Kizuna
Philippines Conference Room
Philippines Conference Room
Stanford, with strong expertise in Japan’s economics and politics, is poised to become a U.S. leader in Japan Studies.
Takeo Hoshi, the Henri H. and Tomoye Takahashi Senior Fellow in Japanese Studies, has joined the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) as the director of its Japan Studies Program (JSP). He will also serve as a professor of finance (by courtesy) in Stanford’s Graduate School of Business. JSP is one of Shorenstein APARC’s five dynamic research programs.
Hoshi is no stranger to Shorenstein APARC, having taken part in a number of Center-sponsored events, including the February 2012 conference about reforming Japan’s energy industry after the Fukushima nuclear disaster. He plans to build JSP into the strongest program of its kind in the United States. “I want to make Shorenstein APARC the first place that researchers, policymakers, business practitioners, and students visit to understand more about the Japanese economy and politics,” he says. “I look forward to working with everyone at Shorenstein APARC (and beyond) to achieve this goal.”
Hoshi, who began his appointment in December 2012, comes to Stanford from the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies (IR/PS) at the University of California, San Diego. He spent nearly twenty-five years conducting research and teaching at IR/PS, where he served as the Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair and as Associate Dean.
Hoshi’s research focuses on the financial aspects of Japan’s economy, and he has written extensively on corporate finance, banking, and monetary policy. He received the 2011 Reischauer International Education Award from the Japan Society of San Diego and Tijuana, and, among many other awards for his scholarship, his co-authored book Corporate Financing and Governance in Japan won the Nikkei Award for the Best Economics Books of 2002.
“We are honored to welcome Professor Takeo Hoshi as JSP’s new faculty director,” says Shorenstein APARC director Gi-Wook Shin. “I am confident he will take Japan Studies at Stanford in a strong, new direction, and succeed in attracting the very best research talent and students to the university.”
Asia is a major source and destination for victims of human trafficking. The region's booming sex tourism industry, China's appetite for Burmese child-brides, and widespread poverty foster a black market that goes unchecked. Governments often have little incentive to combat the internal and cross-border sale of people, sometimes profiting from revenue generated by sex tourism and a cheap, unregulated shadow labor market.
Helen Stacy, director of the CDDRL Program on Human Rights and a FSI senior fellow, says now is the time to address human trafficking and the mechanisms to fight it in Asia. As U.S. foreign policy pivots toward Asia, human rights issues are becoming integrated into regional discussions on trade and economic development. According to Stacy, regional trade blocs - such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) - are using their collective strength to get serious about human rights and curb trafficking.
Stacy, a lawyer by training, has dedicated a great deal of research to examining the shifting landscape of the international human rights movement. Her 2009 book, Human Rights for the 21st Century: Sovereignty, Civil Society, Culture, highlighted the success of sub-regional organizations in using their economic, political, and security cooperation as a platform to pursue human rights issues.
Stacy points to one of Africa's sub-regional organizations - the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) - as a surprising benchmark in pursuing a collective plan of action against human trafficking. The 15 ECOWAS nations signed harmonized legislation outlining how to enforce laws and punish offenders.
Building off this research and her recent travels to Asia, Stacy is writing a new book that will examine how regional and sub-regional institutions in Africa and Asia are able to successfully enact and enforce human rights agreements.
Why the emphasis on regional and sub-regional institutions when examining human rights enforcement?
Africa, Europe, Latin America, and Southeast Asia have created regional bodies for country-to-country dialogue in their region. Given the vastness of their population and territory, sub-regional groups are now forming to advance economic and security cooperation. Intriguingly, the African and Southeast Asian sub-regional bodies principle purpose is economic cooperation, which makes their human rights activity very different from either national government or the international level human rights activity. Countries of varying political interests and economic capacity that had no interest in human rights are now negotiating cross-border human rights agreements with their regional neighbors. They are now being swept into a “regional group-think” approach to human rights.
Why focus on Africa and Asia?
Africa and Asia are huge markets for the U.S. and Asia holds China, the other world economic superpower. In Africa, China is consuming resources at a staggering rate but with scant attention to human rights. The U.S. must manage a complicated dance about trade and human rights in its negotiations with China. China is also a huge economic presence in Southeast Asia, and with the U.S. diplomatic “pivot” to Asia, it’s the right time for the U.S. to be focusing on Asian Pacific human rights.
What is ASEAN's role as a sub-regional organization in Southeast Asia?
ASEAN is a free trade organization that has really started to gather its forces since the Asian financial crisis. At the same time, Asian national governments have realized that their relationship with China makes them vulnerable. On the one hand they want China’s investment money; on the other hand they want to assert their own national goals and standards and not be consumed by China’s huge demand for resources. ASEAN understands that it must have institutions of good regional governance if they are to be taken seriously by the ASEAN Plus Three countries (China, Korea and Japan), or beyond to the U.S., Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.
