Security

FSI scholars produce research aimed at creating a safer world and examing the consequences of security policies on institutions and society. They look at longstanding issues including nuclear nonproliferation and the conflicts between countries like North and South Korea. But their research also examines new and emerging areas that transcend traditional borders – the drug war in Mexico and expanding terrorism networks. FSI researchers look at the changing methods of warfare with a focus on biosecurity and nuclear risk. They tackle cybersecurity with an eye toward privacy concerns and explore the implications of new actors like hackers.

Along with the changing face of conflict, terrorism and crime, FSI researchers study food security. They tackle the global problems of hunger, poverty and environmental degradation by generating knowledge and policy-relevant solutions. 

-

Abstract:

The sanguinary Sri Lankan civil war was brought to a close in May 2009. The means adopted to bring an end to this conflict have come under considerable external criticism on the grounds of the indiscriminate use of force. Regardless of how the conflict was terminated, its end should have enabled the regime in Sri Lanka to reassure the minority Tamil community that their interests would not be overlooked in its wake. Instead the country has witnessed waves of ethnic triumphalism and dissenters have faced intimidation. Unless these trends are reversed, despite the existence of the formal trappings of democracy, the future of Sri Lanka as a viable democratic state could well be in jeopardy.

Speaker Bio:

Sumit Ganguly is a professor of political science and holds the Rabindranath Tagore Chair in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University, Bloomington. He has previously taught at James Madison College of Michigan State University, Hunter College and The Graduate Center of the City University of New York and the University of Texas at Austin. Professor Ganguly has been a Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC, a Visiting Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University, a Guest Scholar at the Center for Cooperative Monitoring in Albuquerque and a Visiting Scholar at the German Institute for International and Area Studies in Hamburg.

He was also the holder of the Ngee Ann Chair in International Politics at the Rajaratnam School for International Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore in the spring term of 2010.  Additionally, he is a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia. Professor Ganguly serves on the editorial boards of Asian Affairs, Asian Security, Asian Survey, Current History, the Journal of Democracy, International Security and Security Studies. A specialist on the contemporary politics of South Asia is the author, co-author, editor or co-editor of 20 books on the region.  

His most recent books are India Since 1980 (with Rahul Mukherji), published by Cambridge University Press and Asian Rivalries: Conflict, Escalation and Limitations on Two-Level Games (with William Thompson) published by Stanford University Press. He is currently at work on a new book, Deadly Impasse: India-Pakistan Relations at the Dawn of a New Century for Cambridge University Press.

His article on corruption in India was just published in the January 2012 issue of the Journal of Democracy, and he is currently writing a new book with Bill Thompson entitled The State of India (for Columbia University Press) which seeks to assess India's prospects and limitations of emerging as a great power

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Sumit Ganguly Professor, Political Science Speaker Indiana University, Bloomington
Seminars
-

Abstract:

The roots of the revolts known as the Arab Spring lie in many sources but one of the leading causes was the high rates of unemployment, low skill levels, and the growth of the youth populations. Now Arab governments are faced with the dual challenges of creating new political and economic systems that can meet the needs and demands of the peoples of their countries. This presentation will focus on the role of the private sector and the need to build an entrepreneurial eco-system that can foster rapid economic growth. Practical examples of reform programs will be emphasized drawing from the work of the Center for International Private Enterprise.

Speaker Bio:

John D. Sullivan is the executive director of the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), an affiliate of the US Chamber of Commerce. As associate director of the Democracy Program, Sullivan helped to establish both CIPE and the National Endowment for Democracy in 1983. After serving as CIPE program director, he became executive director in 1991. Under his leadership CIPE developed a number of innovative approaches that link democratic development to market reforms: combating corruption, promoting corporate governance, building business associations, supporting the informal sector, and programs to assist women and youth entrepreneurs. Today, CIPE has more than 90 full-time staff with offices in Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine.

Sullivan began his career in Los Angeles’ inner city neighborhoods, helping to develop minority business programs with the Institute for Economic Research and the Office of Minority Business Enterprise. In 1976 he joined the President Ford Election Committee in the research department on campaign strategy, polling, and market research.  Sullivan joined the public affairs department of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in 1977 as a specialist in business and economic education.

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

John D. Sullivan Executive Director Speaker The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE)
Seminars
Paragraphs

This paper evaluates the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) of 2005. MGNREGA provides last-resort employment to rural Indians and guarantees beneficiaries one hundred workdays per year, which consist of building and maintaining local infrastructure. I find that that although the program has had strong short-term results, as it currently stands it will likely not generate lasting impacts. Due to a lack of skills development and durable infrastructure, workers remain dependent on the scheme for income, and the maintenance of infrastructure is dependent on continued program funding. In addition, poor oversight allows for corruption and decreases effectiveness. I describe MGNREGA’s weakest areas, as well as provide recommendations for how to refine them.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Working Paper
Authors
Paragraphs

Judging from some of the titles of recent books on Russia—for example, Richard Sakwa's The Crisis of Russian Democracy, Gulnaz Sharafutdinova's Political Consequences of Crony Capitalism inside Russia, and Tom Remington's The Politics of Inequality in Russia—all is not well 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Corruption abounds, and state institutions are weak where they should be strong or strong where they should be weak. Under Vladimir Putin, democracy has deteriorated since the heady early days of the 1990s, and the negative externalities of Russia's rocky economic transition—especially privatization—have made it so that social inequality permeates postcommunist society.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Perspectives on Politics
Authors
Kathryn Stoner
Paragraphs

Focusing on Iran in 2009 and Egypt in 2011, this paper examines the role of the coercive apparatus in responding to crises triggered by mass anti-regime protest. We argue that the divergent outcomes of the two crises – authoritarian resilience in Iran and regime breakdown in Egypt – can be traced to the regimes’ distinct origins. On the one hand, the Iranian Islamic regime’s founding in sustained, violent, and ideologically driven struggle (1978-1983) created a regime elite and coercive apparatus with the stomach and capacity for high intensity coercion necessary to defend the regime against mass-based threats. Revolution, counter-insurgency, and war during the regime’s early years led to the growth of an ideologically motivated and highly partisan security services. In Egypt, by contrast, the absence of origins in violent, revolutionary struggle led to the creation of a coercive apparatus with weaker, more situational cohesion. The regime’s overall coercive capacity was high, but in the absence of a revolutionary heritage, the willingness of the repressive apparatus to suppress large-scale, mass protest was more open to question than in Iran.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
CDDRL Working Papers
Authors

 

Access to information has become one of the most promising tools to combat corruption, increase people’s participation in (self) governance and thus, to strengthen democracy.  Since the 1960s there has been a steady progress in the number of countries that have legislated access to information laws, and over eighty countries have such laws today.  There have also been several social developments and innovations which embrace access to information, such as open constitution reform process in Iceland, open innovation challenges by the United States government, participatory budgeting processes in Germany, Finland and Canada and social audits in India, just to mention few. As a parallel development, the open data movement is evolving in several countries, pushed forward by both civil society and governments, and incentivized by the global Open Government Partnership network. These practices are supported by open innovation and open design strategies, which the public sector is increasingly adopting.

These open and participatory practices give tools for citizens to monitor governments, to hold them accountable, and to practice agency in the public sphere. The right to information and transparency movements can be considerably strengthened by creative use of information technologies – but realizing this potential requires us to revisit the design of RTI policies, tools and practices to update them to serve citizens in the digital age. In re-evaluating the tools for accountability, we should be mindful that increased use of accountability technologies suggests re-articulations of the power structures in modern societies, including new forms of social control, new spaces for public deliberation and new conceptualizations of participation in democracy.

The workshop will convene both practitioners and academics to discuss their work in the area and to examine the theoretical and practical implications of these phenomena. We seek to bring together people engaged in law, policy, social movements, administration, technology, design and the use of technology for accessing information.  We propose to go well beyond the issue of accessing information by looking at the use of technology to record, store, process and disseminate public information, and to create interactive spaces in the public sphere so that the full potential of ICT for transparency can be realized.

For more information, please look at the Conference Website http://www.stanford.edu/group/libtech/cgi-bin/rtitech or contact Tanja Aitamurto at tanjaa@stanford.edu or Vivek Srinivasan at vivekdse@stanford.edu.

While we welcome participants who do not wish to present a paper or a project, we require registration at the Conference Website.

 

Conference Videos

Session 1: Getting Information Providers Ready for Transparency & Citizen Engagement 1
Chris Vein, World Bank: Open innovation:
Ethan McMahon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 
John Wonderlich, Sunlight Foundation:
Sarah Oh, National Democratic Institute:
Luke Heemsbergen, University of Melbourne: 
 
Session 2: Getting Information Providers Ready for Transparency & Citizen Engagement 2
Nicholas Skytland, National Aeronautics and Space Agency: 
Tariq Khokhar, World Bank:
Rajesh Veeraraghavan,  School of Information, UC Berkeley: 
 
Session 3: Technologies for Transparency and Citizen Engagement in Cities
Juan-Pablo Velez, Open City Project
Shannon Spanhake, City of San Francisco: 
Whitney Smithers, The City of Calgary: 
Jerry Hall,
 
Session 4: Monitoring Critical Institutions
Finnur Magnusson, CTO, Icelandic Constitution Council: 
Helene Landemore, Yale University: Constitution
Lauren Kunis, National Democratic Institute: 
Lawrence Repeta, Meiji University: 
Online archive of government record related to the Fukushima nuclear disaster
Olusem Onigbinde, yourbudgit.com: 
Retelling the Nigerian budget across literacy spans
Jonida (Yona) Cali, Egovlab, Stockholm University: 
 
Session 5: What Happens Between Access to Data and Action
Alissa Black, New America Foundation: 
Participatory Budgeting: Illuminating Public Decision Making
David Herzog, Missouri School of Journalism: 
Data driven journalism
Alexey Sidorenko, Teplitsa of Social Technologies: 
Innovations by Teplitsa of Social Technologies, Russia
Issa Pla, Institute of Legal Research, Unam: 
Information poverty and the right to acess public information. A capabilities related issue
Katrin Verclas, National Democratic Institute: 
Koebel Price, National Democratic Institute: 
Liliana Bounegru, European Journalism Centre , University of Amsterdam: 
Sourcing practices in data journalism - Guardian, NYT and Pro Publica
 
Session 6: Technological Platforms & Tools for Transparency and Citizen Engagement
Djordje Padejski, Center for Investigative Reporting, UC Berkeley: 
Gabriela Rodriguez, Datauy: 
Aditya Vashista, Technologies for emerging markets group, Microsoft Research, India: 
Anas Qtiesh, Meedan: 
Andrew Schrock, USC Annenberg: 
Camille Crittenden, Data and Democracy Initiative, UC Berkeley: 
 
Session 7: Legal Challenges to Technology and the Right to Information
Paivi Tiilikka, University of Helsinki: 
Access to information as a Human right in the case-law of the ECtHR
Timonty Vollmer, Creative Commons:
Enrique Armijo, Elon University School of Law: 
 
Session 8: Barriers to Expression & Participation
David Caragliano, National Democratic Institute: 
Minda Rady, Department of Political Science, MIT: Anonymity networks:
Platforms for emerging cyber international conflict
Bill Thies, Technologies for emerging markets group, Microsoft Research India: 
Cristian Zapata, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) Brasil: 
Lindsay Beck, National Democratic Institute: 
 
Session 9: What Does This All Amount to: Assessing the Impact of Transparency
Daniel Posner, Department of Political Science, MIT: 
Does information lead more active citizenship? Evidence from an education intervention in rural Kenya
Guy Grossman, Department of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania: 
Jeremy Weinstein, Department of Political Science, Stanford University: 
Conference Agenda
Download pdf

Bechtel Conference Center

Conferences
News Feed Image
rsd14_050_0027a.jpg
Subscribe to Security