BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Social Science Research Council (SSRC) - ECPv6.17.0//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Social Science Research Council (SSRC)
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.ssrc.org
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Social Science Research Council (SSRC)
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/New_York
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20150308T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20151101T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20160313T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20161106T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20170312T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20171105T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T164118Z
CREATED:20201026T164118Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T164118Z
UID:10000664-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Conviviality beyond the Urban Centre: Theorizing the “Marginal Hub”
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nMagnus Marsden\nProfessor of Social Anthropology and Director of the Sussex Asia Centre\, University of Sussex\nM.Marsden@sussex.ac.uk \nMadeleine Reeves Senior Lecturer in Social Anthropology\, University of Manchester Madeleine.Reeves@manchester.ac.uk \nWorkshop Participants\nItty Abraham\, Associate Professor\, Southeast Asian Studies\, National University of Singapore\n“Poaching as Conviviality in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands” \nKalzang Dorjee Bhutia\, Lecturer\, Religious Studies\, Grinnell College and Amy Holmes-Tagchungdarpa\, Assistant Professor\, Religious Studies\, Grinnell College\n“Alternative Geographies of Global Connection: The Making and Unmaking of Conviviality among Buddhist Hubs of the Tea Horse Road” \nThomas Chambers\, Teaching Fellow\, School of Global Studies\, University of Sussex\n“Scaling Conviviality: The Spatial Economics of a ‘Marginal Hub’” \nYasmin Cho\, Postdoctoral Fellow\, Anthropology\, University of Michigan\n“Purposefully Marginal: Gender\, Wilderness\, and (Dis)connectivity in Tibetan Buddhist Revivalism in Post-Mao China” \nNellie Chu\, Postdoctoral Researcher\, Center for Transregional Research Network\, University of Göttingen\n“Displacement and Maternal Longing: The Production of Jiagongchang as Marginal Hubs of Subcontracted Labor in Guangzhou\, China” \nTill Mostowlansky\, Asia Research Institute\, National University of Singapore\n“Faraway siblings\, so close: marginality\, connectivity and mediated conviviality across the Pakistan-Tajikistan frontier” \nJacob Nerenberg\, PhD Candidate\, Anthropology\, University of Toronto\n“The Terminal Economy: Frontier Dreams and Confrontational Gathering in Highlands Papua (Indonesia)” \nAnton Nikolotov\, PhD Student\, Central Asian Studies\, Humboldt University and Frei University\n“Volatile shashlyk and shopfloor convivialities in a peripheral market in Moscow: skills\, emotionality and exchange” \nMalini Sur\, Research Fellow\, Asia Research Institute\, National University of Singapore\n“Garrison Conviviality: Longing at the Nation’s Margins” \nStacey Van Vleet\, Visiting Lecturer\, History\, East Asian Languages and Cultures\, University of California\, Berkeley\n“Medicine\, Monasteries\, and Scholarly Networks between Qing China and the Tibetan Buddhist World” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nHow might we conceive of places of encounter with difference beyond the major centers that have dominated the study of urbanism in Asia? What forms of social interaction are to be found in such sites? And how are such hubs connected to one another and to major urban centers? This workshop seeks to answer these questions by foregrounding the empirical and conceptual exploration of what we call ‘marginal hubs’ in diverse Asian contexts. \nBy ‘marginal hubs’ we denote sites that may be institutionally or geographically remote from historic centers of urban sociality or political power\, but which are\, or have been\, places of interaction between people\, things\, and ideas from diverse backgrounds. A non-exhaustive list of such sites might include border markets\, caravanserais\, army bases\, peri-urban container camps\, madrassas\, ports\, or the Soviet-era “village of urban type” in which workers of diverse linguistic and confessional backgrounds were posted to work in a single factory or mine. During the workshop we will explore the modes of social interaction that are to be found in such hubs\, the forms of extraction and violence by which they may be characterized in the present or past\, as well as the distinct forms of sociality or conviviality that may shape social life within and around them. We enquire what role such hubs might play in the emergence of new cultural expressions (for instance\, in music\, in manners and etiquette\, in rituals of politeness and hospitality\, in food and consumption\, in dress and clothing) and the degree to which the forms of sociability found in such hubs might be traced to settings beyond. \nThe workshop proceeds from a recognition that while there has been a flourishing of literature on urban life in Asia on the one hand\, and on borders\, frontiers and rural margins on the other\, we know comparatively little about those forms of sensibility and sociability that emerge in hubs that may be remote from\, or peripheral to\, traditional urban centers. By inviting historically and ethnographically informed papers that study ‘marginal hubs’ in diverse Asian settings\, we seek to diversify and unsettle the category of the ‘Asian urban’ and to draw attention to forms of non-elite mobility that link diverse Asian hubs\, including the movement of soldiers\, traders\, construction workers\, members of religious orders\, domestic workers\, and engineers. We invite contributions from junior and senior scholars from anthropology\, history\, geography and allied fields that draw upon a close empirical analysis of hub(s) in one or more Asian setting. We particularly welcome papers that speak to questions of connectivity\, durability or comparability by engaging one or more of the following questions: \n\nIn what ways are marginal hubs connected both to one another and to major urban centers? What forms (infrastructural\, imaginary\, familial\, personal) do such connections take? Are such marginal hubs dependent upon urban centers or do they exist in parallel to them? Are there regular forms of symbiosis and mutual dependency between them?\nIn what ways is it possible to historicize hubs in the margin? Are marginal hubs that apparently emerge almost overnight (e.g. container markets) actually informed by longer histories? How do hubs change through time\, and what temporal scales might be helpful in thinking about this: linearity\, cycles\, stop-start transformations? In what ways do marginal hubs from the past (e.g. caravanserais\, military bases\, or border markets) maintain a place in the life of local communities even after decline? Has the state found it easier to suppress such hubs or to harness them?\nDoes the particular type of flow with which a hub is connected influence the nature of its dynamics\, or is it possible to recognize similarities and parallels across apparently different kinds of marginal hub? For example\, are hubs or religious learning different from or comparable to hubs of trade and commerce?
