid growth can seemingly clash with a concern for safety. One of the main themes of the book is to think carefully about the incentives that govern the process. I think that theme certainly rings true with regard to infrastructure and safety. Put simply: if officials and contractors do not have incentive to prioritize safety, then safety problems are going to arise. The Chinese government efforts to develop and improve specific regulatory structures should continue, as several authors point out in different chapters of the book.

 

"Economic growth is intimately tied to the process of China’s urbanization. Growth of cities has been driven by the ambitions of local officials who want to see their municipalities expand. But the question remains over how they’re going to finance rising needs for and costs of public goods."  

     — Jean C. Oi; Stanford professor of political science, China Program director

 
How can a balance be struck between public and private sector led projects that address urbanization challenges?
Oi: The Chinese government is increasingly looking to establish public-private partnerships as a way to deal with urbanization challenges. Affordable housing is one area that could experiment further with the public-private model. Instead of going to local governments, the central government is now talking directly with housing developers. They say to the developers “we’ll give you permission to develop a housing estate, but within that housing estate, you’re going to have to set aside ‘X’ number of units for affordable housing.” Depending on the city, this approach has had mixed effects. Some high-end housing developers don’t want to include affordable housing because the price per unit could drop as a result.
 
Eggleston: It’s critical to think about public-private partnerships in the context of urbanization-related policy goals. I think we’re bound to see them grow. The government has an opportunity to harness the innovation of the private sector through such partnerships.
Hero Image
beijing urbanization
A man pushes his bicycle past a construction site in the Central Business District in Beijing, China.
China Photos/Stringer
All News button
1
-

About the Event: NATO is entering today the 4th phase of its history and must adapt to changes in today’s security environment in order to remain relevant. NATO’s ability to adapt will ultimately redefine NATO’s place in the world.  General Mercier will discuss challenges facing NATO faces such as maintaining the unity between members in the Alliance, addressing potential crises in Eastern Europe, reopening dialogue with Russia, and addressing instability on NATO-member borders.

About the Speaker: General Denis Mercier is the North Atlantic Council as Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. Prior to this assignment, he served as the French Air Force Chief of Staff from 2012-2015.

He graduated with a Master’s of Science from the French Air Force Academy in 1981, qualifying as a fighter pilot in 1983. He has more than 3000 flying hours including 182 hours in combat missions. Gen. Mercier commanded the 1/12 "Cambrésis" Fighter Squadron, a founding unit of the NATO Tiger association. He participated in numerous other NATO exercises and operations, including Operation Deny Flight over Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1994, "Strong Resolve” in 1998, and Operation Allied Force in Kosovo.

From 1999 to 2002, Gen. Mercier was deputy head of the combined joint task force deputy branch at Regional Headquarters where he contributed to the development of the Combined Joint Task Force concept. He was a member of the combined analysis team for exercise "Allied Effort '01" and an evaluator of the CJTF HQ for Exercise "Strong Resolve '02". He also acted as liaison officer for the Commander Striking Fleet Atlantic stationed in Norfolk, VA.

He later served as the commander of Reims Air force base, integrating Mirage F1CR squadrons with ISAF in Afghanistan. From 2004 to 2008 he served as the head of the plans division at the French Air Force headquarters and was nominated as a flag officer in 2007. He then commanded the French Air Force Academy in Salon-de-Provence. As senior military advisor for the Minister of Defence from 2010-2012, Gen. Mercier prepared and participated in all NATO ministerial meetings, summits in Lisbon and Chicago, and was special advisor to Operation Unified Protector over Libya.

Among other awards, Gen. Mercier has been awarded the rank of Grand Officier of the French Legion of Honor and, among other distinctions, an officer of the National Order of Merit.

Encina Hall, 2nd floor

General Denis Mercier Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, NATO
Seminars

The 9th Annual Koret Workshop

South Korea has long promoted a sense of ethnic unity but in recent years has seen an influx of ethnic and non-ethnic Koreans, making the country more diverse. The government has promoted multiculturalism to deal with such diversity; however, migrants, either permanent or temporary, continue to face discrimination. New approaches are needed to create better social cohesion. This ninth annual conference seeks to examine major issues related to recent migrants in Korea.

NOTE: During the workshop, a keynote address is open to the public. Please click here to register for the lunch time public event on April 21.

The Koret Workshop is made possible through the generous support of the Koret Foundation.

