2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
Browse
by subject...
    Schedule
view...
 

211 - 220 of 577 results for: LAW

LAW 413X: Policy Practicum: Designing a Social Impact Bond for Santa Clara County Mental Health

Social impact bonds, also called "Pay for Success" initiatives, are an innovative finance mechanism through which investors provide the funds for organizations to provide social services at the request of a government entity. These investors may be repaid, with interest, depending on the organizations' success in achieving specified outcomes. The most noteworthy examples to date involve pay-for-success schemes to reduce recidivism in the UK, Massachusetts, and New York City prisons. Santa Clara County will soon issue a request for proposals for a social impact bond to reduce the hospitalization of mentally ill patients at the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center. It has retained Third Sector Capital Partners as an advisor and Keith Humphreys, Ph.D., Professor and Section Director for Mental Health Policy in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University, as the evaluator. Students in this Policy Lab practicum will work with Dr. Humphreys, the Santa Clara County Counsel's Office, and Third Sector to develop the scheme, including designing clear metrics for success and undertaking a cost-benefit analysis of the de-institutionalization of mental health patients. It is likely that we will collaborate with faculty and students from other schools and departments having particular expertise in cost-benefit analysis and evaluation. Special Instructions: Total enrollment in this course will be limited to 12 (4 SLS students, 4 Medical School students & 4 other). A preference will be given to students who can enroll for both the Autumn and Winter quarters. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline. Cross-listed with Psychiatry ( PSYC 213).
Last offered: Spring 2015 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 413Y: Policy Practicum: Catalyzing Nature-Based Coastal Flood Mitigation and Adaptation

Recently, several perilous and costly flood events have raised public awareness of the threats posed by coastal and riverine floods nationally. It is likely that with climate change, the frequency of heavy precipitation will increase in some areas over the 21st century, and that the return interval of flood events will decrease, greatly increasing overall flood risk. Traditionally, flood mitigation has occurred through the use of hard engineering - seawalls, revetments and levees. However, natural habitats and ecosystems also offer significant, and often overlooked and undervalued protections in mitigating or buffering flood hazards. Hazard mitigation plans and conservation project plans very rarely explicitly recognize the protective value of natural habitats, even though this value has been well documented. Moreover, hazard mitigation agents and environmental conservation organizations seldom work together, although recent catastrophic events highlight why it would make sense to do so. FEMA Region IX and The Nature Conservancy in California have recognized this and wish to develop a paradigm for working together to promote nature-based flood mitigation, and have asked for our help. Students in this practicum will: (a) Identify a coastal community with areas of both high flood risk and conservation value; (b) Design a nature-based strategy for risk reduction, which could include managed retreat and/or other mitigation/adaption tactics; (c) Identify available resources/programs/incentives for and barriers to implementation at the local, state and federal levels; (d) Design a process for enabling the community to avail themselves of these resources; and (e) Comment on how laws, regulations and programs could be changed to better facilitate nature-based flood risk reduction. Students will also provide insight into the transferability of this approach beyond the study area. Elements Used in Grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.
Last offered: Winter 2015 | Repeatable 4 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 413Z: Policy Practicum: Endstage Decisions: Health Directives in Law and Practice

Medical decisions toward the end of life can be crucial and difficult for patients, doctors, and the families of patients. Law and medicine have been struggling to find ways to strike a balance between what the patients might want (or say they want), and what makes medical, economic, and ethical sense. People have been encouraged to fill out "Advanced Health Care Directives," which give guidance to doctors and surrogates (usually a family member) on what to do when faced with end-of-life dilemmas. Another form, adopted in just over half the states (including California) is the POLST form (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment). The two types are supposed to complement each other, but they are different in important ways. The Advanced Health Care Directive expresses what a person wants, or thinks she wants, and/or appoints a surrogate, in case the patient is unable to express her wishes. Anybody can fill out a Directive, at any time of life. Ideally, a copy goes to the surrogate, if one is appointed, and another to the primary care physician. The POLST form is meant for people who are seriously ill. It is a one page form, printed on bright pink paper. It is signed by patient and doctor. The directives (for example "no artificial nutrition by tube") are supposed to be controlling; the patient, of course, can change her mind; but there is no surrogate. It is an agreement between the patient and the doctor. Who uses these forms? How effective are they? To what extent and in what situations are they useful? In what situations are they not useful? Can they be made more useful and, if so, how? There has been research on the subject; and a major report on the end-of-life issue (originally due out in December) will be released this summer. The class will look at some of this literature, but the main point will be to find out what local hospitals and nursing homes are doing. Students will conduct interviews with doctors, nurses, and other health care specialists in order to find out what one might call the living law of the Directive and of Polst. The aim is to get a more realistic picture of the situation in the area: how are these forms used, when are they used, what has the experience of health care professionals been; perhaps also some insight into the experience of patients and family members. The ultimately goal would, one hopes, be policy recommendations for improvements in the forms themselves, and the laws relating to the forms, along with recommendations for ways to improve the way the forms are or can be used; or whether some entirely different approach to the problem might be needed. Stanford Hospital and Clinics will be the client in researching and addressing the above questions. Elements used in grading: Final Paper. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2 | Repeatable 4 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414A: Policy Practicum: Central Valley Habitat Exchange

