Prashant Loyalka to Become FSI’s Newest Senior Fellow
The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University is pleased to announce that Prashant Loyalka has been promoted to the position of FSI Senior Fellow. Loyalka is currently a Center Research Fellow at FSI and a faculty member of the institute’s Rural Education Action Program (REAP). His appointment as Senior Fellow is effective June 1, 2020, concurrent with his promotion to associate professor at Stanford’s Graduate School of Education.
“Professor Loyalka’s research has made an impact on millions of people,” said FSI Director Michael McFaul. “Few people have deeper expertise on the inequalities in the education of youth and on how to improve the quality of education received by youth in developing economies such as China, Russia, and India. We are thrilled that he will be a Senior Fellow here at FSI.”
Loyalka’s research examines the consequences of financial constraints, limited information and choices, tracking and admissions rules, as well as social and psychological factors in competitive education environments. His work on understanding educational quality is built around research that assesses and compares student learning in higher education, high school, and compulsory schooling. He also conducts large-scale evaluations of educational programs and policies that seek to improve student outcomes.
“Without doubt, Prashant Loyalka is the number one economist in the world who is working on China’s education system,” said Scott Rozelle, co-director at REAP. “I often say that one of the biggest problems that China faces in the coming years is the weakness of the human capital of its overall labor force. Prashant’s work not only shows the nature of the challenge China faces in trying to raise the levels of education of the massive number of students who are going to school in rural areas, he also has been at the forefront of those that have found effective and cost-effective solutions — solutions that have often been upscaled by policy makers and have affected the lives and learning of millions.”
Loyalka earned a bachelor’s degree in economics and a Ph.D. in international comparative education from Stanford in 1997 and 2009, respectively. He is the lead author on the paper "Computer science skills across China, India, Russia, and the United States," which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Loyalka also recently co-authored “Pay by Design: Teacher Performance Pay Design and the Distribution of Student Achievement,” which was published in the Journal of Labor Economics.
”I am extremely grateful for, and humbled by, the chance to work alongside the outstanding colleagues at FSI,” said Loyalka. “They are striving tirelessly to make the world a better place and I am honored to be among them every day.”
Digital Disinformation and Health: From Vaccines to the Coronavirus
Links to Event Materials:
The Stanford Cyber Policy Center continues its online Zoom series: Digital Technology and Democracy, Security & Geopolitics in an Age of Coronavirus. These webinars will take place every other Wednesday at 10am PST.
The next event, Digital Disinformation and Health: From Vaccines to the Coronavirus, will take place Wednesday, April 8, at 10am PST with Kelly Born, Executive Director of the Cyber Policy Center, in conversation with Professor David Broniatowski, from George Washington University, Professor Kathleen M. Carley, from Carnegie Mellon University, and Professor Jacob N. Shapiro, from Princeton University.
In particular, Professor Broniatowski will discuss the results of new studies regarding bots and trolls in the vaccine debate, as well as what makes messages go viral from the standpoint of Fuzzy Trace Theory. Professor Carley will explore how information moves from country to country, with a look at both the differences in who is broadcasting certain types of disinformation and the role bots play in the spread. Professor Shapiro will speak to trends and themes we are seeing in coronavirus disinformation narratives and in news reporting on COVID-related misinformation.
Professor David Broniatowski conducts research in decision-making under risk, group decision-making, system architecture, and behavioral epidemiology. This research program draws upon a wide range of techniques including formal mathematical modeling, experimental design, automated text analysis and natural language processing, social and technical network analysis, and big data. Current projects include a text network analysis of transcripts from the US Food and Drug Administration's Circulatory Systems Advisory Panel meetings, a mathematical formalization of Fuzzy Trace Theory -- a leading theory of decision-making under risk, derivation of metrics for flexibility and controllability for complex engineered socio-technical systems, and using Twitter data to conduct surveillance of influenza infection and the resulting social response.
Professor Kathleen M. Carley is Director of the Center for Informed Democracy and Social-cybersecurity (IDeaS) and the director of the center for Computational Analysis of Social and Organizational Systems (CASOS). She specializes in network science, agent-based modeling, and text-mining within a complex socio-technical system, organizational and social theory framework. In her work, she examines how cognitive, social and institutional factors come together to impact individual, organizational and societal outcomes. Using this lens she has addressed a number of policy issues including counter-terrorism, human and narcotic trafficking, cyber and nuclear threat, organizational resilience and design, natural disaster preparedness, cyber threat in social media, and leadership.
