A workshop on designing and delivering effective oral presentations.

A workshop on designing and delivering effective oral presentations.

How do we know that a person is what she claims to be? Or how do we make others believe that we are the person that we claim to be? Sociologists have explored these questions by focusing on face-to-face interaction in various everyday settings. This talk concerns the micropolitics of identification in a more formalized and institutionalized setting, specifically in immigration proceedings. Drawing on the literature on bureaucracy, presentation of self, migrant sending communities, and deviance, the speaker examines how immigration bureaucrats seek to establish migrants’ identities in contemporary immigration proceedings; how migrants challenge these dominant identification practices, notably through their involvement in various “illegal” schemes; and what consequences these micropolitical struggles have for both receiving and sending states. The talk is based on a study of the contestations over family-based immigration in South Korea, which have focused on efforts to establish the kinship and marital status of co-ethnic migrants from China (Korean Chinese migrants). The speaker will show how bureaucrats and migrants mobilize various types of “identity tags,” how migrants combine strategic and moral reasoning as they engage in these micropolitical struggles, and how these struggles influence not only immigration policies in the receiving state but also migration brokerage networks and gender and family relations in the sending states. The talk is based on Kim’s award-winning article in Law and Social Inquiry.

Jaeeun Kim is a postdoctoral fellow at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University (2012-2013). Before joining Stanford, she received her PhD degree in sociology from UCLA (2011) and was a postdoctoral research associate at the Center for the Study of Religion at Princeton University (2011-2012). Her dissertation entitled Colonial Migration and Transborder Membership Politics in Twentieth-Century Korea examines diaspora politics in twentieth-century Korea, focusing on colonial-era ethnic Korean migrants and their descendants in Japan and northeast China. Her dissertation has recently been awarded the Theda Skocpol Best Dissertation Award from the Comparative-Historical Sociology Section of the ASA. Kim’s work has appeared in Theory and Society, Law and Social Inquiry, and European Journal of Sociology. Her article in Law and Social Inquiry, entitled “Establishing Identity: Documents, Performance, and Biometric Information in Immigration Proceedings,” has won the graduate and law students best paper award in 2011. After completing her fellowship term at Stanford, Kim will be Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at George Mason University beginning in the fall 2013. 

Abstract:

The discovery of oil or gas in a poor country is potentially beneficial and, simultaneously, potentially calamitous. While countries could put oil revenues toward building much-needed schools and roads, fixing and staffing health systems, and policing the streets, many resource-rich states fare little better—and often much worse—than their re resource-poor counterparts. Too often public money is misallocated and funds meant to be saved are raided, and citizens pay the price. While there is much discussion about how to respond to windfalls, solutions to counteract potential corrosive effects are highly elusive. Todd Moss leads CGD's Oil-to-Cash initiative, which is exploring one policy option: paying revenues directly to citizens. Under this proposal, a government would transfer some or all of the revenue from natural resource extraction to citizens in universal, transparent, and regular payments. The state would treat these payments as normal income and tax it accordingly—thus forcing the state to collect taxes, and addinng additional pressure for public accountability and more responsible resource management. Todd will talk about the idea, the pitfalls, and some of the emerging models experimenting with aspects of the Oil-to-Cash model.

Todd Moss is vice president for programs and senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, a Washington-DC based thinktank. Moss previously served in the US State Department, worked at the World Bank, and was a lecturer at the London School of Economics.  He is the author of African Development: Making sense of the issues and actors (2011).

About the topic: The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees approached CISAC last year to collaborate on a project to improve conditions among global refugee communities.  This has led to a multidisciplinary partnership involving CISAC, students from across the Stanford campus and at the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design. Professors, NGOs, physicians, architects and other professionals have all volunteered time and expertise.  The project led to a Law School class, "Rethinking Refugee Communities," co-taught by CISAC's Tino Cuéllar and IDEO's Leslie Witt.  Four students representing teams from the class recently traveled to refugee camps in western Ethiopia on the border with Sudan.  They conducted field research for their projects focused on camp communications; early camp setup and registration; food security and economic sustainability; and host community relations.

Speakers include:

Parth Bhakta, Co-term senior and first-year graduate student, Computer Science

Beth Duff-Brown,Communications and Editorial Manager, CISAC

Jessica Miranda Garcia, Second-year graduate student, International Policy Studies

Benjamin Rudolph, Senior, Computer Science

Devorah West, Second-year graduate student, International Policy Studies

Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar (Host), Co-Director, CISAC; Co-Instructor, “Rethinking Refugee Communities” 

Abstract:

The U.S. and the E.U. are often seen as fundamentally different democracy promoters. It has been argued that the U.S. has a more political approach, which is confrontational vis-à-vis host governments and promotes democracy bottom-up via civil society. The E.U., on the other hand, is perceived as more developmental, focusing on non-confrontational projects that are mostly top-down or focused on civil society organizations not critical of the government. The U.S.’s political approach has been criticized for being too donor-led, unilateral, and hardly respecting country ownership. But should American democracy assistance become more European?

Based on research on E.U. and U.S. democracy assistance programs in Ethiopia, CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Karen Del Biondo explains the causes and consequences of a political and developmental approach to democracy assistance. She argues that the E.U. has indeed taken a more developmental approach, which can be explained by the European Commission’s commitment to the Paris Declaration principles on aid effectiveness, including ownership, alignment and, harmonization. This was possible because of the relatively autonomous position of the Commission vis-à-vis the Member States and the European Parliament. In contrast, USAID does not enjoy this bureaucratic autonomy, and has therefore paid lip service to aid effectiveness. Del Biondo discusses the advantages and disadvantages of a political and developmental approach in a semi-authoritarian regime such as Ethiopia. She finds that, although the impact of E.U. democracy assistance in Ethiopia can be questioned, the E.U.’s developmental approach has made the government of Ethiopia more open to E.U. democracy assistance, while the U.S.’s political approach led to a backlash.

