Co-director Cuéllar named to endowed professorship at Stanford Law
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
CISAC Co-director Siegfried Hecker has called on colleagues and friends to congratulate his co-director, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar on being named to an endowed professorship at Stanford Law School. Cuéllar is now the Stanley Morrison Professor of Law, named for the late Stanford constitutional law professor. Hecker issued the following statement:
"A member of the Stanford faculty since 2001, Tino became my co-director at CISAC in September 2011. He is also a faculty affiliate of CDDRL and a senior fellow at FSI. The endowed professorship is a tribute to his extensive work in both the law and international security and cooperation. Tino has done much to take CISAC forward as a center that focuses not only on nuclear nonproliferation, arms control and counterterrorism, but one that also tackles cyber and biosecurity, as well as migration and transnational flows.
"His teaching and research focus on administrative law, executive power and how organizations implement critical regulatory, public safety, migration and international security responsibilities in a changing world.
"Tino has a new book coming out next month: “Governing Security: The Hidden Origins of American Security Agencies” (Stanford University Press). The book explores the history and impact of the Roosevelt-era Federal Security Agency (today the Department of Health and Human Services) and the Department of Homeland Security established after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
"Tino has served in the Obama and Clinton administrations, most recently as Special Assistant to the President for Justice and Regulatory Policy in 2009-2010. In July 2010, President Obama appointed Tino to the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an independent agency charged with recommending improvements to federal regulatory programs.
"The Stanley Morrison professorship was established in 1996 by Joan and Henry Wheeler to honor Morrison, who was a beloved professor at Stanford Law School for three decades, specializing in criminal, constitutional, tax and international law."
All News button
1
The Crisis in Japanese and Chinese Public Opinion: Can Soft Power Soften an 'Enemy Image'?
-
Why are Japan and China perpetually at odds? In this talk, Christian Collet will discuss the growing role of public opinion in bilateral tensions and the conflicting images that are held by Chinese and Japanese of one another. While there has long been a mixture of affection, anger and rivalry at the diplomatic level, Collet will explain that the roots of contemporary discontent lie, in part, in contradistinctive citizen impressions: in China, perceptions of threat borne of history and new media; in Japan, discontent manifest in domestic political culture, including eroding trust and right-wing ideology. Collet will examine the potential of soft power for ameliorating the relationship, providing some evidence to suggest that pop cultural exchanges may have a desired impact on segments of both publics. But soft power can only go so far to soften a negative image; concerted efforts, Collet will argue, also need to be made by opinion leaders to reassure citizens and restore trust in governmental decision-making.
Christian Collet (PhD, University of California, Irvine) joins the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) during the 2012–13 academic year from International Christian University, Tokyo, where he serves as senior associate professor of American politics and international relations.
His research interests focus on public opinion in Asian Pacific/American contexts and the influence of race, ethnicity and nationalism on political mobilization. During his time at Shorenstein APARC, he is working on a project that uses comparative survey data to examine the dynamics of Japanese opinion toward domestic politics, China and Southeast Asia. He is also finishing up a project concerning the role of Vietnam in the political incorporation of first generation Vietnamese Americans. In 2004–05, he held a visiting appointment at Viet Nam National University, Ho Chi Minh City, under the U.S. Fulbright Program.
Collet's work has appeared in Perspectives on Politics, The Journal of Politics, Public Opinion Quarterly, Japanese Journal of Political Science, PS, Amerasia Journal and Race/Ethnicity: Multidisciplinary Global Contexts. He is the co-editor, with Pei-te Lien, of The Transnational Politics of Asian Americans (Temple University Press, 2009).
Philippines Conference Room
Christian Collet
Visiting Associate Professor
Speaker
Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University
Seminars
What have we learned from the Cuban Missile Crisis 50 years later?
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
Fifty years ago, the Soviet Union and the United States stood on the brink of nuclear war. For thirteen days in October 1962, people around the world held their breath and hoped for a peaceful resolution to the Cuban Missile Crisis. CISAC convened a distinguished panel for the Oct. 22 event to discuss and debate the crisis from the perspectives of Moscow and Washington, and consider what history has taught us since those thirteen days in 1962. You can watch the full event here. And check out our Storify page on the event.
All News button
1
Silicon Valley Project Roundtable - Silicon Valley: Strengths and Challenges Looming Ahead
-
The Stanford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) cordially invites you and your guests to an invitation-only roundtable with two research pioneers at Stanford University on drivers for innovation and entrepreneurship of Silicon Valley.
