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.
Former Summer Fellow shares insights on the Egyptian revolution and the stalled transition
On May 7, the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted Egyptian activist Ahmed Salah who spoke about the series of events that led up to the Egyptian revolution and the current struggles the country faces in realizing its revolutionary goals. Salah, an alumni of the 2011 Draper Hills Summer Fellowship at CDDRL, has been at the forefront of the revolutionary movement in Egypt. He has been involved in the launch of opposition groups and movements since 2005, including the April 6 Youth Movement and Kifaya (Enough!), both of which played roles in organizing and mobilizing the forces behind the revolution.
Salah returned to Stanford as part of a larger speaking tour across the U.S., to raise awareness and support for the democratic development of Egypt. With the military undermining the goals of the revolution, the constitution-writing process stalled, and a rush towards presidential elections, Salah emphasized the critical moment Egypt faces in its transition towards democracy.
Forced into exiled for his activism, Salah has sought temporary refuge in the U.S. and is dedicating his time to building awareness and advocacy for his cause through the Coalition of the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution in Washington D.C. and beyond.
Addressing the CDDRL seminar, Salah recalled the defining moments of the January revolution, “Getting into Tahrir in the morning, the stench of tear gas was so strong, all these burning vehicles and buildings all around - blood - pools of blood in different locations, and protestors were coming in, again.”
Salah was instrumental in co-devising and implementing the plan leading up to the revolution and has been subject to arrest, incarceration, and abuse as a result of his actions. He described being beaten and his nose broken when a gang of thugs surrounded him in Tahrir Square, and another incident when he was targeted by a sniper firing into a crowd of protestors. He escaped with his life but was not as lucky as thousands of other activists.
As the country faces a crucial period of political transition with presidential elections approaching, Salah emphasized the fact that candidates have not had enough time to campaign, leaving voters with an incomplete picture of the competing platforms. He cited examples of direct vote rigging and manipulation in the parliamentary elections and stressed the importance of ensuring a transparent process when electing Egypt's first post-revolutionary president. While Salah recognizes the shortcomings of the transition period, he endeavors to ensure that the goals of the revolution and the activists who made great sacrifices are fully realized in the long-run.
Stanford scholar recognized for visionary leadership and civic activism
The Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) congratulates Landry Signé for his recent awards in recognition of his pioneering work to advance democratic causes and community leadership in North America. Signé is a 2011-2013 Banting Postdoctoral Fellow at CDDRL where he researches the conditions that create, maintain and sustain democracies and economic development. His Banting fellowship is supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Prior to joining CDDRL, Signé was a visiting scholar at the Stanford Center on African Studies.
On May 19, Signé received the Outstanding Visionary Leadership Award during the 2012 African Network Conference in San Jose, California. Signé was recognized by The African Network for his pioneering role in promoting entrepreneurial opportunities, accountable governance, and economic development for Africa in the Silicon Valley and North America. Signé has been helping to redefine Africa as a continent of economic opportunity through an innovative course he teaches at Stanford Continuing Studies bringing Silicon Valley executives and Stanford students together to spur business and investment strategies.
A week earlier, Signé was awarded the Jury’s Favorite Award for Vision and Inspiration by the African Business Network during their Excellence Vision and Inspiration Gala in Montreal, Canada. Signé was bestowed with this award for his work with the Political Commission of Montreal, the United Nations Association of Canada-Montreal, and the United Nations Missions Committee in New York to champion projects to advance political, economic and social development. One of the projects he supported reinforced the importance of art for economic development, and resulted in a $26 million grant allocated to the Montreal Museum of Fine Art by the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada.
Signé dedicated the award to, “All the people and institutions who - undercover or in the spotlight - contribute through their visionary actions to improve citizen involvement, to create more individual and collective opportunities, and to generate a better and happier life for the current and next generations.”
Signé completed his PhD in political science in 2010 with the Award of Excellence from the University of Montreal, and has been bequeathed the Award for Best International PhD Dissertation of 2011 by the Center for International Studies and Research. Signé is a member of the Stanford University Provost's Advisory Committee on Postdoctoral Affairs and is the co-chair of the Stanford University Postdoctoral Association whose mission is to represent and advocate for the interests of the postdoctoral scholar community, and to enrich their experience at Stanford University.
A frequent commentator on issues of African governance and economic development, Signé has appeared in The New York Times, Reuters, and Afrik-News.
Students simulate White House war-room drama in class born of Ethics & War series
The president, surrounded by his Cabinet members and senior national security and foreign policy advisors, appears grim as he declares: “This is certainly the greatest crisis I’ve ever faced as a president.”
