Society

FSI researchers work to understand continuity and change in societies as they confront their problems and opportunities. This includes the implications of migration and human trafficking. What happens to a society when young girls exit the sex trade? How do groups moving between locations impact societies, economies, self-identity and citizenship? What are the ethnic challenges faced by an increasingly diverse European Union? From a policy perspective, scholars also work to investigate the consequences of security-related measures for society and its values.

The Europe Center reflects much of FSI’s agenda of investigating societies, serving as a forum for experts to research the cultures, religions and people of Europe. The Center sponsors several seminars and lectures, as well as visiting scholars.

Societal research also addresses issues of demography and aging, such as the social and economic challenges of providing health care for an aging population. How do older adults make decisions, and what societal tools need to be in place to ensure the resulting decisions are well-informed? FSI regularly brings in international scholars to look at these issues. They discuss how adults care for their older parents in rural China as well as the economic aspects of aging populations in China and India.

Paragraphs

This research evaluates methodologies to mitigate misreporting in intimate partner violence (IPV) data collection in a middle-income country. We conducted surveys in Russia involving three list experiments, a self-administered tablet questionnaire, a self-administered online survey, and conventional face-to-face interviews. Results show that list experiments yield lower disclosure rates for the complex IPV definitions suggested by the UN. The tablet-based self-administered questionnaire, conducted with an interviewer present, also did not increase IPV reporting. Conversely, the self-administered online survey increased lifetime IPV disclosures by 51% (physical) and 26% (psychological) compared to face-to-face interviews. Women showed greater sensitivity to the online survey mode. This increase is linked to the absence of interviewer bias, enhanced safety by minimizing potential perpetrators’ presence, and reduced cognitive burden. We argue that self-administered online surveys—using sampling bias mitigation—may thus be an optimal, low-cost method for surveying the general population in middle- and high-income countries.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Sociological Methods & Research
Authors
Emil Kamalov
Ivetta Sergeeva
Number
https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241261436407
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

This story first appeared in Japanese in Asahi Shimbun's GLOBE+. The English translation below was machine-generated and lightly edited for accuracy. You can also read a related news article about the Stanford Japan Barometer's experiment discussed here via our website.



The Japanese are currently very cautious about accepting foreign workers, a trend that has intensified especially in recent years. Among foreigners, those from China tend to be less favored, while those more readily accepted are immigrants from Europe, the United States, or Vietnam who work in fields such as medicine, research, or science, speak Japanese, and have high academic qualifications. The Stanford Japan Barometer is an online public opinion survey conducted by Kiyoteru Tsutsui, professor of sociology at Stanford University and director of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, and political scientist Charles Crabtree of Monash University in Australia, covering a variety of themes including Japanese society, economy, and politics. While it boasts one of the largest respondent numbers in Japan, this time the survey focused on the themes of "immigrants" and "foreigners."

The survey was conducted from February 6-8 and 13-16, 2026, with the aim of examining changes in public opinion before and after the House of Representatives election held on February 8, 2026. The number of respondents was slightly over 4,000 in each period. However, the results were almost identical before and after the election.

The survey explored the extent to which Japanese people support or oppose the acceptance of foreign workers. Respondents were asked to answer "agree," "somewhat agree," "somewhat disagree," or "disagree" for 16 policies, including "climate change/global warming," "declining birthrate," "aging population," "social security for the working generation," "national budget cuts," "economic inequality," and "AI strategy."

In the first survey, when asked about "accepting foreign workers," 46.9% answered "agree" (first two groups), and 53.1% answered "disagree" (last two groups), indicating that opposition was the highest percentage. The second survey yielded similar results, with 46.6% agreeing and 53.4% ​​disagreeing.

Regarding policy priorities, including "acceptance of foreign workers," surveys were also conducted in 2022 and 2023. These surveys covered 14 policy items, and while the response categories differed slightly, the content is comparable. In 2022 and 2023, broadly speaking, opposition accounted for 35.5% and 36.6% respectively. This represents an increase of approximately 18 percentage points between 2022 and 2026. This is a significant change compared to other items, where the opposition rate either decreased or remained unchanged, or increased by only a few percentage points. In the following text, the researchers explain the experiment further.

Popular among Westerners and Indians


We also investigated what kind of immigrants are preferred. To do this, we asked people to "make judgments from the perspective of an immigration officer." We asked them about nine attributes: gender, educational background, country of origin, Japanese language ability, reason for immigration application, occupation, length of previous work experience, work plan, and travel history to Japan.