Professor Jacob N. Shapiro is professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University and directs the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project, a multi-university consortium that compiles and analyzes micro-level data on politically motivated violence in countries around the world. His research covers conflict, economic development, and security policy. He is author of The Terrorist’s Dilemma: Managing Violent Covert Organizations and co-author of Small Wars, Big Data: The Information Revolution in Modern Conflict. His research has been published in broad range of academic and policy journals as well as a number of edited volumes. He has conducted field research and large-scale policy evaluations in Afghanistan, Colombia, India, and Pakistan.
Kelly Born is the Executive Director of Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center, where she collaborates with the center’s program leaders to pioneer new lines of research, policy-oriented curriculum, policy workshops and executive education. Prior to joining Stanford, she helped to launch and lead The Madison Initiative at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, one of the largest philanthropic undertakings working to reduce polarization and improve U.S. democracy. There, she designed and implemented strategies focused on money in politics, electoral reform, civic engagement and digital disinformation. Kelly earned a master’s degree in international policy from Stanford University.
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
NATO in the Fight with COVID-19
NATO Foreign Ministers are meeting this week at a time when global institutions are struggling with the COVID-19 pandemic. Some institutions are even fighting for their lives, uncertain whether their missions and functions can emerge intact from this crisis. NATO does not have that problem—its focus as a military alliance is squarely on deterrence and defense against external threats, whether they flow from terrorists or state actors. Its job is to defend its member states, and it will stay ready to do so.
But NATO must pay attention. Some of its members may be tempted to upset democratic principles and take the law into their own hands. This process has already begun with Viktor Orbán in Hungary, who has extended the country’s state of emergency and declared that he will rule by decree for an indefinite period. The excuse is that such measures are needed to fight the pandemic, but they extend a trend that was already underway in Hungary and Poland.
NATO Foreign Ministers do not have the same toolbox to deal with such problems as the European Union: EU Justice Minister Didier Reynders has already launched a formal process to investigate and perhaps censure Hungary. NATO Foreign Ministers, however, can remind all of its members that the principles enshrined in its founding document, the Washington Treaty—democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law—are a condition of their participation in the institution. They must post the warning this week.
Beyond stating its values, NATO Foreign Ministers need to make clear this week that the organization’s strength and coherence can be a global beacon in the fight with COVID-19. They need to show what international institutions can do if they stay together, focused on the fight and using the tools they have available. Being ready to fight on the military front means that NATO must be resilient, and not only in members’ armed forces, but also in their governments and civil societies. Alliance resilience is paying dividends now, as member countries tackle the pandemic.
For instance, NATO has long worked on providing military transport under even the most difficult of circumstances: this kind of capability is needed in crisis or conflict, but it is also needed in this pandemic, right now. NATO heavy transport planes have airlifted over 200 tons of crucial medical equipment acquired from China and South Korea. These shipments have gone to the Czech Republic, Romania and Slovakia. The transports are also delivering field hospital tents to Luxembourg.
This heavy lift capability is a NATO function, but individual NATO countries are also doing what they can: the United States has provided medical equipment to Italy, and the Czech Republic has donated 20,000 protective suits to Italy and Spain. Even today, Turkey is flying military supplies to Italy and Spain. On March 30, the German Luftwaffe flew 400 patients out of France to hospitals in Germany. More such transports are underway. Polish and Albanian medical teams are serving side by side with medical teams in Italy. Militaries across the alliance are setting up temporary hospitals, disinfecting public areas, and helping with logistics and planning.
NATO’s newest member, the Republic of North Macedonia, is finding out in real time how the alliance can help. NATO’s long-standing disaster relief function has trained both Allies and partners to deal with natural disasters such as earthquakes and forest fires. Allies are able to call on the NATO crisis response system to help them cope with such disasters. With its flag just raised this week at NATO Headquarters, North Macedonia is already using the system to coordinate its government and provide the public with information and advice on COVID-19.
These efforts are a quiet testament to NATO’s most basic principle: all for one and one for all. It is the principle inscribed in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, that if the time comes to fight, all NATO members will stand together to defend each other. The message today is that the principle stands also in peacetime, when tragedy strikes. It is a powerful statement that NATO as an institution strives to be fit for purpose and ready for what is thrown at it, whether in crisis, conflict or peacetime.
We need strong institutions right now, committed to the rule of law, coherence and cooperation. NATO has shown what an international institution can do if its members stay together, focus on the fight and use the tools they have available. This Thursday, NATO Foreign Ministers should send that message out to the world: NATO is a global beacon in the fight against COVID-19.
CDDRL Fisher Family Honors Program Award Winner Presentations
The CDDRL Spring seminar series will be open to the Stanford community via Zoom and will be recorded for the general public to watch later.
