Governance

FSI's research on the origins, character and consequences of government institutions spans continents and academic disciplines. The institute’s senior fellows and their colleagues across Stanford examine the principles of public administration and implementation. Their work focuses on how maternal health care is delivered in rural China, how public action can create wealth and eliminate poverty, and why U.S. immigration reform keeps stalling. 

FSI’s work includes comparative studies of how institutions help resolve policy and societal issues. Scholars aim to clearly define and make sense of the rule of law, examining how it is invoked and applied around the world. 

FSI researchers also investigate government services – trying to understand and measure how they work, whom they serve and how good they are. They assess energy services aimed at helping the poorest people around the world and explore public opinion on torture policies. The Children in Crisis project addresses how child health interventions interact with political reform. Specific research on governance, organizations and security capitalizes on FSI's longstanding interests and looks at how governance and organizational issues affect a nation’s ability to address security and international cooperation.

Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On November 10th, the APARC China Program convened an expert panel focused on the Decision of the fifth plenary session of the 19th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, which took place on October 26-29.  The Fifth Plenum Decision outlines not only China’s 14th Five Year Plan (2021-2025), but also Beijing’s economic blueprint through 2035 and the “goal of fully building a modern socialist country."  The CCP leadership recently articulated its “dual circulation” policy – viz., a drastic reduction in China’s dependence on U.S. technologies and increased reliance on domestic consumption while maintaining exports and attracting foreign direct investments.  At this critical juncture when the coronavirus pandemic has shrunk global trade and tensions between the U.S. and China continue to intensify, panel members were asked to examine what the Fifth Plenum Decision might signify.  Does it mark a significant shift in Beijing’s strategic economic orientation?  What are the short- and long-term implications of the Decision for China’s economic development strategy, U.S.-China relations, as well as the world’s economic and technology ecosystems?  

Guests heard from experts James Green, Damien Ma, and Xiaomeng Lu.  James Green, Senior Research Fellow at Georgeton University's Initiative for U.S.-China Dialogue on Global Issues, has worked for over two decades on U.S.-Asia relations.  He has held several positions in government, including Minister Counselor for Trade Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and China Director of the White House’s National Security Council.  Damien Ma is the Director and co-founder of MacroPolo, the Think Tank of the Paulson Institute, which focuses on China's economics, technology, and politics.  He is also adjunct faculty at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.  Finally, Xiaomeng Lu is a senior analyst in Eurasia Group's geo-technology practice.  She focuses on many of the most important issues related to China right now, including cybersecurity, data protection, artificial intelligence, internet governance, 5G, and trade.  The panel concluded with a discussion of audience questions. Watch:

Read More

Min Ye speaking
News

Domestic or International? The Belt and Road Initiative Is More Internally Focused Than We Think, Says Expert Min Ye

Domestic or International? The Belt and Road Initiative Is More Internally Focused Than We Think, Says Expert Min Ye
Photograph of the UN building in Geneva, Switzerland
News

Rebuilding International Institutions Will be Tough but Necessary, Say Stanford Experts Thomas Fingar and Stephen Stedman

Fingar and Stedman spoke as part of the APARC program “Rebuilding International Institutions,” which examined the future of international institutions such as the United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO), and World Health Organization (WHO) in our evolving global political landscape.
Rebuilding International Institutions Will be Tough but Necessary, Say Stanford Experts Thomas Fingar and Stephen Stedman
Hero Image
Photo of the Forbidden City entrance with Mao Zedong's portrait
Markus Winkler on Unsplash
All News button
1
-

**Please note all CDDRL events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone

About the Event:  How can one of the world’s most free-wheeling cities transition from a vibrant global center of culture and finance into a subject of authoritarian control? As Beijing's anxious interference has grown, the “one country, two systems” model China promised Hong Kong has slowly drained away in the years since he 1997 handover. As “one country” seemed set to gobble up “two systems," the people of Hong Kong riveted the world’s attention in 2019 by defiantly demanding the autonomy, rule of law and basic freedoms they were promised. In 2020, the new National Security Law imposed by Beijing aimed to snuff out such resistance. Will the Hong Kong so deeply held in the people’s identity and the world’s imagination be lost? Professor Michael Davis, who has taught human rights and constitutional law in this city for over three decades, and has been one of its closest observers, takes us on this constitutional journey. 

