Shooting for the Moon, embracing failure, learning fast: How to build a culture of innovation in any organization
For Fall Quarter 2021, CDDRL will be hosting hybrid events. Many events will be open to the public online via Zoom, and limited-capacity in-person attendance for Stanford affiliates may be available in accordance with Stanford’s health and safety guidelines.
A Conversation with Obi Felten, founder and CEO of Flourish Labs
With Additional Remarks by 66th US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
Moderated by Ambassador Shirin Tahir-Kheli
Open to all
Stanford affiliates only
Named in honor of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Condoleezza Rice “Women Who Inspire” Lecture Series seeks to highlight how women are reshaping the world, confronting global challenges, and blazing trails across all walks of life that improve the human condition.
SPEAKERS
![Obi Felton](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/350xauto/public/obi_felten_photo_-_cropped.jpg?itok=iQOiHlFk)
Previously, Obi was Head of Getting Moonshots Ready for Contact with the Real World at X (formerly Google X), Alphabet’s ‘moonshot factory’ and innovation lab. At X, Obi worked on cutting edge technology projects such as internet from balloons (Loon), air delivery by drone (Wing) and sustainable energy storage using molten salt (Malta). Most recently Obi founded and led Amber, a project using brain-based biomarkers and machine learning to measure anxiety and depression.
Obi was Director of Consumer Marketing for Google in Europe, Middle East and Africa, launching and growing Google Maps, Chrome and Android from zero to hundreds of millions of users. She founded Campus, Google’s space for tech entrepreneurs. Before Google, Obi set up the ecommerce business of a major UK retailer, worked as a strategy consultant, and led eToys.com’s (unsuccessful) expansion to Germany during the first dotcom boom.
Obi is an independent director of Springer Nature, a global academic and educational publisher. She is an advisor for mental health at the Wellcome Trust, one of the largest funders of scientific research, and Chelsea & Westminster NHS Trust’s Best For You youth mental health initiative.
Obi is an advocate for women, people of colour and other underrepresented groups in technology. At X, she founded the diversity & inclusion team, supported several employee resource groups and served on the leadership team for Women of Alphabet in the Bay Area. She mentors female startup founders and leaders getting ready for board service.
Obi grew up in Berlin and saw the wall come down. She has a BA in Philosophy and Psychology from Oxford University. She now lives in California with her husband and two children. She loves yoga, biking, paddleboarding, skiing (which she picked up at age 40), travelling, cooking, eating, and her family.
![Condoleezza Rice](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/350xauto/public/cr_headshot_-_square.jpg?itok=LXDlNBWt)
From January 2005 to January 2009, Rice served as the 66th Secretary of State of the United States, the second woman and first black woman to hold the post. Rice also served as President George W. Bush’s Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (National Security Advisor) from January 2001 to January 2005, the first woman to hold the position.
Rice served as Stanford University’s provost from 1993 to 1999, during which time she was the institution's chief budget and academic officer. As provost, she was responsible for a $1.5 billion annual budget and an academic program involving 1,400 faculty members and 14,000 students. In 1997, she also served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender-Integrated Training in the Military.
From February 1989 through March 1991, Rice served on President George H.W. Bush’s National Security Council staff. She served as Director, then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs, as well as Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an International Affairs Fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, Rice also served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
As Professor of Political Science, Rice has been on the Stanford faculty since 1981 and has won two of the university’s highest teaching honors – the 1984 Walter J. Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching and the 1993 School of Humanities and Sciences Dean's Award for Distinguished Teaching.
She has authored and co-authored numerous books, most recently To Build a Better World: Choices to End the Cold War and Create a Global Commonwealth (2019), co-authored with Philip Zelikow. Among her other volumes are three bestsellers, Democracy: Stories from the Long Road to Freedom (2017); No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington (2011); and Extraordinary, Ordinary People: A Memoir of Family (2010). She also wrote Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (1995) with Philip Zelikow; edited The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin; and penned The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army, 1948-1983: Uncertain Allegiance (1984).
In 1991, Rice co-founded the Center for a New Generation (CNG), an innovative, after-school academic enrichment program for students in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California. In 1996, CNG merged with the Boys & Girls Club of the Peninsula, an affiliate club of the Boys & Girls Clubs of America (BGCA). CNG has since expanded to local BGCA chapters in Birmingham, Atlanta, and Dallas. Rice remains an active proponent of an extended learning day through after-school programs.
Since 2009, Rice has served as a founding partner at RiceHadleyGates LLC, an international strategic consulting firm based in Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C. The firm works with senior executives of major companies to implement strategic plans and expand in emerging markets. Other partners include former National Security Advisor Stephen J. Hadley and former Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates.