Stanford University

Workshops
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Jaemin Jung, a writer for the South Korean publication known as “SisaIn,” recently interviewed CISAC's Siegfried Hecker on the issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons:

Jung: In your recent op-ed piece in The New York Times, you said talking to North Korea is the best option for the Trump administration. Do you still believe so even when the current North Korean regime repeatedly declared to the world that it would never give up its nuclear program as a nuclear power state?

Hecker: Well, I still believe that talking directly, someone from the Trump administration to North Korea, is essential today. However, what I mean by talking is talk to the regime to make sure that we do not have a nuclear catastrophe. The main reason for talking is to eliminate a potential nuclear confrontation. The issue of whether or not North Korea should have nuclear weapons or will ever give up nuclear weapons has to be a much longer-term issue. The immediate issue, I believe, is that we have a nuclear crisis on our hands now, and we must talk in order to make sure that such a confrontation does not happen. So, that’s the reason for talking.

Jung: In other words, direct talk is essential to avoid any misunderstanding or miscalculation on the part of North Korea?

Hecker: Precisely. The reason for direct talking is to make sure there be no such misunderstanding, potential accidents, or potential escalations to the nuclear arena. Making sure that does not happen, that is the reason for talking now.

Jung: Does it mean that after you build trust from such talking, you then move on to real agenda such as denuclearization?

Hecker: Yes. So, what I recommend is not only talking but also listening. I think it’s important for the new administration to listen to what the Kim Jong Un regime has to say.  By listening we could learn enough to understand how to forge better negotiations, or the long term issue of getting rid of nuclear weapons.

Jung: Regarding the now suspended nuclear talks, many people blame the North for breaking its nuclear agreements with the U.S. or cheating repeatedly. In other words, whether we can trust North Korea is a big issue here. What is your take?

Hecker: Well, we don’t have a relationship that provides the underpinning or foundation for trust: trust by America about North Korea or trust by North Korea about the United States.  When it comes to negotiations, an agreement could be signed pretty quickly but trust can take years and years to develop. So, as you look back, North Korea has indeed violated many of the agreements that they signed. In some cases, we can say that it was to develop a hedge in case the United States dropped out of the agreement. For example, in the Agreed Framework signed in 1994, the United States did not follow its end as quickly and as fully as it promised to do. North Koreans developed a hedge. They cheated by developing an enriched uranium program. Over the years, the Agreed Framework may have been able to build trust by building two modern light water reactors there. But the Bush administration did not trust North Korea and killed the agreement. Now, 15 years later, there is still no trust. It would have to be developed. I think this would take at least a decade.

Jung: In that respect, trust is something not only North Korea but the United States should care about, right?

Hecker: That should be one of the main objectives of whatever next round of negotiations are.

Jung: In your article, you suggested direct talks between the US and North Korea instead of a multilateral talks like the 6-party talks.  In the past, the US tried many times talking directly with the North in Geneva or other places, but failed. Why now?

Hecker: The Geneva talks in 1994 were successful. They led to the Agreed Framework. The main reason that I proposed direct talks between the U.S. and North Korea now is, as I mentioned in the beginning, to avoid a nuclear catastrophe. We have to better understand what North Korea’s nuclear intentions are. What do they expect to get from their nuclear weapons, what are their nuclear policies, what do they have in place to avoid nuclear accidents, what do they have in place to make certain their nuclear weapons are safe and secure? Those kinds of discussions cannot be held in a multilateral forum. The only country that has the opportunity to have those kind of talks with North Korea is the United States. So, talk to avoid a nuclear catastrophe should be bilateral. Eventually negotiations have to include South Korea, they have to include China, and the 6-Party Talks members Japan and Russia should be involved. So, negotiations will have to be multilateral affair. However, to get to the point of meaningful negotiations, to avoid nuclear catastrophe, there should be bilateral talks. The sooner, the better.

Jung: Can you specify what you mean by ‘nuclear catastrophe’?

Hecker: What I’m concerned about is that in the past 10 years North Korea has developed, as best we know because nobody knows for sure, a really threatening nuclear arsenal, perhaps having enough nuclear material of 20-25 nuclear weapons. They continue to try and make those weapons more sophisticated and to be able to mount them on missiles. So, with that level of nuclear firepower, the reason that I worry about nuclear catastrophe is that one could have an accident, there is concern about security and safety of their nuclear weapons, there could be miscalculation on the part of the regime, there could be confrontation and escalation of military activities that could lead to nuclear use. Any use of nuclear devices of any sort on the Korean peninsula is what I call nuclear catastrophe. Today the most important part is to avoid the use or detonation of nuclear device on the Korean peninsula. That has to be the first objective of the Trump administration.

