Stanford University

Foreign Policy

When It Comes to Demand Response, Is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission its Own Worst Enemy?

Paragraphs

The traditional approach to demand response of paying for a customer's electricity consumption reductions relative to an administratively set baseline is currently being advocated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as a way to foster the participation of final consumers in formal wholesale markets. Although these efforts may lead to greater participation of final consumers in traditional demand response programs, they are likely to work against the ultimate goal of increasing the benefits that electricity consumers realize from formal wholesale electricity markets, because traditional demand response programs are likely to provide a less reliable product than generation resources. The moral hazard and adverse selection problems that reduce the reliability of the product provided by traditional demand response resources can be addressed by treating consumers and producers of electricity symmetrically in the wholesale market. Several suggestions are made for how this would be accomplished in both the energy and ancillary services markets. A specific application of this general approach to the California wholesale electricity market is also provided.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The Electricity Journal
Authors
Frank Wolak

Visit by Sir Jonathan Phillips

The Forum on Contemporary Europe designed and sponsored this meeting as part of its series on global conflict, and peace and reconciliation.  This session was conducted as a high level, by-invitation discussion to bring together policy leaders and FCE Research Affiliates aimed to consider the potential benefit of Stanford research on conflict and negotiation for the continuing process of peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland.  The meeting included the UK Permanent Secretary for Northern Ireland, with Stanford faculty and FSI/FCE Research Affiliates including

  • Helen Stacy, Principal Investigator, Project on Human Rights
  • Allen Weiner, Co-Director, Stanford Center for International Conflict Negotiation,
  • Byron Bland, Co-Director, Stanford Center for International Conflict Negotiation, and
  • Roland Hsu, Assistant Director, Stanford Forum on Contemporary Europe. 

Also participating were Robin Newman, UK Vice Consul Political, Press and Public Affairs, and Andy Pike, UK Consul for Northern Ireland in Washington, D.C.  Also invited were a select group of post-graduate scholars currently engaged in research with policy implications on human rights, global justice, and international law.

The meeting addressed multiple engagement and intervention strategies, including using the office of the Permanent Secretary with his deep knowledge of historically contested issues and parties, as well as appealing to international mediation from offices including the European Court of Justice and Court of Human Rights.  Participants also discussed possible lessons to be drawn from this peace process for long-standing conflicts in settings such as Darfur, Sri Lanka, and Sub-Saharan and Southern Africa.

The Forum on Contemporary Europe expresses its appreciation for the Office of the UK Consul General in San Francisco co-sponsorship for this event.

Forum on Contemporary Europe

Sir Jonathan Phillips UK Permanent Secretary for Northern Ireland Speaker
Panel Discussions

Kevin Y. Kim

Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall, E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 724-5646 (650) 723-6530
0
2009-10 Shorenstein APARC Pre-doctoral Fellow
IMG_5718.JPG

Kevin Y. Kim is a Ph.D. candidate in History at Stanford University. He specializes in 20th century U.S. foreign relations, with an emphasis on U.S.-Asia relations. He currently is completing a dissertation titled, “Forging the Free World: Korea, U.S. Leaders, and the World, 1948-1954.” This study examines the impact of the Korean War upon the evolution of U.S. national leaders’ foreign policy ideas on strategy, economy, race, and world politics. Influenced by “constructivist” approaches and traditional historical methods, his dissertation explores the Korean War period as a formative moment in the construction of contemporary U.S. liberal and conservative foreign policy beliefs.

Before entering graduate school, Kim was a Fulbright fellow in South Korea from 2001 to 2002, where he taught English in a Daejeon public middle school and studied Korean language and U.S.-Asia relations at various institutions. He also briefly pursued a career in journalism, and has written on culture, domestic politics, and international affairs for publications such as The Nation, The Progressive, Far Eastern Economic Review, South China Morning Post, and The Village Voice.

