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.

Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Whether it’s WikiLeaks and CIA documents or nuclear thieves, the danger from insiders in high-security organizations is escalating in our Internet age.

But many threats from within go unrecognized or misunderstood, according to Stanford professor Scott Sagan, who co-edited a new book Insider Threats with Matthew Bunn, a professor of practice at Harvard University. Their work analyzes the challenges that high-security organizations face in protecting themselves from employees who might betray them. Sagan, a core faculty member in Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation, and Bunn recently participated in an online discussion of the book’s key arguments. They will hold a talk and book signing at 3:30 p.m. on May 16 in the CISAC Central Conference Room.

Sagan and Bunn wrote, “Perhaps the most striking lesson we learned in working with scholars and officials who have dealt with this problem was the sheer scale of the red flags – from explicit statements of support for Osama bin Laden to behavior leading other staff to fear for their lives – that organizations are able to ignore.”

They found that organizations tend to have biases that cause them to downplay insider threats. In particular, organizations with high-security needs face significant risks from trusted employees with access to sensitive information, facilities, and materials. 

The researchers highlight "worst practices" from these past mistakes, suggesting lessons and insights that could improve the security situations at many workplaces. Amy Zegart, co-director of CISAC, has a chapter in Insider Threats that provides a detailed account of the organizational dysfunction that allowed Nidal Hasan to carry out his massacre at Fort Hood.

Other chapters include the following topics and authors:

  • An analysis of the similar problems that led Bruce Ivins, who probably carried out the anthrax attacks in 2001, to continue to have access to deadly pathogens (by Jessica Stern, then of Harvard and now at Boston University, and Ron Schouten, of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School);
  • An analysis of the rapid rise and subsequent fall of “green-on-blue” attacks in Afghanistan – that is, Afghan soldiers and police officers attacking Americans there to help them (by Austin Long of Columbia University); and 
  • An assessment of how casinos and pharmaceutical plants, with a profit incentive to protect against insiders, cope with the problem (by Bunn and Kathryn Glynn, then of IBM Global Business Services and now at the National Nuclear Security Administration). 

Another chapter examines the potential terrorist use of nuclear insiders, offering new data that shows that jihadist writings and postings contain only a modest emphasis on possible nuclear plots, and essentially no mention of the possibility of using nuclear insiders. However, the authors warn this is no reason for complacency – insiders have been largely responsible for past nuclear theft incidents.

MEDIA CONTACTS

Scott Sagan, Center for International Security and Cooperation: (650) 725-2715, ssagan@stanford.edu

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

 

 

 

Hero Image
gettyimages 540849924
CISAC's Scott Sagan writes in a new book that organizations tend to ignore the many red flags typically associated with insider threats. | xijian/Getty Images
All News button
1
-

- This event is co-sponsored by Stanford Global Studies, The Europe Center, and the History Department - 

Abstract: By 1914, exploiting colonies was a well-established practice of even the most ‘liberal’ empires. Treating areas of Europe like colonies was not, except on the more remote peripheries. However, when the Central Powers occupied substantial parts of Europe during World War One, they applied harsh economic regimes while the British and French intensified the use of their empires. This paper will consider the comparisons – and the links - between these two forms of exploitation. It will suggest that both became ‘laboratories of autarky’ for kinds of economic regime (especially with regard to manpower) that were still not possible domestically for the nation-states fighting the war. The argument will be general but focus empirically on French North Africa and German-occupied France and Belgium. 

About the Speaker: John Horne is Leverhulme Visiting Professor at Oxford University (2016-17) and Emeritus Fellow and former Professor of Modern European History at Trinity College Dublin, where he founded the Centre for War Studies. He is a Fellow of the Royal Irish Academy and a board member of the Research Centre at the Historial de la Grande Guerre, Péronne (France). He is the author and editor of a number of books and over ninety chapters and articles, many relating to the history of the Great War. Among his latest publications are (ed.) A Companion to World War One (Oxford, Blackwell-Wiley, 2010); (ed.) Vers la guerre totale: le tournant de 1914-1915 (Paris, Tallandier, 2010); and with Robert Gerwarth (ed.) War in Peace: Paramilitary Violence in Europe after the Great War (Oxford University Press, 2012). He is currently working on a history of the French experiences of the First World War.

Encina Hall, 2nd floor

John Horne Leverhulme Visiting Professor Oxford University Oxford University and Trinity College Dublin
Seminars
-

Abstract:

Nika Gilauri, has recently published a book Practical Economics: Economic Transformation and Government Reform in Georgia 2004-2012. Former Prime Minister discusses why the Georgian case is exemplary and relevant for countries in transition. He describes how Georgia managed a breakthrough in the fight against corruption, rightsizing of government, creation of business-friendly environment, tax and customs reform, privatization of state-owned companies, etc. During the seminar, Mr. Gilauri will try to answer a question: how do you manage a transformation to bring about fast and sustainable growth? And he will approach this question from two angles: What is the right size for a government, both in terms of its regulatory footprint and in terms of its budget in relation to the size of the economy? How do you ensure a government’s efficiency in terms of its decision making, its interaction with the private sector, financial flows, and the services it provides?

