Paragraphs

Research on reentry has documented how material hardship, network dynamics, and carceral governance impede reintegration after prison, but existing scholarship has left underdeveloped other instances in which adverse outcomes stem from the institution's socioemotional dynamics and people's practical and emotional responses to bureaucratic indignities. Drawing on more than 2 years of ethnographic fieldwork with people on parole in Philadelphia, this study analyzes three sources of adversity that occur because reentry institutions’ or actors’ practices are incompatible with the behaviors and needs of system-involved people. I demonstrate how unrecognized vulnerability, discretion's benefits and drawbacks, and risk-escalating rules contribute to adverse outcomes—withdrawal and rule-breaking—that sometimes lead to reincarceration. In failing to account for aspects of human agency and dignity, such as the ability to provide for oneself and to advance personal and familial well-being, parole guidelines often prompted withdrawal and subversion.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Criminology
Authors
Gillian Slee
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Argument & Key Findings


The system of reentry institutions — including halfway houses, parole agencies, and housing assistance programs — can be extremely complicated for formerly incarcerated persons (FIPs) to navigate. These complications are not merely logistical, but also social and emotional: the ways in which FIPs interact with reentry institutions can affect their sense of belonging, dignity, and prosperity. When the rules and practices of reentry institutions undermine these needs, it becomes more likely that participants will violate rules, withdraw from the institutions altogether, or find themselves reincarcerated. 

In “Home But Not Free,” Gillian Slee offers a rich analysis of these socioemotional dynamics. The paper both increases our knowledge of reentry processes and deepens our understanding of FIPs and reentry staff. Previous scholars have focused more on how adverse outcomes stem from reentry institutions prioritizing surveillance or control. Slee pushes forward this conversation by highlighting how adverse outcomes also stem from failures to acknowledge and support the dignity of FIPs.

Slee’s paper is informed by over two years of ethnographic fieldwork with FIPs in Philadelphia. This includes observing over 200 appointments at a housing assistance program, analyzing more than 130 files of program participants, and both observing and assisting with programming at a women’s halfway house. 
 


Reentry institutions and their staff often fail to recognize or respond to the constraints and vulnerabilities faced by FIPs. These failures can undermine the dignity of FIPs and provoke their withdrawal from such institutions.


Three Mechanisms:


The core of the paper centers on Slee’s elaboration of three mechanisms that link socioemotional concepts, such as indignity, to outcomes like withdrawal or reincarceration. Each mechanism is clarified through a range of examples and case studies.

1. Unrecognized vulnerability:

Reentry institutions and their staff often fail to recognize or respond to the constraints and vulnerabilities faced by FIPs. These failures can undermine the dignity of FIPs and provoke their withdrawal from such institutions. In the realm of housing assistance, the Philadelphia program requires that rent falls between 30% and 45% of participants’ income. However, this is often unrealistic given the difficulties of finding fairly priced units or securing gainful employment with a felony conviction. Accordingly, FIPs must seek low-quality units or roommates. Yet most participants do not want roommates because it reminds them of being incarcerated. Participants are thus presented with an undignified set of choices. The program restrictions mean that many FIPs cannot or will not utilize housing assistance programs, deepening their sense of instability.

Another source of vulnerability concerns the mismatch between FIPs’ expectations and the realities of frontline bureaucracy. For example, many housing assistance programs have too few staff, some of whom struggle to juggle appointments or return phone calls. Because reentry staff are overburdened, they may ask participants to pick up the slack by searching for housing units. Yet many FIPs lack the requisite know-how, for example, calling about units too frequently or too early in the morning. Others may show up hours early for their appointments, in the process annoying reentry staff. Yet participants are not coached on how to improve these behaviors, leading to neglect. Other FIPs must learn that the majority of units are listed online as opposed to in newspapers, incurring the mockery from reentry staff in the process. 

A final source of vulnerability concerns participants’ lack of efficacy — the sense that their efforts make little difference or are inadequate. Reentry staff may have high expectations of people who feel “cryogenically frozen in time” (p. 32) because of years of incarceration. Some are unable to use modern cell phones or have no rental history.
 


