International Relations

FSI researchers strive to understand how countries relate to one another, and what policies are needed to achieve global stability and prosperity. International relations experts focus on the challenging U.S.-Russian relationship, the alliance between the U.S. and Japan and the limitations of America’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

Foreign aid is also examined by scholars trying to understand whether money earmarked for health improvements reaches those who need it most. And FSI’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center has published on the need for strong South Korean leadership in dealing with its northern neighbor.

FSI researchers also look at the citizens who drive international relations, studying the effects of migration and how borders shape people’s lives. Meanwhile FSI students are very much involved in this area, working with the United Nations in Ethiopia to rethink refugee communities.

Trade is also a key component of international relations, with FSI approaching the topic from a slew of angles and states. The economy of trade is rife for study, with an APARC event on the implications of more open trade policies in Japan, and FSI researchers making sense of who would benefit from a free trade zone between the European Union and the United States.

Paragraphs

Global climate policy initiatives are now being proposed to compensate tropical forest nations for reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD). These proposals have the potential to include developing countries more actively in international greenhouse gas mitigation and to address a substantial share of the world's emissions which come from tropical deforestation. For such a policy to be viable it must have a credible benchmark against which emissions reduction can be calculated. This benchmark, sometimes termed a baseline or reference emissions scenario, can be based directly on historical emissions or can use historical emissions as input for business as usual projections. Here, we review existing data and methods that could be used to measure historical deforestation and forest degradation reference scenarios including FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations) national statistics and various remote sensing sources. The freely available and corrected global Landsat imagery for 1990, 2000 and soon to come for 2005 may be the best primary data source for most developing countries with other coarser resolution high frequency or radar data as a valuable complement for addressing problems with cloud cover and for distinguishing larger scale degradation. While sampling of imagery has been effectively useful for pan-tropical and continental estimates of deforestation, wall-to-wall (or full coverage) allows more detailed assessments for measuring national-level reference emissions. It is possible to measure historical deforestation with sufficient certainty for determining reference emissions, but there must be continued calls at the international level for making high-resolution imagery available, and for financial and technical assistance to help countries determine credible reference scenarios. The data available for past years may not be sufficient for assessing all forms of forest degradation, but new data sources will have greater potential in 2007 and after. This paper focuses only on the methods for measuring changes in forest area, but this information must be coupled with estimates of change in forest carbon stocks in order to quantify emissions from deforestation and forest degradation

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Environmental Research Letters
Authors
Holly Gibbs
Authors
Rosamond L. Naylor
Walter P. Falcon
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Energy self-sufficiency at home can mean widespread starvation abroad, FSE director Rosamond L. Naylor and deputy director Walter P. Falcon write in a May 18 San Francisco Chronicle op-ed.

Crude oil prices hit $120 a barrel this month, translating into gas pump prices above $4 a gallon in parts of the United States. As a result, the rallying cry of energy self-sufficiency is gaining strength, reinforcing the U.S. policy of promoting renewable fuels, particularly corn-based ethanol, to reduce dependence on imported oil.

But a different rallying cry—food self-sufficiency—is becoming louder in many developing countries where rice, wheat and other staples are in such short supply that food riots have erupted. China, India, Argentina and several other countries have raised export restrictions on key crops to ensure food supplies for their consumers. That move has further increased world prices.

It is important to remember two key lessons from similar chaos in world food markets in 1973-74. First, attempts to gain domestic price stability create global price instability. And second, once policies are established to protect food markets, they are not easily dismantled. It took two decades for rice trade to expand in Asia, and even then, it remained limited.

The United States must take a lead in confronting the world food crisis. But to do so will require a genuine commitment to improving the well-being of people around the world—and recognizing that energy self-sufficiency at home can mean widespread starvation abroad.

In its starkest form, the global food crisis is about rising agricultural commodity prices that place hundreds of millions of poor people at greater risk of malnutrition. Most of the 800 million people globally who survive on a dollar a day or less live in rural areas and work on farms.

The two- to fourfold jump in prices during the past 18 months for internationally traded commodities, such as rice, wheat, corn, soy and vegetable oils, has resulted in fewer and smaller meals for the poor. The rise in the number of malnourished people globally is only beginning to be tallied.

High food prices have been associated with high petroleum prices. The cost of crop production is up, the value of the dollar is down, and biofuels are an attractive alternative to fossil fuels for transportation. Diverting one-fifth of the U.S. corn crop to corn-ethanol production and setting a renewable fuels mandate of 20 percent of U.S. motor fuel consumption by 2022— a fourfold increase in 15 years—has driven up prices for corn and substitute crops, especially soybeans.