This roundtable is designed to bring together a small circle of the Valley's leading executives, entrepreneurs, investors, service providers, and Stanford faculty for an in-depth, off-the-record conversation. Your participation and insights will inform future research at Stanford on topics relevant for the future sustainability of the Valley.
|
CHARLES EESLEY
Charles Eesley, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Management Sciences and Engineering, Stanford University
|
SHAI BERNSTEIN 
Shai Bernstein, Assistant Professor of Finance, Stanford Graduate School of Business
|
8:30AM: Welcome and Introductions
8:40AM-9:30AM: "Stanford University’s Economic Impact via Innovation and Entrepreneurship"
Topic for discussion:
- How do various key institutions of the Valley's ecosystem, such as Stanford, contribute to real economic outcomes in innovation and entrepreneurship?
- How can they be measured? What has been Stanford's economic impact?
- How has it changed over time? What light does this new analysis shed on changes and vulnerabilities for the Valley going forward?
Charles Eesley will share the results of a newly-released study that puts into perspective the sheer scale of Stanford's economic impact. In this systematic survey of Stanford alumni and faculty conducted by Eesley and SPRIE co-director William F. Miller, it is estimated that companies formed by Stanford entrepreneurs generate world revenue of $2.7 trillion annually and have created 5.4 million jobs since the 1930s. In addition to quantifying Stanford’s economic impact, the report examines Stanford’s role in fostering entrepreneurship and describes how the university creates an ecosystem that encourages creativity and entrepreneurship across schools and disciplines.
Moderator: William F. Miller, SPRIE Co-director; Herbert Hoover Professor of Public and Private Management Emeritus, Stanford Graduate School of Business
Discussant: Dixon Doll, Co-Founder and General Partner, DCM
Roundtable Discussion: All
9:30AM - 10:20AM: "Does Going Public Affect Innovation?"
After going public, how do firms perform in innovative activities, such as internal innovative projects, inventors' turnover, and reliance on acquisition of external technologies? Is the overall"IPO effect" positive or negative for a firms' innovation? Why? What implications does this have for innovation strategies in Silicon Valley?
Shai Bernstein will share his new findings on the "IPO effect" by comparing the long-run innovation of …firms that completed their filing and went public with that of …firms that withdrew their filing and remained private due to exogenous reasons. Using standard patent-based metrics, the results illustrate that the quality of internal innovation of public firms declines by 40 percent relative to …firms that remained private. He will discuss the reasons why and public leads firms to change their strategies in pursuing innovation.
Moderator: Henry S. Rowen, SPRIE Co-director; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Discussant: Bob Pavey, Partner, Morgenthaler Ventures
Roundtable Discussion: All
10:20AM-10:30AM: Wrap-up Discussion
All participants should RSVP by Wednesday, October 31.
Any further questions, please contact Yan Mei at yanmei@stanford.edu, or 650.725.1885.
Oberndorf Event Center, 3rd Floor, North Building, Knight Management Center, 641 Knight Way, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA 94305-7298
Panel Discussions
Five foreign policy questions for Obama and Romney
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs
President Obama and Mitt Romney meet for their third debate to discuss foreign policy on Monday, when moderator Bob Schieffer is sure to ask them about last month's terrorist attack in Libya and the nuclear capabilities of Iran.
In anticipation of the final match between the presidential candidates, researchers from five centers at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies ask the additional questions they want answered and explain what voters should keep in mind.
What can we learn from the Arab Spring about how to balance our values and our interests when people in authoritarian regimes rise up to demand freedom?
What to listen for: First, the candidates should address whether they believe the U.S. has a moral obligation to support other peoples’ aspirations for freedom and democracy. Second, they need to say how we should respond when longtime allies like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak confront movements for democratic change.
And that leads to more specific questions pertaining to Arab states that the candidates need to answer: What price have we paid in terms of our moral standing in the region by tacitly accepting the savage repression by the monarchy in Bahrain of that country's movement for democracy and human rights? How much would they risk in terms of our strategic relationship with Bahrain and Saudi Arabia by denouncing and seeking to restrain this repression? What human rights and humanitarian obligations do we have in the Syrian crisis? And do we have a national interest in taking more concrete steps to assist the Syrian resistance? On the other hand, how can we assist the resistance in a way that does not empower Islamist extremists or draw us into another regional war?
Look for how the candidates will wrestle with difficult trade-offs, and whether either will rise above the partisan debate to recognize the enduring bipartisan commitment in the Congress to supporting democratic development abroad. And watch for some sign of where they stand on the spectrum between “idealism” and “realism” in American foreign policy. Will they see that pressing Arab states to move in the direction of democracy, and supporting other efforts around the world to build and sustain democracy, is positioning the United States on “the right side of history”?