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/conviviality-beyond-the-urban-centre-theorizing-the-marginal-hub/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T164309Z
CREATED:20201026T164309Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T164309Z
UID:10000665-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Forced Migration in/of Asia: Connections\, Convergences\, Comparisons
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nElaine Lynn-Ee Ho\nAssociate Professor\, Geography\, National University of Singapore\nelaine.ho@nus.edu.sg \nCabeiri Robinson\nAssociate Professor\, International Studies & Anthropology\, University of Washington\ncdr33@uw.edu \nWorkshop Participants\nJosee Huennekes\, PhD Candidate\, Swinburne Institute for Social Research\, Swinburne University of Technology\n“Remittances and Responsibilities among Rohingya Families in Kuala Lumpur’s Suburbs” \nUmut Korkut\, Reader (Associate Professor)\, Glasgow School for Business and Society\, Glasgow Caledonian University\n“The Discursive governance of forced migration management: The Turkish shift from reticence to activism in Asia” \nSang Kook Lee\, Associate Professor\, Cultural Anthropology\, Yonsei University\n“From Activists to Entrepreneurs: Burmese Refugees in South Korea” \nKirsten Mcconnachie\, Assistant Professor\, Law\, University of Warwick\n“Boundaries and Belonging in the Indo-Myanmar Borderlands: Chin refugees in Mizoram” \nAnne McNevin\, Associate Professor\, Politics\, New School for Social Research\, The New School\n“Human Displacement and the Crisis of Hospitality: Reflections on the Spirit of Refugee Law and the Example of Acehnese Fishermen” \nMallica Mishra\, Associate Faculty\, Post-Graduate Diploma in Management (Development Studies)\, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India\n“Tibetan Refugees in India: Learnings in Exile” \nRebecca Nedostup\, Associate Professor\, History\, Brown University\n“Home & Land: Profiting from the Displaced during Wartime” \nGlen Peterson\, Professor\, History\, University of British Columbia\n“Refugees\, Forced Migration and China’s Entry into the “Family of Nations” \nNatasha Raheja\, PhD Candidate and Adjunct Instructor\, Anthropology\, New York University\n“From Minority to Majority: Pakistani Hindu Claims to Indian Citizenship” \nWen-Ching Ting\, PhD Candidate\, Migration Studies\, School of Global Studies\, University of Sussex\n“Actors\, Constellations of Mobility and ‘Home’ Territory: case of displaced Shanmigrants along the Thai-Burma border” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nForced migration in Asian countries and dispersing across Asia (henceforth Asian forced migration) is drawing international attention to the extent and nature of humanitarian assistance made available to displaced persons. The conduct of the International Refugee Regime (IRR)\, which evolved out of post-war European agendas\, may have limited reach over the different types of forced migration happening in Asia. Critically examining Asian forced migration reveals the sustained effects of colonial and imperial legacies and how culturally specific notions of territory\, sovereignty\, legal systems\, and kinship\, co-ethnic or other social ties influence the treatment of refugees\, internally displaced people and other types of human displacement. The challenge is to write the Asian forced migration experience into a wider global narrative without losing sight of the specificity of particular regional situations. \nOur workshop seeks to critically examine the InterAsian connections forged through forced migration experiences\, lending to revised inflections upon the way we approach studies of forced migration through hitherto accepted national or regional framings. Through our workshop\, we also examine convergences in how framings of territory\, sovereignty and legal systems in Asian societies impact the way forced migration is managed or experienced by forced migrants themselves. We further elicit comparisons of how Asian states have responded to forced migration in relation to the categorization and management norms that developed in Europe and internationally during the post-war decades. \nThe workshop aims to develop a research agenda concerning how studying Asian forced migration might contribute to wider debates in the fields of refugee\, migration and Asian studies. We encourage papers that focus on one or both of the following themes: \n\nConsider the multiplicity of Asian forced migration such as the multiple ways in which forced migration is experienced and managed and thus the possibility of multiple regimes governing forced migration in an interAsian context. Exploring the presence of multiple regimes requires investigating the history and contemporary experiences of of refugees\, displaced persons and forced migrants on their own terms\, rather than fitting them into conventional legal definitions. It also provides the opportunity to critically engage with the empirical diversity of political and social power that can generate regimes of refugee recognition and managements\, rather than assuming the singularity of primacy of the IRR).\nExamine the interface of an array of social actors implicated in Asian forced migration\, ranging from the ground level to institutionally organized interventions\, locally and transnationally. Such interfaces include\, but are not limited to\, the interactions of community-based organisations or other local networks\, national governments from source or receiving countries of forced migration\, governments-in-exile\, international organisations\, and international non-governmental organisations. Investigating the interface of such interactions open up a dialogue on how knowledge structures and practices pertaining to forced migration circulate in an InterAsian context with global influences in mind.\n\nBy curating papers that explore the multiplicity of forced migration and the interfaces of actors and institutions\, our workshop aims to reposition “Asia” as a central theoretical and empirical site for studies of forced migration. It seeks to do this by examining how local dynamics and social interactions that arise out of displacement experiences shape InterAsian and international knowledge\, and ultimately how international practices and norms are re-appropriated locally. The InterAsian analyses that we undertake through this workshop bring into view how the imagery and functioning of “Asia” has been sedimented through accrued layers and episodes of forced migration.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/forced-migration-in-of-asia-connections-convergences-comparisons/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T164505Z
CREATED:20201026T164505Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T164505Z
UID:10000666-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Frontier Assemblages: Political Economies of Margins and Resource Frontiers in Asia
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nMichael Eilenberg\nAssociate Professor\, Culture and Society\, Aarhus University\netnome@cas.au.dk \nJason Cons\nResearch Assistant Professor\, LBJ School of Public Affairs\, University of Texas at Austin\njasoncons@utexas.edu \nWorkshop Participants\nZachary Anderson\, PhD Candidate\, Geography and Planning\, University of Toronto\n“Pragmatism and politics: Translating the green economy in an Indonesian frontier” \nYoung Rae Choi\, Graduate Student (Post-Defense)\, Geography\, Ohio State University\n“Spaces of sustainability? China’s coastal reclamation boom and the sustainability controversy” \nMichael Dwyer\, Associate Researcher\, Centre for Development and Environment\, University of Bern\n“Concession development: Timber financing and risk modulation at Southeast Asia’s upland frontier” \nGökçe Günel\, Lecturer in Discipline\, Anthropology\, Columbia University\n“Subsurface Workings: the Production of Carbon Capture and Storage Policy in the United Arab Emirates” \nDolly Kikon\, Lecturer\, Department of Anthropology and Development Studies\, University of Melbourne\n“Carbon Connections” \nDuncan McDuie-Ra\, Associate Dean Research\, Arts and Social Sciences\, UNSW\n“Frontier Land Dynamics and the Private Health Boom in Imphal\, Manipur” \nKasia Paprocki\, PhD Candidate\, Development Sociology\, Cornell University\n“The Climate Frontier: Political Economies of Shrimp Aquaculture and Climate Change Adaptation in Coastal Bangladesh” \nIgor Rubinov\, PhD Candidate\, Anthropology\, Princeton University\n“Growing at the margins: Grafting families and trees on a former Soviet frontier” \nJasnea Sarma\, PhD Student\, Comparative Asian Studies\, National University Of Singapore\n“Explorations of Space\, Time and Political Subjectivities in India and China’s Resource Frontier’s In Myanmar” \nMax Woodworth\, Assistant Professor\, Geography\, Ohio State University\n“Frontier Landscapes of the Gigantic and the Ghost Town in Ordos\, Inner Mongolia” \nJerry Zee\, Chancellor’s Postdoctoral Fellow\, Science and Technology Studies\, University of California\, Davis\n“Groundwork: Experiments with Environment on a Chinese