This policy lab will assist in developing more flexible and effective wildlife habitat mitigation tools for use in California's Central Valley, a landscape that presents the challenge of taking advantage of the habitat potential provided by working agricultural lands. Habitat mitigation is an important tool under a variety of environmental and wildlife protection statutes, both state and federal. Current regulatory frameworks usually require that habitat mitigation employ permanent easements or long-term contracts fixed in particular locations, despite the fact that species have changing habitat needs. Many species are migratory and must move across the landscape to survive; a changing climate and shifting human activity only increase the dynamic nature of habitat needs. To ensure that species and their habitat are protected in the most effective manner possible, legal and policy frameworks must be structured to address this and other challenges. Additionally, there is a need for a robust market mechanism that recognizes the inherent natural capital and species habitat provided by working agricultural lands, and compensates landowners for the value of those resources. In the face of significant upcoming conservation and mitigation needs for California, new policies and regulatory frameworks are necessary, and must be rooted in rigorous science, be consistent with existing legal frameworks, and accomplish the dual goals of promoting species recovery and maintaining agricultural production. Students in the Law and Policy Lab will analyze cutting edge issues related to species habitat and protection. They will help provide recommendations to the Central Valley Habitat Exchange (CVHE) in the development of more flexible and marketable habitat mitigation tools that can be used under a variety of programs, including the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, state wildlife laws, and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. The CVHE is a new initiative taking advantage of the emerging market of habitat credits by maximize the benefits of the habitat that willing agricultural landowners can provide. The CVHE will facilitate investment in conservation and restoration of vital and dynamic Central Valley floodplain and riparian habitat by promoting, monitoring and assisting in the exchange of habitat credits. Students will tackle issues of permanence and change from legal, policy, economic, and scientific perspectives, depending on their existing skill set and research needs. During the quarter, visitors from the CVHE Working Group - which includes members from national environmental non-profits, government agencies, and the private sector - will share their perspectives, and students will be invited to present their findings and make recommendations to help inform development of the CVHE. The course will meet at a mutually convenient time that will be chosen after the quarter begins. Meetings will include a mix of individual meetings and group meetings. Special Instructions: This practicum is offered in autumn quarter and winter quarter. Students enrolled in autumn quarter who intend to continue with the practicum will be given preference in winter quarter. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for contact information and submission deadline. Elements used in grading: As agreed to by instructor.
Last offered: Winter 2015 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414B: Policy Practicum: Analyzing Alternative Laws and Policies for Psychoactive Drugs

Four states have already legalized marijuana, and there is a strong likelihood that California will significantly change its marijuana laws This practicum works closely with a policy client to assess alternative options for California marijuana laws. We will examine possible options through many lenses, including moral philosophy, welfare economics, neuroscience and medicine, criminal justice, and political analysis. Students will gain exposure to such policy analysis methodologies as epidemiology, econometrics, quasi-experimentation, simulation modeling, and cross-national case studies to identify and analyze options and likely tradeoffs to help the client and the citizens of California make informed choices. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructor. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.
Last offered: Spring 2015 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414C: Policy Practicum: Strategic Litigation in Global Context

Students will work with litigators at the Open Society Justice Initiative, a law center housed inside a global foundation, on a comparative research project exploring the impacts of strategic litigation in the public interest. The resulting publication aims to assist strategic litigators, social change actors and rights activists in understanding the promise, risks and complexity of the burgeoning global practice of strategic litigation and in wielding this specialized justice tool more skillfully. The autumn practicum will culminate in a conference at the Law School in December 2014 before an international audience of practitioners, with the possibility of student papers appearing in a conference compilation. Students who are available both autumn and winter quarter may continue their work on the project through the winter. The project on the impacts of strategic litigation will examine how legal judgments - both positive and negative - and the ensuing record of implementation have influenced, together with other tools of change, the advancement of human rights in a variety of settings. Over the course of the Practicum, students will explore one or more of the following human rights themes: equal access to quality education, the death penalty, disability, housing rights, land rights and/or state-sponsored violence/torture. Cases will be drawn from domestic courts across the globe, as well as regional human rights tribunals and UN treaty bodies. Specific questions to be examined include: What contributions to social, political and legal change has strategic litigation made on particular issues in particular places? What were the conditions, circumstances and manner in which litigation was pursued (in conjunction with other tools) which enhanced its contribution(s), and which diminished them? What does comparative experience teach about the risks and trade-offs involved in deciding whether, when and how to litigate so that it generates the strongest and most enduring impacts? There is a preference for students who can enroll for both autumn and winter quarter. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.
Last offered: Autumn 2014 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414D: Policy Practicum: Copyright Policy Practicum

