Introduction and Contribution

Since coming to power in 2002, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) have significantly undermined Turkish democracy. This has most visibly involved police repression, systematic prosecutions of the AKP’s critics, and partisan control and censorship of the media. Although opposition persisted in parliament, municipalities, campuses, and professional associations, the playing field is rigged against the AKP’s opponents.

Yet these visible forms of repression are only part of a broader process of Turkey’s autocratization. In “The Capture of Turkey’s Universities Under the AKP,” Ayça Alemdaroğlu shows how the regime has, through a host of less spectacular but durable mechanisms, used its control over higher education to turn universities into channels for distributing opportunity, disciplining dissent, and cultivating loyal staff and students. These mechanisms — including baseless investigations and dismissals of academics, online citizen reporting against faculty, and patronage around university jobs — have weakened academic life and transformed Turkish higher education into a key instrument of the AKP’s governing project.

Importantly, Turkey’s democratic erosion has accelerated in tandem with the massive, rapid growth in colleges and student enrollment. For Alemdaroğlu, this should temper any assumption that higher education is automatically a space of democratic resistance. Universities can produce critique, organization, and dissent, but the higher education system can also facilitate authoritarian consolidation through appointments, disciplinary procedures, funding, surveillance, and patronage. Comparable processes to subordinate universities have unfolded in India, China, and Russia. Instructors may publish or teach critical material while students may organize against the state, but autocrats can hedge against these risks by capturing the university system writ large. In the United States, where universities have become central to “culture wars,” Alemdaroğlu’s article serves as a cautionary tale about how quickly institutional autonomy can erode, especially in the absence of protections against executive encroachment.

The Growth of Turkish Higher Education

The AKP did not eviscerate higher education in one fell swoop but did so incrementally, building on the efforts of its predecessors. For example, after the 1980 coup d'état, Turkey’s military government centralized key aspects of university appointments, which the Erdoğan regime has expanded. In addition, the country’s 1980s neoliberal turn refashioned universities as instruments of profit and efficiency rather than spaces of academic freedom. Since the AKP attained power, higher education has grown at an unprecedented scale: there were 76 universities with 1.7 million enrolled students in 2002, compared to 206 universities and 8 million students in 2020. This has afforded the regime vast new terrain on which to exercise control.

Unsurprisingly, such rapid growth has increased quantity at the expense of quality. From a political standpoint, however, this is not especially costly for the AKP. For example, meager investments in research capacity have served to weaken the independence of academics and their ability to criticize the regime. Meanwhile, university hiring processes reflect the preferences of AKP loyalists, thus expanding the scope of co-optation. These are not unintended consequences but core features of a system geared toward patronage.

University expansion has helped the AKP widen its reach across social groups and economic sectors. Lucrative construction projects, public-sector jobs, faculty appointments and access to scarce resources have become channels through which the party awards supporters and cultivates loyalty.  In other words, higher education has served as a means of patronage, ideological inculcation and political control. The government framed expansion as a democratizing challenge to secular urban privilege and as part of a project to cultivate a more conservative, religiously grounded youth.

Waves of Capture

Alemdaroğlu periodizes the AKP’s higher education agenda into three waves that illustrate the shift from episodic intervention to routinized control. The first wave, which began soon after the AKP came to power, was not immediately visible to international observers as part of a broader authoritarian turn. Though it was clear to those targeted. For example, a 2005 penal code criminalized the “denigration of Turkishness,” which state prosecutors used to target faculty in literature and journalism, particularly those who had published on the Armenian genocide and the systematic mistreatment of Kurds.

By contrast, the second wave, beginning after the failed 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt, was much more dramatic. The AKP government presented the coup attempt, which it attributed to the Gülen movement, as a national emergency requiring sweeping state action. Faculty and employees were dismissed and suspended en masse, while Gülen-affiliated universities were shuttered and had their assets frozen. In addition, investigations were conducted against those who signed a 2016 “Academics for Peace” document, which called for an end to state violence against Kurds. Turkey’s Constitutional Court found the investigations illegal in 2019, but by which time many academics had already lost their positions, passports, income, and professional standing.

The final, ongoing wave has “shifted toward a permanent institutional model, moving control and coercion into the everyday governance of the university.” Faculty are routinely disciplined for “verbally disrespectful speech” or conduct incompatible with “public morality and decency,” while AKP loyalists are appointed to senior academic posts by direct presidential decree. In addition, online citizen reporting through the state’s communication system has created another channel for targeting faculty. Although the rise from 130,000 applications in 2006 to 6 million in 2020 reflects the system as a whole, it shows how citizen complaints became part of everyday state monitoring, including at universities.