He has ordered the deployment of U.S. forces into Syrian territory to protect civilians and establish safe zones. His Cabinet must now determine whether to order a pre-emptive strike against Syrian troops on word from the CIA that the Bashar al-Assad regime appears ready to use chemical and biological weapons stored in underground bunkers east of Damascus.
After a military briefing by the commander of CENTCOM, the president cautions those assembled at the classified briefing: “Remember, history will judge us, in part, by how thoroughly we discuss all the options today.”
With imagined top-secret memorandums from the CIA and the White House – as well as the real-deal Obama Nuclear Posture Review – some 20 Stanford undergraduate and law students dressed in suits and armed with laptops and position papers spend three hours debating the merits of an attack on Syrian forces.
Scott Sagan, a political science professor and senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), plays Obama in the class co-taught by Allen Weiner, director of the Center on International Conflict and Negotiation at the Law School.
The Ethics and Law of War class presents law and political science students with some of the political, legal and moral consequences of war. For their final simulation, they must stay in character, grill one another as policymakers and world leaders might do behind closed doors – and then defend their final decisions.
“Instead of simply learning abstract just-war theory or international law doctrine, the simulations encourage students to apply what they've learned to real problems,” says Weiner, once a legal adviser at the State Department. “This provides for much deeper awareness of the subject matter and richer appreciation of the nuances and complexities.
| Image
|
| Scott Sagan as President Obama |
Ethics & War
The class grew out of Stanford’s hugely successful, two-year War & Ethics lecture series, which concluded last month. Philosophers, writers, journalists, historians, social scientists, human rights activists and policy makers came together several times a month to grapple with the complex ethical equations of war. Co-sponsored by a dozen centers and departments across campus, the series drew big names and big crowds.
Vietnam War veterans and award winning authors Tobias Wolff – a Stanford English professor – and Tim O’Brien told a sold-out audience that writing about war was both therapeutic and heartbreaking. O’Brien was a Pulitzer Prize finalist for “The Things They Carried,” a harrowing string of stories about a platoon of American soldiers in Vietnam.
How do you write about war? “You do it sentence by sentence, line by line, character by character, even syllable by syllable,’ O’Brien told a mesmerized audience. “You dive into that wreck and try to salvage something.”
Journalist Sebastian Junger spoke at the screening of “Restrepo,” his documentary about the Afghanistan War. Stanford students and faculty performed in George Packer’s play, “Betrayed,” which illuminated the U.S. abandonment of young Iraqi interpreters who risked their lives for Washington during the Iraq War. For the final event, Debra Satz, a philosophy professor and director of the McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society, Sagan, and Charles Dunlap, a retired Air Force general who now leads the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University, debated the future ethical challenges of war.
Sagan, an expert in nuclear policy and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction who worked at the Pentagon and was a consultant to the Secretary of Defense, said the lecture series enriched his students by forcing them to pay attention and question the moral and legal underpinnings of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“I was stretched, intellectually, by this series,” he said. “It encouraged me to read and discuss both fiction and philosophy that raises the same ethical issues – from a very different perspective – that we analyze in political science.”
Back to class
Weiner, as stand-in for Vice President Joe Biden, tells those assembled they must consider that within 24 hours, 6,000 American troops will be in danger. The CIA has a “high degree of confidence” that Assad has ordered the removal of the chemical weapons from the underground bunkers and transport trucks have been spotted at the sights.
“As we head into an election cycle, the difficulties of the decision that we make today will be placed under even greater scrutiny,” Weiner says.
That decision will be to make one of these hard choices:
- The U.S. military withdraws its troops and avoids a military confrontation, but risks further civilian deaths and the condemnation of Arab Spring allies;
- Obama orders conventional airstrikes against Syrian troops, which could lead to thousands of inadvertent civilian casualties;
- Washington takes extraordinary measures and uses nuclear weapons to destroy the underground storage bunkers for its weapons of mass destruction. This last option likely would eliminate any chance of Syrian troops using chemical weapons, but it would open a Pandora’s box for the Nobel Peace Prize president who has pledged to work toward a nuclear-free world.
| Image
|
| U.S. Army Col. Viet Luong as CENTCOM Commander Gen. James Mattis |
The students know Americans are weary of war after the WMD fiasco in Iraq and a decade-long war in Afghanistan, both of which have claimed countless lives and a trillion-plus in taxpayer dollars. Their decision – as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, among others – is weighted by the concern that Americans likely won’t re-elect a president who drags them into another costly warm, and by the fear that a successful president cannot let American troops be exposed to deadly chemical attacks.