 

Image
Michael Davis
About the Speaker:  Professor Michael C. Davis is in the Fall of 2020 a Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong where he teaches core courses on international human rights. He is also currently a Global Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC, a Senior Research Scholar at the Weatherhead East Asia Institute at Columbia University and a Professor of Law and International Affairs at O.P. Jindal Global University in India (where he is in residence each spring).  A professor in the Law Faculty at the University of Hong Kong until late 2016, he has held a number of distinguished visiting professorships, including the J. Landis Martin Visiting Professor of Human Rights Law at Northwestern University (2005-6), the Robert and Marion Short Visiting Professor of Human Rights at the University of Notre Dame (2004-5) and the Frederick K. Cox Visiting Professor of Law at Case Western Reserve University (2000).  As a public intellectual his media writing won him a 2014 Human Rights Press Award for commentary. 

 

Online, via Zoom: REGISTER

Michael C.Davis Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong
Seminars
-

**Please note all CDDRL events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone

 

About the Event: Following the Allied invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.S. government and military officials revived counterinsurgency doctrine and practice—widely employed, though not invented, during the era of decolonization—in service of the nation’s ongoing War on Terror. This revival was dramatized during a widely publicized screening at the Pentagon of Gillo Pontecorvo’s classic film The Battle of Algiers (1966). What insights into (Algerian) insurgency and (French) counterinsurgency did U.S. officials hope to glean from Pontecorvo’s film? And how would these insights be mobilized, if at all, for the occupation of Iraq and other insurgent geographies? 

This talk revisits this historical moment and the questions it raises about the relationship between U.S. militarism and the uses of literature and film in the management of insurgency in Africa and Western Asia.

 

Image
Vaughn Rasberry
About the Speaker: Vaughn Rasberry is Associate Professor in the Department of English and Academic Director of the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity at Stanford. He is the author of Race and the Totalitarian Century: Geopolitics and the Black Literary Imagination (Harvard UP, 2016), winner of the Ralph Bunche Award from the American Political Science Association and an American Book Award from the Before Columbus Foundation. 

 

 

Online, via Zoom: REGISTER

Vaughn Rasberry Associate Professor in the Department of English and Academic Director of the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity at Stanford
Seminars
Authors
Callista Wells
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The China Program at Shorenstein APARC had the pleasure of hosting Professor Min Ye of Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies on October 14, 2020. Her program, moderated by China Program Director Jean Oi, focused on the much-discussed but poorly-understood Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), announced in 2013 by President Xi Jinping. While it is not widely known exactly what the BRI is or what Beijing hopes it will accomplish, it has been described as something of a modern silk road, connecting China to dozens of other countries through trade and extensive infrastructure projects. Based on research conducted for her recently published book, The Belt Road and Beyond: State-Mobilized Globalization in China: 1998-2018, Professor Ye enlightened the audience on a surprisingly critical element of this global program: the domestic component.

While Ye began her research with the assumption that many hold about the BRI—that it is primarily a global, internationally-focused initiative—as she continued her research, she found that many, if not most, BRI projects are either entirely domestic or have strong ties to domestic programs. To this end, she posed three questions during her program: Why did Chinese leadership launch the BRI in 2013? How did the Chinese state and businesses implement the BRI? and, What are the internal and external outcomes of the BRI?

To answer these questions, Ye explained the theoretical frameworks she used to understand both the BRI and China's "state-mobilized globalization." Firstly, Ye's "Chinese-State Framework" breaks the Chinese governmental system into three parts: Party Leadership, State Bureaucracy, and Subnational Actors. Each of these elements affect the others, as well as policy surrounding the BRI. However, this division also creates fragmentation in authority and ideology. Secondly, her “State-Mobilized Globalization” framework explains the process surrounding Chinese national strategy. Ye posits that national strategies are generally prompted by crises faced at lower levels of government, particularly when a lack of efficiency or communication is causing “state paralysis.” Once the strategy is announced in order to coordinate efforts and solve the crisis, it enters a feedback loop in which plans are adjusted and changed according to ground-level conditions. These frameworks informed the empirical studies used to answer Ye’s research questions.

The drivers of the BRI, argues Ye, were threefold: strategic, diplomatic, and economic. It was believed by interested parties within China that such an international initiative could ease tensions related to the United States and maritime Asia, as well as generally improve diplomatic relations for the country. China’s industries were also facing problems related to overcapacity, and economic and financial groups wished to use their excess capital to invest abroad. Actors from several different levels in China, including national agencies, local governments, and private entrepreneurs, were involved in executing BRI projects intended to alleviate these tensions. Different cities saw different sides of this implementation: Chongqing, one of China’s largest cities, is heavily dominated by state capital, with its main BRI actors being State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs). Wenzhou, a port city in Zhejiang province, is by contrast dominated by private entrepreneurs.