Ultimately, the Turkey case shows how democracy erodes through both dramatic ruptures and quiet, cumulative transformations. Alemdaroğlu emphasizes that the degraded condition of Turkish higher education does not merely reflect AKP’s autocratization but has actively enabled it.

*Brief prepared by Adam Fefer.

The Firestone Medal for Excellence in Undergraduate Research recognizes Stanford's top 10% of honors theses in the social sciences, science, and engineering among graduating seniors. Marco’s thesis is entitled, “When Democracy Counts: Testing the Demand-Side Micrologics of Backsliding with Evidence from Indonesia.” It poses the question, do Indonesian citizens fail to punish democratic backsliding at the ballot box? Over more than a decade of democratic decline, Indonesian voters have shown remarkably little alarm, continuing to reward leaders associated with democratic erosion while professing support for democracy. This thesis investigates the demand-side foundations of that puzzle, probing whether the content of democracy might itself be the problem. To pinpoint precisely where and how the accountability chain breaks down, Marco fielded an original nationally-representative survey experiment in February 2026 with Indikator Politik Indonesia (N = 1,566), randomly assigning Indonesian respondents to one of three definitions of democracy — electoral, liberal, or substantive — and tracking their responses across four hypothetical scenarios. To measure treatment comprehension and experimental manipulation, he scored open-ended responses using a novel multi-model LLM coding ensemble. Combined, this empirical design enabled him to discriminate between two candidate diagnoses of conceptual failure: that Indonesian citizens hold conceptions of democracy that simply diverge from those of scholars (the divergent conceptions argument), or that “democracy” itself carries too little evaluative content to differentiate governance failures of different kinds (the thinness argument). Ultimately, the evidence points overwhelmingly in support of the latter interpretation — that for many Indonesian citizens, “democracy” functions less as a thick descriptive concept than as a thin term of approval whose application tracks perceived governance quality. The divergent conceptions hypothesis, meanwhile, yields a robust null across thirteen specifications. In this era of backsliding, the conceptual thinning of “democracy” carries severe implications for the validity of cross-comparative survey research, for the elite strategies that exploit the term’s elasticity, and for the resilience of democracy in Indonesia and beyond.

Shayla’s thesis is entitled “Bound by the Ballot? Autocratic Compliance After Electoral Defeat.” When autocrats lose elections, what determines whether they comply with the electorate's judgment? And if they resist, what determines whether they succeed? Despite the frequency and consequences of autocratic electoral crises, electoral compliance decisions remain undertheorized. To address this gap, Shayla proposes a two-stage theory of incumbent compliance. At Stage 1, pre-election structural conditions — military control, elite unity, and international vulnerability — determine whether resistance is viable. At Stage 2, activated only if resistance occurs, two reactive forces — mass mobilization and activated international pressure — become salient. Drawing on an original dataset of elections held in autocratic regimes between 1970 and 2018, the results partially support and partially challenge this theory. While structural weakness reliably precludes resistance, structural strength does not reliably cause it; among cases where resistance occurs, high, cohesive international pressure emerges as the most consistent determinant of whether incumbents ultimately exit. This thesis posits that compliance is best understood as a process shaped by forces operating at different moments, and that this temporal distinction has both implications for how scholars and international actors understand and respond to electoral crises in electoral autocracies.

Honoring a Legacy of Community Building

Zoe Savellos, a Stanford graduate and member of CDDRL’s Fisher Family Honors Class of 2018, passed away in 2025 at the age of 29. She is remembered by those who knew her as brilliant, generous, and deeply committed to others. To honor her memory and the spirit she brought to the CDDRL community, the center has established the Zoe Savellos Memorial Award for Community Building.

“Zoe’s palpable passion for her thesis research and to make a genuine difference in the world inspired a sense of optimism and confidence in our CDDRL cohort to dream bigger and push through when we didn’t think we could,” shared her friend and classmate Kelsey Page ‘18. “As I struggled toward the thesis deadline, Zoe not only helped me with last-minute formatting questions long after she had completed her own thesis, but also brought me a blazer for my presentation when I forgot one. Zoe enthusiastically counting down the minutes to the completion of my thesis so we could celebrate together is just one example of how she placed shared joy over individual accomplishment — she was everyone's biggest cheerleader.”