Demand for corn, soy and other livestock feeds already had been rising due to increased meat consumption by China and other emerging economies. Add some major weather, pest and disease shocks, and the market for staple agricultural commodities tightened dramatically in 2006 and 2007.

Moreover, a surge in speculative activity has exacerbated market volatility.

How should the three presidential candidates, in particular, address this crisis?

For starters, the United States should retreat from its heavy promotion of corn-based ethanol and allow the markets to settle. Although the 2008 U.S. Farm Bill, passed by the House and Senate last week, includes a reduction in the ethanol blending credit from 51 cents to 45 cents per gallon, the subsidy remains high and is offset by other biofuels production incentives.

President Bush plans to veto the bill, but both the House and the Senate passed it with more than the two-thirds majority needed to overturn a veto. The presidential candidates, Sens. John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, were all absent for the vote.

The bill increases the Food Stamp Program by $10 billion to help poor Americans buy food at higher prices, but there are no measures that will assure developing countries and international markets that global food supplies will be adequate and that prices will come down. Congress needs to endorse the World Food Program's new strategy of providing food aid in the form of cash instead of surplus grain shipments, a strategy that would allow food-deficit countries to purchase their calories regionally and thereby promote agriculture closer to home.

It also would be wise for the U.S. Agency for International Development to expand, not abolish, investments in agricultural research for low-income countries.

The world can produce plenty of crops at reasonable prices for food and feed, if appropriate agricultural investments are made. But it cannot produce enough crops for food, feed and fuel at prices affordable to half of the world's population.

All News button
1

Energy and Environment Building - 4205
473 Via Ortega
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305

0
Graduate student

Kaitlin Shilling has spent most of her career working in the non-governmental sector, and specifically in post-crisis development, which she is now studying in more depth at Stanford University. Just prior to returning to the ivory tower, Ms. Shilling spent over a year and a half working for DAI, a development consulting company, on two USAID-funded projects in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. She began as the Director of Finance and Operations for the Afghanistan Immediate Needs Project, and then moved to the Alternative Livelihoods Project to run the Gender and Micro-Enterprise Department. Her work on both of these projects involved collaborating with other NGOs, donors, and UN agencies working in the region.

Before moving to Afghanistan, Ms. Shilling worked in the home office of DAI for almost two years in the Crisis Mitigation and Recovery Group at DAI. Ms. Shilling's work included projects in Indonesia, East Timor, and Liberia, in addition to writing proposals to win new business. While at Stanford, Kaitlin will pursue research relating to post-crisis reconstruction with a focus on incorporating natural resource management into program design.

Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Full video of the Google.org course on poverty and development that Program on Global Justice Director Joshua Cohen moderated from September to November 2007 is now available online at YouTube.com.

The 10-week course, which focused on understanding poverty and development at the global, national, local, and personal levels, was the first of three courses on Google.org's main areas of philanthropic activity--Global Development, Global Health, and Climate Change.

The course on global poverty and development met once a week from Sep. 12 to Nov. 14, 2007 at Google headquarters. Each two-hour session featured guest speakers on development-related issues such as education and health, equitable financial markets, globalization, and population mobility. On Oct. 3, Rosamond L. Naylor, director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment (FSE) at FSI Stanford, co-taught a session on productive agriculture for the 21st century with Frank Rijsberman, Google.org director of water and climate adaptation issues.

Google.org is the philanthropic arm of Google and the umbrella for its commitment to devote employee time and one percent of Google's profits and equity toward philanthropy.

Course videos
9/12: Overture and Overview on Global Development
(Part 1)
9/12: Overture and Overview on Global Development
(Part 2)

 9/19: Poverty at the Personal Level
(Part 1)
9/19: Poverty at the Personal Level
(Part 2)

9/26: Education and Health, Equity and Gender10/3: Productive Agriculture for the 21st Century
10/17: Globalization10/24: Population Mobility: Immigration and Urbanization
10/31: Economic Growth11/7: Mapping the Major Organizations Engaged in Development
11/14: Think Globally, Act Googley 

 

Hero Image
Cohen Google2
All News button
1
Paragraphs

This is the story of a powerful historical pathway of structural transformation that is experienced by all successful developing countries; of highly important and diverse approaches to coping with the political pressures generated along that pathway; and of policy mechanisms available to keep the poor from falling off the pathway altogether.  This structural transformation involves four main features: a falling share of agriculture in economic output and employment, a rising share of urban economic activity in industry and modern services, migration of rural workers to urban settings, and a demographic transition in birth and death rates that always leads to a spurt in population growth before a new equilibrium is reached.

