-

A Workshop in honor of Professor Michel Oksenberg
Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and the Stanford China Program

We continue to honor the legacy of Professor Michel Oksenberg (1938-2001), a core faculty member of the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and one of the country's leading authorities on China and on U.S.-China relations. Professor Oksenberg was one of the most powerful voices advocating a consistent and thoughtful policy of American engagement with China, and with Asia more broadly. The annual Shorenstein APARC Oksenberg Lecture has recognized distinguished individuals who have carried on this legacy of advancing understanding between the United States and China, and the nations of the Asia-Pacific region.

This year, the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Peoples Republic of China and a time of global economic crisis, Shorenstein APARC is broadening the Oksenberg Lecture to a full afternoon workshop to examine the future of US-China relations and China's new role in this turbulent world.  Invited speakers are experts who have had deep experience in the academic, business, and policy worlds.

Agenda:

1:00 Welcoming remarks from Ambassador Michael Armacost, Acting Director, Shorenstein APARC
1:15-3:30 Can China Save the Global Economy?

Moderator:

Jean Oi - William Haas Professor in Chinese Politics, Stanford University

Panelists:

  • Barry Naughton - Professor of Chinese Economy and So Kwanlok Chair of Chinese International Affairs, Graduate school of International Relations/Political Science at UC San Diego
  • Carl Walter - Managing Director of JPMorgan and Chief Executive Officer of JPMorgan Chase Bank China Co Ltd. and a long-time resident of China.
  • David Hale - Founder, David Hale Global Economics, formerly Global Chief Economist for the Zurich Financial Services Group
  • Lyric Hughes Hale - founder of China Online and President of David Hale Global Economics
3:45-5:45 The Group of Two: The Future of U.S.-China Relations

Moderator:

John Lewis - William Haas Professor of Chinese Politics, Emeritus; CISAC Faculty Member; FSI Senior Fellow, by courtesy

Panelists:

  • Susan Shirk - Professor of political science at UC San Diego, Director of the University of California system-wide Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for  East Asia and Pacific Affairs. 
  • Ambassador Stapleton Roy - Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., Chairman of the Hopkins-Nanjing Advisory Council, former U.S. Ambassador to the PRC.
  • Thomas J. Christensen - Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Princeton University, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

Bechtel Conference Center

Shorenstein APARC Encina Hall Stanford University
1
Visiting Scholar at APARC, 2021-2022
Visiting Scholar at APARC, 2012-2013
WalterCarl_WEB.jpg

Carl Walter joined the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) as visiting scholar with the China Program for the 2021-2022 academic year. Prior to coming to APARC, he served as independent, non-executive Director at the China Construction Bank. He was also previously a visiting scholar with APARC during the winter and spring terms of the 2012–13 academic year after a career in banking spent largely in China. 

His research interests focus on China's financial system and its impact on financial and political organizations. During his time at Shorenstein APARC Walter will continue his book project on how fiscal reforms in China have impacted the banking system, the overall economy and the prospect for financial reform going forward.

Walter has contributed articles to publications including Caijing, the Wall Street Journal and the China Quarterly. He is also the co-author of Red Capitalism: The Fragile Financial Foundations of China's Extraordinary Rise (2012) and Privatizing China: Inside China's Stock Markets (2005).

Walter lived and worked in Beijing from 1991 to 2011, first as an investment banker involved in the earliest SOE restructurings and overseas public listings, then as chief operation officer of China's first joint venture investment bank, China International Capital Corporation. Over the last ten years he was JPMorgan's China chief operating officer as well as chief executive officer of its China banking subsidiary.

Walter holds a PhD in political science from Stanford University, a certificate of advanced study from Peking University and a BA in Russian Studies from Princeton University.

Carl Walter Managing Director of JPMorgan and Chief Executive Officer Speaker JPMorgan Chase Bank China Co Ltd.
Barry Naughton Professor of Chinese Economy and So Kwanlok Chair of Chinese International Affairs Speaker Graduate school of International Relations/Political Science at UC San Diego
Lyric Hughes Hale Founder of China Online and President Speaker David Hale Global Economics
David Hale Founder, David Hale Global Economics Speaker formerly Global Chief Economist for the Zurich Financial Services Group
Susan Shirk Professor of political science at UC San Diego Speaker Director of the University of California system-wide Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs
Ambassador Stapleton Roy Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., Chairman of the Hopkins-Nanjing Advisory Council Speaker former U.S. Ambassador to the PRC
Thomas J. Christensen Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Princeton University Speaker former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Department of Political Science
Stanford University
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-26044

(650) 723-2843 (650) 725-9401
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
William Haas Professor in Chinese Politics
jean_oi_headshot.jpg PhD

Jean C. Oi is the William Haas Professor of Chinese Politics in the department of political science and a Senior Fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. She is the founding director of the Stanford China Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center. Professor Oi is also the founding Lee Shau Kee Director of the Stanford Center at Peking University.