The research method involves randomly combining these nine attributes to create two "candidate profiles," and then asking respondents to choose one of them in a two-option format. The same question is repeated a total of six times with variations in the options, and the responses obtained from all respondents are compiled and analyzed. This method allows for a statistically closer understanding of the respondents' true feelings.

The educational background ranges from "no formal schooling" to "equivalent to a Japanese graduate degree" (7 categories), and the applicants come from eight countries: the United States, India, Turkey, Germany, Brazil, Vietnam, China, and South Korea. Japanese language proficiency is categorized into four levels, from "spoke through an interpreter during the interview" to "spoke fluently in Japanese during the interview." The reasons for applying are categorized into three types: "to live with family already in Japan," "to escape political/religious persecution," and "to seek better employment in Japan." The occupations are categorized into 11 types, including IT engineers, convenience store clerks, caregivers, childcare workers, doctors, research scientists, and financial consultants. Work experience is categorized into four types, from "no experience" to "more than 5 years." Employment plans are categorized into four types: "no plans to look for work at this time," "plans to look for work after arriving in Japan," "no contract with an employer in Japan, but has had job interviews," and "has a contract with an employer in Japan." There are five types of travel history to Japan: "Entered Japan once without legal permission," "Spent six months with family in Japan," "Never visited Japan," "Entered Japan once on a tourist visa," and "Visited Japan multiple times on a tourist visa."

The analysis revealed that the most popular responses for each of the above categories were: "female," "graduate degree," "German," "spoke fluent Japanese during the interview," "to live with family already in Japan," "doctor," "more than 5 years of work experience," "has a contract with an employer in Japan," and "spent 6 months with family in Japan." The countries of origin where they were most likely to be accepted were Germany, followed by the United States, then India, Vietnam, Turkey, Brazil, South Korea, and China.

Furthermore, we investigated whether the ease of accepting immigrants changes depending on the preconditions. Focusing on three areas—the Japanese economy, the culture of Japanese society, and the governance and public safety of Japan—we asked participants to choose from "agree," "somewhat agree," "somewhat disagree," or "disagree" regarding Japan expanding immigration after reading statements such as "increased immigration will benefit the Japanese economy" or "will be a burden," "will enrich the culture of Japanese society" or "will be detrimental," and "will bring stability to the governance and public safety of Japan" or "will cause chaos." The results showed that the most significant increase in support for immigration was when the precondition of economic benefits was read. Conversely, the most significant increase in opposition was when the statement that increased immigration would cause chaos to governance and public safety was read.

"The impact of political public opinion arousal"


Regarding these results, Professor Tsutsui commented, "The acceptance of foreign workers has become a major concern for Japanese people. Previously, it was probably not such a significant issue for the average Japanese person, but interest in accepting foreign workers has rapidly increased following the 2025 House of Councillors election and the subsequent gubernatorial elections. This can be attributed to the influence of political public opinion-raising efforts by parties such as the Sanseito party. Although the proportion of foreigners in Japan is on the rise, it is still low compared to Western countries, and it was surprising to see such a shift in public opinion through a political campaign, even in a country that hasn't received a large influx of immigrants."

Regarding the unfavorable perception of people of Chinese descent, the author states, "The tendency to dislike minority groups that become competitors and threaten one's position is quite widespread. For example, in the United States, after the Civil Rights Movement, when Black people began to enter white residential areas and schools, white people felt their space was threatened and that Black people were becoming competitors, leading to resistance. For Japanese people, even among Asian foreigners, Vietnamese people are seen as people who fill jobs in areas with labor shortages, such as elderly care, and are viewed more as complementary than competitive. This is in stark contrast to the perception of Chinese people."

Furthermore, the survey indicated that foreigners who are easily accepted by Japanese people are "individuals with high levels of education, work experience, and Japanese language proficiency, who possess the ability to contribute to Japanese society and who are prepared to do so. A similar trend has been observed in the United States, where ability is highly valued."