Speaker Bio:

Karen Del Biondo is a 2012-2013 postdoctoral fellow at the CDDRL. Her research is funded with a Fulbright-Schuman award and a postdoctoral grant from the Belgian-American Educational Foundation (BAEF). She holds an MA in Political Science (International Relations) from Ghent University and an MA in European Studies from the Université Libre de Bruxelles. In 2007-2008 she obtained a Bernheim fellowship for an internship in European affairs at the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Permanent Representation to the EU. 

Karen Del Biondo obtained her PhD at the Centre for EU Studies, Ghent University in September 2012 with a dissertation entitled ‘Norms, self-interest and effectiveness: Explaining double standards in EU reactions to violations of democratic principles in sub-Saharan Africa’. Her PhD research was funded by the Flemish Fund for Scientific Research (FWO). Apart from her PhD research, she has been involved in the research project ‘The Substance of EU Democracy Promotion’ (Ghent University/University of Mannheim/Centre of European Policy Studies) and has published on the securitisation of EU development policies. In January 2011 she conducted field research in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Her postdoctoral research will focus on the comparison between EU and US democracy assistance in sub-Saharan Africa.

Abstract:

The U.S. and the E.U. are often seen as fundamentally different democracy promoters. It has been argued that the U.S. has a more political approach, which is confrontational vis-à-vis host governments and promotes democracy bottom-up via civil society. The E.U., on the other hand, is perceived as more developmental, focusing on non-confrontational projects that are mostly top-down or focused on civil society organizations not critical of the government. The U.S.’s political approach has been criticized for being too donor-led, unilateral, and hardly respecting country ownership. But should American democracy assistance become more European?

Based on research on E.U. and U.S. democracy assistance programs in Ethiopia, CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Karen Del Biondo explains the causes and consequences of a political and developmental approach to democracy assistance. She argues that the E.U. has indeed taken a more developmental approach, which can be explained by the European Commission’s commitment to the Paris Declaration principles on aid effectiveness, including ownership, alignment and, harmonization. This was possible because of the relatively autonomous position of the Commission vis-à-vis the Member States and the European Parliament. In contrast, USAID does not enjoy this bureaucratic autonomy, and has therefore paid lip service to aid effectiveness. Del Biondo discusses the advantages and disadvantages of a political and developmental approach in a semi-authoritarian regime such as Ethiopia. She finds that, although the impact of E.U. democracy assistance in Ethiopia can be questioned, the E.U.’s developmental approach has made the government of Ethiopia more open to E.U. democracy assistance, while the U.S.’s political approach led to a backlash.

Lina Khatib is the co-founding Head of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University. She joined Stanford University in 2010 from the University of London where she was an Associate Professor. Her research is firmly interdisciplinary and focuses on the intersections of politics, media, and social factors in relation to the politics of the Middle East. She is also a consultant on Middle East politics and media and has published widely on topics such as new media and Islamism, US public diplomacy towards the Middle East, and political media and conflict in the Arab world, as well as on the political dynamics in Lebanon and Iran. She has an active interest in the link between track two dialogue and democratization policy. She is also a Research Associate at SOAS, University of London, and, from 2010-2012, was a Research Fellow at the USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School.

Lina is one of the core authors of the forthcoming Arab Human Development Report (2013) published by the UNDP, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Syria Justice and Accountability Center. She is also a founding co-editor of the Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication, a multidisciplinary journal concerned with politics, culture and communication in the region, and in 2009 co-edited (with Klaus Dodds) a special issue of the journal on geopolitics, public diplomacy and soft power in the Middle East. She edited the Journal of Media Practice from 2007-2010.

Paul Wise is the Richard E. Behrman Professor of Child Health and Society, Professor of Pediatrics at Stanford University School of Medicine, and Senior Fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.  He is Director of the Center for Policy, Outcomes and Prevention and a core faculty of the Centers for Health Policy and Primary Care Outcomes Research, at Stanford University.

Dr. Wise received his A.B. degree summa cum laude and his M.D. degree from Cornell University, a Master of Public Health degree from the Harvard School of Public Health and did his pediatric training at the Children's Hospital in Boston.  His former positions include serving as the Director of Emergency and Primary Care Services at the Children's Hospital, Boston, Director of the Harvard Institute for Reproductive and Child Health at Harvard Medical School, and Special Assistant to the U.S. Surgeon General.  Prior to moving to Stanford University, Dr. Wise was Vice-Chief of the Division of Social Medicine and Health Inequalities in the Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, the academic and research base of Partners in Health.

Rajaie Batniji is a resident physician in internal medicine at Stanford and a CDDRL affiliate. His research examines the selection of priority diseases and countries in global health, and he is interested in global health financing and the priority-setting process of international institutions. His work has also examined social determinants of health in the Middle East. At FSI, Dr. Batniji is co-investigator on Global Underdevelopment Action Fund projects explaining U.S. global health financing and political causes of public health crisis.

Dr. Batniji received his doctorate in international relations (D.Phil) from Oxford University where he studied as a Marshall Scholar. He also earned a M.D. from the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine and M.A. and B.A. (with distinction) degrees in History from Stanford University. Dr. Batniji was previously based at Oxford's Global Economic Governance Program, and he has worked as a consultant to the World Health Organization.

This talk is part of Stanford's Environmental Earth System Science seminar series.