One of today's great challenges for creative production on and off the Internet is to connect creative users of copyrighted works with the works' owners quickly and cheaply in order to enable licensed uses. With the United States Copyright Office as its client, this practicum will develop a feasibility study/rough prototype for a Web-based copyright clearance system. Law students will work with computer science and business students to inventory existing sources of copyright ownership information; explore with the managers of these sources (including the Copyright Office) protocols for integrating the sources in a Web-based platform; explore use protocols with potential copyright users; develop strategies for gathering ownership data that do not presently reside in databases; and develop (and possibly implement) criteria for platform-enabling software. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for contact information and submission deadline. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.
Last offered: Spring 2015 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414E: Policy Practicum: Legal and Policy Tools for Preventing Atrocities

In 2012, at the U.S. Holocaust Museum and Memorial, President Obama announced the adoption of a comprehensive global strategy to prevent atrocities. This strategy is based on a set of recommendations generated by a comprehensive interagency review of the U.S. government's capabilities mandated by Presidential Study Directive 10 (PSD-10) of 2011. In unveiling this major new initiative, President Obama underscored that Preventing mass atrocities and genocide is a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States. Foundational to the PSD-10 recommendations was the creation of a high-level interagency Atrocities Prevention Board (APB) to monitor at-risk countries and emerging threats in order to coordinate the U.S. government's responses thereto. The National Security Staff's Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights convenes the APB. Since being established in 2012, the APB has worked to amass and strengthen a range of legal, diplomatic, military, rhetorical, and financial tools for atrocity prevention. Although the APB is a U.S. initiative, it also aims to build multilateral support around the imperative of prevention, working with the U.N. Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, regional organizations such as the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, and committed partner states, such as Tanzania, Switzerland, and Argentina. The proposed policy lab would support the APB primarily through one of its constitutive entities, the Office of Global Criminal Justice (GCJ) in the U.S. Department of State. GCJ is headed by an Ambassador-at-Large (Assistant Secretary equivalent) and a Deputy (a position I held from 2012-2013) and advises the Secretary of State and the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights on U.S. policy addressed to the prevention of, responses to, and accountability for mass atrocities. Additional client agencies and offices will include the Department of Justice, the National Security Council, the Department of the Treasury, the Agency for International Development (USAID), and other State Department Offices, such as the Bureau of Human Rights, Democracy & Labor and the Bureau of International Organizations. Depending on student interest, I envision the lab taking on a range of projects devoted to (a) strengthening existing tools, (b) developing new capabilities, (c) evaluating the efficacy of past efforts in order to glean lessons learned, and (d) gathering best practices from other states and entities engaged in similar endeavors, all with an eye toward developing concrete recommendations for future action. 1. Regulating the Transfer of Arms in the Service of Atrocities Prevention: In 2013, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), regulating the international trade in conventional arms (which include everything from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft, and warships). According to Article 6(3) of the treaty, States Parties (of which there are now 40) are barred from authorizing the transfer of covered conventional weapons if officials have knowledge that the arms would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes. States Parties are obliged to take measures to implement the provisions of the treaty, including through an effective and transparent national control system. In September 2013, the United States signed the treaty but the President has not yet submitted it for ratification. This project would devise proposals for how states can best implement their treaty duties under Article 6(3) with an eye toward generating model regulatory language based on analogous treaty regimes. 2. Designing Commissions of Inquiry in Support of Accountability: The Under-Secretary of Civilian Security, Human Rights, and Democracy would benefit from advice on how to maximize the impact of the commissions of inquiry (COIs) that are established, usually by the Human Rights Council in Geneva but occasionally by the U.N. Security Council, to document the commission of international crimes in armed conflicts and repressive states. The project would collate the various mandates, methodologies, outcomes, and impact of prior (and current) COIs with an eye toward developing best practices and recommending ways that future COIs can be designed to better contribute to processes of accountability for the crimes they document and the perpetrators they identify. In particular, students would propose options for better leveraging lists of perpetrators for accountability purposes, such as by sharing with national immigration and prosecutorial officials. 3. According and Withholding Foreign Official Immunity: The Department of Justice (Human Rights & Special Prosecutions Unit) is keenly interested in gaining a better understanding of the principles of immunity governing foreign officials. Although they would welcome any up-to-date guidance on background legal principles, they are hoping in particular to get more clarity on the actual practice of states in claiming, and according, such immunities, including the historical practice of the United States. The research and recommendations on when the according of immunity should be resisted would inform their prosecutorial practice vis-à-vis state actors accused of the commission of international crimes as well as their negotiations with the Department of State with respect to assertions/suggestions of immunity. 4. Surveying the Efforts of Others: A number of other states, multilateral entities, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and United Nations offices are also devoted to preventing atrocities in at-risk or volatile states and to inhibiting the escalation of violence once underway. Although the APB is committed to working multilaterally, it has yet to undertake a comprehensive survey of policies developed by other governments and non-governmental entities in this regard. This project would gather this information in order to identify partnership opportunities and identify policies worthy of emulation. As with all policy labs, students would develop a more fulsome project proposal and work plan with the client entity and prepare mid-term and final reports. The proposed projects, and others that might be developed, will give students the opportunity to develop an expertise in: * elements of U.S. foreign policy, * the challenges of interagency and multilateral coordination, * the process of designing and implementing governmental aid and programming, *techniques of treaty interpretation and implementation, * the packaging legal constraints in policy terms, * developing valid metrics for evaluating successes and failures in circumstances characterized by acute uncertainty and multiple variables, and * comparative law and policy. Over the course of the semester, students should improve specific policy analysis skills (e.g., research design, data collection and analysis, and policy writing) as well as general professional skills (analytical thinking, project management, client relations, teamwork, and oral presentation). Because the APB is a new interagency initiative, with no clear precedent, the policy lab will also offer students a blue ski opportunity to think creatively about ways the U.S. government can balance the equities of its various agencies -- and inspire international partners -- to respond effectively to the pressing global challenge of preventing mass atrocities. Course must be taken for at least two units to meet "R" (Research) requirement. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-4 | Repeatable 4 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414F: Policy Practicum: Rethinking Penal Code Enhancements in California