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
Putin and the autocratic response to Covid-19
Speaker Bio:
In addition to many articles and book chapters on contemporary Russia, she is the author or co-editor of five books: "Transitions to Democracy: A Comparative Perspective," written and edited with Michael A. McFaul (Johns Hopkins 2013); "Autocracy and Democracy in the Post-Communist World," co-edited with Valerie Bunce and Michael A. McFaul (Cambridge, 2010); "Resisting the State: Reform and Retrenchment in Post-Soviet Russia" (Cambridge, 2006); "After the Collapse of Communism: Comparative Lessons of Transitions" (Cambridge, 2004), coedited with Michael McFaul; and "Local Heroes: The Political Economy of Russian Regional" Governance (Princeton, 1997). She is currently finishing a book project entitled "Russia Resurrected: Its Power and Purpose in a New Global Order" (Oxford University Press, forthcoming).
She received a BA (1988) and MA (1989) in Political Science from the University of Toronto, and a PhD in Government from Harvard University (1995). In 2016 she was awarded an honorary doctorate from Iliad State University, Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia.
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
Kathryn Stoner
FSI
Stanford University
Encina Hall C140
Stanford, CA 94305-6055
Kathryn Stoner is the Mosbacher Director of the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), and a Senior Fellow at CDDRL and the Center on International Security and Cooperation at FSI. From 2017 to 2021, she served as FSI's Deputy Director. She is Professor of Political Science (by courtesy) at Stanford and she teaches in the Department of Political Science, and in the Program on International Relations, as well as in the Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy Program. She is also a Senior Fellow (by courtesy) at the Hoover Institution.
Prior to coming to Stanford in 2004, she was on the faculty at Princeton University for nine years, jointly appointed to the Department of Politics and the Princeton School for International and Public Affairs (formerly the Woodrow Wilson School). At Princeton she received the Ralph O. Glendinning Preceptorship awarded to outstanding junior faculty. She also served as a Visiting Associate Professor of Political Science at Columbia University, and an Assistant Professor of Political Science at McGill University. She has held fellowships at Harvard University as well as the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC.
In addition to many articles and book chapters on contemporary Russia, she is the author or co-editor of six books: "Transitions to Democracy: A Comparative Perspective," written and edited with Michael A. McFaul (Johns Hopkins 2013); "Autocracy and Democracy in the Post-Communist World," co-edited with Valerie Bunce and Michael A. McFaul (Cambridge, 2010); "Resisting the State: Reform and Retrenchment in Post-Soviet Russia" (Cambridge, 2006); "After the Collapse of Communism: Comparative Lessons of Transitions" (Cambridge, 2004), coedited with Michael McFaul; and "Local Heroes: The Political Economy of Russian Regional" Governance (Princeton, 1997); and "Russia Resurrected: Its Power and Purpose in a New Global Order" (Oxford University Press, 2021).
She received a BA (1988) and MA (1989) in Political Science from the University of Toronto, and a PhD in Government from Harvard University (1995). In 2016 she was awarded an honorary doctorate from Iliad State University, Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia.
Download full-resolution headshot; photo credit: Rod Searcey.
European Elections and Party Advertisements in the Digital Age
Speaker Bio:
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
Laura Jakli
I am a Junior Fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows. Starting in 2023, I will be an Assistant Professor at Harvard Business School's Business, Government and the International Economy (BGIE) unit.
My research examines political extremism, destigmatization, and radicalization, focusing on the role of popularity cues in online media. My related research examines a broad range of threats to democratic governance, including authoritarian encroachment, ethnic prejudice in public goods allocation, and misinformation.
My dissertation won APSA's Ernst B. Haas Award for the best dissertation on European Politics. I am currently working on my book project, Engineering Extremism, with generous funding from the William F. Milton Fund at Harvard.
My published work has appeared in the American Political Science Review, Governance, International Studies Quarterly, Public Administration Review, and the Virginia Journal of International Law, along with an edited volume in Democratization (Oxford University Press). My research has been featured in KQED/NPR, The Washington Post, and VICE News.
I received my Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley in 2020. I was a Predoctoral Research Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University and the Stanford Program on Democracy and the Internet. I hold a B.A. (Magna Cum Laude; Phi Beta Kappa) from Cornell University and an M.A. (with Distinction) from the University of California, Berkeley.