Rice currently serves on the boards of Dropbox, Inc., an online storage technology company; C3.ai, an AI software company; and Makena Capital Management, a private endowment firm. In addition, she is Vice Chair of the Board of Governors of the Boys & Girls Clubs of America and a trustee of the Aspen Institute. Previously, Rice served on various additional boards, including those of: the George W. Bush Institute; the Commonwealth Club; KiOR, Inc.; the Chevron Corporation; the Charles Schwab Corporation; the Transamerica Corporation; the Hewlett-Packard Company; the University of Notre Dame; the Foundation for Excellence in Education; the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts; and the San Francisco Symphony.
In 2013, Rice was appointed to the College Football Playoff Selection Committee, formerly the Bowl Championship Series. She served on the committee until 2017.
Born in Birmingham, Alabama, Rice earned her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver; her master’s in the same subject from the University of Notre Dame; and her Ph.D., likewise in political science, from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver.
Rice is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences and has been awarded fifteen honorary doctorates.
![Ambassador Shirin Tahir-Kheli](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/350xauto/public/shirin-r-tahir-kheli-3fa569bf-7816-4ca9-b89d-06daa6971dc-resize-750_-_square.jpg?itok=oxWmW0Ht)
![CDDRL and SAIS logos](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/960xauto/public/cddrl_and_sais_logos.jpg?itok=qtblNCvU)
City Size and Public Service Access: Evidence from Brazil, India, and Indonesia
Abstract: The fiscal federalism and decentralization literatures suggest that larger cities often deliver better public goods more effectively because of scale economies. Yet small cities exhibit higher rates of access to basic health and education services in Brazil, India, and Indonesia. Why is this the case? Building on modernization theory and models from urban economics, we argue that citizens in smaller cities prioritize investments in basic health and education facilities because there are few low- cost substitutes for government offerings, and because they face few characteristically “urban” problems, such as congestion and insecurity. Residents of larger cities, in contrast, prioritize investment in a wider set of policy areas because they experience more negative externalities from urban growth and can turn to a larger supply of non-state providers of basic social services. Moreover, public officials in smaller cities find it easier to earn political returns for investments in “divisible” infrastructure for service delivery, such as schools and clinics, because they can coordinate lobbying and credit-claiming more effectively than politicians in larger cities. We illustrate the mechanisms underlying these differences across policy areas through data analysis and paired comparison of representative cities of different sizes in Brazil, and with shadow cases from Indonesia.
Alison Post is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Global Metropolitan Studies. Her research lies at the intersection of comparative urban politics and comparative political economy, with regional emphases on Latin America and South Asia. Her research examines regulation and business-government relations, decentralization, and urban politics and policy. She is the author of Foreign and Domestic Investment in Argentina: The Politics of Privatized Infrastructure (Cambridge University Press, 2014) and articles in the Annual Review of Political Science, Comparative Politics, Governance, Perspectives on Politics, Politics & Society, Studies in Comparative International Development, World Development, and other outlets. She is currently the President of the Urban and Local Politics section of the American Political Science Association and Chair of the Steering Committee for the Red de Economía Política de America Latina (Repal).
LIVESTREAM HERE: https://tinyurl.com/apostlive
This event is co-sponsored by Center for Latin American Studies and Center for South Asia
![Professor Alison Post](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/350xauto/public/clas_virtual_lecture_series_presents.jpg?itok=O2ya1C1K)
How Stanford Scholars Are Teaching the Next Generation About 9/11
This story was originally reported by Melissa De Witte for Stanford News.
For those who remember Sept. 11, 2001, details of the day – the confusion, chaos and collective grief – are as clear now as they were 20 years ago when the deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history occurred.
But many college students today have no memories of 19 al-Qaida operatives hijacking four commercial airplanes and killing nearly 3,000 people in a terrorist attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon outside Washington, D.C, and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Teaching this next generation about the passion and the intensity that defined that pivotal moment is difficult, says Condoleezza Rice, who was the U.S. National Security Advisor at the time of the attacks.
For the new generation of students, 9/11 is now a part of history. “It would be like people trying to convey the intensity of World War II to me,” said Rice, who went on to serve as the 66th secretary of state of the United States under President George W. Bush before returning to her professorship at Stanford in 2009.
Rice, now the Tad and Dianne Taube Director of the Hoover Institution, was in the White House on that Tuesday morning of Sept 11. When she discusses the attacks with her students, her experiences on that day inevitably come up.
She is candid in her recounting. “That helps to vivify it because it’s a personal story,” Rice said.