Kim received his M.A. in History from Stanford University and a B.A. in English and Comparative Literature from Columbia University. He was born and raised in the New York City metropolitan area.

Authoritarian Governments in Cyberspace

-

In the context of authoritarian states the internet has always been viewed as an unambiguous force for good, allowing citizens of such states to mobilise around particular political and social issues, and gain access to previously banned materials. However, many authoritarian governments are now actively exploiting cyberspace for their own purposes; some of them appear to be succeeding in subverting the internet's democratising potential. Have we overestimated the internet's ability to bring democratic change and underestimated? Drawing on numerous recent examples from Russia, China, and Iran, the talk will illustrate the darker side the use of social media in these countries.

Evgeny Morozov is a leading thinker and commentator on the political implications of the Internet. He is a contributing editor to Foreign Policy and runs the magazine's influential and widely-quoted "Net Effect" blog about the Internet's impact on global politics (neteffect.foreignpolicy.com). Morozov is currently a Yahoo! fellow at Georgetown University's E.A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Prior to his appointment to Georgetown, he was a fellow at George Soros's Open Society Institute, where he remains on the board of the Information Program (one of the leading and most experimental funders for technology projects that have an impact on open society and human rights). Before moving to the US, Morozov was based in Berlin and Prague, where he was Director of New Media at Transitions Online.

Wallenberg Theater

Evgeny Morozov

Program on Liberation Technology
616 Serra Street E108
Stanford, California 94305

0
Morozov.png

Evgeny Morozov is a visiting scholar in the Liberation Technology Program at Stanford University and a Scwhartz fellow at the New America Foundation. He is also a blogger and contributing editor to Foreign Policy Magazine. He is a former Yahoo fellow at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University and a former fellow at the Open Society Institute, where he remains on the board of the Information Program. His book The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom was published by PublicAffairs in January 2011.

Evgeny Morozov Yahoo fellow Speaker Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University
Seminars
Liberation Technology Seminar Series

Benchmarking the Global VC Industry -- Emerging vs. Mature Markets

-

This presentation will compare the more mature venture capital markets of the United States, Europe, and Israel with the larger emerging venture capital markets of China and India.

Most analyses being presented are as recent as the second and third quarters of 2009 and will include:

  1. Venture capital investment by number of deals and dollar amounts by stage and industry
  2. Valuation benchmarks by industry and geography
  3. Exit benchmarks by industry sector and exchange 
  4. Comparing specific differences of startups through their life cycles
  5. Venture capital firms investing in other geographies
  6. Cleantech deals and their latest performances

The methodology used in the analysis differs from the traditional Western model (comparison by round), since the investment patterns in emerging markets are very different.

About the speaker:

Dr. Martin Haemmig's venture capital research covers 13 countries in Asia, Europe, Israel, and USA. He lectures and/or performs research at numerous universities across the U.S., Europe, China and India. He has authored books on the Globalization of Venture Capital. He is Senior Advisor on Venture Capital at SPRIE and advises on venture capital for China's Zhongguancun Science Park. Martin Haemmig earned his electronics degree in Switzerland and his MBA and doctorate in California, and worked for almost 20 years in global high-tech companies in Asia, Europe and the U.S. before returning to his academic career. He became Swiss national champion in marketing in 1994.

Download pdf

Philippines Conference Room

Martin Haemmig Speaker
Seminars

A Historical Perspective on the Development of the VC Industry in Silicon Valley--Are We in a New Era?

-

Formal venture capital investing in Silicon Valley has been underway for more than 50 years. It was in the Valley that the limited partnership format was first used for venture capital. Whereas, originally Silicon Valley VCs were mostly from a finance background, very early on individuals with operating experience formed or joined partnerships.

Perhaps most important was the tight linkages between the venture capitalists and the nearly continuous evolution of information technologies. The enormous returns from information technologies enabled Silicon Valley VCs to make very early investments in other technologies ranging from biotechnology to nanotechnology. These returns also encouraged high levels of risk-taking.

Through the use of a historical perspective, the concluding remarks will reflect upon the current dire straits for venture capital.

Martin Kenney is a Professor at the University of California, Davis, a Senior Project Director at the Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, as well as a fellow at the Center for Entrepreneurship at UC Davis. He has authored or edited five books and over 120 scholarly articles on the globalization of services, the history of venture capital, university-industry relations, and the development of Silicon Valley. His two recent edited books Understanding Silicon Valley and Locating Global Advantage (with Richard Florida) were published by Stanford University Press where he is the editor of a book series in innovation and globalization. Currently, he is preparing a book on the history and globalization of the venture capital industry.

Download pdf

Philippines Conference Room

Martin Kenney Professor Speaker University of California, Davis
Seminars
The Silicon Valley Project

Merkel 2, And What It Means for European and International Politics

-

Please join the Forum on Contemporary Europe for a first assessment of the September 27 German elections by FSI Senior Fellow Josef Joffe.

Josef Joffe is publisher-editor of the German weekly Die Zeit, and was previously columnist/editorial page editor of Sddeutsche Zeitung (1985-2000). Abroad, his essays and reviews have appeared in: New York Review of Books, New York Times Book Review, Times Literary Supplement, Commentary, New York Times Magazine, New Republic, Weekly Standard, Prospect (London), Commentaire (Paris). Regular contributor to the op-ed pages of Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post; Time and Newsweek.  In 2005, he co-founded the foreign policy journal "The American Interest" in Washington (with Zbigniew Brzezinski and Francis Fukuyama).

His most recent book is Überpower: America's Imperial Temptation (2006, translated into German and French). His articles have appeared in Foreign Affairs, The National Interest, International Security, The American Interest and Foreign Policy as well as in professional journals in Germany, Britain and France. He is the author of The Limited Partnership: Europe, the United States and the Burdens of Alliance, The Future of International Politics: The Great Powers; co-author of Eroding Empire: Western Relations With Eastern Europe.

 

Event Synopsis:

As Professor Joffe describes, political scientists predicting the outcome of the recent German elections based on economic factors were surprised by the victory of the Center Right, expecting a "Red-Red-Green" (Social Democrats-Left-Green Party) coalition instead of Merkel's "Black-Yellow" (Christian Democrats and Free Democrat) coalition party. He sees the outcome more as a loss for the Social Democrats, Lefts, and Greens - who should have done better in tough economic times, and capitalized on left-leaning ideology in Germany - than as a decisive victory for the winners.  He disagrees with the New York Times' declaration of a "mandate for change" in Germany for several reasons:

  1. The proportional representation party system based on coalitions rather than majorities makes it impossible to enact wholesale change
  2. The "stalemate system" features too many centers of power and makes change difficult
  3. Germans like these features of their political system too much to change them

Professor Joffe asserts that the outcome of the elections is a good one for Germany. A victory by the "Red-Red-Green" coalition would have brought about years of instability under a grand coalition that would be characterized by high taxes and spending, pacifism, and the status quo, and which would soon have broken down. In the coming years, Joffe predicts a medium-term exit of German troops from Afghanistan, resistance of US calls for more troops in the Middle East, a pro-Israel stance, and little to no change in domestic policy.  He believes there should be greater focus on preventing the collapse of social support programs, but admits this does not fit into the electoral cycle of domestic politics and will likely be overlooked.

In conclusion, Joffe views the election outcome as the best possible one given alternatives, and as a message to Angela Merkel that Germans are realistic and want German politicians to be less timid.

A discussion session following the talk addressed such issues as: Will Germany revise its position toward Turkey's EU integration under Merkel's leadership? Will the election outcome affect the competitive position of German business? How are rising debt levels in Europe felt by Germany? How do the German people feel about their economic situation and competitiveness?

Josef Joffe Speaker
Seminars
Subscribe to Foreign Policy