~Larry Diamond, director of the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
What do you consider to be the greatest threats our country faces, and how would you address them in an environment of profound partisan divisions and tightly constrained budgets?
What to listen for: History teaches that some of the most effective presidential administrations understand America's external challenges but also recognize the interdependence between America's place in the world and its domestic situation.
Accordingly, Americans should expect their president to be deeply knowledgeable about the United States and its larger global context, but also possessed of the vision and determination to build the country's domestic strength.
The president should understand the threats posed by nuclear proliferation and terrorist organizations. The president should be ready to lead in managing the complex risks Americans face from potential pandemics, global warming, possible cyber attacks on a vulnerable infrastructure, and failing states.
Just as important, the president needs to be capable of leading an often-polarized legislative process and effectively addressing fiscal challenges such as the looming sequestration of budgets for the Department of Defense and other key agencies. The president needs to recognize that America's place in the world is at risk when the vast bulk of middle class students are performing at levels comparable to students in Estonia, Latvia and Bulgaria, and needs to be capable of engaging American citizens fully in addressing these shared domestic and international challenges.
~Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, co-director of the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Should our government help American farmers cope with climate impacts on food production, and should this assistance be extended to other countries – particularly poor countries – whose food production is also threatened by climate variability and climate change?
What to listen for: Most representatives in Congress would like to eliminate government handouts, and many would also like to turn away from any discussion of climate change. Yet this year, U.S. taxpayers are set to pay up to $20 billion to farmers for crop insurance after extreme drought and heat conditions damaged yields in the Midwest.
With the 2012 farm bill stalled in Congress, the candidates need to be clear about whether they support government subsidized crop insurance for American farmers. They should also articulate their views on climate threats to food production in the U.S. and abroad.
Without a substantial crop insurance program, American farmers will face serious risks of income losses and loan defaults. And without foreign assistance for climate adaptation, the number of people going hungry could well exceed 15 percent of the world's population.
~Rosamond L. Naylor, director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment
What is your vision for the United States’ future relationship with Europe?
What to listen for: Between the end of World War II and the end of the Cold War, it was the United States and Europe that ensured world peace. But in recent years, it seems that “Europe” and “European” have become pejoratives in American political discourse. There’s been an uneasiness over whether we’re still friends and whether we still need each other. But of course we do.
Europe and the European Union share with the United States of America the most fundamental values, such as individual freedom, freedom of speech, freedom to live and work where you choose. There’s a shared respect of basic human rights. There are big differences with the Chinese, and big differences with the Russians. When you look around, it’s really the U.S. and Europe together with robust democracies such as Canada and Australia that have the strongest sense of shared values.
So the candidates should talk about what they would do as president to make sure those values are preserved and protected and how they would make the cooperation between the U.S. and Europe more effective and substantive as the world is confronting so many challenges like international terrorism, cyber security threats, human rights abuses, underdevelopment and bad governance.
~Amir Eshel, director of The Europe Center
Historical and territorial issues are bedeviling relations in East Asia, particularly among Japan, China, South Korea, and Southeast Asian countries. What should the United States do to try to reduce tensions and resolve these issues?
What to listen for: Far from easing as time passes, unresolved historical, territorial, and maritime issues in East Asia have worsened over the past few years. There have been naval clashes, major demonstrations, assaults on individuals, economic boycotts, and harsh diplomatic exchanges. If the present trend continues, military clashes – possibly involving American allies – are possible.
All of the issues are rooted in history. Many stem from Imperial Japan’s aggression a century ago, and some derive from China’s more assertive behavior toward its neighbors as it continues its dramatic economic and military growth. But almost all of problems are related in some way or another to decisions that the United States took—or did not take—in its leadership of the postwar settlement with Japan.
The United States’ response to the worsening situation so far has been to declare a strategic “rebalancing” toward East Asia, aimed largely at maintaining its military presence in the region during a time of increasing fiscal constraint at home. Meanwhile, the historic roots of the controversies go unaddressed.
The United States should no longer assume that the regional tensions will ease by themselves and rely on its military presence to manage the situation. It should conduct a major policy review, aimed at using its influence creatively and to the maximum to resolve the historical issues that threaten peace in the present day.
~David Straub, associate director of the Korea Studies Program at the Walter H. Shorentein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Compiled by Adam Gorlick.
Hero Image
President Obama and Mitt Romney speak during the second presidential debate on Oct. 16, 2012. Their third and final debate will focus on foreign policy.