The mock military briefing by Gen. James Mattis – played by visiting CISAC military fellow, U.S. Army Col. Viet Luong, himself a commander in Afghanistan – lays out the risks and probabilities of casualties under each scenario.
A student asks Luong which military option he would recommend.
The general prevaricates: “I’m a military guy; I tend to lean toward success and then I also consider civilian casualties. But I’m also very concerned about putting my soldiers at risk.”
Clinton, voiced by international policy student Micaela Hellman-Tincher, says she’s concerned about mission creep. “Consider the international implications of us entering into conflict,” she says.
The fake Samantha Power of the National Security Council, played by Ashley Rhoades, urges diplomatic measures and a stand-down from military conflict. “I’m not advocating in any way for inaction,” she says. “There are several diplomatic solutions. We ask that you give us 24 hours to be able to work on these diplomatic options and multilateral diplomacy.”
Such as what? Such as calling on Moscow to mediate or seeking a U.N. envoy.
The legal team from the law school lays out their arguments for why a preventive strike would be illegal under certain conventions; while a pre-emptive strike based on imminent and unavoidable threats of attack might be permissible.
Then Stanford law student Alex Weber – playing Avril Haines, legal advisor to the National Security Council – addresses the elephant in the room: the nuclear option.
“If you use a nuclear weapon, regardless of whether the Syrians use chemical weapons against our troops, you are, as Colin Powell said in the 1991 Gulf War, opening a Pandora’s Box, particularly because Syria has no nuclear weapon,” Weber says. “You are the nuclear nonproliferation president. There is a psychological button that you push that will prompt the media to take the ethical debate to new levels.”
In the end, consensus appears to be growing around an immediate preventive strike against the storage bunkers using conventional forces. The Cabinet knows this could lead to deaths on both sides, but allowing the Syrians to use chemical weapons could lead to even more.
“You can’t cut and run, Mr. President,” insists student Torry Castellano, playing White House Chief of Staff Jacob Lew.
Obama says he will take their advice under advisement and all rise as he leaves the war room.
More photos of the student simulation are available at CISAC's Facebook page.
On foreign policy, experts give Obama political edge
Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: Narrative, Analysis, and Recommendations
This report provides one of the first coherent, readable narratives of the Fukushima nuclear disaster—what happened in the first few days. It is based on new sources available in Japanese and National Diet testimonies, and is an objective overview of events as they unfolded, rather than an ideologically positioned effort of advocacy. The report goes on to analyze the institutional and governance aspects of Japan’s nuclear oversight, highlighting the fundamental problems that surfaced during the disaster that stem from deeper structural issues. The report also draws upon expertise from a conference held at Stanford University in February 2012 to analyze the politics and industry structure of Japan’s electric power sector, making concrete recommendations for reorganizing the power industry and government oversight structure.
Risk Attitudes Shape National Oil Company Strategies
Abstract
Mark C. Thurber, David R. Hults
National oil companies (NOCs) often behave in strikingly different ways from one another and from private, international oil companies (IOCs). Given that NOCs control about three-quarters of world oil reserves by equity share, their variation in corporate strategy has important implications for the world oil market. The recently released book Oil and Governance: State-owned Enterprises and the World Energy Supply, which we co-edited (along with our colleague, David Victor) and contributed to, explores the variation among NOCs through 15 detailed case studies and several cross-cutting pieces. Building off the research in that book, our aim in this essay is to discuss the differences among NOCs in their approach to risk.
As described by Nolan and Thurber in Chapter 4 of our book, the notion of risk encapsulates both the likelihood of a negative outcome (e.g., of drilling a dry hole) and the loss that such an outcome would entail (e.g., the investment in an exploration well). Risks are pervasive in the oil industry because of the enormous sums of money on the line and the significant uncertainty around whether investments will prove successful. In this article we suggest that the goals of the state and its tools of governance may cause an NOC to tend towards one of three types of behavior: risk avoidance, risk taking, or risk management. Each of these three approaches to risk, we find, can be useful or counterproductive for the state depending on the context.