At one level, the story is easy to tell because the statistical picture presented, both graphically and econometrically, is, well, telling.  In their broad sweep and relevance, these are very robust results that have very deep historical roots.  Challenging them is like challenging the tides.

At another level, the complexity of national diversity asserts itself in very important ways.  This finding does not alter the pathways themselves, but rather their consequences for income distribution and the gap in labor productivity between urban and rural economies.  We learn a lot about the possibilities for narrowing this gap during the process of structural transformation by comparing the historical experience of rapidly growing Asia with the rest of the world.  Individual country experience is revealing as well.  The stress placed on this productivity gap, how it changes during the structural transformation, and potential policy interventions to narrow it, is the major contribution of this monograph.

Making sure the poor are connected to both the structural transformation and to the policy initiatives designed to ameliorate the distributional consequences of rapid transformation has turned out to be a major challenge for policy makers over the past half century.  There are successes and failures, and the historical record illuminates what works and what does not.  Trying to stop the structural transformation does not work, at least for the poor.  Investing in the capacity of the poor to cope with change and to participate in its benefits through better education and health does seem to work.  Such investments typically require significant public sector resources and policy support, and thus depend on political processes that are themselves conditioned by the pressures generated by the structural transformation.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Wendt Lecture, American Enterprise Institute
Authors
Peter Timmer
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

FSE is excited to welcome Peter Timmer as FSE Visiting Professor. Prior to joining FSE, Timmer was a resident fellow at the Center for Global Development in Washington, and prior to that, Dean of the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at UC San Diego. Timmer has also held professorships at Harvard, Cornell, and Stanford. In 1992, he received the Bintang Jasa Utama (Highest Merit Star) from the Republic of Indonesia for his contributions to food security. He served as the chief outside advisor to USAID in developing their strategy on growth and agriculture for the Natsios Report (Foreign Assistance in the National Interest), and was one of the key advisors for the World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. Timmer's work focuses on three broad topics: the nature of "pro-poor growth" and its application in Indonesia and other countries in Asia; the supermarket revolution in developing countries and its impact on the poor (both producers and consumers); and the structural transformation in historical perspective as a framework for understanding the political economy of agricultural policy.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

This paper provides an original account of global land, water and nitrogen use in support of industrialized livestock production and trade, with emphasis on two of the fastest growing sectors, pork and poultry. Our analysis focuses on trade in feed and animal products, using a new model that calculates the amount of "virtual" nitrogen, water and land used in production but not embedded in the product. We show how key meat importing countries, such as Japan, benefit from "virtual" trade in land, water and nitrogen, and how key meat exporting countries, such as Brazil, provide these resources without accounting for their true environmental cost. Results show that Japan's pig and chicken meat imports embody the virtual equivalent of 50% of Japan's total arable land, and half of Japan's virtual nitrogen total is lost in the US. Trade links with China are responsible for 15% of the virtual nitrogen left behind in Brazil due to feed and meat exports, and 20% of Brazil's area is used to grow soybean exports. The complexity of trade in meat, feed, water and nitrogen, is illustrated by the dual roles of the US and the Netherlands as both importers and exporters of meat. Mitigating environmental damage from industrialized livestock production and trade depends on a combination of direct pricing strategies, regulatory approaches and use of best management practices. Our analysis indicates that increased water and nitrogen use efficiency and land conservation resulting from these measures could significantly reduce resource costs.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Ambio
Authors
Marshall Burke
Rosamond L. Naylor
Walter P. Falcon
Henning Steinfeld

Center on Food Security and the Environment
Encina Hall East, E400
Stanford, CA 94305

0
Thomas D. Cabot Professor of Development Studies, Emeritus, Harvard University
2720_image_PeterTimmerpg.jpg

C. Peter Timmer was a visiting professor at Stanford's Center on Food Security and the Environment in 2007. He is a leading authority on agriculture and rural development who has published widely on these topics. He has served as a professor at Stanford, Cornell, three faculties at Harvard, and the University of California, San Diego, where he was also the dean of the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies. A core advisor on the World Bank's World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development, Timmer also works with several Asian governments on domestic policy responses to instability in the global rice market. In 1992, he received the Bintang Jasa Utama (Highest Merit Star) from the Republic of Indonesia for his contributions to food security. He is an advisor to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on agricultural development issues.