Reuters
All News button
1
Mobility and Innovation: A Cross-Country Comparison in the Videogames Industry
-
About the seminar
Does labor mobility matter for innovation more in some countries than in others? Based on theoretical considerations of the economic systems literature we argue that labor flexibility has different innovation effects depending on national-level institutions. This talk further argues that institutional constraints may be encountered by creating functional equivalents. The analysis is based on career histories in the videogames industry. The videogames industry is structured differently between the best performing countries U.S. and Japan. This raises two issues on human capital diversity: How does composition of human capital affect innovation? How do people react towards institutional constraints in the labor market? Contrasting approaches on the systematic relations between the structure of labor markets and the dynamics of innovation is first introduced, the seminar will then present an empirical case which is based on the career histories of 39.439 videogame developers between 1999 and 2009.
This talk is part of the seminar series hosted by by the Stanford Project on Japanese Entrepreneurship (STAJE) at Stanford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Stanford Graduate School of Business, and sponsored by The Miner Foundation.
About the speaker
Cornelia Storz is Professor for the Study of Economic Institutions and East Asian Development at the University of Frankfurt, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, and affiliated to the Interdisciplinary Centre for East Asian Studies (IZO). She is associate researcher of the EHESS, Paris.
Her research focuses on comparative institutional analysis, innovation and industry emergence. With scholarships of JSPS, JILPT, BMBF and others she has been invited to the University of Tokyo, the Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training, the RIETI at METI, the Hitotsubashi University, the Stanford Graduate Business School and others. She was granted research funds by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the Wolfgang Ritter Foundation, the Japan Foundation and others.
Recent papers have been published in Research Policy, ZfB and Social Science Japan Journal. She is co-editing a special section of Research Policy on “Path Dependence and Emergence of New Industries” and a special issue of Socio Economic Review on “Asian Capitalism” (both forthcoming). She is co-author of Institutional Diversity and Innovation. Continuing and Emerging Patterns in Japan and China (Routledge, 2011) and co-editor of Institutional Variety in East Asia. Formal and informal patterns of coordination (Edward Elgar, 2011). She is co-organiser of the SASE network “Asian Capitalisms” and member of executive committee of the European Research Network EJARN, based at the Stockholm Schools of Economics.
SE107, First Floor, Serra East Building, Knight Management Center, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA94305-7298
Cornelia Storz
Professor for the Study of Economic Institutions and East Asian Development
Speaker
University of Frankfurt
William F. Miller
Moderator
Seminars
Rumor as Resistance
-
Abstract
At the end of February 2012, the number of mobile subscribers topped 1 billion in China, an average of around four out of every five people, and this number never stops increasing. What are the consequences of such popularity of a communication technology in China, the largest authoritarian state in the world? Among many things, the ubiquity of mobile phones in China, as in other authoritarian states, dramatically changes the way people experience and cope with everyday communication activities, offering unprecedented opportunities for them to expose discontent, air grievances, and coordinate online/offline collective resistance—in short, nourishing changes in political culture and power structure.
My study explores how people appropriate and use their mobile phones to initiate, organize, and mobilize collective resistance and popular protests in contemporary China. Specifically, my presentation will focus on mobile phone rumor as an emerging form of public resistance at the grassroots level in contemporary China. By focusing on several concrete case studies with 80+ in-depth interviews, my study observes that the low-cost and user-friendly mobile device lowers the average protest threshold, creating an opportunity for people, especially those without complicated communication skills, to organize or participate in resistance. The mutual visibility of meta-communication through mobile network greatly increases both credibility of information and sense of security for participation. Additionally, the synchronous mobile communication accumulates rumor discourse into resistance in a very short time. As a kind of contentious politics, rumor communication via mobile phones shows the opposition to government censorship and control of communications, and most important, the resistance against the use of the accusation of “rumor” by authorities to stifle any different voices.
Finally, I will highlight that both the Party-state mass media and the Internet in China tend to focus our gaze too much on “public” communications flows and their related public sphere, ignoring invisible but relevant interpersonal communication as well as the fact that the motivation and actions of human beingsare rooted in the experiences of everyday life.
Jun Liu just finished his Ph.D. study at University of Copenhagen and is currentlya visiting researcher in Stanford University. His research interest covers the relationship between media, contemporary culture, and political and social change in China with particular attention to the importance of new media andcommunications technologies including the Internet and mobile phones. He has a Ph.D. in Chinese studies. He has articles published and forthcoming in several academic journals, including Modern Asian Studies and the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.
Wallenberg Theater
Jun Liu
Visiting Researcher
Speaker
Stanford University
Seminars