With diverse implementation comes diverse outcomes. Ye argues that some BRI projects have been helpful in reforming cities’ structural economy, while others have helped upgrade industry. The BRI has managed to alleviate some of the tensions listed above, but at the same time, it has created its own problems. While there has been a massive internal mobilization effort for BRI projects, there exists a disconnect between the domestic situation and demands for transparency from outside actors.

Ye concluded her talk by tying her research to current developments related to COVID-19. While one might imagine that a global pandemic would be a significant inhibitor to an international trade and infrastructure project, Ye finds just the opposite. Because the BRI is, in fact, quite domestically focused, many BRI projects are continuing at a rapid pace, albeit with digital adjustments. Some projects, such as the New Infrastructure Plan, were actually fast-tracked in the wake of the pandemic outbreak. Ye predicts that as COVID-19 restrictions ease and the world returns to “normal,” these domestic and digital elements will be combined with the BRI’s original projects.

An audio recording of this program is available at the link below, and a video recording is available upon request. Please contact Callista Wells, China Program Coordinator at cvwells@stanford.edu with any inquiries.

Read More

Photograph of the UN building in Geneva, Switzerland
News

Rebuilding International Institutions Will be Tough but Necessary, Say Stanford Experts Thomas Fingar and Stephen Stedman

Fingar and Stedman spoke as part of the APARC program “Rebuilding International Institutions,” which examined the future of international institutions such as the United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO), and World Health Organization (WHO) in our evolving global political landscape.
Rebuilding International Institutions Will be Tough but Necessary, Say Stanford Experts Thomas Fingar and Stephen Stedman
Cover of the book Fateful Decisions: Choices That Will Shape China's Future
News

Thomas Fingar and Jean Oi Analyze the Choices and Challenges Facing China’s Leaders

Fingar and Oi joined the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations to discuss their edited volume, ‘Fateful Decisions: Choices that Will Shape China’s Future.’
Thomas Fingar and Jean Oi Analyze the Choices and Challenges Facing China’s Leaders
Hero Image
Min Ye speaking
All News button
1
Paragraphs

The internet economy has produced digital platforms of enormous economic and social significance. These platforms—specifically, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, and Apple—now play central roles in how millions of Americans obtain information, spend their money, communicate with fellow citizens, and earn their livelihoods. Their reach is also felt globally, extending to many countries around the world. They have amassed the economic, social, and political influence that very few private entities have ever obtained previously. Accordingly, they demand careful consideration from American policymakers, who should soberly assess whether the nation’s current laws and regulatory institutions are adequately equipped to protect Americans against potential abuses by platform companies.

The Program on Democracy and the Internet at Stanford University convened a working group in January 2020 to consider the scale, scope, and power exhibited by the digital platforms, study the potential harms they cause, and, if appropriate, recommend remedial policies. The group included a diverse and interdisciplinary group of scholars, some of whom had spent many years dealing with antitrust and technology issues.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
White Papers
Publication Date
Authors
Francis Fukuyama
Ashish Goel
Marietje Schaake
Age Range
Secondary - Community College
Paragraphs

THE IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH OF ELECTION DAY 2020 offers lessons about the state of American democracy as well as technology’s influence on voters, the voting process, and democratic institutions. Whatever the outcome of an election, and despite a polarized society, it is clear that all Americans share a common stake in protecting the integrity and independence of the administration of elections, the declaration of winners and losers, and a peaceful transition of power. Yet other questions persist: How have disinformation campaigns, whether domestic or foreign, affected the electoral process? And what does the future hold in terms of a tech agenda?

All Publications button
1
Publication Date
Authors
Marietje Schaake
Rob Reich
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/0Vs_njo0TcA

 

About the Event: The U.S. Department of Defense has been ahead of the curve on climate change.  They worry that the military’s likely use in responding to natural disasters is a potential distraction and strain on their resources and primary missions, and they are concerned that sea level rise and flooding put many of its installations at risk. Further, they see climate change increasing the competition for natural resources such as fresh water and arable land, in already volatile regions, and as “threat multiplier,” potentially leading to increased armed conflict.  What they haven’t addressed, even as they green the services, is the enormous scale of their own greenhouse gas emissions — larger than the annual emissions of most of the world’s countries.