Timmer's work focuses on three broad topics: the nature of "pro-poor growth" and its application in Indonesia and other countries in Asia; the supermarket revolution in developing countries and its impact on the poor (both producers and consumers); and the structural transformation in historical perspective as a framework for understanding the political economy of agricultural policy. 

Conference report

Agriculture is the human enterprise most dependent on climate and natural resources, and is thus the sector that has the most to gain or lose from short- or long-run changes in the level or variability of climate. A growing literature seeks to understand the probable effects of climate change on agriculture, and improvements in our understanding of climate dynamics and crop response has begun to reduce some of the uncertainties inherent in projecting future impacts on agriculture. Nevertheless, there has been scant research conducted on the climate impacts on various crops and agroecosystems of central importance to the global poor. Furthermore, much of the existing literature assumes that farmers will automatically adapt to climate change and thereby lessen many of its potential negative impacts, taking for granted the monumental past efforts at the collection, preservation, and utilization of plant genetic resources on which much of farmer adaptation has historically depended.

Given potentially large changes in global temperature, regional precipitation patterns, and extreme weather events, we believe it is dangerous to assume that adaptation of cultivars will happen automatically. Extensive crop breeding that relies on access to genetic resources will almost certainly be required for crop adaptation under conditions of global climate change. Furthermore, substantial knowledge and insight is needed to gauge what types of diversity now exist in the gene banks, and what will be needed in the future. Fundamental questions remain to be addressed, for example: How are regional patterns of climate expected to change in the future, and how will these changes affect agro-ecosystems around the world? There are also several strategic investment issues to consider--which traits, which crops and which regions should be central to strategic decisions on ex situ genetic conservation? What steps should be taken to conserve the genetic diversity of the important but neglected minor crops where the number of accessions is currently low? Answers to these questions will be critical for promoting food security and ensuring human survival, and to date have received little or no attention in the scientific literature or broader policy arena.

This conference will seek to answer three main questions:

1) What and where are the largest threats to agro-ecosystems under future climate change? Here we will seek to identify both the nature and the location of the largest probable threats, a topic that to date has not been systematically undertaken for certain areas of interest.

2) Taken individually and together, what do these threats imply for crop genetic diversity on a regional or global level? I.e. which traits, which crops and which regions appear central to strategic decisions on ex situ genetic conservation?

3) What is the current state of genetic conservation with respect to these threats, and what does this imply about the sequencing of future efforts at ex situ conservation focus? For example, are there a set of minor crops important to food security that are both poorly represented in the gene banks and under great threat from future climate change?

Particular attention will be paid to those crops and cropping systems on which food insecure populations currently depend, and who would be least able to adapt in the absence of concerted public action to the contrary. We expect that this effort will be the first serious attempt to link crop genetic resource conservation to climate change and variability.

» A news article on recent investments being made by the Global Crop Diversity Trust, decisions which were informed by the Bellagio meeting.

Bellagio, Italy

Conferences
Paragraphs

A concept note about setting up an international program for studying the effects of the emergence of biofuels on global poverty and food security. 

The recent global expansion of biofuels production is an intense topic of discussion in both the popular and academic press. Much of the debate surrounding biofuels has focused on narrow issues of energy efficiency and fossil fuel substitution, to the exclusion of broader questions concerning the effects of large-scale biofuels development on commodity markets, land use patterns, and the global poor. There is reason to think these effects will be very large. The majority of poor people living in chronic hunger are net consumers of staple food crops; poor households spend a large share of their budget on starchy staples; and as a result, price hikes for staple agricultural commodities have the largest impact on poor consumers. For example, the rapidly growing use of corn for ethanol in the U.S. has recently sent corn prices soaring, boosting farmer incomes domestically but causing riots in the streets of Mexico City over tortilla prices. Preliminary analysis suggests that such price movements, which directly threaten hundreds of millions of households around the world, could be more than a passing phenomenon. Rapid biofuels development is occurring throughout the developed and developing world, transforming commodity markets and increasingly linking food prices to a volatile energy sector. Yet there remains little understanding of how these changes will affect global poverty and food security, and an apprehension on the part of many governments as to whether and how to participate in the biofuels revolution.

We propose an international collaborative effort to:

  • Understand and quantify the effects of expanding biofuels production on agricultural commodity markets, food security, and poverty;
  • Develop training programs and policy tools to harness the benefits and mitigate the damages from such expansion on both local and global scales; and
  • Build an international network of scholars and government officials devoted to studying and managing biofuels development and its social consequences
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Authors
Scott Rozelle
Rosamond L. Naylor
Walter P. Falcon
Kenneth Cassman
Subscribe to International Relations