![Condoleezza Rice with President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Chief of Staff Andy Card and Special Agent Carl Truscott of the U.S. Secret Service in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center of the White House.](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/680x378/public/image-caption/rice_president.jpg?itok=zuVQG9A2)
Rice shares how, when the first plane hit the North Tower at the World Trade Center at 8:46 a.m., she and others were uncertain about the cause of the crash. She remembers wondering whether it could have been an accident. But when the second hijacked plane hit the remaining South Tower 17 minutes later, Rice knew it had to be a terrorist attack on the United States.
Then there was the short period when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld could not be reached because the Pentagon was also hit that morning, Rice said. She, along with other senior government leaders, were ushered into the White House bunker. She tells students that around noon that day, oxygen levels started to drop because too many people were crammed into the fortified space. “So the Secret Service was going around saying, ‘You have to leave, you are not essential; you have to leave, you are not essential.’ You would never plan for such a thing as that,” she said.
Inevitably, a student will ask her if she was afraid. Rice was so taken aback the first time she faced that question that she actually paused to think about it – and then concluded that she wasn’t. “I didn’t have time to be scared,” Rice recalled. “You can fear for your loved ones, but you are not allowed to feel personal fear. You don’t think about that in the moment.”
Rice also emphasized the importance of talking to students about how 9/11 transformed the world and that what seems routine today – such as additional airport screenings and the formation of new government institutions – didn’t even exist before the attacks.
“I try to help them understand how we are still living the effects of 9/11,” said Rice. “It isn’t an event that happened one day and then was over, but everything from the way that you go through an airport to something called ‘homeland security,’ which you didn’t have before 9/11.”
Teaching 9/11 Since 9/11
The attacks also introduced into the wider vernacular new places – like Afghanistan – and people – like Osama bin Laden – that students 20 years ago knew very little or nothing about.
Stanford scholars Amy Zegart and Martha Crenshaw experienced this firsthand on the day of the attacks when they found themselves in the surreal situation of teaching about 9/11 on 9/11. Both were so shocked by the unfolding events that they were unable to do anything except the one thing they were supposed to do that day, which was teach.
When they showed up to their respective classrooms – at the time, Crenshaw was at Wesleyan University teaching a course on decision making and foreign policy; Zegart at UCLA – they found them packed. There were more students in the lecture hall for Crenshaw’s course than were enrolled.
![Martha Crenshaw, a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/680x378/public/image-caption/crenshaw.jpg?itok=ln0KbZwL)
Students – horrified and trying to make sense of what was happening – sought clarity and comfort from their teachers, who just happened to be experts on the issues that would come to define the next two decades of U.S. domestic and foreign policy.
“When something that shocking happens, our natural inclination is to make sense of what’s going on together, right now,” said Zegart, who is a leading scholar on national security and the Central Intelligence Agency and is now a senior scholar at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) and the Morris Arnold and Nona Jean Cox Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Students wanted to know more about the terms and names they were hearing for the first time that day, like jihadism and the Taliban. Over the months that followed came more complex challenges to explain: the global war on terror, torture, rendition, Guantanamo Bay, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is the world that today’s students have inherited. Even the current generation’s media, as Zegart’s research has shown, has become increasingly saturated with a proliferation of “spytainment”: movies and TV shows depicting, often inaccurately, the clandestine world of intelligence and counterterrorism operations.
Like Rice, Crenshaw has also found herself having to explain that none of this was normal before 9/11.
“I have to go back and say, ‘All this wasn’t always here before 9/11.’ I have to trace the trajectory of policy changes,” said Crenshaw, a senior fellow at FSI and the Center for International Security and Cooperation.
Shifts in Emotion
In the first decade after the attacks, Zegart said her students were incredibly emotional about 9/11 and its aftermath, including the expansion of U.S. conflict abroad. A few years after the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq broke out, Zegart remembers one of her students, a recently returned veteran, telling her that he was taking her intelligence class because he wanted to learn more about why he had gone to Iraq, and what his friend who had deployed with him had died fighting for.
“It was a really raw, personal experience for students studying foreign policy in the first decade after 9/11 because they were living with war and uncertainty,” said Zegart. She had to push them be more analytical and objective in their class discussions of what a post 9/11 world entailed.
As the years progressed, though, 9/11 increasingly became less personal for the next generation of students. Perceptions began to shift. So much so that Zegart now finds herself in the opposite predicament: How to insert those feelings back in.
“Because they didn’t live through it, they look at it distantly and dispassionately,” Zegart said. “The challenge is, how do you help students better understand the context in which decisions were made and the raw emotion that unavoidably affects how we perceive threats and how we deal with policy responses.”