A final source of vulnerability concerns participants’ lack of efficacy — the sense that their efforts make little difference or are inadequate.


2. Discretion’s Benefits and Drawbacks:

The discretion exercised by reentry staff introduces difficult choices for participants, forcing them to choose between (a) following the rules and becoming socially isolated or (b) breaking the rules and developing social connections. For example, some halfway houses are restrictive about time spent outside of the house. Participants who abide by the rules may miss out on socially important events, like a child’s basketball game. Some FIPs may lie about or conceal where they live in order to deal with less intrusive parole agents. Others may cross state lines to pursue important career opportunities. One participant parked their mobile home outside of the parole district lines because it was less expensive and easier than seeking alternative units, but these kinds of ‘rational’ behaviors cannot be accommodated. Discretion is a highly variable attribute: some reentry staff cancel meetings and inconvenience participants, while others remember individuals’ needs and accommodate them. Those who expect more discretion than they receive may break the rules out of frustration. Ultimately, discretion and its absence can provoke a host of socioemotional problems.
 


Instead of preventing noncompliance, program rules may serve to encourage it when they undermine participants’ sense of dignity.


3. Risk-Escalating Rules:

Instead of preventing noncompliance, program rules may serve to encourage it when they undermine participants’ sense of dignity. For example, 29 states prohibit associating with other FIPs, yet many participants have friends or family supervised by the system; as such, people violate the rules in order to preserve meaningful relationships. Some FIPs are faced with painful dilemmas, for example, choosing between living in halfway houses where drug use is common or breaking the rules by leaving. Others report using cocaine instead of marijuana because the latter can be detected in their bloodstream for much longer. Some halfway houses mandate spending a certain number of hours inside the house, but this leads to participants being unable to work multiple jobs to support themselves, a clear violation of their dignity.

For many FIPs in uncomfortable halfway houses, they cannot be placed in another house unless they break the rules of their existing house; some consider breaking the rules for the sake of their well-being, even though doing so might land them under even more restrictive supervision. One participant was refused permission to live in a camper that he could afford because the camper’s mobility posed a flight risk. Another participant broke the rules by traveling out of state because her son’s father had cancer, and a reentry professional later told her to return in a rather threatening way. The rules of reentry institutions thus incentivized FIPs to make very risky choices.
 


By highlighting socioemotional concepts — especially (in)dignity — as central to the experiences of formerly incarcerated persons, Slee shows how the rules and practices of reentry institutions can undermine reintegration.


By highlighting socioemotional concepts — especially (in)dignity — as central to the experiences of formerly incarcerated persons, Slee shows how the rules and practices of reentry institutions can undermine reintegration. Addressing sources of vulnerability and counterproductive rules may help reform reentry institutions in more humane and effective ways.

*Research-in-Brief prepared by Adam Fefer.

 
Hero Image
Prison corridor with jail cells on either side.
Prison corridor with jail cells on either side.
7500 RPM via Unsplash
All News button
0
Subtitle

CDDRL Research-in-Brief [4-minute read]

Date Label
-

Virtual participation available via Zoom using the link above. Zoom Meeting ID: 997 4878 4037, Passcode: 998456

We invite our virtual participants to join in celebrating Marcel Fafchamps' distinguished career. Following the keynote address, at 10:00 AM PST, there will be an opportunity for online attendees to offer brief remarks or words of appreciation to honor Professor Fafchamps and his many contributions to scholarship, mentorship, and our academic community. Your reflections are a valued part of this special occasion.

Unfinished Business: A Tribute to Marcel Fafchamps

Join us for a full-day academic symposium celebrating the career and contributions of economist Marcel Fafchamps, Satre Family Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, on the occasion of his retirement. Featuring a keynote by Marcel himself, this tribute brings together colleagues, collaborators, and students to engage with the themes and ideas that have shaped his influential work in development economics, labor markets, and social networks.