A PhD in political science from the University of Michigan, Oi first taught at Lehigh University and later in the Department of Government at Harvard University before joining the Stanford faculty in 1997.

Her work focuses on comparative politics, with special expertise on political economy and the process of reform in transitional systems. Oi has written extensively on China's rural politics and political economy. Her State and Peasant in Contemporary China (University of California Press, 1989) examined the core of rural politics in the Mao period—the struggle over the distribution of the grain harvest—and the clientelistic politics that ensued. Her Rural China Takes Off (University of California Press, 1999 and Choice Outstanding Academic Title, 1999) examines the property rights necessary for growth and coined the term “local state corporatism" to describe local-state-led growth that has been the cornerstone of China’s development model. 

She has edited a number of conference volumes on key issues in China’s reforms. The first was Growing Pains: Tensions and Opportunity in China's Transformation (Brookings Institution Press, 2010), co-edited with Scott Rozelle and Xueguang Zhou, which examined the earlier phases of reform. Most recently, she co-edited with Thomas Fingar, Fateful Decisions: Choices That Will Shape China’s Future (Stanford University Press, 2020). The volume examines the difficult choices and tradeoffs that China leaders face after forty years of reform, when the economy has slowed and the population is aging, and with increasing demand for and costs of education, healthcare, elder care, and other social benefits.

Oi also works on the politics of corporate restructuring, with a focus on the incentives and institutional constraints of state actors. She has published three edited volumes related to this topic: one on China, Going Private in China: The Politics of Corporate Restructuring and System Reform (Shorenstein APARC, 2011); one on Korea, co-edited with Byung-Kook Kim and Eun Mee Kim, Adapt, Fragment, Transform: Corporate Restructuring and System Reform in Korea (Shorenstein APARC, 2012); and a third on Japan, Syncretism: The Politics of Economic Restructuring and System Reform in Japan, co-edited with Kenji E. Kushida and Kay Shimizu (Brookings Institution, 2013). Other more recent articles include “Creating Corporate Groups to Strengthen China’s State-Owned Enterprises,” with Zhang Xiaowen, in Kjeld Erik Brodsgard, ed., Globalization and Public Sector Reform in China (Routledge, 2014) and "Unpacking the Patterns of Corporate Restructuring during China's SOE Reform," co-authored with Xiaojun Li, Economic and Political Studies, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2018.

Oi continues her research on rural finance and local governance in China. She has done collaborative work with scholars in China, including conducting fieldwork on the organization of rural communities, the provision of public goods, and the fiscal pressures of rapid urbanization. This research is brought together in a co-edited volume, Challenges in the Process of China’s Urbanization (Brookings Institution Shorenstein APARC Series, 2017), with Karen Eggleston and Wang Yiming. Included in this volume is her “Institutional Challenges in Providing Affordable Housing in the People’s Republic of China,” with Niny Khor. 

As a member of the research team who began studying in the late 1980s one county in China, Oi with Steven Goldstein provides a window on China’s dramatic change over the decades in Zouping Revisited: Adaptive Governance in a Chinese County (Stanford University Press, 2018). This volume assesses the later phases of reform and asks how this rural county has been able to manage governance with seemingly unchanged political institutions when the economy and society have transformed beyond recognition. The findings reveal a process of adaptive governance and institutional agility in the way that institutions actually operate, even as their outward appearances remain seemingly unchanged.

Selected Multimedia

Director of the China Program
Lee Shau Kee Director of the Stanford Center at Peking University
Faculty Affiliate at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions
Date Label
Jean C. Oi William Haas Professor in Chinese Politics Moderator Stanford University
John W. Lewis William Haas Professor of Chinese Politics, Emeritus; CISAC Faculty Member; FSI Senior Fellow, by courtesy Moderator Stanford University
Conferences
Authors
Martin Kenney
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Venture capital (VC) investment provides a unique mechanism for gauging the technological and entrepreneurial sophistication of a national economy. It is no surprise, then, that the two giants of Asia—China and India—have rapidly become important destinations for VC investment. The latest data available from Ernst & Young reveals an astonishing development: China received more VC investment than any nation except the United States. India, though lagging behind China, still received $862 million. To compare, over $30 billion in VC money was invested in the United States in 2007; $823 million was invested in Canada. Clearly, China and India are becoming nodes for the global VC practice. Many of the largest and most prestigious Silicon Valley VC firms have established significant presences in both nations.

China and India differ in many ways, but with respect to the development of VC they share important characteristics. Until late 2008, both nations had rapidly growing consumer economies. The Chinese and Indian governments and populations both agree that education—and particularly engineering—is critical to their future. Both China and India are leaders in sending their graduate students abroad, which has created a pool of well-trained nationals overseas who can advise their peers at home, or even return home themselves to set up new ventures. Many of these Chinese and Indian nationals have worked in U.S. sciences and engineering-based firms. Such professional experience, especially during the last two decades, has laid the basis for successful technology-based entrepreneurship, and the growth in VC that accompanies it.