Teaching the Emotions of the Day
To evoke a visceral response to 9/11, Zegart shows a 4-minute montage of news clips. Students get a sense of how the day unfolded, from the breaking reports of the first tower being struck to a reporter’s on-air reaction as the second plane crashes live into the remaining tower. There are also scenes of people fleeing lower Manhattan amid dust, smoke and debris.
“You just cannot convey that day in a normal lecture or a book,” Zegart said. The video is effective; her students are often left with a sense of the sadness, horror and anguish that defined 9/11.
![Amy Zegart and Condoleezza Rice co-teaching.](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/680x378/public/image-caption/zegart_rice_teaching.jpg?itok=o6QN1rXp)
Zegart then asks her students to imagine they are policymakers at the White House and have to decide what to do next. “We often teach U.S. foreign policymaking as a sterile, Spock-like process where people weigh the pros and cons of options and make dispassionate decisions,” Zegart said. “But human emotion and searing national experiences are important and hard to convey. A key part of understanding history is empathy, and thinking about what it was like to live through something rather than only looking at an event through the distance of time. 9/11 looks inevitable in hindsight, but it was unimaginable on September 10.”
Through the exercise, students get a sense of the urgency that policymakers, like Rice, have to grapple with while making decisions amid a national emergency.
“In retrospect, everything looks quite orderly,” said Rice, who co-taught a class on global risk with Zegart at the Graduate School Business. “It looks like ‘of course that decision led to that decision.’ Political scientists are always talking about the options that were put before the president. That’s not how crisis decision making unfolds. You are dealing with really incomplete information, you are dealing with the need to act now, and you are often reacting from instinct because you don’t have time to think through things.”
Viewing the Attacks from All Sides
When political scientist Lisa Blaydes teaches 9/11 to her students, she tries to give an international perspective of the issues, particularly on how grievances can arise – both legitimately or falsely constructed – in countries abroad and how that can lead to extremism and political violence. For example, in her course Political Science 149: Middle Eastern Politics, several classes are dedicated to examining anti-American attitudes in the Islamic world and the conditions under which individuals become radicalized.
“I try to make sure that students understand both the individual motivations associated with the radicalization of political thought as well as the global context that empowers radicalized individuals to undertake violent action,” said Blaydes, a professor of political science in the School of Humanities and Sciences and a senior fellow at FSI. She asks students to read Lawrence Wright’s book The Looming Tower, which picks up on themes Blaydes covers in the course, particularly those dealing with how authoritarian regimes in the Arab world provided a backdrop for the rise of al-Qaida.
In recent years, Blaydes has found her students showing an increased interest in learning more about radical groups like ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) and how they have terrorized communities across the Middle East. “While Sept. 11 made terrorism a salient threat for Americans living in U.S. cities, both terrorism and state-sponsored violence are unfortunately a trauma shared by people around the world,” she said.
Similarly, Crenshaw said, it is important to explain to students the conditions that lead to such extremist views. But, she added, explaining motives should not be mistaken as justifying them. “We are not trying to excuse it; we are trying to understand why something happened,” she said.
With her students, Crenshaw has also looked at how terrorism has been used across history. In the aftermath of 9/11, terrorism almost exclusively became associated with a particular ideology and religion. But there are other examples throughout history of how it has been used as a form of political violence, she said.
“As an instructor, one of my goals was always to show students that 9/11 was something extraordinary, but there are other instances of terrorism and it can be associated with any ideology,” Crenshaw said.
Given its elasticity, terrorism is a confusing and contentious term with no standard definition, Crenshaw said. Thus, as both the term and the acts associated with terrorism have evolved over the past two decades, so has her teaching of it. “The phenomenon that you are trying to teach is changing over time as well, so it’s really a very dynamic subject requiring constant adjustment to take into account the vast outpouring of writing on terrorism but changing terrorism and counterterrorism as well,” she said.
In addition to situating 9/11 against a global and historical backdrop, teaching the attacks also requires a critical look at the domestic challenges that led up to it, including the shortcomings in U.S. intelligence. Zegart assigns students an article she wrote about the failures within the U.S. intelligence communities to adapt to the threat of terrorism, as well as a critique against her piece. “There’s no one perfect view, and if students can realize that their professor is part of an argument and people can disagree, that’s really important,” she said.
Zegart and Crenshaw have also assigned students the 9/11 Commission Report, the official report of the events that led up to the attacks and detailed account of the circumstances surrounding it.
‘Still Hard’
Even though 20 years have passed since 9/11, it does not mean that teaching about the attacks has gotten easier.
“I still have a hard time,” Zegart said. “For years, my screensaver was a picture of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center. It was important to me not to forget. I’ve spent my career researching why our intelligence agencies failed to stop 9/11 and how they can better meet threats in the future. I think about that day every day.”