Accountability at a time of Crisis: the case of Covid-19 in Egypt
Nancy Okail is a visiting scholar at CDDRL. She has 20 years of experience working on issues of democracy, rule of law, human rights, governance and security in the Middle East and North Africa region. She analyzes these issues and advocates in favor of human rights through testimony to legislative bodies, providing policy recommendations to senior government officials in the U.S. and Europe. She is currently the president of the board of advisors of The Tahrir Institue for Middle East Policy (TIMEP), previously she was the Institute’s executive director since its foundation. Dr. Okail was the director of Freedom House’s Egypt program. She has also worked with the Egyptian government as a senior evaluation officer of foreign aid and managed programs for several international organizations. Dr. Okail was one of the 43 nongovernmental organization workers convicted and sentenced to prison in a widely publicized 2012 case for allegedly using foreign funds to foment unrest in Egypt. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Sussex in the UK; her doctoral research focused on the power relations of foreign aid.
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
Preparing for the Election in the Midst of the Pandemic
Nathaniel Persily is the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, with appointments in the departments of Political Science, Communication and FSI. Prior to joining Stanford, Professor Persily taught at Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and as a visiting professor at Harvard, NYU, Princeton, the University of Amsterdam, and the University of Melbourne. Professor Persily’s scholarship and legal practice focus on American election law or what is sometimes called the “law of democracy,” which addresses issues such as voting rights, political parties, campaign finance, redistricting, and election administration. He has served as a special master or court-appointed expert to craft congressional or legislative districting plans for Georgia, Maryland, Connecticut, and New York, and as the Senior Research Director for the Presidential Commission on Election Administration. In addition to dozens of articles (many of which have been cited by the Supreme Court) on the legal regulation of political parties, issues surrounding the census and redistricting process, voting rights, and campaign finance reform, Professor Persily is also coauthor of the leading election law casebook, The Law of Democracy (Foundation Press, 5th ed., 2016), with Samuel Issacharoff, Pamela Karlan, and Richard Pildes. His current work, for which he has been honored as an Andrew Carnegie Fellow and a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, examines the impact of changing technology on political communication, campaigns, and election administration. He has edited several books, including Public Opinion and Constitutional Controversy (Oxford Press, 2008); The Health Care Case: The Supreme Court’s Decision and Its Implications (Oxford Press 2013); and Solutions to Political Polarization in America (Cambridge Press, 2015). He received a B.A. and M.A. in political science from Yale (1992); a J.D. from Stanford (1998) where he was President of the Stanford Law Review, and a Ph.D. in political science from U.C. Berkeley in 2002.
Online, via Zoom: REGISTER
Nathaniel Persily
Nathaniel Persily is the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, with appointments in the departments of Political Science, Communication, and FSI. Prior to joining Stanford, Professor Persily taught at Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and as a visiting professor at Harvard, NYU, Princeton, the University of Amsterdam, and the University of Melbourne. Professor Persily’s scholarship and legal practice focus on American election law or what is sometimes called the “law of democracy,” which addresses issues such as voting rights, political parties, campaign finance, redistricting, and election administration. He has served as a special master or court-appointed expert to craft congressional or legislative districting plans for Georgia, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. He also served as the Senior Research Director for the Presidential Commission on Election Administration. In addition to dozens of articles (many of which have been cited by the Supreme Court) on the legal regulation of political parties, issues surrounding the census and redistricting process, voting rights, and campaign finance reform, Professor Persily is coauthor of the leading election law casebook, The Law of Democracy (Foundation Press, 5th ed., 2016), with Samuel Issacharoff, Pamela Karlan, and Richard Pildes. His current work, for which he has been honored as a Guggenheim Fellow, Andrew Carnegie Fellow, and a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, examines the impact of changing technology on political communication, campaigns, and election administration. He is codirector of the Stanford Program on Democracy and the Internet, and Social Science One, a project to make available to the world’s research community privacy-protected Facebook data to study the impact of social media on democracy. He is also a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a commissioner on the Kofi Annan Commission on Elections and Democracy in the Digital Age. Along with Professor Charles Stewart III, he recently founded HealthyElections.Org (the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project) which aims to support local election officials in taking the necessary steps during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide safe voting options for the 2020 election. He received a B.A. and M.A. in political science from Yale (1992); a J.D. from Stanford (1998) where he was President of the Stanford Law Review, and a Ph.D. in political science from U.C. Berkeley in 2002.
U.S. Tech Companies Can Do More During the COVID-19 Outbreak
Technology companies in South Korea helped tackle COVID-19. The U.S. government can incentivize U.S. tech companies do the same.