 

Learn more about the Stanford Japan Barometer's research and insights >

Read More

People cross a road in the Akihabara district in Tokyo, Japan.
News

Japanese Public Sets High Bar for Immigrants

The latest findings of the Stanford Japan Barometer show that the Japanese public’s opinion on immigration depends heavily on applicants' skills, language ability, and country of origin, and on whether politicians emphasize economic benefits or stoke security and cultural anti-immigration rhetoric.
Japanese Public Sets High Bar for Immigrants
A woman walks past signs displaying gasoline prices outside a gas station on March 13, 2026, in Kobe, Japan.
News

Energy Security Nudges Japanese Opinion on Military Deployment in Iran, but Baseline Opposition Persists

A Stanford Japan Barometer experiment reveals that invoking Japan's energy dependence on Middle Eastern oil, rather than the Japan-U.S. alliance, increases the Japanese public’s support of deploying the Self-Defense Forces to the Strait of Hormuz, but does not overcome the underlying opposition to military action in the crisis.
Energy Security Nudges Japanese Opinion on Military Deployment in Iran, but Baseline Opposition Persists
A 3D illustration of a checkmark sign on a futuristic, blue pixelated background.
News

Voters Increasingly Use AI as Political Advisor. A New Study Shows the Risks.

In an experiment during Japan’s February 2026 Lower House election, policy stances dominated AI chatbots’ voting guidance, and left-leaning stances caused five AI models to recommend the Japanese Communist Party. The results are driven by which sources models can access and have significant implications for democratic systems as they grapple with the future of elections in the AI era.
Voters Increasingly Use AI as Political Advisor. A New Study Shows the Risks.
Hero Image
People walk through a shopping street in Osaka, Japan, 2024.
People walk through a shopping street in Osaka, Japan, 2024. | Tomohiro Ohsumi/ Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

The Asahi Shimbun's GLOBE+ features the latest findings from the Stanford Japan Barometer, a periodic public opinion survey co-developed by Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui, which unveils nuanced preferences and evolving attitudes of the Japanese public on political, economic, and social issues. Its recent experiment revealed that Japanese people have become wary about accepting foreign workers in recent years. Political influences are behind this trend.

Date Label
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
Yes
-
4.27.26 Book Talk Event

In Private Power and Democracy's Decline, a compelling, urgently important book, author Mordecai Kurz offers both a bold explanation of our democratic crisis and a major contribution to economic and political theory. The “second Gilded Age” of the last four decades has exposed democracy’s core contradiction. Democracy needs capitalism, but the unfettered, “free market” form of it generates extreme inequality and social and political polarization, which tear democracy apart. Moreover, the intrinsic tendency of unregulated capitalism toward monopoly power and wealth concentration has been turbocharged by the information and AI revolutions and globalization, which have been displacing workers, stagnating wages, and generating staggering new levels of private power. Public policy must contain monopoly power, reduce inequality, and broadly improve job prospects, skills, and economic security, or the surging system of “techno-winner-takes-all” will bring down democracy.

speakers

Mordecai Kurz

Mordecai Kurz

Joan Kenney Professor of Economics Emeritus, Stanford University
full bio

Mordecai Kurz is the Joan Kenney Professor of Economics Emeritus at Stanford University. He has worked in diverse fields of Economics. He is the author of Private Power and Democracy's Decline, which follows an earlier book, published in 2023, titled The Market Power of Technology: Understanding the Second Gilded Age. Together, they offer a unified view of the combined impact of policy, technology, and culture on income and political inequality, and on the functioning and dysfunction of democratic institutions.

Larry Diamond headshot

Larry Diamond

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
full bio

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. 

Larry Diamond
Larry Diamond

Please note new date: Monday, April 27
William J. Perry Conference Room, 2nd Floor, Encina Hall (616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford)

This is a hybrid event; only invited guests and those with an active Stanford ID with access to William J. Perry Conference Room in Encina Hall may attend in person, all others may join via Zoom. Registration required.

Mordecai Kurz Joan Kenney Professor of Economics Emeritus Presenter Stanford University
Seminars
Date Label
Authors
Aleeza Schoenberg Gelernt
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On March 11, 2026, the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program (JKISP) at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law hosted constitutional scholar Masua Sagiv for a discussion titled “Who Stands for Democracy? Understanding Israel’s Constitutional Crisis,” as part of its Israel Insights Webinar series. Moderated by Amichai Magen, Director of JKISP, the conversation explored how Israel’s ongoing war, political realignment, and institutional tensions are reshaping debates over the Israel's democratic future. During the webinar, a missile alert prompted Sagiv to leave the conversation; while awaiting her return, Magen noted the moment reflected the realities of daily life in Israel.