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
nika gilauri
Mr. Gilauri has been a managing partner of Reformatics since 2012 and a senior advisor to McKinsey & Company since 2014. Earlier, he spent 8 years in the Georgian government, where he served as Minister of Energy (2004-2007), Minister of Finance (2007-2009) and Prime Minister (2009-2012). Mr. Gilauri’s term as Prime Minister was notably marked by rapid economic recovery and growth in the aftermath of the 2008-2009 global economic crisis: Georgia’s GDP rose from - 9.0% when Mr. Gilauri was appointed (Q2 2009) to +8.1% when his term came to an end (Q2 2012). Georgia’s budgetary deficit also decreased during his term as prime minister, dropping from 9% in 2009 to 3% in 2012.

During his time in government, Mr. Gilauri also guided reforms in the energy sector, fiscal policy, healthcare, customs, education and other spheres of economic development, and contributed to efforts to improve Georgia’s overall business environment. His greatest achievement as Minister of Energy was to transform Georgia from being a country of semi- permanent blackouts into a net exporter of electricity to all its neighbors.

In his more recent capacity as managing partner of Reformatics, Mr. Gilauri has been involved in over 20 advisory assignments on three continents for various high-ranking government officials and politicians including presidents and prime ministers. Mr Gilauri holds a BA in Economics and Finance from the University of Limerick (Ireland) and an MA in International Business Management from Temple University (USA).

Nika Gilauri Founder & Managing Partner of Reformatics, Senior Advisor to McKinsey and Company Former Prime-Minister of Georgia (’09-’12)
Seminars

1265 Welch Road, Room 245
Stanford, CA 94305-5479

(650) 725-5507
0
Associate Professor in Medicine (Biomedical Informatics), Surgery, and Biomedical Data Science
hernandez-boussard.jpg PhD, MPH, MS

Dr. Hernandez-Boussard is an Associate Professor in Medicine (Biomedical Informatics), Surgery, and Biomedical Data Science at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Dr. Hernandez-Boussard's background and expertise is in the field of computational biology, with concentration on accountability measures, population health, and health policy. A key focus of her research is the application of novel methods and tools to large clinical datasets for hypothesis generation, comparative effectiveness research, and the evaluation of quality healthcare delivery.

CV
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
Admiral Harry B. Harris, Jr., commander of U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM), visited the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center last Friday. Throughout the day, he met with faculty, fellows and students and delivered a keynote speech to the broader Stanford community.
 
In his remarks titled Deterring Revisionist Powers, Harris described how the Indo-Asia-Pacific region fits in the context of the “global operating system,” a term used to illustrate the norms and standards that have defined the international system since the end of World War II. Harris also explained how USPACOM is ensuring continued international access to the shared domains of the Indo-Asia-Pacific, which include use of the air, sea and cyber domains.
 
Harris also led discussions on the strategic environment and security challenges that the United States faces. He engaged in an exchange with various audience members on current security dilemmas such as North Korea’s nuclear program, the South China Sea, and the state of U.S. alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.
 
The Chatham House Rule applied to Harris’ public presentation, and his subsequent meetings were closed to the public and news media.
 
Harris was later featured at a meeting held at the Highly Immersive Classroom at the Graduate School of Business. Faculty and students at Stanford conversed by way of video teleconference with affiliates at Stanford Center at Peking University (SCPKU), Beijing. U.S.-Asia Security Initiative Director Karl Eikenberry and SCPKU Executive Director Josh Cheng moderated the dialogue.
 
Admiral Harris’ visit to Stanford was co-sponsored by Ambassador Eikenberry and Admiral Gary Roughead, Robert and Marion Oster Distinguished Military Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Hero Image
2017march admharris visit online
Admiral Harry B. Harris, Jr., commander of U.S. Pacific Command, delivers remarks titled "Deterring Revisionist Powers" at the Bechtel Conference Center, March 3, 2017. | Debbie Warren
All News button
1
-

Abstract:

This paper provides an account of the strategies of extortion and co-optation used by drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) toward civil society in Mexico. Our theoretical approach focuses on levels of territorial contestation among armed actors, as well as state capture by DTOs, to explain variation in co-opting or coercing civil society. Through the use of list experiments in a nationally representative survey, the paper measures extortion and assistance by DTOs in Mexico. We find that territorial contestation among rival DTOs increases predation on civil society while reducing DTOs assistance, which is found to occur in uncontested municipalities. Additionally, we find that extortion is higher in municipalities where DTOs have captured the state. These results suggest that territorial contestation and state capture are important in determining the strategy toward civil society during drug wars.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
gustavo
Gustavo Robles is a Research Scholar for the Program on Poverty and Governance (POVGOV) at CDDRL. He finished his PhD in Political Science at Stanford University in 2017 with specialization in Political Methodology and Comparative Politics. His PhD dissertation focused on the dynamics and consequences of drug-related violence in Mexico. His research interests include the economics of crime and violence in Latin America, political economy of development, and legislative studies. He is involved in POVGOV’s projects on police accountability and use of force, crime and security, and violence prevention in Brazil and Mexico. He holds a M.A. in Economics from Stanford University and a BA in Economics and Political Science from ITAM.

Research Scholar for the Program on Poverty and Governance (POVGOV) at CDDRL
Seminars
-

Abstract:

As the number of migrants in Europe has risen in recent years, far right parties have fuelled voters’ fears concerning what the influx will mean for their nations. This project utilizes paired pre-election polls and actual vote shares across state and regional elections pre- and postmigrant crisis to provide evidence that far right sympathists often practiced preference falsification prior to this legitimizing shock, but that the crisis reshaped the political conversation such that far right identification is no longer deemed politically shameful. Although the theoretical framework surrounding preference falsification is well developed in the social movement literature as well as in American politics, Laura Jakli argues that it has untapped parallels in the study of Europe's far right. She also embeds priming and list experiments in a Facebook survey to determine whether there is a significant difference between subjects' willingness to identify with the far right using explicit versus implicit measurement approaches.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
headshot jakli
Laura Jakli is a PhD student and FLAS fellow at UC Berkeley. Her research focuses on the intersection of modern European politics and political behavior. She has designed and implemented field experiments, internet-based survey experiments, and interview-based research in the US, Greece, and Hungary. Her dissertation examines the relationship between digital media polarization and individual-level attitude strength as well as aggregate-level electoral mobilization. The overall goal of her dissertation is to explain why recent far right voter turnout has been remarkably high relative to the underlying distribution of ideological adherents across the West. She holds a BA from Cornell University and an MA from UC Berkeley.

Laura Jakli PhD student and FLAS fellow at UC Berkeley
Seminars
-

Abstract:

The Allied occupation of Japan is remembered as the "good occupation." An American-led coalition successfully turned a militaristic enemy into a stable and democratic ally. Of course, the story was more complicated, but the occupation did forge one of the most enduring relationships in the postwar world. Recent events, from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan to protests over American bases in Japan to increasingly aggressive territorial disputes between Asian nations over islands in the Pacific, have brought attention back to the subject of the occupation of Japan. But where did occupation policy come from? This talk considers the role of presidents, bureaucrats, think tanks, the media, and Congress as part of an informal policy network created to manage the postwar world during World War II.

 

Speaker Bio:

Image
dbarnes1
Dr. Dayna Barnes is a specialist in 20th century international history, American foreign policy, and East Asia. She is a visiting scholar at Stanford University's Center on Democracy, Development and Rule of Law, and is an incoming assistant professor of history at City, University of London. Her book, Architects of Occupation: American Experts and the Planning for Postwar Japan, was published in Cornell University Press in March 2017.

Dana Barnes Visiting scholar at CDDRL
Seminars
-

Although the post-1989 world is the world that America and Europe made, it has now become the world that America and Europe have started to fear and sometimes even hate. Looking back across the turbulent decades since 1989, we are astounded by the speed with which yesterday's euphoric victory has turned into today's anxiety and distress. Explaining why and how it happened in the different parts of Europe, Russia, Turkey, Eastern Europe is the principal ambition of this lecture.

 

[[{"fid":"225445","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":"font-size: 13.008px; height: 320px; width: 320px; float: left; margin-right: 15px;","class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto","data-delta":"1"}}]]Ivan Krastev is the Chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia and Permanent fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences, Vienna. He is a founding board member of the European Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the Board of Trustees of The International Crisis Group and is a Contributing Opinion Writer of The New York Times. His latest books in English are “Democracy Disrupted. The Global Politics on Protest” (UPenn Press, May 2014); “In Mistrust We Trust: Can Democracy Survive When We Don't Trust Our Leaders?” (TED Books, 2013). He is a co-author with Stephen Holmes of a forthcoming book on Russian politics.  His book “After Europe” is forthcoming in English (Penn Press, 2017) and in German (Suhrkamp, 2017).

 

 

THIS EVENT HAS REACHED FULL CAPACITY. PLEASE CONTACT MAGDALENA magdafb@stanford.edu TO GET ON THE WAITLIST. 

Ivan Krastev Chairman of the Center for Liberal Strategies Speaker
Lectures

Damian Collins MP is a member of the House of Commons, and Chairman of the Parliamentary Select Committee for Cuture, Media and Sport. He graduated in modern history from the University of Oxford, and 'Charmed Life, the phenomenal world of Philip Sassoon'Damian Collins MP is a member of the House of Commons, and Chairman of the Parliamentary Select Committee for Culture, Media and Sport. He graduated in modern history from the University of Oxford, and Charmed Life, the Phenomenal World of Philip Sassoon is his first book.

 

 

 

No RSVP required.  For more information, please contact jewishstudies.stanford.edu.

This event is co-sponsored by The Taube Center for Jewish Studies, the Department of History, and The Europe Center.
 

 

Lane History Corner (Building 200)
Room 302

 

Damian Collins Member of Parliament, UK
Lectures
Subscribe to Governance