Airstream” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThis workshop interrogates the contemporary expansion of so-called resource frontiers into marginal spaces throughout Asia. The past decades have seen a radical and unprecedented transformation in margins—borders\, upland areas\, and “waste” zones—throughout Asia. Millions of acres of land have been rapidly converted to large-scale\, export-oriented monoculture production. Often\, though not exclusively\, the funding and management of these resource frontiers comes from elsewhere in Asia. We are interested in exploring the implications for the sovereignty\, security\, and political economy of the states in which these transformations are occurring; the new financial configurations that are driving it; the environmental impact of this expansion in these often ecologically vulnerable zones; and the impacts on the people who live in these rapidly transforming margins. \nWhile scholars have begun to direct attention towards these individual transformations\, very little is known about their similarities and differences across space. It is clear that the expansion of palm oil\, rubber\, aquaculture\, and other mono-culture commodities have radically altered territorial sovereignty\, ecology\, and human security throughout the region. Yet\, what similarities and differences do these transformations share? What are the broad and micro dynamics of resource frontier transformation? And what do these shifts portend for margins\, which have and continue to be sites of intense securitization\, conflict\, and expansion? Understanding these dynamics helps to clarify processes that are reshaping the geopolitics of the region and reformatting millions of people’s relationship to land. \nWe understand the linkages between foreign direct investment\, large-scale resource extraction and territorial politics in the margins of Asia as frontier assemblages to engage the multiple meanings and notions associated with regions where resource frontiers and marginal spaces interlock. We use the term “assemblage” to indicate a historically contingent convergence that facilitates expansion into frontier zones. We conceptualize frontiers as\, first\, a discourse of untouched wilderness and infinite unexploited resources and\, second\, as moving zones of state control and resource extraction. We see frontier assemblages as projects in the making\, which are unstable and in flux. We understand these frontier assemblages as broad\, yet historically and spatially specific forms of resource exploitation now unfolding in the margins of Asia. \nThis workshop interrogates this unprecedented transformation and the complex array of actors\, forces\, and ecologies that constitute it. We wish to explore four key questions: (1) What are the commonalities and differences in frontier development and resource exploitation across different national borders in Asia; (2) What kinds of framings of “space” and “territory” legitimatize and mobilize expansion into frontier zones and subsequent land enclosures; (3) what kinds of capital flows and financial configurations are mobilized to produce new resource frontiers; (4) and how do largescale development schemes in marginal areas articulate with projects of national security\, sovereignty\, and state-formation in different geopolitical contexts? \nWe invite participation from scholars working on\, but not limited to\, such topics as: \n\nThe development of new export processing zones;\nThe financialization of new extractive economies;\nThe political ecology of resource extraction;\nLand grabbing and land dynamics in frontier zones;\nThe dynamics of new plantation economies.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/frontier-assemblages-political-economies-of-margins-and-resource-frontiers-in-asia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T164657Z
CREATED:20201026T164657Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T164657Z
UID:10000667-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Genealogies of Financialization: Reframing Sovereignty in Asia (1600–present)
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nSankaran Krishna\nProfessor of Political Science\, University of Hawaii at Manoa\nkrishna@hawaii.edu \nSaeyoung Park\nAssistant Professor\, Modern Korean Studies\, Leiden University\nspark34@jhu.edu \nWorkshop Participants\nColin Agur\, Postdoctoral Associate\, Yale Law School\, Yale University\n“Communication Technology\, Illicit Flows of Capital\, and State-Society Tensions” \nGiulia Dal Maso\, PhD Candidate\, Cultural Studies\, Institute for Culture and Society “Past and present mass financialization: continuity in state legitimation” \nLaura Elder\, Assistant Professor\, Global Studies\, Saint Mary’s College Notre Dame\n“Banking Like a State: An alternative genealogy of Islamic finance” \nHarald Fuess\, Professor\, Cultural Economic History\, Heidelberg University\n“Undermining the Sovereignty of Korea? Capital Flows\, Investments\, and Trade\, 1876-1910” \nHoward Kahm\, Assistant Professor\, Underwood International College\, Yonsei University\n“Currency Smuggling: Monetary Sovereignty\, Decolonization\, and Undercover Financial Networks during the American Occupation of Korea\, 1945-1948” \nGeeta Patel\, Associate Professor\, Department of Middle Eastern and South Asian Languages and Cultures\, University of Virginia\n“Liquid Capital\, Illiquid Entities: The East India Company and the Madras Civil Fund” \nAditi Saraf\, PhD Candidate\, Anthropology\, Johns Hopkins University\n“Frontier’s Signature: Trade and Territory at the Edges of Empire” \nKellee Tsai\, Head and Chair Professor\, Division of Social Science\, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology\n“Moving Merchants and Money: Zhejiang and Gujarat’s Transnational Traders” \nLeilah Vevaina\, Postdoctoral Fellow\, Religious Diversity\, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity\n“To Hong Kong and Back Again: Building Bombay and Redeveloping Mumbai” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThe Great Recession of 2007 and the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 have ignited interest in how state power and peoples’ will are transmuted\, amplified\, and undermined by global financial regimes. Few may know of earlier financial crises\, such as those in late Ming China (1368–1644) that led to the Single-Whip silver tax reform that sparked the first global integration of currency markets. Financial crises and state responses have shifted state-society boundaries for centuries\, giving rise to novel transnational financial orders that discipline and engender new ideas of personhood and political subjectivities. Situated at the nexus of state power and finance from 1600 to the present\, our objective is to explore non-Eurocentric genealogies of financialization across Asia. \nWe conceive of financialization broadly as an apparatus or a set of practices\, discourses\, and epistemologies that mediate the contested reordering of the world along lines of credit\, assets\, capital mobility and extraction. Whether it’s pilgrimage financing through informal credit associations in the eighteenth century\, nineteenth century indentured service practices\, or a twentieth century M&A deal\, our daily transactions and their attendant logics of financialization are deeply imbricated in systems of value\, security\, and regulation that give rise to the ubiquitous yet unseen architecture of transborder finance. \nExploring new ways to periodize and historicize financialization\, this workshop focuses on three inter-related themes: \n\nFinancialization and Nation/Empire making: First\, we will interrogate the ways in which financialization and its accompanying socio-legal technologies are deployed in state and empire building from 1600–present. Triumphalist western narratives often fall short in explaining global finance’s failures to displace local\, often older\, parallel systems of credit\, or assume institutionalization occurs only by alien imposition and with little local mediation. Hence\, a study of financialization over the longue durée reinscribes Asian experiences into teleologies of finance\, e.g. highlighting how the house of Jagat Seth\, a giant Jain indigenous banking firm brokered the rise of Company Raj\, hastening the eighteenth century decline of the Mughal Empire. How do such analyses trouble a convergent understanding of the state as postcolonial restorer of sovereignty and as a neoliberal shepherd of economic development?\nForgotten intermediaries of finance: Our vantage renders visible mobile middle men and women whose political alliances do not neatly align with geopolitical boundaries. State-centered scholarship awkwardly accommodates the individuals\, private banks\, and black market financiers that have historically facilitated credit flows through the “plumbing” of regional and global finance that existed prior to the modern institutionalization of international finance. The slippery spaces between money and morality can foster unlikely alliances that cross racial\, gender\, and political lines. Hence\, this workshop seeks new studies that explore how people and institutions have navigated scales of financialization (simultaneously global/local; Islamic/Western; colonial/postcolonial) that disrupt traditional territorial orders that undergird sovereignty by producing new geographies that bring Shanghai and faraway Mumbai closer together than Shanghai and Shenyang.\nProblematizing the state-market binary: International financial institutions (IFIs such as the World Bank and the IMF) have broken out of their “straitjackets of transactional legal work\,” to invest in the construction of economic foundations—work formerly within the domain of states. The recursive dynamics through which IFIs and their partners acquire state functions\, sometimes against sovereign resistance\, but at times in collusion with states (often against other states) complicates straightforward analyses. Further\, is what we think of as the “work of a state” stable when states themselves have been reconfigured by waves of financialization? How has financialization shaped continuities in state practice over the five-century decline and re-emergence of Asian economic hegemonies?\n\nParticipants are not required to engage the entire longue durée of Asian financialization (1600–present)\, but we seek papers on the theme of finance and sovereignty that use multidisciplinary methods\, trace historical lineages\, and preferably range across more than one (nation-)state.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/genealogies-of-financialization-reframing-sovereignty-in-asia-1600-present/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T164837Z
CREATED:20201026T164837Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T164837Z
UID:10000668-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Geo-political Economies of (Post) Developmental Urbanization in East Asia
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nJamie Doucette\nLecturer\, School of Environment and Development\, University of Manchester\njamie.doucette@manchester.ac.uk \nBae-Gyoon Park\nProfessor\, Geography Education\, Seoul National University\ngeopbg@snu.ac.kr \nWorkshop Participants\nCarolyn Cartier\, Professor of Geography and China Studies\, School of International Studies\, University of Technology Sydney\n“‘Cut from the County’: Mao-era Cities and their Territorial Legacies in Contemporary China” \nEli Friedman\, Assistant Professor\, International and Comparative Labor\, Cornell University\n“Just-in-Time Urbanization? Managing migration\, citizenship\, and schooling in the Chinese city” \nJim Glassman\, Professor\, Geography\, University of British Columbia\n“Developmental Bureaucratic States\, Developmental Network States and the Geopolitical Economy of Cold War Industrialization in Ulsan and Kaohsiung” \nHeidi Gottfried\, Associate Professor\, Sociology\, Wayne State University\n“The Phoenix Rises: Tokyo’s Origin as a Global city” \nLaam Hae\, Associate Professor\, Department of Political Science\, York University\n“Traveling Policy: City Marketing and the Neoliberal Turn of Urban Studies in South Korea” \nJinn-yuh Hsu\, Professor\, Department of Geography\, National Taiwan University\n“Hsinchu Technopolis: A Socio-technical Imaginary of Modernity in Taiwan?” \nJoo-Hyoung Ji\, Assistant Professor\, Sociology Department\, Kyungnam University\n“The Making of the (Real) Gangnam Style: A Cultural Political Economy of Compressed Urbanization in South Korea” \nChristina Kim\, PhD Candidate\, Anthropology\, The New School for Social Research\n“Bridges of Ambition to North Korea: Economy of Anticipation and Materiality of Aspiration in Dandong\, China” \nJana Kleibert\, Postdoctoral Research Fellow\, Dynamics of Economic Spaces\, Leibniz Institute for Regional Development and Structural Planning\n“Enclave urbanism in Metro Manila” \nKah-Wee Lee\, Assistant Professor\, Architecture\, National University of Singapore\n“Normalizing Exception/Beyond consumerism: Casino Urbanisms in Singapore and Macau ” \nChristina Moon\, Assistant Professor of Fashion Studies\, School of Art and Design History and Theory\, The New School\, Parsons School of Design\n“Fashion City: zones\, markets\, and diaspora across the US and Asia” \nJoanna Phua\, Doctoral Candidate\, Political Science\, The Graduate Center\, City University of New York\n“Circuits and Transfers of the Cold War: From Prescriptive to Neo-Developmental Urbanism in Asia” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nProcesses of East Asian urbanization are unique because they have been deeply influenced by state-led strategies of national development that were deeply interwoven with Cold War geo-political economies of capitalist development. Existing studies on East Asian cities\, however\, have not been able to properly address this unique feature of urbanization because they have not made sufficient efforts to understand cities in relation to broader politico-economic processes of East Asian capitalist development. These studies tend to take a localist approach that regards the city as a social object that is territorially contained and institutionally coherent. As such\, previous works on East Asian cities have privileged the urban scale as their primary unit of analysis\, to the neglect of wider socio-spatial processes that condition urban development. For instance\, the roles played by transnational networks of capital\, migrants\, and various forms of expertise in creating spaces of ‘national’ urban development during the Cold War have often been neglected. Likewise\, the multi-scalar interactions between urban development and wider configurations of power\, regulation\, and ideology have remained understudied. \nWith this problem orientation\, this workshop aims to collect papers that address the multi-scalar dynamics and geo-political economic contexts of East Asian capitalist development. We seek work that characterizes the processes of East Asian urbanization as a form of “developmental urbanization” by paying special attention to how East Asian urban development during the period from the 1950s to the 1980s was heavily influenced by socio-spatial processes of national development that included 1) state-led developmentalist industrialization and 2) post-colonial nation-building activities. East Asian states actively promoted the development of national urban networks to enhance the territorial integrity of the nation\, and prioritized urban infrastructure to support mass production and economic growth. Under the state’s big push\, urban processes took place very rapidly in strategically selected areas of political and economic importance. The outcome was 1) spatio-temporal compression of urban development (thereby resulting in ‘compressed urbanization’)\, 2) spatial selectivity in urban development (thereby producing ‘spaces of exception’)\, and 3) uneven geographies of power (thereby shaping uneven geographies of urban contestation). \nWhile neoliberal and market-friendly processes of urban development have gradually become more influential than national developmentalist efforts since the end of the Cold War\, the institutional and material legacies of developmental urbanism are still influential in East Asian urban development. The legacies of developmental urbanism\, combined with the influences of post-Cold War geo-political economies and neo-liberal globalization\, have resulted in the rise of ‘neo-developmental urbanization.’ This process has thus contributed to existing urban problems in East Asia such as urban displacement\, divided cities\, and struggles over public space and the right to the city. Therefore\, this workshop equally solicits papers that address how processes of developmental urbanization have been transformed since the 1990s in relation to neoliberal globalization and post-cold war geo-political economies. \nSome topics might include but are not limited to: compressed urbanization\, trans-local connections\, postcolonial urbanism\, urban mega projects\, speculative urbanization\, the construction state\, spaces of exceptions\, zoning technologies\, urban-industrial experiments\, circuits of developmentalist expertise\, infrastructural spaces\, contentious politics and urban development\, and urban social movements.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/geo-political-economies-of-post-developmental-urbanization-in-east-asia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T165033Z
CREATED:20201026T165033Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T165033Z
UID:10000669-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Knowledge Mobilities and the Prospects for InterAsian Urbanisation
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nFrancis Collins\nSenior Lecturer\, Geography\, School of Environment\, University of Auckland\nf.collins@auckland.ac.nz \nKong Chong Ho\nAssociate Professor\, Sociology\, National University of Singapore\nsochokc@nus.edu.sg \nWorkshop Participants\nJacqueline Armijo\, Associate Professor\, International Affairs\, Qatar University\n“Islamic Knowledge Mobilities\, DragonMart\, and the Growing Chinese Muslim Community in Dubai” \nSujin Eom\, PhD Candidate\, Department of Architecture\, UC Berkeley\n“The Idea of Chinatown: Policy Mobilities and the Making of New Economic Imaginations in South Korea” \nMaureen Hickey\, Instructor\, International and Global Studies Program\, Portland State University\n“‘English Fever\,’ Migrant Teachers\, and Cosmopolitan Aspirations in an Interconnected Asia” \nNithila Kanagasabai\, Junior Research Fellow\, Advanced Centre for Women’s Studies\, Tata Institute of Social Sciences\n“Possibilities of Transformation: Women’s Studies in Tier II Cities in India” \nYoonhee Kang\, Associate Professor\, Department of Anthropology\, Seoul National University\n“A Pathway to ‘Constant Becoming’: Time\, Temporalities and the Construction of Self among South Korean Educational Migrants in Singapore” \nStephanie Kim\, Program Director\, Center for Korean Studies\, University of California\, Berkeley\n“Flexible Citizenship or Pejorative Privilege? Student Dynamics in an International Higher Education Space in South Korea” \nSuray Agung Nugroho\, PhD Student\, Korean Studies\, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies and Younghan Cho\, Associate Professor/Associate Dean\, Korean Studies\, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies\n“Unwarranted Students: Changing Subjectivities of Indonesian Workers Studying at Indonesian Open University in South Korea” \nHyun Joo Sandy Oh\, PhD Candidate\, Anthropology\, University of Toronto\n“Escaping obsolescence: The shift from subject to skill based education in a South Korean International School” \nYasmin Patrice Ortiga\, Research Fellow\, Public Policy and Global Affairs\, Nanyang Technological University\n“Constructing a Global Education Hub: The Unlikely Case of Manila” \nLe-Ha Phan\, Professor\, College of Education\, University of Hawaii at Manoa\n“Transnational Education\, English\, the Idea of ‘the West’\, Reaching to ASEAN\, and Dream Realization: A Case Study of a Regional University in Vietnam” \nLiliia Zemnukhova\, Research Fellow\, Center for Science and Technology Studies\, European University at St. Petersburg and Melanie Feakins\, Research Associate\, Institute of Slavic East European and Eurasian Studies\, University of California\, Berkeley\n“’I’m not a gastarbeiter anymore”: Liminal Mobility of Young Kazakh IT Professionals in Russia” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nOver the last two decades\, Asian nations have embarked on ambitious political projects that seek to reconfigure education\, research\, and knowledge as critical drivers of competitiveness\, productivity\, and economic growth. Heralded as the pathway to global emergence\, these knowledge projects hinge on the cultivation and circulation of people\, the transfer of skills and knowledge\, and the generation of new InterAsian connections that cut across traditional hierarchies of nations\, cities\, and institutions. These aspirations speak to the multiplex challenges of interconnected Asian modernities: demographic growth in some places and a desire for renewal in others; the human capital demands of service and technology-centered economies in an era of growing trade; the impact of regional mobility and ethnic diversity on national identities; the place of meritocracy\, privilege and inequality in the making of knowledge economies; and the social and ecological consequences of economic growth. \nIn the Asian region\, a select group of regionally and globally connected cities are key sites for the generation and articulation of knowledge-based political projects and migration trajectories. Stretching from Dubai and Riyadh in West Asia\, Delhi and Mumbai in South Asia\, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore in Southeast Asia\, to Hong Kong\, Seoul\, Shanghai and Tokyo in East Asia. Long seen as critical spaces for nation-building projects\, these cities are being re-crafted as post-industrial zones\, desirable destinations for knowledge migrants\, and regional hubs for education\, research and technology. These cities are being re-assembled through transnational flows of popular culture\, symbolic and aesthetic expressions\, governmentalities of migration regimes\, and materialities of new built forms. Concomitantly\, this reworking of the Asian urban also articulates through a range of deterritorialising and reterritorialising effects as universities seek out global status and regional networks beyond the nation\, workplaces become more diversified\, urban spaces are reshaped to attract foreign students and workers\, and principles of citizenship and political participation are re-examined. \nThis workshop will explore the emerging role of knowledge migration and the InterAsian connections that are being reconfigured in and through major urban centres in the region. Participants are asked to address specific forms of knowledge migration – student\, scholar\, scientist\, professional – and examine the ways in which these mobilities are generated in and generative of new InterAsian connections; involve the de/reterritorialisation of urban\, national and regional spaces; and articulate through new political anxieties and subjectivities. We seek papers from scholars across the social sciences and humanities who are working empirically in Asia on the role of education and knowledge in migration. Contributions are encouraged from scholars advancing new conceptualisations of the interconnections between mobility\, cities\, and knowledge flows. Potential themes include: \n\nThe desires/aspirations of people on the move and the role of knowledge as driver and enabler of migration.\nCities as desirable destinations for students\, scholars\, and professionals\, and the ways in which such desirability is generated in transnational flows of popular culture\, governmental discourses\, institutional narratives and other symbolic endeavours.\nThe role of population mobilities in reconfiguring the role of cities within national\, regional\, and global spaces.\nEmergence of various intra-regional Asian connections: Islamic\, Southeast Asian\, diasporic\, mobility in the wider spheres of China and India\, cross-regional movement.\nInterAsian knowledge flows and the challenge of Anglophone hegemony in research\, teaching and practice; alternative centres of knowledge production and circulation.\nNormative and alternative globalization and regionalization of urban knowledge endeavours – policy mobility and learning in government\, institutions\, civil society.\nPolitical anxieties and subjectivities in knowledge migration: demographic renewal\, diversity and national identity; challenges to authoritarian rule; regional identities.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/knowledge-mobilities-and-the-prospects-for-interasian-urbanisation/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T165240Z
CREATED:20201026T165240Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T165240Z
UID:10000670-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Logistics of Asia-Led Globalization: Infrastructure\, Software\, Labor
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nBrett Neilson\nResearch Director\, Institute for Culture and Society\, University of Western Sydney\nb.neilson@uws.edu.au \nRanabir Samaddar\nDirector\, Calcutta Research Group\nranabir@mcrg.ac.in \nWorkshop Participants\nMajed Akhter\, Assistant Professor\, Geography\, Indiana University Bloomington\n“An infrastructural approach to region: Corridor controversies\, emergent Asias\, and the afterlives of the developmental state” \nPaula Banerjee\, Professor\, South and Southeast Asian Studies\, Calcutta University\n“Multiplying Insecurity” \nGiorgio Grappi\, Research fellow\, Political and Social Sciences\, University of Bologna\n“Corridors as political discourse? Decoding the language of logistical governance” \nRolien Hoyng\, Visiting Assistant Professor\, Cultural Studies\, Lingnan University\n“Multiplying logistics: undoing and redoing categorization in e-waste recycling in Hong Kong” \nThilini Kahandawaarachchi\, Attorney-at-Law\n“Politics of ports – China’s investments in Pakistan\, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh” \nNelli Kambouri\, Researcher\, Centre for Gender Studies\, Panteion University and Pavlos Hatzopoulos\, Centre for Gender Studies\, Panteion University\n“Piraeus Port as a Machinic Assemblage: Labour\, Precarity and Struggles” \nIman Kumar Mitra\, Research Associate\, Economics\, Calcutta Research Group\n“Spatialization of Calculability\, Financialization of Space: A Study of the Kolkata Port” \nNed Rossiter\, Professor of Communication\, Institute for Culture and Society\, Western Sydney University\n“Imperial Infrastructures: Data Centers\, State Formation and the Territory of Logistical Media” \nKaustubh Mani Sengupta\, Assistant Professor\, History\, Bankura University\nThe Port of Calcutta in the Imperial Network of South and South-East Asia\, 1870s-1950s” \nPing (Sophie) Sun\, PhD Student\, School of Journalism and Communication\, Chinese University of Hong Kong and Michelangelo Magasic\, Curtin University\n“Knowledge Workers\, Identities\, and Communication Practices: Understanding Code Farmers in China” \nJohn Walsh\, Director\, SIU Research Centre\, School of Management\, Shinawatra University\n“Thailand’s Border Special Economic Zones and the Reconfiguration of Cross-Border Social\, Labour and Commercial Relations” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nAsia’s emergence as one of the world’s most important trading regions is giving rise to new global connections and spatial economic networks. Recent attention has focused on China’s “One Belt\, One Road” policy\, which seeks to revive historical Silk Road transport routes\, but infrastructural and informational installations across the region are fast changing geopolitical visions\, renderings of urban space\, and understandings of historical transition. From the Asian Highway Network to the Yuxinou freight railway connecting Chongqing to Duisburg in Germany\, from the proliferation of discount airline hubs to the tangle of fiber optic cables surrounding data centers in Hong Kong’s New Territories or the Jurong district of Singapore\, logistical developments are reconfiguring both Asia’s relation to the world and its internal logics of transport and communication. Building on critical perspectives that understand logistics as a political technology for producing and organizing space and power\, this workshop will enlist a diversity of scholars to discuss how digital technologies and material infrastructure combine to remake urban and regional territories and produce new forms of governance and subjectivity. \nLogistics mobilizes infrastructure\, labor\, data\, and software to create a smooth world for the circulation of commodities and capital but\, at every juncture\, must negotiate social and cultural frictions. This tension lends itself at once to innovation in governmental technologies and to the organization of dissent\, resistance\, and violence. In urban settings\, logistics presents a model of space\, time\, and economy distinct from the global city of finance capital or the industrial city of factories. The logistical city tends to locate itself on the urban periphery\, taking advantage of cheap land\, lower labor costs and\, ideally\, a clean slate for the installation of infrastructure. This clean slate\, however\, is a planner’s unfulfilled dream. Logistical spaces are commonly occupied by workers\, peasants\, migrants\, and other marginal subjects who have their own vision and version of these spaces. There is a tussle between competing visions\, which produces a narrative of urban transformation that is uneven\, contentious\, and overtly political. Understanding the stakes and consequences of this politics means not only examining conflicts on the ground but also studying how logistical technologies marshal populations in ways that parallel\, rival\, and influence the statecraft of traditional political bodies. \nThis workshop welcomes papers that explore global extensions of Asian economic power by examining the conflicts and complexities generated when logistical operations hit the ground. We invite interventions that critically investigate resonances and divergences in the making of logistical connections between different sites\, sectors\, and practices of mobility. Contributions may focus on developments in Asia or examine how infrastructural and informational strategies extend from Asia to other continents in ways that reorganize both Asia’s internal regions and the wider spatial patterning of the world. We are particularly interested in papers that utilize data analytics or other digital methods to offer insights into how logistical practices guide current global mobilities. More widely\, we seek presentations from a range of disciplinary and conceptual orientations – including feminism\, political economy\, postcolonial theory\, critical geography\, and communication/media studies – to explore the power-laden operations of logistics in and beyond Asian urbanities\, socialities\, and regionalisms.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/logistics-of-asia-led-globalization-infrastructure-software-labor/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T165431Z
CREATED:20201026T165431Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T165431Z
UID:10000671-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Mecca InterAsia
DESCRIPTION:Organized in association with the Muhammad Alagil Chair in Arabia Asia Studies\, Asia Research Institute\, National University of Singapore \n\nWorkshop Directors\nCemil Aydin\nAssociate Professor\, Department of History\, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill\ncaydin@email.unc.edu \nEngseng Ho\nProfessor of History and Anthropology\, Duke University; Muhammad Alagil Distinguished Visiting Professor in Arabia Asia Studies\, Asia Research Institute\, National University of Singapore\nengseng.ho@duke.edu \nWorkshop Participants\nJawaher Al Sudairy\, Research Fellow\, Evidence for Policy Design\, Harvard University\n“The State Within: The Burmese Community in Makkah” \nGuy Burak\, The Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies Librarian\, Division of Libraries\, New York University\n“Mecca\, Its Descriptions and Sovereignty in the Sixteenth-Century Indian Ocean: Jar Allah Ibn Fahd and His The Best of Joy of the Time for the Construction of Mecca by the Kings of the Ottoman Dynasty” \nLale Can\, Assistant Professor\, History\, City College of New York\n“Central Asians in an “Exceptional” City?: The Politics of Imperial Citizenship in Ottoman Mecca” \nTeresita Cruz-del Rosario\, Senior Research Fellow\, Asia Research Institute\, National University of Singapore\n“Return to Mecca: Balik-Islam among Filipino Migrants in Southeast Asia” \nDadi Darmadi\, Center for the Study of Islam and Society\, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta\n“State versus Private: Pilgrimage to Mecca as a Contested Space” \nHyeju (Janice) Jeong\, Graduate Student\, History\, Duke University\n“Home Away from Home: Community and Networks of Chinese-Muslim Political Exiles at Mecca (Hejaz) during the Cold War” \nMahmood Kooria\, PhD Candidate\, Institute for History\, Leiden University\n“Introducing a Meccan Version of Law: Networks of Shāfiʿī fuqahā in the Sixteenth Century” \nMichael Christopher Low\, Assistant Professor\, History\, Iowa State University\n“Unfurling the Flag of Extraterritoriality: Foreign Muslims\, Muslim Consular Agents\, and the Evolution of the Capitulations in the Indian Ocean Hijaz” \nSebastian Maisel\, Associate Professor of Arabic and Middle East Studies\, Modern Languages\, Area Studies\, Grand Valley State University\n“Private versus public service-provision and revenue-sharing for Hajj and Umrah” \nMuhammad Arafat Mohamad\, Postdoctoral Fellow\, Department of Southeast Asian Studies\, National University of Singapore\n“Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Saudization\, Belonging\, and the Migration Dilemma of Mecca’s Diasporic Residents” \nMohamed Sbitli\, Senior Fellow\, King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies\n“The Society of the Ulama of Macca “Ilm\, Trade\, and Tawafa” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nMecca has long been revered\, studied and celebrated as a unique place\, a destination without equal that bestows its name onto other destinations\, other meccas. While scholarly attention lavished on Mecca has been largely ideographic in persuasion\, this workshop invites historical and contemporary studies on Mecca that speak to themes which have been central to the InterAsia conferences\, such as mobility; transregional connections across Asia; transcultural relations; religious\, intellectual\, literary\, political and diasporic networks; varieties of international society. Such themes engage data with historical depth and geographical reach that go far beyond the breathless abstractions of globalization-speak and the false culturalism of anti-terrorism security analysis. \nBy employing Mecca as a dynamic and live focal point\, this workshop seeks to bring these themes together over two days of discussion. Mecca provides a challenge and an opportunity to interweave these themes so as to construct notions of transregional society that are not narrowly local yet are ethnographically rich\, that are local yet cosmopolitan\, and that constantly navigate states that are not set up to recognize or administer such transregional societies. \nWe invite proposals for papers that would contribute to such discussion\, especially those drawing on non-European sources\, historical and contemporary. We are open to a wide range of topics\, which may include: \n\nMecca as refuge in exile;\nendowments by distant persons;\npilgrim organizers/brokers (mutawwif) who chaperone pilgrims from given regions;\nscholarly\, sufi or diasporic networks past or present;\nregional pilgrimages to mini Meccas elsewhere;\nlogistics;\ngenerations of Meccans without citizenship papers or rights;\nMeccan communities and neighbourhoods;\ntrade and pilgrimage;\nredevelopment of Mecca\, Meccan urban developments as stable\, longterm investments;\nbureaucratization and marketization of organized pilgrimage;\nMeccan legal framework for an international city;\nSignificance of Mecca in transregional circuits of ideas and mobility of people across centuries;\nWhat different modes of transport entail for the pilgrimage\, and their consequences: walking\, sailboats\, buses\, steamships\, trains\, aircraft; from the Indian Ocean zone\, Central Asia and China\, as well as nearer by;\nMecca as a symbolic and actual center of Muslim internationalism\, as well as colonial fears of Pan-Islam;\nMecca as a hub of political networking during the era of imperial rivalries\, decolonization\, and the Cold War;\nChallenges of administering pilgrimage and Mecca as a global Muslim city during the 20th century;\nImpact of travel writings to Mecca on the intellectual\, religious and cultural history of diverse Muslim societies;\nUrban Architecture\, neighborhoods\, hospitality industry and ethnic diversity of Mecca in the past and present.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/mecca-interasia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T165620Z
CREATED:20201026T165620Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T165620Z
UID:10000672-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Mediatized Populism across InterAsia
DESCRIPTION:Organized by InterAsia Transregional Virtual Research Institute\, “Media\, Activism and the New Political” \n\nWorkshop Directors\nPaula Chakravartty\nAssociate Professor\, Gallatin School\, Media\, Culture\, and Communication\, New York University\npuc1@nyu.edu \nZeynep Gambetti\nAssociate Professor\, Political Science and International Relations\, Bogaziçi University\ngambetti@boun.edu.tr \nSrirupa Roy\nDirector and Professor\, Centre for Modern Indian Studies and Political Science\, University of Göttingen\nsroy@uni-goettingen.de \nWorkshop Participants\nMiriyam Aouragh\, Leverhulme Fellow\, Communication And Media Research Institute\, University of Westminster\n“Mediating the Makhzan: Counter-revolution & populism in the digital age” \nErgin Bulut\, Assistant Professor\, Media and Visual Arts\, Koç University and Erdem Yörük\, Assistant Professor\, Sociology\, Koç University\n“Contentious Politics and Trolling in Turkey’s Social Media” \nMurat Es\, Assistant Professor\, Department of Geography and Resource Management\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong and Rolien Hoyng\, Visiting Assistant Professor\, Department of Cultural Studies\, Lingnan University\n“Conspiratorial Webs: Media Ecologies and Parallel Realities in Turkey” \nJiyeon Kang\, Assistant Professor\, Communication Studies\, University of Iowa\n“Internet Activism Transforming Street Politics: The 2008 ‘Mad Cow’ Candlelight Festivals and New Democratic Sensibilities” \nAlison Lamont\, PhD Fellow\, Sociology\, University of Duisburg-Essen\n“The Utopian Politics of Disaster in the People’s Republic of China” \nJinee Lokaneeta\, Associate Professor\, Political Science and International Relations\, Drew University\n“Policing\, Law and the Public: Truth and Justice in a Media Trial” \nDuncan McCargo\, Professor of Political Science\, School of Politics and International Studies\, University of Leeds\n“New Media\, New Partisanship: Divided Virtual Politics Beyond Thailand” \nAyesha Mulla\, PhD candidate\, Anthropology\, University of Chicago\n“Broadcasting the Dharna: Mediating ‘Contained’ Populism in Contemporary Pakistan” \nBabak Rahimi\, Associate Professor\, Literature and Cultural Studies\, University of California\, San Diego\n“History\, Context Collapse\, and Transnational Internet Activism in Iran” \nCatherine Sameh\, Assistant Professor\, Gender & Sexuality Studies\, University of California\, Irvine\n“Mediating Gender Equality in Iran” \nValerie Soe\, Associate Professor\, Asian American Studies\, San Francisco State University\n“Migrating Revolution Across Platforms: Social Media and the Sunflower and Umbrella Movements” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nAcross the globe today\, from Thailand to Egypt\, India to Spain\, we are witnessing the emergence of new political movements passionately advancing the claims of “the people” against the ruling “political classes”. Such populist vocabularies are not just confined to the domain of street or protest politics\, but are also harnessed by governing incumbents and aspirants to political office\, whose bid to join the political establishment is paradoxically furthered through anti-establishment claims and stances. Media of various kinds\, from television and social media to camera-enabled mobile phones and text messages\, play a key role—whether as tool\, site\, or agent—in enabling and extending such a politics. This particular formation of “mediated populism” is the focus of our workshop\, which seeks to understand the political historical dynamics and implications of mediated projects of “people-making” that have gained prominence in regions across Asia (from MENA to East Asia) in recent years. \nOur workshop has five interrelated objectives. First\, we seek papers that consider the distinctive institutional contexts of mediated populism across InterAsian space. In contrast to both the European and Latin American contexts\, the mass-mediated spectacle of popular politics is a relatively new phenomenon across much of Asia\, the Middle East and Africa\, where it was only since the last decade of the 20th century that the government-monopolized propagandist architectures of television were replaced by commercial television news. In the intervening years\, media—both old and new—have become privileged domains of politics for the first time. What\, if any\, difference does this relatively late arrival of mediated politics in these regions make to the logic of mediated populism in particular: to what extent do the institutional dynamics of media commercialization and economic liberalization shape the terrain of populist politics across Asia? How do state-institutional contexts shape the media field\, and hence the politics of mediated populism: do media-enabled projects of “people-making” unfold differently in countries where states have more direct control over the media\, whether in Egypt\, China or Iran\, versus those of the seemingly democratic polities of Turkey\, Israel and India? By addressing such questions\, we hope to unpack and disaggregate the idea of a singular “media logic” of populist politics and examine instead the institutional and political-economic dynamics of mediation\, and the variegated structures of media fields\, in which contemporary forms of populist politics are embedded. \nSecond\, we seek papers that engage analytically with the very idea of a politics in the name of “the people”. Twenty-first century mediated populism does not emerge out of an historical or political vacuum; there are multiple and contending constructions of “the people” sedimented and circulating within political arenas at any given point in time. As Ernesto Laclau argues\, populist reason brings together disparate popular demands in critical historical conjunctures not as an aberration or deviation of democracy but instead as the very stuff of democratic politics: populism is the “royal road to the political” in Laclau’s words. We are interested in the intersections\, collusions\, and collisions of these different “road-building” projects. And so\, to what extent do mediated populisms make and remake “the people” differently from other cognate ideas\, whether of the demos\, the nation\, the masses\, the multitude? What are the new lines of agonism and antagonism opened up and elided by the insistence on the division between “the people” and “those in power” that lies at the heart of contemporary political assertions? \nThird\, we welcome contributions that consider the historical distinctiveness of a mediated production of the people/the popular that twenty-first century technologies and processes of mediation might be seen to enable. For Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt or Manuel Castells\, contemporary media and information technologies enable novel\, horizontally connected networks to produce new social relations and political subjectivites. For Judith Butler\, mediated connectivity between “bodies in action” produces a new sense and visibility of “the people” embodied in public protests and popular demands. These are among the theoretical perspectives that have recently been used to conceptualize populist politics in the twenty-first century\, and we are interested in building and innovating upon these approaches. \nFourth\, we are interested in the question of how ideologies fare in the contemporary era of mediated populism. A commonly heard refrain of many populist movements today is that of being “beyond ideology” or “post-ideological”. How might we assess this claim\, on empirical as well as theoretical grounds? What new visions of politics and society emerge from contemporary popular demands? Can they be classified as New Social Movements (Alain Touraine and Claus Offe); social “non-movements” (Asef Bayat) or “political society” (Partha Chatterjee); or should we develop new frames of analysis to grasp their form and content? In addressing these questions about the nature of the “new” political\, we are equally interested in the question of how movements organized around “old”\, “left” and “right” ideological affiliations engage the terrain of mediated politics. For instance\, how have nationalist and religious extremist parties and movements reformulated their politics in the age of both growing inequality and media spectacle? Similarly\, how has the Left reinvented itself in the age of mediated populism? \nFinally\, and this is where the InterAsia dimension of our project is particularly salient\, and useful\, we seek papers that explore the supra-national spatial dynamics that shape the politics of mediated populism. The modularity\, diffusion and “inter-referencing” of ideas\, techniques\, and technologies of populist politics across national territorial spaces; the ways in which cross-border media flows and geopolitical dynamics shape and enable the politics of populism in national contexts\, are among the issues that interest us here. \nPossible Themes: \n\nMedia and the rise of “new populisms” in InterAsian contexts\nInstitutional dynamics of media liberalization and the reshaping of state-society relations\nHistorical perspectives on mediated politics and “people-making” projects in and across Asian regions; comparisons of “old” and “new” mediated populisms\nThe normative politics of transparency and visibility in InterAsian contexts\nRemaking “left” and “right” in the era of twenty-first century mediated populism\n“Inter-referencing” and diffusion of populist ideas\, practices\, and technologies across InterAsian spaces\nGeopolitical dynamics (e.g. wars in Iraq\, Syria\, Afghanistan and Pakistan; “refugee crises” in Asia) and the shaping of national populist politics
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/mediatized-populism-across-interasia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20160427T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20160430T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T165804Z
CREATED:20201026T165804Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T165804Z
UID:10000673-1461744000-1462035600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:The Social Economy and Alternative Development Models in Asia
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nEuiyoung Kim\nProfessor and Director\, Political Science and International Relations\, Institute for Korean Politics\, Seoul National University\neuiyoungkim@snu.ac.kr \nHiroki Miura\nResearcher\, Institute of Korean Political Studies\, Seoul National University\nsugeun@msn.com \nWorkshop Participants\nBipasha Baruah\, Canada Research Chair in Global Women’s Issues\, Women’s Studies and Feminist Research\, Western University\n“Social Innovation and Gender Equality in India: Moving Beyond the Numbers Game” \n(Mohammad) Anwar Hossen\, Associate Professor\, Sociology\, University of Dhaka\n“Village as the Model Organization for Sustainable Development in Bangladesh” \nYu Huang\, Adjunct Assistant Professor\, Anthropology\, The Chinese University of Hong Kong\n“‘Get Organized!:’ Contradictions between Capital and Labor in a Nascent Shrimp Farmers’ Cooperative in South China” \nMarguerite Mendell\, Professor\, School of Community and Public Affairs\, Concordia University and Gi Bin Hong\, Karl Polanyi Institute\n“Is the Social Economy the Seed of a New Economic Paradigm? Some Reflections” \nAkihiro Ogawa\, Professor of Japanese Studies\, Asia Institute\, University of Melbourne\n“Lessons from Fukushima: A green economy built by social enterprises focused on renewable\, sustainable energy” \nMasanari Sakurai\, Professer\, College of Policy Science\, Ritsumeikan University\n“Did Japanese social welfare NPOs fail? Some evaluation about emerging social enterprises and major transformation” \nIlcheong Yi\, Research Coordinator\, Social Policy and Inclusive Development\, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development\n“Transformative interactions between social policy and SSEs in Developing Countries” \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThe social economy refers to an economic activity of enterprises and organizations whose primary objectives are the creation of social values and the facilitation of solidarity rather than profit seeking and capital accumulation. In general\, social economy organizations include cooperatives\, mutual benefit societies\, civic associations\, foundations\, social enterprises\, community enterprises and so on. Recently\, we have been witnessing a worldwide boom of this old but renewed concept. Various policies and institutions as well as creative and innovative business practices have been introduced. The UN designated the year 2012 as “The International Year of the Cooperatives” and encouraged every member state to facilitate effective institutionalization of the cooperatives. In 2013\, UN agencies and other intergovernmental organizations\, including UNRISD\, ILO\, UNDP\, UNEP\, UNESCO\, OECD\, established the “UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Social and Solidarity Economy\,” aiming to raise awareness and support the policy environment of social economy. At the same time\, research on the social economy is also in rapid progress\, introducing or renewing such interesting concepts and theories as social innovation\, civic entrepreneurship\, shared values\, corporate citizenship\, co-production\, and social eco-system. \nAsia is no exception to this global rise of the social economy. The concept has been widely received and diverse policy fields throughout the region are undergoing institutional reforms. In China\, the basic model of the provision of social welfare has shifted in the 2000s from the large-scale and unit-centered Danwei system to the community-centered Shequ system\, resulting in a rapid increase of grass-root nonprofit organizations and residential groups. The government has also supported such national level events as the China Social Innovation Award and the China Poverty Eradication Award\, through which creative and innovative ideas and business methods are learned and spread. The Japanese government consecutively presented new policy visions: “The New Public” in 2009\, “The Mutual-help Society” in 2013\, both of which emphasize the collaboration among non-profit\, for-profit\, and governmental organizations for realizing a more effective and sustainable welfare system. In South Korea\, several laws have been established to qualitatively improve the social service system by reducing government expenditure and facilitating public-private collaboration. The Social Enterprise Promotion Act and the Framework Act on Cooperatives were enacted in 2006 and 2013 respectively\, and a new comprehensive law for promoting the social economy was recently introduced and is being deliberated on in the National Assembly. In Thailand\, the government set up the Thai Social Enterprise Office (TSEO) in 2010 to implement the Social Enterprises Master Plan (2010–14)\, which called for strengthening cooperation among social enterprises in Thailand and developing various support tools such as incubation system and social finance and investment. While the President’s Office of Singapore launched the President’s Challenge Social Enterprise Award in 2012 to honor outstanding social enterprises for their contributions to the local community. Recently\, the government set up the Singapore Centre for Social Enterprise (raiSE) in 2015 to bring together multiple stakeholders of the social enterprise sector. \nThis workshop aims to analyze the current status of social economy in Asia\, where the traditional ‘Asian Capitalism’ and the state-led development model are in transition on the one hand and non-Western style models and practices of social economy are emerging on the other hand. The basic assumption is that social economy\, with its virtues of creativity and hybridity\, empathy and community\, participation and solidarity\, and new collaborative modes of governance\, can help address various social problems and may provide a viable\, alternative model of development in the region. This workshop calls for papers from various academic disciplines to understand the diverse and hybrid nature of the social economy. It also encourages the participation of practitioners with working knowledge and hands-on experience on the subject. It will also invite established scholars and experts on the Western models and practices of social economy\, who can provide valuable comparative perspectives. \nMore specifically\, this workshop anticipates paper presentations in following themes: \n\nresearch on the conceptual or institutional development of the social economy in East Asia and Asia more broadly\nin-depth case study of policies or practices of the social economy in various policy fields including social welfare\, education\, environment\, energy\, culture\, and local community\nexploration of new models or modes of Asian capitalism\, governance\, and/or civic participation in relation to the development of social economy
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/the-social-economy-and-alternative-development-models-in-asia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/street-view_seoul-56d881b4bab83.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR