Genetic mapping has led scientists to a better understanding of human disease and how to fight ailments like diabetes, mental illness and cancer.

But the information they have to work with is limited, drawing mostly from the DNA of people with European bloodlines. When it comes to figuring out how genetic disorders affect groups who don’t share that ancestry or have only trace amounts of it in their family histories, researchers are often at a loss.

Andres Moreno is changing that. Thanks to the $100,000 he is receiving as this year’s recipient of the George Rosenkranz Prize for Health Care Research in Developing Countries, the Stanford researcher will analyze the DNA of indigenous groups and cosmopolitan populations living in Mexico, South America and the Caribbean.

The data he gathers will lay the groundwork for scientists interested in knowing how genetic diseases take hold and manifest themselves among Latin Americans – one of the most underrepresented populations in the field of genetics.

“We can’t start talking about how to deliver personalized medicine in Latin America because we still have much to learn about their genetic makeup at the population level,” said Moreno, a research associate at School of Medicine’s genetics department.

“We need to draw the genetic map that will allow us to better understand the genetic basis of multiple conditions that lead to major health problems in Latin America,” he said.

Scientists have found numerous genetic variants linked to complex traits among people with European backgrounds, and that connection has allowed doctors to better treat and prevent diseases in that group.

But without a rich database built on the DNA of people whose family trees are rooted in Latin America, researchers have yet to find the genetic key to explain why descendants of region’s indigenous populations are predisposed to particular conditions.

Obesity, for example, is more prevalent in Mexico than in other parts of the world, Moreno said.

“We need to find population-specific gene variants that don’t exist anywhere else but locally,” he said. “Then we can maybe find the gene behind obesity there.”

Other conditions may be addressed by studying locally adapted populations, such as those living at high altitude in the Andes where pregnant women have a five-fold higher rate of maternal hypertension than the native population.

“We are trying to identify the genetic variants underlying the mechanisms for this protection, which may help to design preventive and therapeutic measures worldwide,” Moreno said.

Stanford’s Center for Health Policy, a center of the university’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, administers the Rosenkranz award that will fund Moreno’s work. The prize was created in 2007 to foster the research of a young Stanford scholar committed to improving health care in developing countries and reducing health disparities across the globe.

The first recipient was Eran Bendavid, an assistant professor of medicine and a CHP associate.

“We believe Andres’ work will deepen our understanding of the genetics of disease across populations, and we are delighted to recognize his important scientific contributions,” said Douglas Owens, director of the Center for Health Policy, the Henry J. Kaiser, Jr. Professor in the School of Medicine and an FSI senior fellow.

The Rosenkranz prize was established by the friends and family of Dr. George Rosenkranz, the scientist who helped first synthesize Cortizone in Mexico in 1951.

Rosenkranz, who lives in Menlo Park, also synthesized the active ingredient for the first oral birth control and served as a CEO of Syntex, a Mexican pharmaceutical company.

In addition to Owens, members of the award selection committee included: Donald Kennedy, president emeritus of Stanford; Rosamond Naylor, the William Wrigley Senior Fellow at FSI and Stanford’s Woods Institute for the Environment; Paul Yock, the Martha Meier Weiland Professor in the medical school; and Michele Barry, the medical school’s senior associate dean of global health and director of the Center for Innovation in Global Health.

Scarborough Shoal, a small lagoon in the South China Sea, remains the center of a months-long standoff between China and the Philippines. Donald K. Emmerson discusses Indonesia's role in leading ASEAN, after a week of silence, to announce a consensus that avoids the issue.

Europe Center Director Amir Eshel's new book Futurity: Contemporary Literature and the Quest for the Past, argues for the prospective rather than retrospective vision of literary works.  "Bringing to light how reflections on the past create tools for the future, Futurity reminds us of the numerous possibilities literature holds for grappling with the challenges of both today and tomorrow," says the University of Chicago Press.  Recently released in German (Suhrkamp Verlag, May 2012), the English version will be published by the University of Chicago Press in December 2012.

Amir Eshel is the Edward Clark Crossett Professor of Humanistic Studies, Professor of German Studies and Comparative Literature, and the Chair of Graduate Studies, German Studies.  His website is at http://aeshel.com/

 

The Stanford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) at the Stanford Graduate School of Business hosted the 4th annual Stanford Project on Japanese Entrepreneurship (STAJE) Conference on April 26-27. STAJE is an academic project that contributes to the understanding of entrepreneurship, firm growth, and institutions by studying the new entrepreneurial dynamic in Japan. Faculty from over 20 universities, government officials including the U.S. ambassador to APEC, and business leaders presented their research and papers over the two-day conference.

When one mentions the word “entrepreneurship,” Japan does not immediately come to mind. Although Japan has as many startups each year as the United States – adjusting for the size of the economy - in many ways entrepreneurship is misunderstood in Japan. This makes it an ideal laboratory for researching and observing entrepreneurial behavior because it is an economy similar to the United States in many ways. So, if there are differences – and there is a popular perception that the differences are great – the study of Japan will sharpen our understanding of Silicon Valley and the world economy.

Background

In the 1980s, large companies that were entrepreneurial when they started, like Sony, Honda, Toyota, and Mitsubishi, became successful large companies and were envied around the world. There was a great pride in Japanese electronics and manufacturing as Walkman and Camry became household names in Japan and abroad. The Walkman was an innovative mobile music device, the first of its kind on the market long before the iPod launched in 2001. The goal for many, if not all, college graduates was to get a job with a Japanese company or government that offered the security of lifetime employment.

Along with the growth of the Japanese economy, personal incomes were growing as companies continued to expand. The hallmark signs of Japanese wealth were lavishly displayed with the acquisition of second homes in Hawaii, impressionist art from renowned auction houses, the purchase of land and buildings around the world, and popular stories of luxurious travel and dining experiences. Meanwhile, real estate and stock prices in Japan soared setting the stage for an asset bubble collapse similar to the U.S. experience in 2007. The Nikkei 225 stock price average peaked at over 30,000 in December of 1989. It remains less than 9,000 over 20 years later.

Changes to regulations

The persistent decline in Japanese asset values during the 1990s caused much policy, legal, and corporate strategic change. As the Japanese economy reached its nadir after the collapse of its asset bubble, a broad business and policy criticism arose that the legal and informal institutional architecture of Japan was no longer relevant to a new economic age in a globalized setting. Moreover, the old banks were illiquid and had to be reorganized. New laws were passed affecting the formation, financing, and exit or dissolution of firms.

One example of the change was the reform of bankruptcy laws in Japan. During the 1980s bankruptcy was used to recollect debt and to punish irresponsible managers. There was a belief that bad decisions were not only a corporate responsibility, but also a personal one as well and therefore it was acceptable that a manager’s personal assets be seized in order to satisfy a corporate debt. This type of regulation may be partially responsible for perceptions of the risk adverse nature of the Japanese firms. Conversely, especially in Silicon Valley, failure is often seen as an opportunity to grow and learn from mistakes. Japanese policy-makers sought to emulate Silicon Valley where bankruptcy is viewed more as a normal and necessary element of the startup environment. Understanding this, in 2001 - 2003 reforms were enacted in Japan’s laws. These changes included lowering the maximum liability exposure that directors and CEOs were subjected to from unlimited personal exposure in many cases to limited assets at risk.

In a

recent paper, presented by STAJE researcher Robert Eberhart, they discover that “lowering failure barriers increases new firm performance and generates exceptional growth firms.” Eberhart says, “using Japan as a laboratory, we were able to show that laws that make it easier to start firms determine whether one can be an entrepreneur. But easing the laws that punish bankruptcy determine whether one wants to be an entrepreneur. In this way, studying Japan helps us understand entrepreneurship everywhere.”

New attitudes

Nowadays Japan is dynamic and changing. High growth new firms like GREE, DeNA, and Rakuten are not well known outside of Japan but are profitable, large, and acquiring firms around the world as well as being responsible for employment of thousands. Japanese firms are acquiring manufacturing capacity in China and Korea as they focus on high profit components instead of name brands. Data from STAJE’s research shows that new firms that start in Japan in the last ten years now employ millions. In contrast, Sony recently terminated 10,000 employees in Japan. Mitsubishi, Mitsui, and Sumitomo have scaled back in many business units and Toyota lost market share over quality concerns. There has been a breakdown in the social contract system of job security through lifetime employment. Job security in a large company, once a mainstay of working for a Japanese company, is no longer as available and undergraduates coming out of college are now more willing to work for foreign companies or to try something on their own. Students are beginning to show interest in entrepreneurship and there is a feeling of doing something for oneself is more important than relying on the “salary man” job. Venture capital firms and incubators are starting to sprout in Japan. Open Network Lab (Onlab) is Japan’s version of Silicon Valley based Y Combinator, an incubator that provides technology startups with mentorship, office space, and an introductory investment of approximately US$12,000 in exchange for equity. Even large Japanese giants are getting into the game; NTT Investments, the investment division of Japan’s largest telecommunications company, NTT DoCoMo, has invested in B Dash Ventures, a venture capital fund started by Hiroyuki Watanabe, a veteran venture capitalist in Japan.

The research at Stanford is helping to make the dynamic situation in Japan understandable. SPRIE-STAJE recently hosted an event in Tokyo with the US Embassy with over 500 attendees listening to research and views. Last year, SPRIE-STAJE hosted the US undersecretary of State, Robert Hormats, Japan’s ambassador to the US, Ichiro Fujisaki, the US ambassador to Japan, John Roos and dozens of representatives from industry and universities in both countries. STAJE facilitated the new joint work between the National Venture Capital Association and the Japanese Venture Capital Association. Research from STAJE is being used by joint U.S.-Japan government commissions on innovation and entrepreneurship – of which both Eberhart and SPRIE faculty co-director Professor William Miller are delegates - and the effort was recently featured in a joint communiqué of the White House and the Japanese Prime Minister’s office. STAJE has over 50 papers written and presented under its auspices and cooperated closely with the University of Tokyo.

Conclusion

Japan is a critical and exemplary part of the world’s cultural matrix that earned the respect of all around the world as Japanese people cooperated and showed its strength in the face of their disasters last year. As a famous researcher on Japan observed, Japan – a relatively small country – could not have become the 2nd largest economy in the world if it were not innovative and entrepreneurial. Its differences with the U.S. and other nations give researchers of entrepreneurship a powerful tool and laboratory. According to Professor William Miller, “culture is defined by the system in the environment, and when the system changes, the culture changes.” In Japan, research has shown that lowering failure barriers, such as reducing personal asset risk, increases new firm performance and contributes to an entrepreneur-friendly environment. SPRIE’s Stanford Project on Japanese Entrepreneurship is leading timely and relevant research to help us understand not only Japan, but ourselves.

Steven Pifer, former United States Ambassador to Ukraine and senior fellow and director of the Arms Control Initiative at Brookings, offers his insight into the current status of nuclear arms control and the issues impacting future prospects for negotiation in a presentation posted on the Brookings Institute website

Steven Pifer’s career as a Foreign Service officer centered around Europe, the former Soviet Union and arms control. In addition to Kyiv, he has had postings in London, Moscow, Geneva and Warsaw as well as on the National Security Council. Ambassador Pifer is currently a Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution, focusing on Ukraine and Russia issues. He is a frequent invited expert speaker at The Europe Center. 

In an interview with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization, Co-Director and nuclear expert Sig Hecker explains why a U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty helps national security. He also discusses stockpile stewardship and how the U.S. nuclear arsenal is safe, secure, and reliable without nuclear tests.

With Spain as the current hotspot in the European financial crisis, it is easy to lose sight of the broader features of the Spanish predicament, which, I submit, was political and cultural before it emerged as financial. One reason for the dramatic escalation of the risk premium on Spanish bonds is the government’s low credibility - itself the consequence of a heady mix of self-contradiction, lack of transparency, and downright lying. On November 20, 2011, after years of corrosive opposition, Mariano Rajoy rose to the presidency of the government on assurances that he understood the crisis and knew how to handle it.  He now feels trapped in a situation he cannot control, not least because much of the damage is of his own party’s making. To be sure, the socialists contributed mightily to the public debt, exacerbated it by denying the crisis when it was already in evidence, and worst of all, did not act to control the housing bubble, which left in its wake banks filled with toxic assets and a severe credit crunch. But at the root of the housing and mortgage bubble were the dangerous liaisons between the banking system and regional governments such as those in  Madrid and Valencia, that have long been steeped in the Partido Popular’s reckless politics and corrupt practices (epitomized by Bankia’s lurid ambitions and costly rescue.)

The banking crisis is dragging down the Spanish economy and bringing the country’s financial structure into uncharted territory. This is a seemingly paradoxical outcome for a country that a few years back boasted a positive balance and a higher growth rate than its neighbors. What happened to upend the triumphant rhetoric of presidents Aznar and Zapatero? To a certain extent the markets appear to have overreacted, and their knee-jerk response to rising debt caused in part by investors’ demand for higher interest on Spanish bonds threatens to bring about a self-fulfilling prophecy. Before the market developed these jitters however, Spain’s public debt was in fact lower than Germany’s, even as the latter functions as the basis against which the financial risk of other countries is measured. In the last week of June 2012, the distance between Spain's and Germany's debt risk was 504 basis points, while that between the US and Germany was only 13. In relation to GDP however, Spain’s public debt remains significantly lower than that of the U.S. At the end of 2011, Spain’s public debt was 68.5% of its GDP, while the US’s was 110.2%.  In spite of this, the US continues to have no trouble financing its debt, and the American dollar has been rising in recent months and continues to be regarded as a safe haven, while the euro is at risk.

Why all the fuss about Spain? The answer lies in a combination of causes.  In the first place, there is the big hole punched into Spanish banks by the large-scale default on loans irresponsibly pushed on overly optimistic borrowers; and then there is the unlikelihood of an economic recovery vigorous enough to guarantee the debt’s financing. Saddled with debt, subjected to salary cuts, and adrift in a dwindling job market, Spanish consumers will hardly be able to fuel a meaningful recovery for some time.  At present, the combined debt ofSaish families is nearly 100% of national GDP. Corporate debt is even larger. And it is not the private sector alone that is stuck. The loss of confidence also affects the Bank of Spain. For a long time the country’s central banking authority turned a blind eye to the bad lending practices of private institutions, and so it shares the blame for the illusion of an ever-expanding and ever-appreciating housing sector. When the fantasy receded, thousands of families, as well as the owners of small and middle-sized companies, were left stranded in a financial desert; and once the economy actually began to shrink, the government increasingly lost its ability to finance the debt.

Is Spain at risk of leaving the Eurozone? While this cannot be ruled out, it is unlikely. The possibility of going back to the peseta is precluded by the fact that foreign, mostly German and Chinese, investors, whose money helped pump up the housing bubble, now make up the bulk of Spain’s creditors. They will hardly sit by and allow Spain to devalue its way out of the mess. Although he dragged his feet, Rajoy has finally applied to Brussels for rescue funds and will submit to European oversight.  The proposed solution will undoubtedly involve further dismantling of services, salary cuts, and higher unemployment.  This is a bitter pill that will test Spain’s already shaky social cohesion. Rajoy will dispense it because he has no alternative, or rather because the alternative—letting the sick banks fail instead of nationalizing their losses—is not acceptable to the financial markets. Adding to the markets’ nervousness is the fact that Rajoy has proven to be singularly maladroit at administering the medicine.  This is where politics and culture come into the picture.

Spain’s troubles go back to the origin of its current regime in the late 1970s. They are rooted in a faulty transition that was expected to convert a country without democratic traditions into a full-fledged western democracy. But today all of Spain’s core institutions have fallen into disrepute: after years of covering its scandals, the monarchy has finally disgraced itself irreparably; the Supreme Court is affected by corruption at its core; the president of Madrid's regional government (a militant and vocal member of the extreme right wing of the Partido Popular) is calling for the dissolution of the Constitutional Court (i.e. for a return to undisguised authoritarian rule); and the tone of the debates in Congress could hardly fall to a lower level. Spanish democracy is ailing, but for anyone who has observed it with attention since its inception, the confirmation of what was once merely an inkling can hardly be cause for surprise.

In the 1970s, Spain’s bid for democratic legitimacy and admission to the European Community required the restoration of Basque and Catalan self-government, which Franco had suppressed. At the time, the provision of institutional guarantees for these nationalities was seen as a requirement of justice meant to correct decades of persecution. The Basque Country and the semi-Basque region of Navarre emerged from the transition with an important privilege. They collect their own taxes. From this revenue they transfer an amount to Madrid and use the rest as they see fit. Fiscal independence in the hands of a responsible government led to a clear improvement in the Basque standard of living and, and, not incidentally, to a certain insulation from the current crisis. Catalonia, with a larger economy, was denied that privilege. In fact the opposite occurred: its economy was made hostage to a state that, under the pretext of redistribution, severely impaired its growth and development.  Since Franco’s death, Catalonia’s leading position within Spain and its capacity to compete globally (it still accounts for 25% of all Spanish exports) have been eroded through an unfair fiscal burden and hostile decisions in matters of territorial development. Year after year, Spain’s government has defaulted on the execution of public works approved for Catalonia in the former's budget, thus retarding the latter's modernization and straining its finances to the breaking point.  Rajoy’s government will not even honor the state’s appropriations for Catalonia mandated by current fiscal law. In a display of cynical reason, the central Spanish government now blames regional governments for Spain’s public debt, obscuring the fact that the combined debt of the 17 autonomous communities is only 16% of the total, while that of the central government accounts for 76%. The remaining 8% is municipal debt. By shifting the responsibility for the crisis to the regional governments, Rajoy is patently using the current emergency as an opportunity to dismantle the structure of regional autonomy enshrined in Spain's current constitution.  The result of course would be to abrogate the limited degree of self-government that Spain only grudgingly conceded to Catalonia in the former's hour of democratic need.

As usual, propaganda is based on plausibility. It is true that Spain’s system of regional governments is costly, and a revision is long overdue. Most autonomous communities were invented ad hoc by the central government for the purpose of generalizing the autonomy principle and dissolving Catalonia’s historic claim to autonomy within a so-called “autonomous common regime” that as popularized at the time as “coffee for all.”  While history required the articulation of a state with two or three autonomous regions based on tangible cultural differences, Madrid’s politicians created 17 “autonomous communities” by administrative fiat. And since Madrid was unwilling to slim down the state’s bureaucracy, parallel administrations were created, adding to the cost of government. Since the beginning, the unwieldy system of “autonomous governments” was financed through the transfer of funds from the most productive to the least productive regions with a regularity and volume that ended up crippling the donors. These have been, with predictable monotony, the regions on the Mediterranean seaboard that possess a distinct culture and language: Catalonia, Valencia, and the Balearic Islands. So striking is the fiscal imbalance that for decades Spanish governments have refused to publicize the figures, even though this refusal constitutes the violation of a standing congressional order to make them available. But how the cookie crumbles is made evident by the president of Extremadura’s admission that a new fiscal deal for Catalonia would be catastrophic for his region. Catalonia suffers from a political paradox. As a “wealthy region” in a “poor country,” it never benefited from the European structural and cohesion funds of which Spain was the largest recipient, but instead became a net contributor on a level higher than France. Economists calculate that the Catalan fiscal deficit, that is, the percentage by which taxation exceeds allocations, rests anywhere between 8 and 10% of Catalonia’s GDP (roughly $20 billion annually for a region of 7,000,000 people.) Over time, the magnitude of such siphoning of resources impacts an economy, leading to obsolescent infrastructure, the impoverishment of the service sector, the deterioration of the educational system, and the inevitable loss of competitiveness. Catalonia’s public debt in 2011 was $52 billion, approximately 20.7% of the Catalan GDP. Two and a half years of a balanced fiscal relation with the rest of Spain would have sufficed to mop up all Catalan public debt.

Spain’s troubles were political before they became financial, but politicians will not resolve them. The country needs to be further integrated into the European structure through a common fiscal policy and a commonly regulated banking system; more importantly however, Spain needs to be politically accountable to Brussels and meet European standards of justice and democratic procedure.  This would do much to bring about economic rationality. A country on the brink of default cannot afford to build unprofitable fast-speed trains to provincial destinations, boondoggle expressways in a radial system stemming from Madrid, or airports without air traffic.  Nor should it insist on an extravagant freight train route that requires drilling through the thick of the Pyrenees instead of building a cheaper and commercially sensible coastal itinerary, a plan that, without Brussels' better judgement, the Spanish government would have rejected for the ostensible purpose of isolating Barcelona’s harbor, the busiest in Spain.  The senseless megalomania and castigation of specific territories cannot be explained along traditional ideological lines — such projects have been developed by socialists and conservatives alike — but by long-term cultural continuities. The recent bout of megalomania was buoyed by billions in structural funds, while the territorial grievances, notorious to anyone who is conversant with Spanish history, went on as before, shielded by Spain’s membership in the core Western institutions.

Spain would gain much from trading sovereignty for rationality, and from being forced to invest for economic rather than merely symbolic payoff. A dishonored monarchy, a politicized justice, and a corrupt party system are as much toxic assets as those the banks hold, and if intervention is inevitable, the discipline mandated from outside ought to touch the country to the quick. If and when Brussels decides to put the Iberian house in order, it ought to recognize which administrations have practiced fiscal restraint and are capable, under good governance, of meeting European standards. Spain could well be the last ditch of the European monetary union and of the political union itself. But timely political reform in Spain could be the last opportunity not only to keep the country within the EU but also to hold it together as a meaningful political project.