When VC investing is viewed globally, U.S. dominance is unquestioned. In the United States, 30–35 percent of all VC-financed firms are located in the San Francisco Bay area. Another 10–12 percent are located in the Boston and New York areas, respectively. In India and China, VC investments are similarly concentrated, and generally occur in locations with the greatest concentrations of highly educated persons. As Table 1 indicates, the investment concentration is remarkable. Forty percent of all the VC-funded firms are located in Beijing, 26 percent are in Shanghai, and the Southern Chinese triangle of Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Hong Kong accounts for another 14 percent. VC investment in China is even more concentrated than in the United States.

Table 1 VC Investments in China and India by City, 2004–2007
(more than 5 investments per city)

Chinese City    Number of Firms    Percent    Indian City    Number of Firms    Percent
Beijing                   213                  40          Bangalore           55                    38
Shanghai               137                  26          Mumbai              31                    21
Shenzhen                36                    7          Chennai             21                     14
Hong Kong              19                    4          New Delhi           16                    11
Guangzhou             16                    3           Hyderabad          11                     8
Hangzhou               13                    2           Pune                   8                      5
Nanjing                  11                    2             n/a       
Suzhou                    9                    2             n/a       
Wuhan                     7                    1             n/a       
Others                   66                   13           Others                4                      3
Unknown                  1                    0          Unknown             0                       0
Total                      528               100            Total                146                  100
Binational                9                    2          Binational             45                    31


VC-backed startups in India, though more diffuse in terms of the top six, are more concentrated overall. Three city regions—Bangalore (38 percent), Mumbai (21 percent), and Chennai (14 percent)—attract the largest investment. However, when including Delhi (11 percent), Hyderabad (8 percent), and Pune (5 percent), these six cities account for an even greater percentage of overall VC investment. The most technology-oriented cities in both nations, Beijing and Bangalore, have received approximately 40 percent of all VC investment. The second largest recipients are Shanghai and Mumbai, which are also the financial capitals.

In China, an enormous economy growing at nearly 10 percent per year even as it emerges from a socialist past, there are significant opportunities in infrastructure development and in supplying the burgeoning underserved consumer market. In a recent Ernst & Young report, Fan Zhang, one of the founding managing partners of Sequoia Capital China, was quoted as saying that “one of the factors that attracted Sequoia Capital to China is the country’s booming consumer market that provides an opportunity to create companies to define certain sectors and fill the need for strong brands, not only in technology but also tech-related consumer services and more traditional industries.”

Zhang is correct—VC investing in China does not directly compete with U.S. firms seeking VC investment. Table 2 shows the fields that VC firms are targeting in China. The table is divided into two binary categories—whether the firm receiving the investment targets the domestic or the global market across a variety of industries, and whether a given firm is in a high technology or non-high technology sector. Chinese firms, even those in technology-based fields, overwhelmingly target the domestic market (87 percent). The Internet has given rise to the largest number of VC startups, nearly all of which are focused on the Sinophone market. Two other key areas—software (10 percent) and mobile phone applications (10 percent)—also cater almost exclusively to the Chinese market. This domestic focus suggests that it will be quite some time before VC-backed Chinese firms threaten counterpart firms in the United States. A possible exception may be semiconductor design, where there are some Chinese startups. Though few Chinese VC-financed firms are likely to be directly competitive with U.S. firms in global markets, many of these Chinese firms compete ferociously against U.S. multinationals trying to make their own inroads into the Chinese domestic market.

Table 2 VC Investments in China and India by Sector and Market, 2004–2007

                                         India                               China
Sector                      Domestic*    Global         Domestic **    Global

Semiconductors               0               7                  22                20
Internet                        16               3                144                  2
Software                         2             14                  55                  4
Communications              1               4                  23                  9
Services                          4             53                  28                  9
Mobile phone                   7              5                   51                  1
Media                             2              0                    35                 0
Healthcare                      1               4                   26                 4
Retail                             1               1                   19                  0
Miscellaneous                  2               0                  20                  2
Components                    0               0                   2                   1
Energy                            0               0                   6                   8
Environment                    0               0                   5                   1
Manufacturing                  0               0                 25                  6
Total                              34             91                461                67

 

* Domestic firms are identified as those that made no apparent attempt to serve overseas markets.

The profile of Indian firms differs from those in China. First, Indian firms are internationally oriented (73 percent); only 27 percent focus on the domestic market. With respect to sector concentration, VC investing in India favors the services sector (46 percent) and software (13 percent). This is not surprising, given India’s well-known comparative advantage in these arenas. Unlike most VC-backed companies in China, many Indian firms may well create competition for U.S. service firms, despite the less developed nature of the Indian economy as a whole.