The Stanford Criminal Justice Center was approached by the Chief Justice of California to advise the judiciary, and indirectly the Legislature, on potential revisions to the California Penal Code. The California prison system remains under federal court control for unconstitutional overcrowding, and the federal court is loath to terminate the injunction without some reassurance of reforms that might prevent the overcrowding from recurring. In the absence of a state sentencing commission, the Chief Justice believes that we at Stanford can perform a fresh new analysis of the parts of the Penal Code that most merit review, in terms of their undue complexity, their arguably disproportionate severity, and the possibility that they are major drivers of the size of the prison population. Enhancements are an incredibly complex part of the Penal Code. Tens of provisions, many of them obscure even to judges, allow for very large upgrades to sentences because of aspects of conduct that are said to aggravate the underlying crime. (Please note that while some of the enhancements under review involve prior crimes, we are not dealing with the Three Strikes Law.) The Chief Justice's administrative arm, the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), acknowledges that no one has performed even a statutory analysis of the overall scheme of enhancements, much less any empirical effort to connect them to prison inputs. This will likely be a multi-term Policy Lab that will ultimately gather data to attempt this empirical analysis, but the first term effort is more circumscribed. A team of students will undertake the mapping of the statutory terrain - a charting of all the enhancements in the Penal Code and the many cross-permutations of these enhancements and the crimes to which they attach, and as a first empirical cut, identification of the permutations of crime and enhancements that are most often charged in California. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for contact information and submission deadline. Elements used in grading: As agreed to by instructor.
Last offered: Winter 2015 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 414G: Policy Practicum: Energy and Environmental Governance

Important energy and environmental initiatives cut across many agencies in the federal government, leading to significant policymaking and implementation challenges. Many of the agencies operating in the energy and environmental sphere have overlapping jurisdictions, but they also have different missions, priorities, and resources that push them toward agency-specific policies and programs and away from cross-cutting, government-wide initiatives. The result has been sub-optimal federal implementation of clean energy solutions, responses to climate change, the coordination of regulatory and permitting activity, and the like. In this SPRING QUARTER policy lab (3 units), students will work with the Center for American Progress (CAP) and the Office of Management & Budget in Washington to scope out the governance challenge and to review and analyze administrative tools (e.g., Executive Orders; Presidential Memoranda; inter-agency Task Forces; budget-led initiatives, etc.) that have been used to address it. Students will develop candid assessments of successes and failures and seek to identify common ingredients that may help predict the efficacy of cross-agency efforts. The policy lab will produce a report to CAP that should assist future Administrations in deploying more effective administrative governance tools in the energy and environmental arena. Elements used in grading - Individual and Team Development of Written Analyses and Policy Recommendations . NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructor. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.
Last offered: Spring 2015 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 8 units total)
Filter Results:
term offered
updating results...
teaching presence
updating results...
number of units
updating results...
time offered
updating results...
days
updating results...
UG Requirements (GERs)
updating results...
component
updating results...
career
updating results...
© Stanford University | Terms of Use | Copyright Complaints