The day will feature in-depth paper presentations, rapid-fire research talks, and engaging discussions with scholars, including Stefano Caria (University of Warwick), Pascaline Dupas (Princeton University), and Simon Quinn (Imperial College London), with more speakers to be announced soon. Topics span management practices, persuasion and diffusion, strategic reasoning, and mutual aid—from field experiments to economic theory.

Come celebrate the distinguished research career of Marcel Fafchamps with us.

Lunch and refreshments will be provided.

The symposium will be held in person, by invitation only. Professor Fafchamps' keynote will be livestreamed via Zoom.

This event is co-sponsored by the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and the King Center on Global Development.

8:30 AM  —  Continental Breakfast available in 2nd Floor Lobby, Encina Hall Central

8:45 AM — General Welcome, Kathryn Stoner

9:00 AM — Keynote Address, Marcel Fafchamps: Behavioral Markets

10:00 AM — Virtual Attendees may join to share brief remarks and words of appreciation

10:15 AM — Morning Break

10:45 AM — Session Speaker: Stefano Caria, Competition and Management

11:45 AM — Rapid Fire Speaker: Tom Schwantje, Management Style Under the Spotlight: Evidence from Studio Recordings

12:15 PM — Lunch Break

1:15 PM — Session Speaker Pascaline Dupas: Keeping Up Appearances: Socioeconomic Status Signaling to Avoid Discrimination

2:15 PM — Rapid Fire Speaker: Deivy Houeix, Eliciting Poverty Rankings from Urban or Rural Neighbors

2:45 PM Afternoon Break

3:00 PM Session Speaker: Simon Quinn, Matching, Management and Employment Outcomes: A Field Experiment with Firm Internships

4:00 PM Special Presentation

4:15 PM — Concluding Remarks: Kathryn Stoner, Marcel Fafchamps

4:30 PM — Event Concludes

 

Kathryn Stoner
Kathryn Stoner
Melanie Morten
Katherine Casey
Katherine Casey

In-person session open to invited guests; registration is required. 

William J. Perry Conference Room, Encina Hall, Second floor, Central, S231
616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305

Encina Hall
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Senior Fellow Emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Professor, by courtesy, of Economics
marcel_fafchamps_2025.jpg

Marcel Fafchamps is a Senior Fellow Emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) and a member of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. Previously, he was the Satre Family Senior Fellow at FSI. Fafchamps is a professor (by courtesy) for the Department of Economics at Stanford University. His research interests include economic development, market institutions, social networks, and behavioral economics — with a special focus on Africa and South Asia.

Prior to joining FSI, from 1999-2013, Fafchamps served as professor of development economics in the Department of Economics at Oxford University. He also served as deputy director and then co-director of the Center for the Study of African Economies. From 1989 to 1996, Fafchamps was an assistant professor with the Food Research Institute at Stanford University. Following the closure of the Institute, he taught for two years at the Department of Economics. For the 1998-1999 academic year, Fafchamps was on sabbatical leave at the research department of the World Bank. Before pursuing his PhD in 1986, Fafchamps was based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, for 5 years during his employment with the International Labour Organization, a United Nations agency that oversees employment, income distribution, and vocational training in Africa.

He has authored two books: Market Institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa: Theory and Evidence (MIT Press, 2004) and Rural Poverty, Risk, and Development (Elgar Press, 2003), and has published numerous articles in academic journals.

Fafchamps served as the editor-in-chief of Economic Development and Cultural Change until 2020. Previously, he had served as chief editor of the Journal of African Economies from 2000 to 2013, and as associate editor of the Economic Journal, the Journal of Development Economics, Economic Development and Cultural Change, the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, and the Revue d'Economie du Développement.

He is a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an affiliated professor with J-PAL, a senior fellow with the Bureau for Research and Economic Analysis of Development, a research fellow with IZA, Germany, and with the Center for Economic and Policy Research, UK, and an affiliate with the University of California’s Center for Effective Global Action.

Fafchamps has degrees in Law and in Economics from the Université Catholique de Louvain. He holds a PhD in Agricultural and Resource Economics from the University of California, Berkeley. 