Jung: If the direct talks with the North go well, you said Trump should send a presidential envoy to Pyongyang.  Don’t you think Trump must get North Korea’s commitment to denuclearization before sending such an envoy?

Hecker: That approach misunderstands what my concerns are. My most immediate concerns are to avoid the use of nuclear weapons. The issue of denuclearization comes down the road. In other words, it’s a longer-term issue. The concerns I have about the use of nuclear weapons are so great that they require talks now without preconditions. Any future negotiations, of course, must be aimed at eventual denuclearization of North Korea. However, in my opinion, that’s much of a long-term issue. It will not happen over the next few years. I am not talking about negotiations now. I’m talking about talking, talking to avoid a nuclear catastrophe.

Jung: Do you prefer the U.S. talking with North Korea about it in formal or informal setting?

Hecker: I am saying at this point a presidential envoy should bring up the topic in a quiet, informal setting, but it has to have the imprimatur of the Trump administration.

Jung: In op-ed, you said the nuclear clock keeps ticking, and every six to seven weeks, the North may be able to add another nuclear weapon to its arsenal. Is the nuclear bomb based on plutonium only, or does it include uranium-based bomb, too?

Hecker: My estimate is not based on plutonium alone. It’s based on both plutonium and highly enriched uranium.  North Korea cannot produce more than one bomb’s worth of plutonium per year. With highly enriched uranium we have great uncertainties. We simply do not know enough about highly enriched uranium program. My best estimates are perhaps as many as six nuclear weapons out of highly enriched uranium per year.  So, it’s possible that North Korea could make 6-8 nuclear weapons per year. But let me stress the fact again that’s my best estimate, and we don’t know for certain. It’s important to realize that the nuclear crisis is here now. We don’t need to wait until North K. can reach mainland U.S. with a nuclear-tipped missile.

Jung: So, how many nuclear weapons do you think North Korea has now?

Hecker: Again, all we can do is estimate, and my own estimate is North Korea may have enough plutonium and highly enriched uranium for perhaps 20-25 nuclear weapons as of the end of 2016.

Jung: Some experts believe freeze on North Korea’s nuclear capabilities, not denuclearization, is the best realistic option at this point to break the long stalled nuclear talks.  What do you think?

Hecker: I’ve been promoting for the last eight years or so that we proceed in the following manner: First, halt the program, then roll it back, and then eventually eliminate it. To me, freeze is the same as halt. So, the most important part is to stop the problem from getting worse. However, there are many aspects to what we call halt or freeze. I stated it in the following manner - I call it “Three Nos.” We would like North Korea to make no more bombs (that means, no more plutonium or highly enriched uranium), no better bombs (no more nuclear tests or long-range missile test), and no export of bombs or nuclear material. So, that would be the essence of a freeze or halt.)

Jung: I see many North Korea experts agree with your proposal as a realistic option to break the current bottleneck in the nuclear talks. Did you get any reaction from the U.S. government?

Hecker: Well, I wish the American government had supported that eight years ago, because then we’d be in a much better position today. Unfortunately, for a number of reasons we didn’t get there, and now we have to deal with the way things are. Now, the Trump administration comes in, and its challenge is to avoid a nuclear detonation on the Korean peninsula. That’s the challenge, and because of that, it’s a completely different challenge than the Obama administration or the Bush administration faced, and the Trump administration must address that challenge differently.

Jung: So, what is your advice to the Trump administration?

Hecker: At this point, talk to the North Koreans to prevent any sort of potential nuclear catastrophe, and then try to listen to the North Koreans. And make sure they understand our strong commitment to our allies, South Korea and Japan, and that we care about human rights in North Korea, and we are committed to the eventual denuclearization of North Korea. Finally, it will be to North Korea’s advantage to get back to serious negotiations to eventually denuclearize the Korean peninsula. That’s my advice. 