Sagiv argued that for the next Israeli elections, the key political question surrounds not which individual leaders prevail but rather the coalitions that emerge afterward. While Israeli politics has shifted rightward, especially on security issues since the Second Intifada and the October 7 attacks, she emphasized the range of future directions depending on whether parties align with far-right and ultra-Orthodox partners or form broader centrist coalitions. Although consensus exists across political camps regarding concerns over a constitutional crisis—including desires to clarify the balance of power among the judiciary, executive, and legislature—political mistrust repeatedly derails compromise proposals. Resolving the crisis, Sagiv argued, will require rebuilding trust across Israel’s ideological divides and establishing clearer constitutional “rules of [the] game” to stabilize the country’s democratic system.

Read More

Event cover photo
Seminars

Israel Insights Webinar with Tomer Persico — Liberalism in Israel: Foundations, Development, and Crises

Thursday, April 16. Click for details and registration.
Israel Insights Webinar with Tomer Persico — Liberalism in Israel: Foundations, Development, and Crises
Event cover photo
Seminars

Israel Insights Webinar with Ambassador Daniel Shapiro — US-Israel Security Relations: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?

Thursday, May 21. Click for details and registration.
Israel Insights Webinar with Ambassador Daniel Shapiro — US-Israel Security Relations: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?
Judea Pearl (R) in conversation with Amichai Magen (L) at the 2026 Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture.
News

Judea Pearl Examines Coexistence, Sovereignty Among Israelis, Palestinians

UCLA scholar reflects on history, legitimacy, and the prospects for two states at the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program’s annual Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture.
Judea Pearl Examines Coexistence, Sovereignty Among Israelis, Palestinians
Hero Image
All News button
1
Subtitle

Constitutional scholar Masua Sagiv examines Israeli democracy, coalition politics, and institutional reform amid wartime pressures.

Image
Photo of speaker
Date Label
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No
Authors
Aleeza Schoenberg Gelernt
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On February 25, 2026, as part of the Israel Insights webinar series hosted by the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, former Mossad counterterrorism chief Oded Ailam—now a researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs—discussed the evolving dynamics of the Israel–Hamas conflict and its regional and global implications.

Ailam argued that although Hezbollah is currently weakened financially and constrained domestically in Lebanon, it may increasingly employ overseas attacks against Israeli, American, and Jewish targets to demonstrate loyalty to Iran. He said that Hamas's dependence on Iran, however, diminishes as Turkish and Qatari support for Hamas grows, forming a new axis of political, financial, and military backing. According to Ailam, Hamas is unlikely to relinquish its weapons or influence in Gaza and will instead work to retain control behind the scenes even under a potential technocratic governing structure, casting doubt on the viability of proposed diplomatic frameworks.

Finally, addressing concerns about global radicalization and dormant terrorist networks in Western countries, Ailam outlined how state-backed ideological and financial influence spreads extremism and argued for stronger Western responses and long-term deradicalization efforts.

Read More

Event cover photo
Seminars

Israel Insights Webinar with Tomer Persico — Liberalism in Israel: Foundations, Development, and Crises

Thursday, April 16. Click for details and registration.
Israel Insights Webinar with Tomer Persico — Liberalism in Israel: Foundations, Development, and Crises
Photo of Karnit Flug in webinar
News

The Israeli Economy at a Crossroads

Former Governor of the Bank of Israel Karnit Flug examines growth, governance, and the structural risks facing Israel.
The Israeli Economy at a Crossroads
Judea Pearl (R) in conversation with Amichai Magen (L) at the 2026 Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture.
News

Judea Pearl Examines Coexistence, Sovereignty Among Israelis, Palestinians

UCLA scholar reflects on history, legitimacy, and the prospects for two states at the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program’s annual Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture.
Judea Pearl Examines Coexistence, Sovereignty Among Israelis, Palestinians
Hero Image
All News button
1
Subtitle

Oded Ailam examines Hamas, Iran, and shifting Middle East alliances in an Israel Insights webinar hosted by the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program.