It can be useful for an NOC to avoid risk, as Sonangol has done, if its government is highly dependent on oil revenue, but this approach usually means that it must allow IOCs to shoulder risks if the oil sector is to thrive. Intelligent risk taking by the NOC, on the other hand, can help build domestic technological capability and may be a reasonable approach if the government has less need to maximize hydrocarbon revenue in the short term. Finally, commercial risk management by the NOC may be an appropriate model where the NOC has developed some competitive advantages and its government has few remaining expectations for the NOC apart from revenue generation. There is no “right” or “wrong” approach to risk for NOCs in a general sense. The goal of each government and its NOC should be to make sure that the way the NOC takes, avoids, or manages risk is of benefit to both the country and the NOC itself.
Link to article (free trial subscription available) => http://www.worldoil.com/June-2012-Risk-attitudes-shape-national-oil-company-strategies.html
Only Beautiful, Please
Coverage of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) all too often focuses solely on nuclear proliferation, military parades, and the personality cult around its leaders. As the British ambassador to North Korea, John Everard had the rare experience of living there from 2006, when the DPRK conducted its first nuclear test, to 2008, just before Kim Jong Il’s stroke. While stationed in Pyongyang, Everard’s travels around the DPRK provided him with numerous opportunities to meet and converse with North Koreans.
Only Beautiful, Please goes beyond official North Korea to unveil the human dimension of life in that hermetic nation. Everard recounts his impressions of the country and its people, his interactions with them, and his observations on their way of life. He provides a picture as well of the life of foreigners in this closed society, considers how the DPRK evolved to its current state, and discusses the failure of current approaches to tackle the challenges that it throws up. The book is illustrated with striking and never-before-seen photographs taken by Everard during his stay in North Korea.
Desk, examination, or review copies can be requested through Stanford University Press.
A British Diplomat in North Korea
Voting and Peer Effects: Experimental Evidence from Mozambique
Abstract:
Voter education campaigns often aim to increase voter participation and political accountability. We follow randomized interventions implemented nationwide during the 2009 Mozambican elections using a free newspaper, leaflets and text messaging. We investigate whether treatment effects were transmitted through social networks (kinship and chatting) or geographical proximity. For individuals personally targeted by the campaign, we estimate the reinforcement effect of proximity to other targeted individuals. For untargeted individuals we estimate the diffusion of the campaign depending on proximity to targeted individuals. We find evidence for both effects, similar across the different treatments and across the different connectedness measures. We observe that the treatments worked through networks by raising the levels of information and interest about the election, in line with the average treatments effects. However, differently from those average effects, we find negative network effects of voter education on voter participation. We interpret this result as a free-riding effect, likely to occur for costly actions.
Marcel Fafchamps is Professor of Development Economics at Oxford University, a Professional Fellow at Mansfield College and the Deputy Director of the Centre for the Study of African Economies. Fafchamps’ research is focused primarily on institutions that enable exchange, including risk-coping strategies, market institutions, intra-household allocation and the allocation of economic activity across space, with a concentration on the regions of Africa and South Asia. He is also interested in spatial networks and social networks from a methodological perspective. His scholarship on the topic of market institutions is summarized in Market Institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa, (MIT Press, 2004), which his work on risk coping is addressed in Rural Poverty, Risk, and Development (Elgar Press, 2003). Fafchamps studied law and economics at the Université Catholique de Louvain and spent nearly five years working on rural development in Africa for the International Labour Organization before earning his Ph.D. in agricultural economics at the University of California, Berkeley in 1989. He taught development economics at Stanford from 1989 until 1998.
Encina Ground Floor Conference Room
Francis Fukuyama
Encina Hall, C148
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305
Francis Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a faculty member of FSI's Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). He is also Director of Stanford's Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy, and a professor (by courtesy) of Political Science.
Dr. Fukuyama has written widely on issues in development and international politics. His 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man, has appeared in over twenty foreign editions. His book In the Realm of the Last Man: A Memoir will be published in fall 2026.
Francis Fukuyama received his B.A. from Cornell University in classics, and his Ph.D. from Harvard in Political Science. He was a member of the Political Science Department of the RAND Corporation, and of the Policy Planning Staff of the US Department of State. From 1996-2000 he was Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University, and from 2001-2010 he was Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. He served as a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics from 2001-2004. He is editor-in-chief of American Purpose, an online journal.
Dr. Fukuyama holds honorary doctorates from Connecticut College, Doane College, Doshisha University (Japan), Kansai University (Japan), Aarhus University (Denmark), the Pardee Rand Graduate School, and Adam Mickiewicz University (Poland). He is a non-resident fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of the Rand Corporation, the Board of Trustees of Freedom House, and the Board of the Volcker Alliance. He is a fellow of the National Academy for Public Administration, a member of the American Political Science Association, and of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is married to Laura Holmgren and has three children.
(October 2025)