Curriculum Vitae

Publications 

Working Papers

Date Label
Marcel Fafchamps Satre Family Senior Fellow; Professor, by courtesy, of Economics Keynote Speaker Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Stefano Caria Professor of Economics Speaker University of Warwick

Landau Economics Building, Office 238

579 Jane Stanford Wayl, Stanford, CA 94305

0
Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Professor, Economics
Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
Director, Stanford King Center on Global Development
dupas_photo_resized.jpg Ph.D.

Pascaline Dupas is a development economist seeking to better understand challenges facing poor households in lower income countries. Her aim is to identify tools and policies that can help overcome these challenges and reduce global poverty.  Her research aims to understand the barriers that households and governments face in accumulating or fostering accumulation of health and education, and how these barriers can be overcome. She conducts extensive fieldwork — field experiments embedded in longitudinal data collection efforts, which are used to perform empirical tests of microeconomic theory and to quantify the effects of potential policies. Health is the primary focus of Dupas’ research to date. Her work covers the role of information and education in health behavior, and the role of subsidies in increasing adoption of health technologies.

 

 

Pascaline Dupas Professor of Economics and Public Affairs Princeton University
Deivy Houeix Prize Fellow, Center for History and Economics Panelist Harvard University
Simon Quinn Associate Professor, Department of Economics & Public Policy Speaker Imperial College Business School
Tom Schwantje Postdoctoral Research Fellow Panelist Bocconi University
Symposiums
Date Label
Paragraphs

Public health infrastructure varies widely at the local, state, and national levels, and the COVID-19 response revealed just how critical local health authority can be. Public health officials created COVID policies, enforced behavioral and non-pharmaceutical interventions, and communicated with the public. This article explores the determinants of public health capacity, distinguishing between formal institutional capacity (i.e., budget, staff) and informal embedded capacity (i.e., community ties, insulation from political pressures). Using qualitative data and interviews with county health officers in California, this article shows that informal embedded capacity—while difficult to measure—is essential to public health capacity. It concludes by relating public health capacity to broader issues of state capacity and democracy.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Urban Affairs Review
Authors
Number
0
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On Tuesday, June 3, a largely student audience gathered for an urgent and moving conversation: Persisting in Hard Times, a panel highlighting the work and insights of four extraordinary practitioners who have spent their lives confronting injustice, responding to crises, and working every day toward a more equitable and humane society.

The conversation was co-organized by Hakeem Jefferson, assistant professor of political science and faculty director of the Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), and Gillian Slee, the 2024-25 Gerhard Casper Postdoctoral Fellow in Rule of Law at CDDRL and incoming assistant professor of sociology at the University of Georgia. It was co-moderated by Jefferson and Karina Kloos, Executive Director of the Democracy Hub and ePluribus Stanford.

In organizing the event, Slee framed it as follows:

What does it mean to persist in hard times? The country is wrestling with major questions right now — about rights and resources, belonging and expression, well-being and justice. How we proceed will shape our understanding of American democracy and have real consequences for daily life within this country.

You are all here today because you recognize we are living through hard times. Throughout the year, we have had conversations across campus about democratic norms, the rule of law, and the exercise or availability of rights and resources. Students in the room today are wrapping up a quarter of asking critical questions about the state and health of American democracy. These questions and their answers are urgent and consequential.

Still, we seek a different kind of conversation today. Our focus is on persisting through hard times. Our orientation is particular. Today’s panelists draw on unique expertise working in the trenches to respond to crises that imperil dignity, justice, and well-being. When they think about the major questions of our times, each panelist has the capacity to see the faces of clients, constituents, workers, immigrants, students, neighbors, and more. They know what it means to address urgent, immediate crises through on-the-ground daily action. They also know what it means to engage in work that is sometimes underfunded, lonely, and pursued with long odds.

Importantly, their work is fueled by a vision of a wildly promising future in which people, especially those from marginalized groups, have opportunities to thrive.