Image
Event cover photo
Date Label
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No
-
5.21.26 Alice Evans Seminar

The Global Islamic Revival represents one of the most significant sociopolitical transformations of the past half-century – marked by exceptional religiosity, support for sharia, and gender segregation. Yet existing theories cannot explain its particular timing or global spread across diverse economies, geographies, and political systems. Why did this movement gain traction from the 1970s onward, transforming societies from Egypt to Indonesia to Britain? This review synthesizes cross-regional evidence to assess competing explanations: deep historical roots, contingent shocks, and economic modernization. I then offer a novel theory. First, I argue that there was a crucial transformation in Muslim identity: from locally-based syncretism to state-attempted secular modernization to a reinvigoration of a transnational Muslim identity. Second, I propose the Prestige-Piety Feedback Loop:  modernization paradoxically amplified strengthened adherence to jurisprudential Islam and deference to credentialed religious authorities. As Muslims gained unprecedented access to jurisprudential knowledge, piety and gender segregation became primary markers of status, with profound consequences for women’s status. 

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Dr. Alice Evans is a Senior Lecturer in the Social Science of Development at King's College London. She has also been a Faculty Associate at Harvard Center for International Development and has held previous appointments at Cambridge University and the London School of Economics. Her research focuses on social norms and why they change; the drivers of support for gender equality; and workers' rights in global supply chains.

Dr. Evans is writing a book, The Great Gender Divergence (forthcoming with Princeton University Press). It will explain why the world has become more gender equal, and why some countries are more gender equal than others.

Hesham Sallam
Hesham Sallam

Virtual to Public. If prompted for a password, use: 123456

Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to Philippines Conference Room in Encina Hall, 3rd Floor may attend in person.

Alice Evans
Seminars
Date Label
-
SteveStedmanSeminar

Democracy and security coexist uneasily. Security asserts priority over democracy during emergencies, when democratic processes seem luxuries. Yet deference paid to security can sow the seeds of democracy’s destruction. This prospect is magnified now, as both popular and elite usages of security in the United States have reached their highest levels in history. A short list of recent threats to national security alleged by our leaders includes unions of government workers, wind turbines, Chinese automobiles, Chinese garlic, America’s lack of sovereignty over Greenland, and America’s declining birth rate.

Why is security discourse so pervasive now, and what does this mean for democracy? This talk addresses these questions through examining security's history, focusing on three problematic features — ambiguity, immeasurability, and amorality — and their implications for contemporary democracy.

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Stephen Stedman is a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Professor by Courtesy of Political Science, and Director of Stanford's Program in International Relations. He joined Stanford in 1997, initially at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, before moving to the Center for Democracy, Development and Rule of Law (CDDRL) in 2010. Previously, he taught at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and Washington University in St. Louis.

Professor Stedman has led three major global commissions examining critical aspects of international security and democracy. From 2003-2004, he served as Research Director for the UN High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, and in 2005 as Assistant Secretary-General and Special Advisor to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. This work produced the landmark report A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility (2004) and led to significant institutional innovations, including the UN peacebuilding architecture (commission, support office, and fund), the mediation support office, a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy, adoption of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, and streamlined decision-making processes for the Secretary General. From 2010 to 2012, he directed the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy, and Security, which published Deepening Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide (2012). From 2018 to 2020, he served as Secretary General of the Kofi Annan Commission on Elections and Democracy in the Digital Age, which examined how social media and the internet affect democratic processes, resulting in Protecting Electoral Integrity in the Digital Age (2020).

Professor Stedman's research spans mediation, civil war termination, international institutions, American foreign policy, and democracy. His work has appeared in leading journals, including The Lancet, International Security, Foreign Affairs, Journal of Democracy, International Affairs, International Studies Review, and Boston Review. His co-authored book Power and Responsibility (Brookings, 2009) drew praise from Brent Scowcroft, who wrote that "the vision, ideas, and solutions the authors put forward…have the potential to redeem American foreign policy."

A dedicated teacher, Professor Stedman has directed the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL since 2015 and received Stanford's Dinkelspiel Award in 2018 for outstanding contributions to undergraduate education. 

Hesham Sallam
Hesham Sallam

Virtual to Public. If prompted for a password, use: 123456

Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to Conference Room E-008 in Encina Hall, East, may attend in person.

CDDRL
Encina Hall, C152
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 725-2705 (650) 724-2996
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Professor, by courtesy, of Political Science
Stedman_Steve.jpg PhD

Stephen Stedman is a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) and the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), an affiliated faculty member at CISAC, and professor of political science (by courtesy) at Stanford University. He is director of CDDRL's Fisher Family Honors Program in Democracy, Development and Rule of Law, and will be faculty director of the Program on International Relations in the School of Humanities and Sciences effective Fall 2025.