China and India continue to attract significant VC investment, albeit in different sectors. Today, China is second only to the United States in terms of VC investing, and this is unlikely to change. In China, the preponderance of VC investment is geared to the rapidly growing internal market. The size and unique nature of this market offers entrepreneurs lucrative opportunities to provide “knock-off” U.S. Internet sites for the Chinese market. There are Chinese interpretations of Yahoo!, Google, eBay, Facebook, and Monster.com that service Chinese customers. These firms are self-limited by the language; as such, they do not threaten companies overseas. Moreover, these Chinese companies do not own unique or global class technology that could challenge larger multinational players. It is unclear whether this situation will change over time.

Indian firms differ from Chinese firms in their strong outward orientation. In percentage terms, more Indian than Chinese firms operate in hard-core technology fields. Thus, while China currently enjoys greater VC investment, it is possible that Indian firms may ultimately play a bigger role in the global economy.

Hero Image
shanghai conventionctr flickr hbarrison
The Shanghai International Convention Center in Lujiazui, located in the finance and trade zone within the Pudong New District on the eastern bank of the Huangpu River.
Flickr/HBarrison
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Asia Health Policy Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center is pleased to announce that Brian K. Chen has been awarded the %fellowship1% for 2009-2010.  Brian is currently completing his Ph.D. in Business Administration in the Business and Public Policy Group at the Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley.  He received a Juris Doctor from Stanford Law School in 1997, and graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College in 1992. 

As an applied economist, Brian’s research focuses on the impact of incentives in health care organizations on provider and patient behavior.  For his dissertation, Brian empirically examined how vertical integration and prohibition against self-referrals affected physician prescribing behavior.  His job market paper has been selected for presentation at the American Law and Economics Association’s Annual Meeting in 2009.

Brian comes to the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center not only with a multidisciplinary law and economics background, but also with an international perspective from having lived and worked in Taiwan, Japan, and France.  He has a particularly intimate knowledge of the Taiwanese health care system from his experience as an assistant to the hospital administrator at a medical college in Taiwan.

During his residence as a postdoctoral fellow with the Asia Health Policy Program, Brian plans to conduct empirical research on cost containment policies in Taiwan and Japan and how those policies impacted provider behavior. His work will also contribute to the program’s research activities on comparative health systems and health service delivery in the Asia-Pacific, a theme that encompasses the historical evolution of health policies; the role of the private sector and public-private partnerships; payment incentives and their impact on patients and providers; organizational innovation, contracting, and soft budget constraints; and chronic disease management and service coordination for aging populations.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

Do regime change and market reform disrupt patterns of intergenerational mobility? China's political trajectory is distinctive from that of other communist regimes in two ways. During its first three decades, the regime enforced unusually restrictive barriers to elite status inheritance. And during the subsequent market transition, unlike most of its counterparts, the Communist Party survived intact. Data from a multigeneration survey suggest that despite their obvious exclusion from the party and related administrative careers in the Mao era, certain prerevolution elites transmitted one type of elite status to their offspring to a surprising degree. Party elites, in contrast, were hit hard by radical Maoism but recovered quickly afterward, and their offspring inherited elite status at much higher rates.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
American Journal of Sociology
Authors
Andrew G. Walder
-

Reckoning with the Past:  Truth, Justice and Reconciliation in Asia

Is it possible to come to terms with the violent past and foster reconciliation with former foes, what are the obstacles and how can they be overcome? These are some of the questions we are asking in the "Divided Memories and Reconciliation" project. This colloquia will bring several scholars to Stanford to discuss the ‘history problem' in a series of lectures analyzing the ways in which past conflict has or has not been addressed and resolved in contemporary Asia. Examining issues of memory and forgetting, guilt and innocence, apology and restitution from diverse social science perspectives, our speakers investigate the handling of the violent past both within and between countries in contexts ranging from international diplomacy to the broadcast media to mass education.

In November of 2008, the head of the Japanese air self defense force, General Tamogami Toshio, resigned in a swirl of controversy over an essay he wrote entitled "Was Japan An Aggressor Nation?" The essay argued that Japan's seizure of Korea and of northern China was a legal act and that it had pursued a moderate policy of modernization in its colonial rule of Korea, Taiwan and Manchuria, superior to the colonial rule of the Western imperial  powers. General Tamogami also argued, in his published essay, that Japan's war with the United States was a result of being "ensnared in a trap that was carefully laid by the United States to draw Japan into a war." What is the story behind this controversial incident? What does it mean when a senior Japanese military officer holds such views of the wartime past? What are the implications of this for Japan's security relations with its neighbors and the United States?

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Daniel Sneider Speaker
Seminars
Subscribe to North America