Why does ASEAN care about human trafficking?
There aren't any accurate statistics of the number of victims whose bodies are being sold – that’s just an unfortunate reality of any black market. Global estimates are that 27 million people are enslaved, half of them children. That’s more today than the entire 300-year long Atlantic slave trade. Governments are realizing that if they want to claim national governance credibility they have to at least acknowledge the problem, sign human rights agreements, and start cooperating with their neighbors.
What are the steps ASEAN is taking to combat human trafficking?
ASEAN has committed itself to a trafficking agreement in 2014. They signed their first human rights convention in November 2012. I have been meeting with the country representatives here at Stanford and overseas and this is a serious diplomatic cadre. The U.S. has its own ambassador, which again is all part of its pivot toward Asia. President Obama made a landmark speech about human trafficking in September 2012 and the U.S. Agency for International Development is now incorporating anti-trafficking programming into their agenda. There has never been this level of international understanding of human slavery as a global phenomenon. My interest lies in seeing how the regional and sub-regional organizations respond to this moment.
What are your plans for your next book?
The book is about new actors, markets, and technologies that yield both good and bad human rights outcomes. The number of “deep-pocket” non-governmental groups is growing exponentially: both helpful ones like philanthropic organizations, and worrying ones like black market and underground political organizations. One way or another they have profound influences upon the actions of national governments and regional and sub-regional institutions.
How does human trafficking factor into your research?
Human trafficking is my lens because it provides a unique window into a country and region. It provides information about the status of minorities; levels of health, education, and poverty; and a national government’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law. A trafficking analysis shines light on when regional co-operation, economic aid, and philanthropic assistance improves human rights. It also reveals when corrupt governments profit from predatory black market trade in humans, guns, and drugs. If we understand this better we can guide intelligence professionals, civil society, communications people, and policy-makers in human rights reform.
Stacy will be discussing her evolving research agenda on human trafficking, with a focus on Burma's current human rights challenges, at the weekly CDDRL seminar on Feb. 7. For more information, please click here.
The road to the 18th Party Congress was contentious, leading to its delayed convocation. Nevertheless, the processes of generational turnover in China’s leadership at the Chinese Communist Party’s 18th National Congress extended patterns of formal politics that trace their roots to Deng Xiaoping’s political reforms of the 1980s, that advanced in the Jiang Zemin era in the 1990s, and that matured under outgoing General Secretary Hu Jintao in the 2000s. As such, the transition in the party leadership at the 18th Congress marked another step forward in the institutionalization of Chinese leadership politics.
---
Alice Lyman Miller is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and teaches in the Departments of History and Political Science at Stanford. She is also a senior lecturer in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.
Prior to coming to Stanford in 1999, Miller taught at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C. from 1980–2000. From 1974–90, Miller worked in the Central Intelligence Agency as a senior analyst in Chinese foreign policy and domestic politics, and branch and division chief, supervising analysis on China, North Korea, Indochina, and Soviet policy in East Asia. Miller has lived and worked in Taiwan, Japan, and the PRC, and she speaks Mandarin Chinese.
Miller's research focuses on foreign policy and domestic politics issues in China and on the international relations of East Asia. She is editor and contributor to the Hoover Institution’s China Leadership Monitor, which has since 2001 offered online authoritative assessments of trends in Chinese leadership politics to American policymakers and the general public. Miller has published extensively on policy issues dealing with China, including several articles and book chapters, as well as two books: Science and Dissent in Post-Mao China: The Politics of Knowledge (University of Washington Press, 1996), and, with Richard Wich, Becoming Asia: Change and Continuity in Asian International Relations Since World War II (Stanford University Press, 2011). She is currently working on a new book, tentatively entitled The Evolution of Chinese Grand Strategy, 1550–Present, that brings a historical perspective to bear on China's rise in the contemporary international order.
Miller graduated from Princeton University in 1966, receiving a B.A. in Oriental Studies. She earned an M.A. and a Ph.D. in history from George Washington University in 1969 and 1974. Formerly H. Lyman Miller, she transitioned in 2006.
Philippines Conference Room
The ability of governments to raise revenue to finance spending varies greatly across the industrialized democracies. Despite the prediction of the globalization thesis, variation in budget deficits and public debt has actually increased. While a developed literature has attempted to explain fiscal performance, there has been little attention to the role of that the welfare state might have. Meanwhile, the welfare state literature has focused on welfare spending with less attention to how such spending is financed. This presentation shows that the two are linked. Governments can use taxes not only as a source of revenue but also as a means to achieve redistributive goals directly by targeting tax relief to specific groups. Using quantitative data and a case study of Japan and Sweden, this study shows how governments combine welfare and tax policies, i.e., the “tax-welfare mix,” shapes their long-term extractive capacity.
Gene Park is an assistant professor in the department of political science at Loyola Marymount University (LMU). Prior to arriving at LMU, he taught at Baruch College, City University of New York. Previously, Dr. Park was Shorenstein Fellow at Stanford University’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and a visiting scholar at the Japanese Ministry of Finance’s Policy Research Institute. He specializes in comparative political economy and has an area interest in Japan. His research focuses on the politics of public spending and taxation. He is the author of Spending without Taxation: FILP and the Politics of Public Finance in Japan (Stanford University Press, 2011). He is currently working on a comparative study of fiscal consolidation and a comparative study of state extractive capacity.
Philippines Conference Room
Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055
Gene Park is a Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow at Shorenstein APARC for 2007-2008. Park is currently working on a book that analyzes how a large government system for mobilizing and allocating financial capital, the Fiscal Investment Loan Program, has influenced budget politics and the internal coalitional dynamics within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).
His work has appeared in the journals Governance and Asian Survey, and he co-authored an article for the edited volume, The State after Statism (Harvard University Press). Dr. Park received a Fulbright scholarship to study in Japan. He has been a visiting scholar at the Japanese Ministry of Finance's Policy Research Institute and Sophia University in Tokyo.
Dr. Park completed his Ph.D. in 2007 in political science at University of California, Berkeley. He also holds a Masters in City and Regional Planning from Berkeley, and a B.A. in Philosophy from Swarthmore College.
This paper examines how diversely organized capitalist societies evolve by analyzing the transformation of Japan’s financial system since the 1990s. The banking, securities and insurance, as well as the postal financial institutions changed significantly, but are hardly converging to Anglo-American or ‘liberal market’ models. The authors contend that Japan’s new financial system is best characterized as syncretic, with new, traditional and hybrid forms of practices, organizations and norms coexisting. Syncretism in industry was driven by a distinctive pattern of interest group politics we call syncretization. Strong political leadership, facing serious electoral threats, shifted the policy logic from gradual incremental reforms following traditional interest group dynamics, to rapid reforms that excluded the traditionally powerful interest groups most affected by these reforms. We support the notion that diverse industry outcomes can be complementary to broader political economic reforms that take Japan away from its traditional model, part of a broader ‘convergence towards diversity.’
In an International Economy article, Daniel C. Sneider explores the troubling history of China-Japan tension. He concludes that China and Japan have every reason to pull back from
the brink of conflict—and most importantly, the United States serves a crucial role in reminding both nations of the need for peace and stability in this vital region. But the economics of the global supply chain cannot wipe away the cumulative effect of the “poisoned well” of a history of hostility. Japanese Premier Abe may wish to put the past aside and be, as he says, “forward looking.” But a failure to address the past is likely to lead to repeating it.
Takeo Hoshi was Henri and Tomoye Takahashi Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Professor of Finance (by courtesy) at the Graduate School of Business, and Director of the Japan Program at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC), all at Stanford University. He served in these roles until August 2019.
Before he joined Stanford in 2012, he was Pacific Economic Cooperation Professor in International Economic Relations at the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies (IR/PS) at University of California, San Diego (UCSD), where he conducted research and taught since 1988.
Hoshi is also Visiting Scholar at Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) and at the Tokyo Center for Economic Research (TCER), and Senior Fellow at the Asian Bureau of Finance and Economic Research (ABFER). His main research interest includes corporate finance, banking, monetary policy and the Japanese economy.
He received 2015 Japanese Bankers Academic Research Promotion Foundation Award, 2011 Reischauer International Education Award of Japan Society of San Diego and Tijuana, 2006 Enjoji Jiro Memorial Prize of Nihon Keizai Shimbun-sha, and 2005 Japan Economic Association-Nakahara Prize. His book titled Corporate Financing and Governance in Japan: The Road to the Future (MIT Press, 2001) co-authored with Anil Kashyap (Booth School of Business, University of Chicago) received the Nikkei Award for the Best Economics Books in 2002. Other publications include “Will the U.S. and Europe Avoid a Lost Decade? Lessons from Japan’s Post Crisis Experience” (Joint with Anil K Kashyap), IMF Economic Review, 2015, “Japan’s Financial Regulatory Responses to the Global Financial Crisis” (Joint with Kimie Harada, Masami Imai, Satoshi Koibuchi, and Ayako Yasuda), Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 2015, “Defying Gravity: Can Japanese sovereign debt continue to increase without a crisis?” (Joint with Takatoshi Ito) Economic Policy, 2014, “Will the U.S. Bank Recapitalization Succeed? Eight Lessons from Japan” (with Anil Kashyap), Journal of Financial Economics, 2010, and “Zombie Lending and Depressed Restructuring in Japan” (Joint with Ricardo Caballero and Anil Kashyap), American Economic Review, December 2008.
Hoshi received his B.A. in Social Sciences from the University of Tokyo in 1983, and a Ph.D. in Economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1988.