Hero Image
gettyimages 508888794
People watch a television screen showing a breaking news on North Korea's long-range rocket launch at Seoul Station on Feb. 7, 2016 in Seoul, South Korea. CISAC's Siegfried Hecker urges direct talks between the U.S. and North Korea to resolve an increasingly dangerous situation in the latter country.
Han Myung-Gu/Getty Images
All News button
1
-

The Italian civil war and the Nazi occupation of Italy occurred at a critical juncture, just before the birth of a new democracy and when, for the first time in a generation, Italians were choosing political affiliations and forming political identities. In this paper we study how these traumatic events shaped the new political system. We exploit geographic heterogeneity in the intensity and duration of the civil war, and the persistence of the battlefront along the “Gothic line” cutting through Northern-Central Italy. We find that the Communist Party gained votes in the post-war elections where the Nazi occupation and the civil war lasted longer, mainly at the expense of the centrist and catholic parties. This effect persists until the early 1990s. Evidence also suggests that this is due to an effect on political attitudes. Thus, the foreign occupation and the civil war left a lasting legacy of political extremism and polarization on the newborn Italian democracy.

Guido Tabellini is the Intesa Sanpaolo Chair in Political Economics at Universita' Bocconi.

This seminar is part of the Comparative Politics Workshop in the Department of Political Science and is co-sponsored by The Europe Center.

Guido Tabellini Bocconi University
Seminars
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

When governments and scholars work together on data security, society benefits from better safeguards and protections, a U.S. intelligence expert said Wednesday.

The difficulty is keeping up with technology and societal trends, Admiral Bobby R. Inman said at the Center for International Security and Cooperation's annual Drell Lecture for 2017. His talk was titled, “The Challenges of Providing Data Security.”

Inman, whose U.S. Navy career spanned 31 years, served as the director of the National Security Agency, deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and held other influential positions in the U.S. intelligence community. After retiring from the Navy, Inman worked on start-ups in the private sector, in higher education, and as chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. He is currently the Lyndon B. Johnson Centennial Chair in National Policy at the University of Texas, Austin.

'9/11 changed everything'

During his talk, Inman recounted the early days of cryptography and the dialogue between government officials like himself and scholars at universities such as Stanford and UC Berkeley. Cryptography or cryptology is the practice and study of techniques for secure communication in the presence of third parties typically known as adversaries.

Inman was a key driver behind establishing the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 1978. The purpose of the “FISA” court was to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Today, technology has overwhelmed many issues regarding how the government tracks the communications of foreign entities, Inman said. And events have ushered in a different orientation on what type of information and from whom is sought by U.S. intelligence. “9/11 changed everything,” he added.

After 9/11, U.S. intelligence began to focus on foreign individuals in addition to the traditional foreign state actors, Inman said. He pointed out the value of such data collection, as penetrating small groups with human agents is extraordinarily difficult and dangerous.

“The only way you’re likely to get a lead on them (terrorists or narcotic traffickers) is through their communications,” he said.

The Internet, especially social media, has exploded in usage and made data security efforts even more complex, Inman said. “A vastly different world.” As a result, serious privacy, commercial usages and intellectual property issues need to be resolved more than ever. He noted that the rule of law is important to follow when the governmnt or other entities collect and examine communications data.

Inman is particularly worried about how “basic issues of ethics and morality” have eroded in society, which results in people scheming to sell private data for profit that puts others at risk. Another issue involves how to prevent terrorist groups from preying upon mentally weak people and recruiting them over the Internet.

A key reason Inman was invited to be the Drell speaker this year was his connection to Martin Hellman and Whitfield Diffie, two pioneering cryptographers from CISAC who drew Inman’s attention in the mid-1970s when they wrote a groundbreaking paper in their field of study. The three later established long-running friendships that produced strong cryptography frameworks.

Inman said, “We were privileged to start the dialogue. That’s where you begin to solve problems,” as fears and misperceptions can be resolved through discussions and openness. “I think what we need is a repeat of pulling together people” from academia and government to deal with today’s security threats. “We need to assess where we are.”

His concern is who would convene such a dialogue. “We’re in a pretty bumpy time, nationally,” said Inman, who urges a neutral party to be such a convener. On broader security fronts, Inman said he is most apprehensive about a possible nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India.

Legacy of Drell

The event included a tribute to Sidney Drell, who passed away last December at the age of 90. Drell co-founded CISAC, and jointly directed it from 1983 to 1989. The Drell Lecture, which is named after him, is an annual public event sponsored by CISAC. By tradition, the lecturer addresses a current and critical national or international security issue that has important scientific or technical dimensions.

In her opening remarks, Amy Zegart, co-director of CISAC, described Drell as a “true giant in the field of theoretical physics” who devoted his life’s work to reducing the threat of nuclear catastrophe. One trademarks of the Drell lecture was that its namesake had the opportunity to ask the first question of the speaker. “He had a unique way of asking penetrating questions" with gentle decency and fairness, she added.

CISAC’s William Perry, also on hand to discuss Drell’s legacy, said, “Sid Drell was truly a man for all seasons” who excelled in various fields of academic and policy. Perry first met Drell 55 years ago when he was beginning his own career in nuclear arms control. “Sid’s deep interest in arms control led to him teaming up with John Lewis” to launch CISAC, he noted.

“He was an extraordinary man,” Perry said, “and we shall never see his like again.”

Drell was a fan of classical music, especially the St. Lawrence String Quartet, a chamber music group whose music was piped in to the Bechtel Conference Room before the event began.

Follow CISAC at @StanfordCISAC and  www.facebook.com/StanfordCISAC

MEDIA CONTACTS

Clifton B. Parker, Center for International Security and Cooperation: (650) 725-6488, cbparker@stanford.edu

 

Hero Image
gettyimages 507473994 Getty Images
All News button
1
-

Image
Ma Ying-jeou KMT

The eight-year presidency of Ma Ying-jeou (2008-2016) in Taiwan left a complex legacy of political achievements, confrontations, and disappointments that defies easy characterization. It began with President Ma and the Kuomintang’s (KMT) commanding electoral victories in the 2008 elections, and ended with the KMT’s overwhelming loss to the resurgent Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and its leader Tsai Ing-wen in 2016.

It featured rapid conclusions to a broad set of agreements on cross-Strait cooperation with the People’s Republic of China (PRC). But worries about closer ties with the PRC also triggered a popular backlash against growing mainland Chinese influence in Taiwan’s economy and culminated in a student-led occupation of the Legislative Yuan.

It coincided with contradictory trends in public opinion, including both the consolidation of a separate Taiwanese identity and support for the status quo in cross-Strait relations, as well as the increasing salience of divisions over social and environmental issues such as same-sex marriage and green energy at the same time as rising concerns about economic inequality.

It also marked a return to unified government after the acrimonious partisan fights of the Chen Shui-bian years, but long-standing intra-KMT divisions and the decentralized organization of the legislature continued to frustrate the administration, especially in President Ma’s second term.        

Finally, the Ma era produced no consensus about how to move beyond Taiwan’s developmental state legacies. Plans for domestic economic liberalization and greater integration into the global economy were only partially carried out, and the Ma administration ignored or struggled to address rising inequality, stagnant wages, increasing economic dependence on the PRC market, and a skewed tax system favoring investors and corporations over salaried workers.

 

Conference Agenda

The 11th Annual Conference on Taiwan Democracy will bring together scholars from Taiwan, the US, and Europe to consider these political achievements, confrontations, and disappointments in depth, and to assess the strengths and weaknesses of Taiwan’s democracy at the end of the Ma Ying-jeou’s presidency. Conference participants will discuss trends in public opinion, party politics and elections, cross-Strait relations, governance and media, and the performance of political institutions. The conference papers will be revised and included in an edited volume covering democratic practice during the Ma Ying-jeou era in Taiwan.

The conference is free and open to the public. Those interested in attending are requested to RSVP at the link above. This event is organized by the Taiwan Democracy Project in the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.

 

Thursday, March 9

9:15-10:45. Panel I. Public Opinion and Elections

  • Min-hua Huang, "Why Young Voters Abandoned the KMT"
  • Ching-hsin Yu, "Trends in National Identity, Partisanship, and Attitudes toward Cross-Strait Relations"
  • Yun-han Chu, discussant

11:00-12:45. Panel II. Party Politics

  • Austin Wang, "Tsai Ing-wen and the DPP: The Path Out of the Political Wilderness"
  • Nathan Batto, "The KMT as a Presidentialized Party: Party Leaders and Shifts in China Discourse"
  • Kharis Templeman, "The Disruption that Wasn't: How 2016 Changed the Taiwanese Party System"
  • Ching-hsin Yu, discussant