Click to view draft paper

 

About the Speaker: Neta C. Crawford is Professor and Chair of Political Science at Boston University.  She is the author of more than two dozen peer reviewed articles on issues of war and peace and the author of three books, Soviet Military Aircraft (1987); Argument and Change in World Politics (2002), named Best Book in International History and Politics by the American Political Science Association, and Accountability for Killing: Moral Responsibility for America’s Post-9/11 Wars (2013).  Crawford has served on the governing boards of American Political Science Association and of the Academic Council of the United Nations System, and is a co-director of the Costs of War Project based at Brown and Boston Universities.  In 2018, the International Ethics Section of the International Studies Association gave her a Distinguished Scholar Award.

Virtual Seminar

Neta C. Crawford Professor and Chair of the Department Political Science Boston University
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording:  https://youtu.be/cU07s81-X8E

 

About the Event: President-Elect Biden was the person who announced the Obama administration’s Reset policy at the Munich Security Conference in 2009. U.S-Russian relations have deteriorated considerably since 2014, and in 2021 there will be no Reset.  Nevertheless, the incoming administration realizes the need to refocus the relationship on issues that represent core interests for the United States. My talk will review the legacy of the Trump administration’s policy toward Russia, its successes and failures and the unfinished business it has bequeathed to the incoming Biden-Harris team. It will focus on priorities going forward and areas where the U.S. and Russia may find common ground—and areas where they will not.

 

About the Speaker: Angela Stent is director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies and a professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University. She is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-chairs its Hewett Forum on post-Soviet affairs. During the 2015 to 2016 academic year, she was a fellow at the Transatlantic Academy of the German Marshall Fund. From 2004 to 2006, she served as national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council.  From 1999 to 2001, she served in the Office of Policy Planning at the U.S. Department of State.

Virtual Seminar

Angela Stent Professor of Government and Foreign Service Georgetown University
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording:  https://youtu.be/F60rYpY5agw

 

About the Event: Russia is a country in economic and demographic decline, but it is still able to cause considerable disruption on the international stage. It compensates for its relative weakness with a willingness to act decisively, often breaking international norms, while its competitors are still debating what to do. The UK has got some things right in its response to hostile Russian actions, but it has failed to address some important vulnerabilities.

 

About the Speaker: Ian Bond joined the Centre for European Reform in 2013 after 28 years as a British diplomat.

He served in the British Embassy, Washington (2007-12), focusing on US foreign policy. He was Ambassador to Latvia from 2005-07. As deputy head of the UK delegation to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna (2000-04), he worked on the Balkans and the former Soviet Union. He was also posted in Moscow (1993-96) and at NATO HQ (1987-90), and worked in London on the former Soviet Union, on the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy and on NATO issues.

Virtual Seminar

Ian Bond Director of Foreign Policy The Centre for European Reform
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/bphwqcK97zY

 

About the Event: A struggle is currently being waged for the soul of the West: to determine whether America and Europe can recover instincts for joint action or if they are doomed to pursue divergent paths. Much damage has been inflicted during the past four years, but the election of Joe Biden as president augurs well for the prospect of potentially the most trans-Atlanticist administration in decades. Yet, reinvigorating and reimagining the trans-Atlantic relationship will be an uphill battle. Success in that will affect, among other things, the West's ability to deal with Russia.

Based on their book, Partners of First Resort: America, Europe, and the Future of the West, David McKean and Bart M. J. Szewczyk will lay out a path for a trans-Atlantic renaissance to restore a community based on the same liberal objectives that animated the West and built a more peaceful, prosperous, and politically inclusive world order. America and Europe still need each other as partners of first resort, out of strategic necessity and commonality of interests. Moreover, the world needs a vibrant and energetic West to protect its fundamental values from illiberal forces. Modernizing the institutional links will help better address common challenges.

 

About the Speakers: 

David McKean served as Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Ambassador to Luxembourg. He is currently a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund. He is the author of four acclaimed political histories and biographies, and a forthcoming book: Watching Darkness Fall: Franklin Roosevelt and His Ambassadors in Europe (St. Martin’s Press, 2021)  

Bart M.J. Szewczyk (SHEF-chick) served as Member of the Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State and Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, as well as Adviser on Global Affairs at the European Commission’s think-tank. He is adjunct professor at Sciences Po in Paris and author of two forthcoming books: Europe’s Grand Strategy (Palgrave Macmillan 2020) and European Sovereignty and Legitimacy(Routledge 2020).

Virtual Seminar

David McKean and Bart M. J. Szewczyk
Seminars
Subscribe to Governance