As a resident of Silicon Valley heading into our second week under the shelter in place order, what surprises me is the sudden low profile of the tech companies that dominate this area. Until just a month ago it seemed like these companies were taking over the world - churning out new products, connecting people online, providing information and news, and in turn driving equity and real estate prices to unprecedented new highs. But as the COVID-19 cases explode in the US, we rarely hear about them. Public health workers are at the frontlines fighting the war against COVID-19, and grocery stores and retailers are stepping up to the challenge of trying to maintain normalcy of life and providing for the people.
I wonder whether Apple is still pre-occupied with the development of the next iteration of the iPhone, and Google with the development for better search algorithms. Wouldn’t today’s tech companies with their vast resources, creative minds, and technical skill be able to help minimize the impact of COVID-19?
Tech companies in South Korea have played an important role in containing the spread of the virus and reducing casualties. Soon after the first COVID-19 case was confirmed within South Korea, at least four tech companies have launched apps that provide detailed information of the movement of all people who tested positive for COVID-19 – from which restaurant the person visited at what time, to the seat number the person sat in which movie theatre.
The information was collected from a variety of sources including smartphone location data and credit card transactions. The names were anonymized but providing such detailed information raised privacy concerns. However, the South Korean government was swift to declare COVID-19 a public health emergency, which ultimately gave the people the right to information for their safety, and companies to use such data. Moreover, the government allowed companies to by-pass traditional regulatory hurdles.
When Seegene, a biotech company in Seoul, used artificial intelligence to develop South Korea’s first COVID-19 test kit, it needed to get government approval for use. The approval process typically can take over a year, but the Korea Center for Disease Control approved it in a week. Though COVID-19 cases surged in South Korea soon after its first case, the aggressive testing policy and the information provided through these apps have helped South Korea to quickly “flatten the curve,” that is, slow the rate of new infections.
So why don’t we see U.S. tech companies developing new technologies and innovation that can help contain the spread of the virus, minimize the impact, and develop strategies that help people cope with the crisis? It’s because such actions would not generate immediate returns to the company. Despite the greater societal benefit of slowing down the spread of the virus, unless there are clear private returns CEOs and shareholders will be unlikely to devote their resources to fighting a virus with so much uncertainty.
In simple economics terms, it’s a classic case of market failure; and the standard remedy in cases of market failure is government intervention. The government needs to provide incentives, either through relaxing regulatory hurdles or by subsidizing research and development, to encourage tech companies to help contain the virus and minimize the impact of COVID-19 on our society. It is not an issue of big vs. small government, but governments creating the right incentives when private firms can’t easily make the right call.
The U.S. has finally taken measures in the manufacturing sector to fight COVID-19. The White House after several days of going back and forth, eventually invoked the Defense Production Act to order GM to produce ventilators. But hospitals around the country also need masks and personal protection equipment. Unlike smaller countries without a strong manufacturing base, the U.S. has the manufacturing capacity to produce these goods, if the will is there. These manufactured goods are essential for our doctors and nurses in helping patients and fighting the virus.
However, we need more innovative approaches, beyond traditional public health approaches, to fight COVID-19 and future pandemics. Tech companies, in addition to pharmaceuticals and biotech companies that are developing vaccines and cures, can play a significant role in fighting pandemics. Tech companies can use information and communication technology (ICT) to inform the public and reduce the spread of diseases, use machine learning to diagnose new diseases, predict future outbreaks and the spread of current outbreaks, and predict when and which resources would be in need in different parts of the country. Furthermore, there may be more innovative ways to tackle the virus that many of us have not yet thought of. The government can induce tech companies to actively take action by offering R&D grants and loans, providing access to critical information and data, and reducing red-tape.
The South Korean government recognized the urgency of the situation and enlisted the help of private tech firms allowing them to do what they do best with minimal red tape and access to the necessary resources. The European Union has recently put out a call for startups that are developing technologies and innovation related to COVID-19 to apply for fast-track funding.
Chinese tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent, potentially through explicit or implicit government directive, have been actively involved in fighting the COVID-19 crisis. Alibaba has deployed an AI algorithm that predicts COVID-19 from lung CT scans. The procedure only takes a few seconds, which not only substantially speeds up diagnosis but also reduces the risk of doctors and nurses being exposed to the virus. Tencent has committed over 1.5 billion Yuan (over 210 million USD) to help fight COVID-19, which will be spent on prevention and control but also on funding companies that are developing new ways to overcome the pandemic and help with the recovery.
People are sacrificing their individual rights and income. Small businesses are closing doors. All this for the good of the greater public. U.S. tech companies, together with the right push from the federal and state governments, should be able to put aside private returns and short-termism for the moment and work towards an innovative approach to mitigating the impact of today’s crisis.
Yong Suk Lee is an Economist at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Deputy Director of the Korea Program at Stanford University.