Presented annually within CDDRL’s Fisher Family Honors Program, the award will recognize a student selected by their peers for their meaningful contributions to the strength of the honors cohort. The class of 2026 has selected Zoya Fasihuddin, an Economics major also studying Human Rights, as the first recipient of this award.

“I'm so honored, and this is entirely a reflection of the cohort we all got to be a part of, as well as Steve and María’s leadership,” shared Zoya. “While I didn't have the privilege of knowing Zoe, everything that’s been shared about her in terms of her warmth and empathy is exactly the kind of person I aspire to be.”

The cohort experience is central to the Honors Program. Students engage deeply with one another’s work and navigate the challenges of independent research together. The Zoe Savellos Memorial Award for Community Building recognizes the important role students play in shaping that experience and honors the individual whose support, enthusiasm, and community-building spirit help create a more connected and meaningful collective experience.

The Class of 2026

Marco, Shayla, and Zoya are part of a cohort of 12 graduating CDDRL honors students who have spent the past year working in consultation with CDDRL-affiliated faculty members and attending honors research workshops to develop their thesis projects. The theses this year covered topics as wide-ranging as democratic resilience and authoritarian elections, feminist mobilization in Pakistan, Indigenous reunification and identity in Oklahoma, net neutrality and regulatory politics, economic protectionism, collective memory in Spain, and the role of retired military leaders in American elections.

"We could not be prouder of this cohort of seniors in the Fisher Family Honors Program and the theses they produced," shared María Ignacia Curiel, a Research Scholar at CDDRL who co-teaches the Honors Program alongside Stephen Stedman. "Born from a year of scholarly perseverance and camaraderie, these projects genuinely advance our understanding of democracy, development, and the rule of law around the world."

In addition to the Firestone Medal, CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award, and the Zoe Savellos Memorial Award for Community Building, members of the Class of 2026 have received several other honors heading into graduation:

• Anagali Duncan received the 2026 Lloyd W. Dinkelspiel Award, which recognizes distinctive contributions to undergraduate education and the quality of student life.
• Emma Wang and Marco Widodo are among the newest members elected to the Phi Beta Kappa academic honors society.
• Anagali Duncan, Dani Gonzalez-Gaubecka, Emma Wang, Lila Batcheller, Lorraine Cioffi, and Rachel Owens have all received the Award of Excellence. Designed to recognize the top 10% of the class, this award honors graduating seniors who have demonstrated a sincere commitment to the university through involvement, leadership, and extraordinary Stanford spirit.
   

CDDRL's Fisher Family Honors Program trains students from any academic department at Stanford to write a policy-relevant research thesis with global impact on a subject related to democracy, development, and the rule of law. Honors students participate in research methods workshops, attend Honors College in Washington, D.C., connect to the CDDRL research community, and write their thesis in close consultation with a faculty advisor to graduate with a certificate of honors in democracy, development, and the rule of law.
 

Explore the rest of the thesis topics of the Fisher Family Honors Program Class of 2026 below:

The Firestone Medal for Excellence in Undergraduate Research recognizes Stanford's top ten percent of honors theses in social science, science, and engineering among the graduating senior class. Charles's thesis is entitled The Limits of Payout Politics: How Biden-Harris Federal Spending Shaped (and Didn't Shape) the 2024 Presidential Vote. His thesis examines whether the Biden-Harris administration’s signature spending programs — the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Inflation Reduction Act, and CHIPS Act — yielded electoral rewards in the 2024 presidential election. Using an original dataset of over 40,000 geocoded federal projects representing $227 billion in county-level investments, Charles finds no statistically significant association between per-capita spending and shifts in Democratic vote margins, even when accounting for partisan context and project visibility. Through interviews with federal and local officials, he identifies three explanatory mechanisms: implementation lags prevented most projects from reaching completion before Election Day, administrative and policy bottlenecks systematically delayed development, and Republican messaging successfully reframed spending as inflationary. These findings suggest that retrospective voting operates primarily through immediate, visible benefits rather than campaign promises or announced investments, with significant implications for how policy initiatives must be designed to deliver outcomes within electoral cycles.