12:45-1:45. Lunch

1:45-3:30. Panel III. Economics, Security, and Cross-Strait Relations

  • Szu-yin Ho, "Ma Ying-jeou's Cross-Strait Policy: Ambitions, Constraints, Results" 
  • Lang Kao, "Cross-Strait Agreements and Taiwan's Executive-Legislative Relationship, 2008-2016"
  • Dean Chen, "In the Shadow of Great Power Rivalry: The KMT Administration's Relations with America, China, and Japan, 2008-2016"
  • Larry Diamond, discussant

 

 

Friday, March 10

9:15-10:45. Panel IV. Governance, Media, and Civil Society

  • Eric Yu, "The Changing Media Environment and Public Opinion"
  • Yun-han Chu and Yu-tzung Chang, "The Challenge of Governability in Taiwan"
  • Kharis Templeman, discussant

11:00-12:30. Panel V. Political Institutions

  • Shih-hao Huang, w/ Shing-yuan Sheng, "Decentralized Legislative Organization and Its Consequences for Policy-making in the Ma Ying-jeou Era"
  • Christian Goebel, "Special Prosecutors, Courts, and Other Accountability Institutions under Ma YIng-jeou"
  • TJ Pempel, discussant

12:30-1:30. Lunch

 

 

 

Oksenberg Room, 3rd Floor, Encina Hall Central

CDDRL
Stanford University
Encina Hall, C147
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 724-6448 (650) 723-1928
0
Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution
Professor, by courtesy, of Political Science and Sociology
diamond_encina_hall.png MA, PhD

Larry Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He is also professor by courtesy of Political Science and Sociology at Stanford, where he lectures and teaches courses on democracy (including an online course on EdX). At the Hoover Institution, he co-leads the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and participates in the Project on the U.S., China, and the World. At FSI, he is among the core faculty of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, which he directed for six and a half years. He leads FSI’s Israel Studies Program and is a member of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. He also co-leads the Global Digital Policy Incubator, based at FSI’s Cyber Policy Center. He served for 32 years as founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.

Diamond’s research focuses on global trends affecting freedom and democracy and on U.S. and international policies to defend and advance democracy. His book, Ill Winds: Saving Democracy from Russian Rage, Chinese Ambition, and American Complacency, analyzes the challenges confronting liberal democracy in the United States and around the world at this potential “hinge in history,” and offers an agenda for strengthening and defending democracy at home and abroad.  A paperback edition with a new preface was released by Penguin in April 2020. His other books include: In Search of Democracy (2016), The Spirit of Democracy (2008), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (1999), Promoting Democracy in the 1990s (1995), and Class, Ethnicity, and Democracy in Nigeria (1989). He has edited or coedited more than fifty books, including China’s Influence and American Interests (2019, with Orville Schell), Silicon Triangle: The United States, China, Taiwan the Global Semiconductor Security (2023, with James O. Ellis Jr. and Orville Schell), and The Troubling State of India’s Democracy (2024, with Sumit Ganguly and Dinsha Mistree).

During 2002–03, Diamond served as a consultant to the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and was a contributing author of its report, Foreign Aid in the National Interest. He has advised and lectured to universities and think tanks around the world, and to the World Bank, the United Nations, the State Department, and other organizations dealing with governance and development. During the first three months of 2004, Diamond served as a senior adviser on governance to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad. His 2005 book, Squandered Victory: The American Occupation and the Bungled Effort to Bring Democracy to Iraq, was one of the first books to critically analyze America's postwar engagement in Iraq.

Among Diamond’s other edited books are Democracy in Decline?; Democratization and Authoritarianism in the Arab WorldWill China Democratize?; and Liberation Technology: Social Media and the Struggle for Democracy, all edited with Marc F. Plattner; and Politics and Culture in Contemporary Iran, with Abbas Milani. With Juan J. Linz and Seymour Martin Lipset, he edited the series, Democracy in Developing Countries, which helped to shape a new generation of comparative study of democratic development.

Download full-resolution headshot; photo credit: Rod Searcey.

Former Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law
Faculty Chair, Jan Koum Israel Studies Program
Date Label
Conferences
-

Each year up to 100 high-achieving students with demonstrated intellect, leadership potential and civic commitment will receive full funding to pursue a graduate education at Stanford. Join us to learn more about the Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program. 

                                      Registration报名

https://apply.knight-hennessy.stanford.edu/register/PKU 

 

Knight-Hennessy Info Session Flyer
Download pdf
John Hennessy Knight-Hennessy Scholars
Seminars
Subscribe to Governance