The panelists brought this vision to life. Professor Pam Karlan, a renowned constitutional scholar and professor at Stanford Law, reflected on the role of history, poetry, and truth in helping her persist. She recommended three poems that offer solace and clarity in this moment: Langston Hughes’ Let America Be America Again, Marge Piercy’s The Low Road, and Tennyson’s Ulysses, with its enduring call: “To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”

DeCarol Davis, Director of the Community Legal Services Program at Legal Aid at Work, spoke powerfully about being shaped by a Black family with deep roots in the South — roots that helped prepare her for navigating systems marked by discrimination and inequality. She reminded us that persisting is not new, and that her work is animated by a long legacy of Black resilience and clarity of purpose.

Alison Kamhi, Legal Director of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, shared stories of the immigrants her work brings her into contact with — people for whom hard times are not new, but ongoing. She charted what has shifted — and what has not — in U.S. immigration policy and enforcement, and spoke to the emotional and moral weight of sustaining this work amid cruelty and complacency.

Poet, public servant, and Stanford PhD candidate Antonio López offered a stirring meditation on proximity to harm and the moral responsibility it demands. His poem, Opening Statement, anchored the room in both clarity and conviction. It was a poet who reminded us that we are all implicated — and that this implication opens up opportunities for all of us to act. López also pointed us to the many lessons embedded in Black liberation struggles and other freedom movements that offer enduring blueprints for persisting in this moment.

Throughout the conversation, Kloos invited panelists to reflect on where they find joy in the midst of struggle. Drawing from Ross Gay’s Inciting Joy, she asked what it means for joy to coexist with strain and uncertainty — a question that brought the panel back to the everyday practices that nourish courage and clarity.

The audience Q&A that followed surfaced difficult, generative questions: What can the law do — and what can it not do? What does solidarity require of us? And how do we ensure that the most vulnerable among us, including trans communities, are not forgotten in the push for change?

The conversation closed with a powerful exchange about community, belonging, and the intertwined nature of our fates. Jefferson ended by noting that perhaps a key part of persisting in this moment, especially for those of us with so much privilege, is to remember — as Dr. King reminded us — that our fates are inextricably bound together, that unfreedom for our neighbors is unfreedom for us, and that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Read More

View of the huge crowd from the Lincoln Memorial to the Washington Monument, during the March on Washington
News

New Research Program Explores Intersection of Identity, Democracy, and Justice

Led by Professor Hakeem Jefferson, the program housed at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law will advance innovative research on the multifaceted dimensions of identity and their role in democratic development, struggles for recognition, social justice, and inclusion.
New Research Program Explores Intersection of Identity, Democracy, and Justice
Hakeem Jefferson (L) and Jake Grumbach (R) moderate a panel with authors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt.
News

Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice (IDJ) Engages Campus on Multiracial Democracy

The launch events hosted by CDDRL's new research initiative invited undergraduates, graduate associates, and members of the public to discuss the future of multiracial democracy.
Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice (IDJ) Engages Campus on Multiracial Democracy
Hero Image
Persisting in Hard Times panel
Hakeem Jefferson and Karina Kloos (L) moderated a panel discussion on June 3, 2025.
Hesham Sallam
All News button
1
Subtitle

A June 3 panel hosted by CDDRL’s Program on Identity, Democracy, and Justice brought together four leaders who shared their personal and professional insights on how to continue the work of justice when the road is long and the odds are steep.

Date Label
Authors
Nora Sulots
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law proudly congratulates its 2025 graduating class of honors students on their outstanding original research conducted under CDDRL's Fisher Family Honors Program. Among those graduating is Charles Sheiner, an International Relations major, who has won a Firestone Medal for his research on the electoral impact of Biden-era spending programs. Additionally, two students were selected as recipients of the CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award. Adrian Feinberg, an International Relations major who is also minoring in History, Film & Media Studies, was honored for his research revealing how postwar Yugoslavia utilized the justice system to build state power and suppress dissent. Adelaide Madary, a Political Science major, was honored for her research exploring how local leadership shapes the responses of rural Calabrian communities to immigration, fostering hospitality in some towns and resistance in others.

Firestone Medal winner Charles Sheiner, '25, presents his honors thesis.
Firestone Medal winner Charles Sheiner, '25, presents his honors thesis. | Nora Sulots

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.

CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award winner Adrian Feinberg ('25) presents his honors thesis.
CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award winner Adrian Feinberg ('25) presents his honors thesis. | Nora Sulots

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.

CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award winner Adelaide Madary ('25) presents her honors thesis.
CDDRL Outstanding Thesis Award winner Adelaide Madary ('25) presents her honors thesis. | Nora Sulots

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.”

Our 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.
Didi Kuo
Center Fellow, FSI; Co-director, Fisher Family Honors Program

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:

Read More

Phi Beta Kappa graduates
News

Record Number of CDDRL Honors Students Elected to Phi Beta Kappa

Seniors Alex Borthwick, Adrian Feinberg, Malaina Kapoor, and Avinash Thakkar (Fisher Family Honors Program class of 2025), and junior Emma Wang (Fisher Family Honors Program class of 2026) are among the newest members of this prestigious academic honors society.
Record Number of CDDRL Honors Students Elected to Phi Beta Kappa
Noah Tan and Adrian Feinberg
News

Noah Tan and Adrian Feinberg Named Gaither Fellows

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.
Noah Tan and Adrian Feinberg Named Gaither Fellows
Stanford students Francesca Fernandes, Alvin Lee, Mikayla Tillery, and Kate Tully are 2025 Rhodes Scholars.
News

Kate Tully Among Four Stanford Students Named 2025 Rhodes Scholars

The prestigious award provides support for talented scholars to pursue postgraduate degrees at Oxford University in England.
Kate Tully Among Four Stanford Students Named 2025 Rhodes Scholars
Hero Image
CDDRL 2025 Thesis Award Winners
All News button
1
Subtitle

Charles Sheiner ('25) is a recipient of the 2025 Firestone Medal, and Adrian Feinberg ('25) and Adelaide Madary ('25) have won CDDRL's Outstanding Thesis Awards.

Date Label
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Both Southern California and Israel suffered disastrous wildfires this year.

In January, the Palisades and Eaton fires in Los Angeles killed 29 people and destroyed thousands of buildings, spurring a United Nations report titled “Once-in-a-generation events now happen frequently.”

In late April, a huge wildfire in central Israel threatened Jerusalem, caused nearby towns to evacuate and led to a national emergency.

The fires are just one example of the devastating effects of climate change experienced by California and Israel, said Alon Tal, an environmental scholar, former Knesset member and part of the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, which co-hosted the conference.

Read the full story from J. The Jewish News of Northern California.

Hero Image
The gathering included a tour of the Stanford Central Energy Facility
The gathering included a tour of the Stanford Central Energy Facility.
Rod Searcey
All News button
1
Subtitle

More than 200 academics and political leaders met last week at Stanford for “Climate Resilience and Local Governmental Policy: Lessons from Los Angeles and Tel Aviv,” a groundbreaking conference organized by CDDRL's Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program.

Date Label
Authors
Soraya Johnson
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Conventional indicators may suggest that the United States is not susceptible to democratic backsliding, given its levels of wealth and the longevity of its political institutions. Yet a different picture emerges when considering assaults on the law following President Donald Trump’s return to power. In a recent CDDRL seminar. U.C. Berkeley Distinguished Professor of Political Science Paul Pierson examined the institutional roots of this trend and how it was shaped by the current moment of polarization and rising inequality.

Deepening partisanship, Pierson explained, has eroded the checks and balances embedded in U.S. institutions. Some assert that polarization is not abnormal in our country’s history, but Pierson believes that the state of polarization today poses unprecedented challenges. Politics has been increasingly nationalized, with state elections serving as a virtual training ground for ambitious politicians. Local media have declined in influence relative to nationally oriented partisan news outlets like Fox News. State issues are blending into national politics. These trends have undermined the system of federalism that historically kept the national government in check. 