In 2011-12 Professor Stedman served as the Director for the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy, and Security, a body of eminent persons tasked with developing recommendations on promoting and protecting the integrity of elections and international electoral assistance. The Commission is a joint project of the Kofi Annan Foundation and International IDEA, an intergovernmental organization that works on international democracy and electoral assistance.

In 2003-04 Professor Stedman was Research Director of the United Nations High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and was a principal drafter of the Panel’s report, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility.

In 2005 he served as Assistant Secretary-General and Special Advisor to the Secretary- General of the United Nations, with responsibility for working with governments to adopt the Panel’s recommendations for strengthening collective security and for implementing changes within the United Nations Secretariat, including the creation of a Peacebuilding Support Office, a Counter Terrorism Task Force, and a Policy Committee to act as a cabinet to the Secretary-General.

His most recent book, with Bruce Jones and Carlos Pascual, is Power and Responsibility: Creating International Order in an Era of Transnational Threats (Washington DC: Brookings Institution, 2009).

Director, Fisher Family Honors Program in Democracy, Development and Rule of Law
Director, Program in International Relations
Affiliated faculty at the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Date Label
Stephen J. Stedman Senior Fellow Presenter Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law
Seminars
Date Label
-
Mike Albertus Seminar5.14.26

Electoral autocracies have become one of the most prevalent forms of authoritarian rule. In these regimes, incumbents use state resources to shape electoral competition and bias outcomes in their favor. Existing research highlights media control, clientelism, and opposition harassment as central strategies. This paper identifies a distinct mechanism: the manipulation of electoral infrastructure as a tool of dispersed political engineering. We study this mechanism in Venezuela, an archetypal case of contemporary electoral autocracy, where the number of voting centers has nearly doubled over the last two decades. Using a novel panel dataset of geocoded polling centers covering 2000–2024, we examine the determinants of new center creation. We show that new voting centers are significantly more likely to be established in areas that previously exhibited stronger support for the incumbent. This relationship holds after accounting for population dynamics and spatial factors. The effect is particularly pronounced in urban areas and among centers that can be identified as politically motivated additions to the electoral infrastructure. We also find evidence that local pro-government organizations contribute to this process by generating bottom-up demand for new centers. These findings highlight how incumbents in electoral autocracies can manipulate the organization of elections to maintain political advantage.

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Michael Albertus is a CDDRL Visiting Scholar and Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. His research examines democracy and dictatorship, inequality and redistribution, property rights, and civil conflict. He has authored five books and over thirty peer-reviewed articles. His most recent book, Land Power: Who Has It, Who Doesn't, and How That Determines the Fate of Societies, published by Basic Books in 2025, examines how land became power, how it shapes power, and how who holds that power determines the fundamental social problems that societies grapple with. Albertus' work has also been published in the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, World Politics, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of Development Economics, Quarterly Journal of Political Science, Comparative Political Studies, and elsewhere. 

Hesham Sallam
Hesham Sallam

Virtual to Public. If prompted for a password, use: 123456

Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to Conference Room E-008 in Encina Hall, East, may attend in person.

Michael Albertus Visiting Scholar Presenter Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Seminars
Date Label
Authors
Nensi Hayotsyan
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

In a CDDRL research seminar held on February 19, 2026, Oliver Kaplan, visiting scholar at CDDRL and Associate Professor at the University of Denver, presented a collaborative project on labor market discrimination against ex-combatants in Colombia. The study explores how prevalent hiring discrimination is against ex-combatants in the formal job market and whether this bias can be reduced. To highlight the significance of this issue, Kaplan emphasized the central role employment plays in reintegration, explaining that it is not only about income and individual well-being, but also about preventing recidivism, which is critical to long-term democratic stability and the rule of law. 

As Kaplan argues, stigma can play a major role in shaping hiring outcomes, as employers may associate ex-combatants with violence, instability, or unreliability, impacting the hiring process. Hence, the research tests whether ex-combatants face an employment penalty relative to non-ex-combatants. The study also examines whether conflict victims face similar bias and whether applicants who were both ex-combatants and victims experience different outcomes, since victim status could either reinforce stigma or generate sympathy and improve hiring chances. Finally, the study aims to identify practical ways to mitigate discrimination through education and skills training beyond high school, participation in reconciliation or peacebuilding activities, and the presence of employer tax incentives.

Kaplan and colleagues implemented a field experiment, partnering with Columbia’s reintegration agency to work with eight former combatants who applied to jobs using different versions of their resumes. The key treatment was selectively including or withholding information such as reintegration status, education, training, or reconciliation experience. This allowed the researchers to see how employers respond to different signals without faking information or using false identities. Applications were submitted through major online job platforms, and employer responses, including interview invitations, requests for additional information, and job offers, were tracked through calls, messages, and emails.  

Kaplan concluded by emphasizing the potential policy implications of these findings, explaining that improving access to employment through training and employer incentives might strengthen reintegration and reduce barriers faced by ex-combatants. Ultimately, Kaplan stressed that employment is not just an economic issue, but a key component of long-term peacebuilding, as access to stable jobs reduces the likelihood that ex-combatants return to conflict and helps sustain democratic stability.

Read More

Laia Balcells presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on March 5, 2026.
News

Do Transitional Justice Museums Change Minds?

Georgetown scholar Laia Balcells's research finds that museums commemorating past atrocities can shift political attitudes — but the extent of that shift depends on context.
Do Transitional Justice Museums Change Minds?
Adrienne LeBas presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on February 27, 2026.
News

Social Intermediaries and Statebuilding

Adrienne LeBas explores whether social intermediaries with strong state capacity can help build tax revenue.
Social Intermediaries and Statebuilding
Lucan Way presented his research in a REDS Seminar on February 12, 2026.
News

Resource Concentration and Authoritarianism

Lucan Way examines the structural relationship between state resource concentration and democratic outcomes, using Russia as a central case while situating it within broader comparative patterns.
Resource Concentration and Authoritarianism
Hero Image
Oliver Kaplan presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on February 19, 2026.
Oliver Kaplan presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on February 19, 2026. | Nora Sulots
All News button
1
Subtitle

CDDRL Visiting Scholar Oliver Kaplan explores how stigma shapes hiring decisions for ex-combatants in Colombia and identifies ways education, reconciliation efforts, and employer incentives can reduce discrimination.

Date Label
In Brief
  • At a CDDRL research seminar, Visiting Scholar Oliver Kaplan examined how stigma shapes employers’ hiring decisions for former combatants in Colombia.
  • A field experiment with Colombia’s reintegration agency tested how signals like education, training, and reconciliation experience affect employer responses.
  • The research suggests that education, participation in peacebuilding, and employer incentives could reduce discrimination and strengthen post-conflict reintegration.
Display Hero Image Wide (1320px)
No
-
DidiKuoSeminar_4.2.26

One of the hallmarks of successful democratization is programmatic party competition, whereby parties compete for office by offering distinct sets of policies to voters. However, there are signs across the advanced democracies of challenges, or alternatives, to policy competition. Elected officials rely on emotion, anti-system rhetoric, or identity to mobilize voters and make representative claims; further, affectively polarizated voters may care little about policy. This project develops a theory of programmatic decline, conceptualizing it as distinct from the typical programmatic-clientelistic dichotomy in comparative politics. It considers the limitations to programmatic competition, and bridges a gap between the study of party systems (focusing on what parties offer) and political behavior (focusing on how voters make choices). It develop potential indicators and measures of programmatic decline in the United States, with implications for the broader study of policy-based competition and democratic erosion. 

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Didi Kuo is a Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University. She is a scholar of comparative politics with a focus on democratization, political parties, state-building, and the political economy of representation. She is the author of The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don’t (Oxford University Press) and Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: the rise of programmatic politics in the United States and Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2018).

She has been at Stanford since 2013 as the manager of the Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective and was previously co-director of the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL. She was an Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow at New America and is a non-resident fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She received a PhD in political science from Harvard University, an MSc in Economic and Social History from Oxford University, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar, and a BA from Emory University.

Hesham Sallam
Hesham Sallam

Virtual to Public. If prompted for a password, use: 123456

Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to E-008 Conference Room in Encina Hall may attend in person.

Encina Hall, C150
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305

0
Center Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
didi_kuo_2023.jpg

Didi Kuo is a Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University. She is a scholar of comparative politics with a focus on democratization, corruption and clientelism, political parties and institutions, and political reform. She is the author of The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don’t (Oxford University Press) and Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: the rise of programmatic politics in the United States and Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2018).

She has been at Stanford since 2013 as the manager of the Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective and is co-director of the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL. She was an Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow at New America and is a non-resident fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She received a PhD in political science from Harvard University, an MSc in Economic and Social History from Oxford University, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar, and a BA from Emory University.

Date Label
Didi Kuo Center Fellow Presenter Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Seminars
Date Label
Subscribe to Society