Read More
On the 20th anniversary of 9/11, four Stanford scholars and leading experts in national security, terrorism and contemporary conflict – Condoleezza Rice, Amy Zegart, Martha Crenshaw and Lisa Blaydes – reflect on how their teaching of the terrorist attacks has evolved.
Good News for Indonesian Studies
This piece was originally published in The Jakarta Post.
Congratulations, Indonesia! What a thrill it was to open my daily copy of The New York Times on Aug. 3 and see a nearly half-page color photo of the jubilant faces and raised fists of Greysia Polii and Apriyani Rahayu as they celebrated their and their country’s Olympic gold medal in women’s- doubles badminton.
Their first-place finish could not have been more timely. Indonesia needs good news. Bloomberg has combined 12 variables to determine where the COVID-19 pandemic is being most-to- least effectively managed.
From April to July, by that measure, Indonesia fell steadily to last place among the 53 countries covered. Such a bad review cannot be explained by domestic underperformance alone. The ferocity of the now ubiquitous Delta variant has played a role. So has vaccine nationalism—the limited and late availability of effective jabs from abroad. Not to mention less well-established variables such as the relative potency of Chinese vaccines. Whatever the reasons, there is little to celebrate regarding the risk to the health of Indonesians.
In this downbeat context, however, and far less well known than Indonesia’s “goodminton” victory in Tokyo, is an upbeat development on Indonesia’s academic front that also deserves Indonesian pride: the five-day inaugural Conference on Indonesian Studies (CIS) held online on June 24-27 Jakarta time. The American Institute for Indonesian Studies and Michigan State University sponsored the meeting with the participation and cooperation of hundreds of students, academics, and educational institutions in Indonesia and the United States. As a long-time would-be Indonesianist, I was happy to attend.
Researchers have more questions than answers. Nationalists reverse the ratio. The scholarly ideal—gathering evidence, testing assertions, birthing, sharing, and comparing ideas— transcends borders. But nationality has long shaped Indonesian studies.
During Dutch rule over the East Indies from 1816 to 1941, with rare exceptions, the archipelago’s past was largely interpreted by Europeans with colonial access. Indonesian studies were dramatically expanded and diversified following World War II. But the birth and growth of “area studies” in Western universities continued to incubate mainly Western scholarly careers.
The recent CIS was doubly important, as an affirmation and a stimulus. Its 326 presentations in 65 different sessions served to remind the roughly 500 attendees from Indonesia and 22 other countries of the breadth and vitality of Indonesian studies and thereby motivate further research.
Included on the program were a first-rate keynote speech by Prof. Aquarini Priyatna of Padjadjaran University on feminist voices in Indonesian literature; the premiere reading in English of Oh by Indonesia’s renowned novelist and playwright Putu Wijaya, whose work I remember applauding at Taman Ismail Marzuki decades ago; and a rousing performance of the wayang lakon (Javanese puppet show) Ciptoning by Ki Purbo Asmoro, ably and simultaneously rendered in English by Kathryn Emerson (no relation).
The conference also conveyed what was on the minds of the more than 300 mainly young and Indonesian panelists who wrote papers and made presentations about their country. Although the topics were diverse, some were more popular than others. A comparison may offer clues as to the subjects for research that are attracting the next generation of Indonesian scholars as they begin to shape the future and focus of Indonesian studies.
The distribution of themes is informative. Nearly half of all the CIS sessions were about culture. Culture in the sense of identity was by far the most popular topic at the conference, including religious and especially Muslim identity, with lesser attention to language and gender. Three genres of performed culture — art, music, and literature—were featured in roughly a fourth of the sessions. Five different sessions took up the blood-shedding watershed of 1965, encouragingly in the light of past silence on the subject. Only three panels focused on the economy, merely three were on climate change, and just two featured foreign policy.
It is tempting to view this evidence for the popularity of cultural identity in Indonesian studies as a local instance of two trends that some scholars have noted: a greater emphasis on identity in political discourse around the world and a related decline in the salience of ideology, including democracy.
Of the 65 conference panels, only two featured democracy, despite the alarm bell that some established Australian and Indonesian scholars had rung in 2020 in a book entitled Democracy in Indonesia; From Stagnation to Regression? Yet human rights and civil liberties in Indonesia were highlighted at the event, including the freedom of creative expression embodied in literature and the arts. A case in point was a session on “Islam Nusantara” featuring scholars from the University o Nahdlatul Ulama Indonesia.
Not even a five-day-long gathering could have dealt with everything. The relative neglect of economics and foreign policy was unfortunate nevertheless. Five days after the conference ended, the World Bank reclassified Indonesia as a lower-middle-income country, down one level from the upper-middle-income status it had previously briefly held. Also basically ignored at the CIS was a key reason for that slippage: COVID-19.
In fairness, these omissions are not unique to Indonesia. Among scholars in area studies worldwide, economists are scarce and health policy experts still harder to find. In my own conversations with foreign advisors in Indonesia during the Soeharto years, some of the number-crunching economists were inclined to dismiss the interpretation-minded anthropologists. Some of the latter reciprocated the disregard. A joke in circulation at the time held that the sole requirement that a development economist needed to meet in order to be a consultant in Indonesia was to have flown over the country once in daylight.
That disciplinary rift may very well be obsolete. But if it isn’t, it should be. Climate-friendly economic development and improved health policies are vital to Indonesia’s future and therefore to the future agenda of Indonesian studies.
As for Indonesian foreign policy, the paucity of CIS panels on that topic has to an extent been compensated for by the laudable efforts of Dino Patti Djalal’s Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia to stimulate and reward the interest and involvement of the younger generation in their country’s future role in the world.
The challenge now is to build on the success of the inaugural CIS to the larger and ongoing benefit of Indonesia’s capacity to navigate these difficult times.
View Emmerson's keynote address at the CIS conference,"Scholarship, Autonomy, and Purpose: Issues in Indonesian Studies" >>
Read More
DEI-related Project Update, Summer and Fall 2021
The update below also appears on SPICE’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion page, where we post periodic updates about SPICE’s DEI-focused work.
SPICE serves as a bridge between FSI and K–12 schools and community colleges. As noted in fall 2020, the SPICE staff has agreed to do more to help move our local community, nation, and the world to achieve racial justice. SPICE works in three areas: (1) curriculum development; (2) teacher professional development; and (3) online course offerings. Below are a few recent efforts that SPICE has made with the goal of achieving racial justice.
Curriculum: SPICE launched an interactive website called “What Does It Mean to Be an American?” in 2020. It focuses on topics like civil liberties & equity, civic engagement, and justice & reconciliation and includes videos called “What Does It Mean to Be a Young Black Man in America?” and “What It Means to Be Muslim American.” Student reflections on the website continued to be featured in articles on March 16, 2021, May 18, 2021, and July 20, 2021. This article series will continue in 2021.
SPICE is collaborating with the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) to introduce underrepresented minority high school students to issues in international security and increase awareness of career opportunities available in international security.
Teacher Professional Development: Given the pandemic, SPICE has transitioned its teacher professional development seminars to online webinars.
SPICE worked with community college educators who participated in the Education Partnership for Internationalizing Curriculum (EPIC) program of Stanford Global Studies. On May 22, 2021, SGS hosted the 2021 EPIC Symposium and SPICE staff moderated two panels.
SPICE offered a webinar, “Indigenous Voices: Educational Perspectives from Navajo, Native Hawaiian, and Ainu Scholars in the Diaspora,” for teachers on June 18, 2021.
From June 28 to July 1, 2021, SPICE hosted a summer institute for middle school teachers that focused on East Asia and the Asian American experience. From July 26 to July 30, 2021, SPICE hosted a similar summer institute for high school teachers. Teachers from 20 states attended the seminars as well as teachers from China and Canada.
Online Course Offerings: SPICE currently offers three courses (on China, Japan, and Korea) for high school students in the United States and courses for students in Japan and China. SPICE seeks to broaden its offerings in the United States.
SPICE pledges to continue to do the following:
- In its recruitment of students for SPICE’s online classes, we will redouble our efforts to recruit from diverse areas throughout the United States.
- SPICE will seek to increase the diversity of the teachers who attend its teacher professional development seminars.
- SPICE will seek to expand the diversity of the students who enroll in its online course offerings.
- SPICE will continue to host webinars that focus on diversity.
- SPICE will continue to explore—with the FSI REDI Task Force—additional outreach activities that focus on enhancing diversity at FSI.
Read More
Read about SPICE's recent and current DEI-related efforts.
The Long and Winding Road to the 2020 Tokyo Summer Olympics
This interview was first published by the Stanford News Service.
The 2020 Summer Olympics have begun this week but public support among the Japanese public for the games has been generally low and their mood can be articulated through the succinct question: “Why are we doing this now?” says Stanford sociologist and Japan Program Director Kiyoteru Tsutsui.
Polls among the Japanese public show mixed support for the games and meanwhile, major advertisers in the country are pulling out. As a sociologist, how do you see this mixed public sentiment affecting overall mood and morale?
There is no question that there is a strong headwind against the Olympics in the lead-up to the opening ceremony. Opinion polls are still against the games, although the numbers improved a little in recent weeks. The general public sentiment can be summed up as “Why are we doing this now?”
The road to the Tokyo Olympics has been a long and winding one complicated by COVID-19, first and foremost, and various scandals. The Japanese public has been fed up with the COVID-19-related emergency declarations and other restrictions as well as the slower pace of vaccination compared to other developed countries. The perception, right or wrong, is that the government is making decisions based on whether they help in hosting the Olympics successfully, when the focus should be on public health and economic rescue in the COVID environment.
Morale is low, but many are hoping that things will change quickly once the games begin. Whether that happens or not depends on a whole host of factors, most importantly whether major public health incidents and other unfortunate accidents happen or not, how Japanese athletes fare, who might emerge as global stars, and so on.
To what extent has the International Olympic Committee (IOC) helped or hindered support for the games among the Japanese public?
The Japanese public sees the IOC as simply pushing its economic interest without the proper regard for their safety and health. Many people do not understand that the Japanese government does not have the authority to cancel the Olympics and could have faced a lawsuit with a huge compensation at stake if it tried to do so. The IOC looks like the IMF/World Bank during the Asian economic crisis in affected countries or the EU in some European countries – an international entity that pushes its agenda without accountability to the citizens. The frustration has nowhere to go but to the Japanese government, which combined with overall COVID-19-related dissatisfaction, has led to the most recent polls showing the lowest approval rating for the government under Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga.
For Japan, hosting the 2020 Olympic Games initially symbolized the country’s rebound from the devastating Tōhoku earthquake, tsunami and Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in 2011 and was poised to boost their economy. Then COVID hit, and meanwhile, Olympic expenses ballooned. Are there any opportunities for the Olympic Games to help the country bounce back?
The 2020 Olympics was initially framed as a symbol of recovery from the triple disaster in 2011, but that slogan is no longer central. The expenses were justified as a way to develop infrastructure for foreign visitors and increase inbound tourists, and the government’s goals for the number of visitors from abroad have been met already. With no spectators allowed, Japan will lose money on hosting the Olympics, but the economic damage is not irrecoverable. Once the world gets out of COVID-19, the Japanese economy will likely rebound and tourists will come back.
It will be interesting to follow how socially, in terms of the national psyche and its unity, Japan will respond to the Tokyo Olympics. Even when the games take place in other countries, the Olympics often serve as a moment of national unity, especially in Japan. With Japan being the host, many thought that it would serve as an enormous booster towards national confidence and unity. We have yet to see how the games will turn out, but these psychological impacts will likely be lessened as the games are scaled down and may not get as much global attention as typical Olympics do.
There’s still a chance for a better outcome though if the games go smoothly and offer many compelling moments. People in many countries are still more homebound than usual and the contents that the games offer could be attractive. And the Japanese public is known to swing from one side to the other very quickly and on a massive scale, so once the games begin, TV personalities who were questioning whether the games should happen will likely quickly turn around and support Japanese athletes and tout their accomplishments. That is, if no serious outbreak incidents occur.
The Olympics are often celebrated as a nonpolitical event that can unite the world. In a globally turbulent world, what do you make of that assessment? Can the Olympics be nonpolitical?
The Beijing Winter Olympics in 2022 is a case in point. Boycott of the games seems unlikely, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already floated an idea of diplomatic boycott. There’s a lot at stake for the host country, and the Olympics will likely be politicized when countries like China, Russia or even the U.S. host it.
Another problem is that not many democracies would be eager to host the games anymore. Public support is needed for democracies to host the Olympics, but the growing cost of the games, combined with increasingly less clear benefits of hosting, has made it difficult to find democracies that are eager to be the host country. Meanwhile, non-democracies like China and Russia, and even smaller countries like Kazakhstan or Azerbaijan campaign to become host nations. The pattern of dictatorships hosting the Olympics and the world demanding a change in their human rights practices and, threatening a boycott, might be a recurring pattern in the coming decades.
![Photo of Kiyoteru Tsutsui](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/188x188/public/kiyoteru_tsutsui.jpg?h=c561d94a&itok=auD6-ilP)
Kiyoteru Tsutsui
Read More
While public support in Japan has been lackluster for the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games, the mood may change once the games start – provided no major public health incidents and other unfortunate accidents occur, says Stanford sociologist Kiyoteru Tsutsui.
Scholarship, Autonomy, and Purpose: Issues in Indonesian Studies
The American Institute for Indonesian Studies and Michigan State University Asian Studies Center are holding the inaugural Conference on Indonesian Studies this week, June 23-26, 2021. The conference's theme is "Indonesian Studies — Paradigms and New Frontiers." On June 24, APARC's Southeast Asia Program Director Donald K. Emmerson delivered a keynote address, "Scholarship, Autonomy, and Purpose: Issues in Indonesian Studies." Watch the session below:
The Conference on Indonesian Studies seeks to expand research dissemination, activities, and collaboration on the academic study of Indonesia to better understand the archipelago's historical, cultural, linguistic, literary, artistic, economic, environmental, and political dimensions, as well as its role in the Indo-Pacific and the world. The conference connects scholars and academic communities from multiple disciplines based in Indonesia, the United States, the Asia-Pacific, and other global contexts.
Read More
Southeast Asia Program Director Donald K. Emmerson delivers a keynote address at the American Institute for Indonesian Studies–Michigan State University Conference on Indonesian Studies.
President Biden Nominates Dr. Clayborne Carson to Civil Rights Cold Case Review Board
In his latest round of nominations, President Biden nominated FSI's MLK, Jr. Centennial Professor Emeritus Dr. Clayborne Carson to the Civil Rights Cold Case Review Board.
As noted in the nomination accouncement from the White House, Dr. Carson has devoted most of his professional life to the study of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the movements King inspired. Since receiving his doctorate from UCLA in 1975, Dr. Carson has taught at Stanford University, where he is Martin Luther King, Jr., Centennial Professor of History (Emeritus).
In 1985, the late Coretta Scott King invited Dr. Carson to direct a long-term project to edit and publish the authoritative edition of her late husband’s speeches, sermons, correspondence, publications, and unpublished writings. Under Carson’s direction, the King Papers Project has produced seven volumes of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr. In 2005 Carson founded the Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute to endow and expand the educational outreach of the King Papers Project.
Carson is mindful of the unique arc of his academic and personal life. "I grew up in Los Alamos, New Mexico where we were one of only three Black families. What I knew about Black America was mainly what I read in the newspapers. I read about these heroic figures like Martin Luther King Jr., Bob Moses, Diane Nash, and John Lewis, and I wanted to be like them. I went to the March on Washington as a nineteen-year-old and watched and listened to what these leaders were working to accomplish. One of the remarkable things about my life is that I've been able to meet and get to know so many of the people who spoke or performed at the march or were on the speaker's platform at the Lincoln Memorial."
Dr. Carson is currently completing his final year as the director of the King Institute, afterwhich he will continue his research and teaching at Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.
As Carson looks towards the future, he's appreciative of the opportunities ahead. "I’m still excited about the idea of exploring little known aspects of African-American history, so that should be good preparation for studying largely forgotten 'cold cases,'" he says.
![Dr. Clayborne Carson](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/188x188/public/additional-content-people/clayborne_carson_headshot_square2_0.png?h=28f8edc3&itok=pNFLSRkp)
Read More
In his new role on the Civil Rights Cold Case Review Board, Dr. Carson, a seminal scholar on the life and writing of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., will review dozens of unsolved and racially motivated murder cases from the civil rights era.
Webinar to Explore Native and Indigenous Studies in the Classroom
The California Department of Education adopted the Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum last March. Chapter 3 of the Model Curriculum includes a section on “Native American Studies.”
On June 18, 2021, SPICE will host a panel of three Native and Indigenous scholars to reflect on California’s new model curriculum and the state of ethnic studies in their respective regions. The panel will include Navajo, Native Hawaiian, and Ainu educators who will provide a range of educational perspectives on Native and Indigenous studies in the United States and Japan.
- Dr. Harold Begay, Superintendent of Schools, Navajo Nation
- Dr. Sachi Edwards, Faculty Member at Soka University in Tokyo, Japan
- Dr. Ronda Māpuana Shizuko Hayashi-Simpliciano, Vice Principal, Ke Kula Kaiapuni ʻo Ānuenue, Honolulu, Hawaiʻi
The webinar, titled “Indigenous Voices: Educational Perspectives from Navajo, Native Hawaiian, and Ainu Scholars in the Diaspora,” will address several additional topics, such as the various academic field names of the study of Native and Indigenous people, the complexity and diversity of Native and Indigenous people’s experiences, and recommended resources for K–12 educators.
These topics are not only relevant to teachers in California but to educators in other states as well. K–12 educators and administrators are encouraged to attend. Register in advance at https://bit.ly/3z4kxtc.
This webinar is a joint collaboration with the National Consortium for Teaching about Asia (NCTA) and the Center for East Asian Studies at Stanford University.
To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Read More
Navajo, Native Hawaiian, and Ainu educators will join together on June 18 to examine the state of Indigenous studies.