As politicians have become more concerned about teamsmanship and partisan loyalty, the path of least resistance for them has been to prop up their party leaders even at the expense of democratic processes. In the past, partisan politicians could be trusted to keep their leaders in check should they behave undemocratically, regardless of how popular they may be. A case in point is President Richard Nixon, who had been reelected in a landslide in 1972, but was later held accountable by members of his own party once his transgressions were revealed in the wake of the Watergate scandal. The same cannot be said for the contemporary Trump era, as politicians appear reluctant to hold their president accountable due to partisan considerations. This trend has undermined horizontal oversight and, arguably, vertical accountability. On the latter, political elites have failed to adequately press citizens to hold the current administration accountable. 

The U.S. remains an extreme outlier in its growing wealth inequality, as mirrored by the ascendancy of ultra-wealthy plutocrats. Campaign funding has been increasingly dominated by the ultra-wealthy, many of whom supported the Republican ticket in the 2024 election. That said, these individuals’ influence is not unlimited, considering that the president has leverage over them and has shown willingness to threaten their interests should they behave disloyally. 

Despite blatant warning signs, there are some reasons to temper the alarmism surrounding the prospects of democratic backsliding in the United States. President Trump is not overwhelmingly popular, and aspects of his agenda will unlikely garner support from most of the electorate. Furthermore, whether his legacy will endure following the end of his presidency is unclear. Indeed, the vulnerabilities of U.S. political institutions remain salient. But plenty of room remains for resisting anti-democratic transgressions, given the non-partisan orientation of the judiciary and the small size of the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The challenges confronting U.S. political institutions in the face of hyperpolarization and deepening wealth inequality demonstrate that democracy should not be taken for granted and that more efforts are needed to protect and strengthen democratic accountability.

A recording of Professor Pierson's talk can be viewed below:

Read More

Clémence Tricaud presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 15, 2025.
News

Margins That Matter: Understanding the Changing Nature of U.S. Elections

In a CDDRL research seminar, Clémence Tricaud, Assistant Professor of Economics at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, shared her research on the evolving nature of electoral competition in the United States. She explored a question of growing political and public interest: Are U.S. elections truly getting closer—and if so, why does that matter?
Margins That Matter: Understanding the Changing Nature of U.S. Elections
Grigore Pop-Eleches discussed his research in a REDS Seminar on May 1, 2025.
News

Empathy in Action: How Perspective-Taking Shapes Public Support for Ukraine in Eastern Europe

In a REDS seminar talk, co-hosted by CDDRL and The Europe Center, Princeton Professor of Politics Grigore Pop-Eleches shared findings from a major research project examining what drives support for Ukraine — and whether empathy can help counter growing war fatigue.
Empathy in Action: How Perspective-Taking Shapes Public Support for Ukraine in Eastern Europe
Danila Serra presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 8, 2025.
News

Impacts of Ethics Training on Police Officers in Ghana

Associate Professor at Texas A&M University Danila Serra’s field research on the impacts of police ethics training provides hope for reducing corruption and restoring public faith in state institutions.
Impacts of Ethics Training on Police Officers in Ghana
Hero Image
Paul Pierson presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on May 22, 2025.
Paul Pierson presented his research in a CDDRL seminar on May 22, 2025.
Soraya Johnson
All News button
1
Subtitle

University of California, Berkeley Distinguished Professor Paul Pierson explores the risks of democratic backsliding in the United States in the face of rising polarization and inequality.

Date Label
Authors
Khushmita Dhabhai
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

As part of the CDDRL research seminar series, Clémence Tricaud, Assistant Professor of Economics at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, delivered a talk on the evolving nature of electoral competition in the United States. Her presentation explored a question of growing political and public interest: Are U.S. elections truly getting closer — and if so, why does that matter?

To begin answering this, Tricaud emphasized the need to clarify what we mean by “closeness.” She distinguished between vote margins, which measure how much one candidate wins over another in a specific race, and seat margins, which reflect the difference in how many seats each party wins in a legislative body like the House, Senate, or Electoral College.

These margins have real consequences. Seat margins affect which party holds power, the likelihood of legislative gridlock, and how legitimate elected officials are perceived to be. Vote margins, on the other hand, influence how informed and motivated voters are, especially if they feel their votes can truly make a difference.

Using a vast dataset covering over 150 years of U.S. federal elections, Tricaud and her coauthors documented a striking trend: while seat margins have narrowed significantly over the past 60 years, vote margins have remained relatively stable. In fact, there has been a decline in the number of extremely close races at the district level. This raises a puzzling question — how can national elections appear tighter if the races themselves are not actually becoming more competitive?

To address this, Tricaud presented a novel theoretical model of electoral competition. Building on the classic “Downsian framework,” where candidates try to appeal to the median voter, her model incorporates multiple districts, national and local shifts in voter preferences, and differences in whether candidates tailor their platforms to local constituencies or follow national party lines.

The model explains that two major changes have reshaped U.S. elections:

  1. Better Information: Thanks to advances in polling and data analytics, candidates now have a much clearer sense of where voters stand.
  2. Nationalization of Politics: Candidates increasingly campaign on unified national platforms rather than platforms tailored to respond to local issues.
     

Together, these changes help parties target just enough competitive districts to win control, even if many races remain lopsided. This leads to narrower seat margins without narrower vote margins.

Tricaud also examined campaign finance data to show how this shift affects political behavior. Since only a small number of districts are truly competitive, campaign resources are increasingly concentrated in these few swing districts. This geographic targeting could have troubling implications: growing political attention to a handful of places, rising regional inequalities, and a sense of disconnection between local voters and national outcomes.

In sum, Clémence Tricaud’s presentation provided a fresh lens on how modern campaigns operate and why elections may feel closer than they truly are. By disentangling seat and vote margins, her work sheds light on the evolving dynamics of U.S. democracy — and the challenges that come with it.

Read More

Danila Serra presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 8, 2025.
News

Impacts of Ethics Training on Police Officers in Ghana

Associate Professor at Texas A&M University Danila Serra’s field research on the impacts of police ethics training provides hope for reducing corruption and restoring public faith in state institutions.
Impacts of Ethics Training on Police Officers in Ghana
Grigore Pop-Eleches discussed his research in a REDS Seminar on May 1, 2025.
News

Empathy in Action: How Perspective-Taking Shapes Public Support for Ukraine in Eastern Europe

In a REDS seminar talk, co-hosted by CDDRL and The Europe Center, Princeton Professor of Politics Grigore Pop-Eleches shared findings from a major research project examining what drives support for Ukraine — and whether empathy can help counter growing war fatigue.
Empathy in Action: How Perspective-Taking Shapes Public Support for Ukraine in Eastern Europe
CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Ivetta Sergeeva presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on April 24, 2025.
News

How Transnational Repression Impacts Exiled Opposition

CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Ivetta Sergeeva’s research on the Russian diaspora’s willingness to donate to oppositional organizations demonstrates that the criminalization of groups can incentivize greater donor support among emigrants, contrary to the Putin regime’s intentions.
How Transnational Repression Impacts Exiled Opposition
Hero Image
Clémence Tricaud presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 15, 2025.
Clémence Tricaud presented her research in a CDDRL seminar on May 15, 2025.
Khushmita Dhabhai
All News button
1
Subtitle

In a CDDRL research seminar, Clémence Tricaud, Assistant Professor of Economics at the UCLA Anderson School of Management, shared her research on the evolving nature of electoral competition in the United States. She explored a question of growing political and public interest: Are U.S. elections truly getting closer—and if so, why does that matter?

Date Label
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Hero Image
Panel 1: Executive Power Over Agencies and Funding
All News button
1
Subtitle

During the event, held at Stanford Law School, panelists, including Diego Zambrano and Francis Fukuyama, examined the constitutional questions and rule-of-law tensions sparked by the Trump administration’s expansive and boundary-testing use of executive power.

Date Label
Subscribe to United States