Adrian's thesis is entitled The Gavel and the Gun: Post-War Trials and State-Building Politics in Yugoslavia (1945-1949). His thesis explores how the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (KPJ) authorities used the post-World War II justice process to consolidate power from 1945 to 1949. Drawing on trial transcripts, newspapers, and other archival materials, the study argues that the Yugoslav state instrumentalized judicial structures in three distinct stages: first, using honor courts to assert basic state capacity; second, conducting public-facing war crimes trials to promote the state’s ideological legitimacy; and third, orchestrating espionage trials to suppress dissent and entrench single-party rule. While affirming that the KPJ often subordinated judicial integrity to its state-building project, the thesis complicates conventional narratives by attending to the moral ambiguities, partial truths, and undeniable moments of justice present in even the most politicized of trials. In doing so, it offers broader insights into the fraught intersection of law, memory, and power in postwar societies.

Adelaide's thesis is entitled Philoxenia: Local Responses to Immigration in Calabria, Italy. Over recent decades, many nations across Europe and the Americas have responded to mass migration movements across the globe with hostile policies, xenophobic sentiment, and poorly managed immigration systems. At the same time, several municipalities in Calabria, Italy that struggle with severe depopulation and economic hardship have experienced positive transformations upon opening refugee reception centers, including reversals to declining population trends, job creation and the continuation of important public goods, such as elementary schools — but not all towns that have a demand for immigration respond in the same way. Many Calabrian municipalities have not opened refugee resettlement centers, and others have become a breeding ground for labor exploitation among migrant workers. This thesis employs a mixed-methods approach to consider how structure, agency, and culture account for the variation in local responses to migrants and refugees throughout the relatively homogenous region of Calabria. A systematic analysis of quantitative municipal-level data paired with four granular case studies suggests that a municipality’s structural characteristics alone do not explain the variance in local responses to immigration. Rather, the presence of an entrepreneurial local actor, such as a mayor or non-profit leader with strong humanitarian commitments, is necessary to recognize and actualize the aligned interests between locals and newcomers and bring about cultures of hospitality. While much of the literature on local responses to immigration has focused on urban settings, this thesis aims to widen academic discussions to include more rural contexts and contributes to the underdeveloped literature on hospitality, rather than hostility, toward newcomers.

The Class of 2025

Charles, Adrian, and Adelaide are part of a cohort of 13 graduating CDDRL honors students who have spent the past year working in consultation with CDDRL-affiliated faculty members and attending honors research workshops to develop their thesis projects. The theses this year covered topics as wide ranging as authoritarian repression, conflict and state-building, regulation and governance, and democratic accountability. Students embarked on original research across multiple countries, conducting interviews, fielding surveys, plumbing archives, and building datasets.

“We are so proud of this year’s cohort of seniors in the Fisher Family Honors Program,” shared Didi Kuo, Center Fellow at FSI and co-director of CDDRL’s Fisher Family Honors Program. “Our multidisciplinary students brought a range of methods and analytical approaches to inform their understanding of democracy and development. They asked a range of trenchant research questions and brought a collaborative spirit to the research enterprise that improved everyone’s projects.”

In addition to the Firestone Medal and CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Awards, members of the Class of 2025 have received several other honors heading into graduation:

• Kate Tully is among four Stanford students named as 2025 Rhodes Scholars. The prestigious award provides support for talented scholars to pursue postgraduate degrees at Oxford University in England.
• Alex Borthwick, Adrian Feinberg, Malaina Kapoor, and Avinash Thakkar, along with junior Emma Wang, are among the newest members elected to the Phi Beta Kappa academic honors society.
• Adrian Feinberg was also named a Gaither Fellow. The national program offers recent graduates the opportunity to work as research assistants on projects related to democracy, global security, and foreign policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C.
• Alex Borthwick, Adrian Feinberg, Elizabeth Jerstad, and Gabriela Holzer have all received the Award of Excellence. Designed to recognize the top 10% of the class, this award honors graduating seniors who have demonstrated a sincere commitment to the university through involvement, leadership, and extraordinary Stanford spirit.

CDDRL's Fisher Family Honors Program trains students from any academic department at Stanford to prepare them to write a policy-relevant research thesis with global impact on a subject touching on democracy, development, and the rule of law. Honors students participate in research methods workshops, attend honors college in Washington, D.C., connect to the CDDRL research community, and write their thesis in close consultation with a faculty advisor to graduate with a certificate of honors in democracy, development, and the rule of law.
 

Explore the rest of the thesis topics of the Fisher Family Honors Program Class of 2025 below: