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:20170312T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20171105T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20180311T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20181104T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20190310T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20191103T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20200308T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20201101T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190603
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190604
DTSTAMP:20210819T164033Z
CREATED:20200820T211052Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210819T164033Z
UID:10000582-1559520000-1559606399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:A Modern History of the Disinformation Age: Communication\, Technology\, and Democracy in Transition Workshop
DESCRIPTION:What are the roots of our “epistemic crisis” regarding what counts as facts and as “reality?” Participants focused on actors who benefit from the questioning of truth claims\, how institutions that once served as gatekeepers for such claims have been weakened and are now unable to adjust to new media ecosystems\, and how new maladapted gatekeeping institutions have taken their place. \nParticipants included: \nSteven Livingston\, Professor of Media and Public Affairs & Professor of International Affairs\, George Washington University \nPatricia Aufderheide\, University Professor of Communication Studies\, American University \nYochai Benkler\, Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman Professor for Entrepreneurial Legal Studies\, Harvard University \nBenjamin Epstein\, Associate Professor of Political Science\, DePaul College \nDavid Karpf\, Associate Professor of Media and Public Affairs\, George Washington University \nNancy MacLean\, William H. Chafe Professor of History and Public Policy\, Duke University \nMark Major\, Associate Teaching Professor of Political Science\, Pennsylvania State University \nNaomi Oreskes\, Professor of the History of Science\, Harvard University \nVictor Pickard\, Associate Professor of Communication\, University of Pennsylvania \nPaul Starr\, Stuart Professor of Communications and Public Affairs & Professor of Sociology\, Princeton University
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/a-modern-history-of-the-disinformation-age-communication-technology-and-democracy-in-transition-workshop/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/5d9b7ca8cb756.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190525
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190530
DTSTAMP:20210819T165554Z
CREATED:20200820T211236Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210819T165554Z
UID:10000583-1558742400-1559174399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Media & Democracy at ICA 2019
DESCRIPTION:The Media & Democracy program was thrilled to be at the International Communication Association (ICA) 2019 annual meeting in Washington\, DC. \nAs part of the ICA proceedings\, we sponsored an ICA theme panel entitled “A Modern History of the Disinformation Age” at the Washington Hilton\, held on May 25. The panelists presented research from our December 2018 workshop of the same name. \nWe also co-hosted an SSRC reception on May 28\, 2019 at Jack Rose Dining Saloon in collaboration with the Social Data Initiative. \nFinally\, we were proud to co-sponsor “The Rise of Platforms: Individual\, Institutional\, and Governance Questions for Communication Research\,” an ICA post-conference that convened an interdisciplinary and international group of scholars to present comparative analyses of platforms across economics\, political\, and social contexts. The conference took place at George Washington University in Washington\, DC and was held on May 29\, 2019.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/media-democracy-at-ica-2019/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/post_title_banner.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20190517T093000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20190517T170000
DTSTAMP:20210921T144633Z
CREATED:20210921T144633Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210921T144633Z
UID:10000772-1558085400-1558112400@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Religion and Social Justice Movements in Transatlantic Perspective
DESCRIPTION:Given the rise of nationalist and exclusionary movements on both sides of the Atlantic\, which have mobilized against (and racialized) immigrant groups and communities of color\, the symposium brings US- and Europe-focused research more directly into dialogue with regard to scholarship on religious responses to Islamophobia\, the demonizing of migrants\, and the broader attacks on growing racial and religious diversity. This full-day event is arranged around three sessions of relatively informal roundtables\, addressing how religious transformations influence social action; the ways in which social mobilization has changed in the past fifty years and the effects on religious engagement with social justice; and the religious and social movement responses that may hold promise in advancing a more just and democratic future.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/religion-and-social-justice-movements-in-transatlantic-perspective/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/default-bg.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190516
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190518
DTSTAMP:20210819T182834Z
CREATED:20200820T211603Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210819T182834Z
UID:10000584-1557964800-1558137599@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Media\, Technology\, and Democracy in Historical Context
DESCRIPTION:If you consult recent headlines\, the news media is in crisis\, and the problems are manifold: disruptive changes to media technology\, the spread of misleading news\, and anonymous harassment of public figures are causing serious concerns about the quality and trajectory of our democracy and the place of the news media in it. At the same time\, these phenomena are not new; disruptions\, falsehoods\, and harassment have been topics of public concern at various moments throughout the history of media and democracy. \nHow does the current moment\, dominated by concerns over the rise of social media\, the prevalence of online harassment\, the commercial viability of the print press\, and the loss of local journalism\, compare to previous moments of crisis? Which developments have echoes in the past\, and which concerns are truly novel or unprecedented? \n“Media\, Technology\, and Democracy in Historical Context” is a research workshop directed at scholars in the social sciences and the humanities that encourages historically-informed research on the impact of recent technological changes on media and democracy. \nTopics covered at the workshop will include “Historicizing Mis and Disinformation in the American Press”\, “Partisan Influence on Media Development”\, “Shaping the Public Through Cinema”\, “Race\, Gender\, and Institutional Bias in American Mass Media”\, and “Technological Change and American Political Development.” \nThe original call for proposals may be found here
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/media-technology-and-democracy-in-historical-context/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/5d9b88584134b.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190409
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190412
DTSTAMP:20241213T153101Z
CREATED:20200827T172458Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241213T153101Z
UID:10000599-1554768000-1555027199@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Next Generation African Peacebuilding: New Voices\, Perspectives\, and Approaches
DESCRIPTION:Next generation African peacebuilding: new voices\, perspectives and approaches (WP1676) \n \nWilton Park\, in collaboration with the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) and the African Leadership Centre (ALC)\, organized and hosted a conference on “Next generation African peacebuilding: new voices\, new networks and new strategies” in Steyning\, England\, from April 10-12\, 2019. The three-day conference was supported by Carnegie Corporation of New York (CCNY). \nThis conference is the fifth in an annual series on peacebuilding in Africa that started in 2015. Previous events assessed the changing dynamics of conflict and other evolving challenges\, the ways in which African peacebuilding actors have been responding to these challenges\, how to sustain civil society engagement in peacebuilding\, and how to build more effective interaction between African and global peacebuilding. \nThe SSRC was represented by Ron Kassimir\, the Vice President of Programs\, along with seven African Peacebuilding Network (APN) and Next Generation Social Sciences in Africa (Next Gen) fellows: Arsene Brice Bado of the Centre for Research and Action for Peace in Ivory Coast (APN 2018); Chantal Ingabire of Community Based Sociotherapy in Rwanda (APN 2017); Edmore Chitukutuku of the Wits University in South Africa (Next Gen 2013; APN 2018); Fredrick Ogenga of Rongo University in Kenya (APN 2014); Toyin Ajao of the African Leadership Centre in Kenya (Next Gen 2017); Admire Mare of the Namibia University of Science and Technology (APN 2013); and Samaila Suleiman of Bayero University\, Kano (Next Gen 2012\, 2013 and APN 2018). \nThe overarching objective for the 2019 conference was to reflect on and generate innovative ideas for transforming peacebuilding in the following areas: (1) how to bring new voices into peacebuilding and how to help empower those new voices as effective peacebuilding actors\, (2) how new networks could usefully be created between traditional peacebuilding actors and organizations and how to bring emerging and new voices into both existing and new networks; and (3) how to use the leverage derived from new voices and networks to facilitate the implementation of new strategies such as applying nonviolent social action towards achieving sustainable peacebuilding. \nOpening remarks were delivered by Wilton Park Program Director Robert Grant\, Ron Kassimir\, and ALC Executive Director Shuvai Nyoni. Participants represented a host of institutions\, including the United Nations (UN)\, the African Union (AU)\, and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). There was also scholarly participation from universities and think-tanks across Africa\, Europe\, and the United States\, including: International Crisis Group\, Brussels; Institute for Security Studies (ISS)\, Pretoria; African Institute for Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation (AIPECT)\, Rabat; International Peace Institute (IPI)\, New York; Chatham House\, London; and the West Africa Network for Peacebuilding (WANEP)\, Accra. \nSSRC’s APN and Next Gen fellows who attended the conference made presentations\, chaired sessions\, contributed to discussions and networked with some of the world’s leading thinkers\, practitioners\, and funders in the field of peacebuilding. The theme of the conference was a good fit for their APN and Next Gen-supported projects as scholars based in post-conflict and conflict-affected African countries. The fellows later wrote a short article for the Kujenga Amani blog based on their experience at the conference where they spoke about being able to use their research as a basis “for rethinking methodological\, epistemological\, and ontological ways of producing and consuming knowledge on peacebuilding in Africa and decolonizing peacebuilding research and practice.” The fellows particularly enjoyed being able to bring their own voices to debate the idea of disrupting dominant narratives of violence and opening up new paths to peace and unity in diversity. \nAmong the key points made at the conference were the need for peacebuilding to adapt to diverging internal trends on the continent\, the failure of the traditional liberal peacebuilding model\, and the changing nature and scope of the activities of newly assertive external state actors in Africa. Participants at the conference also discussed the challenges facing peacebuilding networks with respect to sustainability\, relevance and effective leadership\, the lack of support for and recognition of networks led by youth and women\, and the importance of new online media sources and the need to incorporate new technologies and media in peacebuilding strategies. Among others\, it was observed that Next Generation peacebuilding in Africa requires bringing together the extensive knowledge and experience of youth organizations\, women’s networks\, community groups\, and nonviolent movements. Participants at the conference were also of the view that peacebuilding in Africa should be contextual and cautioned against one-size-fits-all approaches that fall short of addressing the diverse challenges facing the continent.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/next-generation-african-peacebuilding-new-voices-perspectives-and-approaches/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/next-generation-african-peacebuilding-new-voices-perspectives-and-approaches-e1598549076382.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20190329T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20190329T170000
DTSTAMP:20210817T155837Z
CREATED:20200903T145344Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210817T155837Z
UID:10000609-1553850000-1553878800@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Immigration: The Politics of Inclusion and the Politics of Threat
DESCRIPTION:Immigration: The Politics of Inclusion and the Politics of Threat was a one-day research workshop that took place at Social Science Research Council headquarters in Brooklyn\, New York on March 29\, 2019. \nThe workshop gathered scholars to address the politics of immigration\, with a particular focus on how and why Latin American immigration is politicized (sometimes as virtue and increasingly as threat) in the United States in the contemporary period. Scholars were organized into panels on three themes: Parties\, Voter Linkages\, and Immigration Politics; Framing Immigrants; and Policies of the State. \n  \nPanels and Participants \nParties\, Voter Linkages\, and Immigration Politics\nWhat is the partisan/electoral basis of xenophobic and restrictive policies – within the US and at the border?  To what degree is this stable/changing and why?  What explains when and why parties promote inclusive/exclusive platforms and policies towards immigrants? To what degree are state/local level parties replicating/breaking from national party platforms?   How have immigrants in the US reacted/responded to the country’s changing party dynamics? What explains variations in reaction? \nChair\nNancy Bermeo\, Senior Research Fellow\, Nuffield College\, University of Oxford \nDiscussant\nKatherine Cramer\, Professor of Political Science\, University of Wisconsin\, Madison \nPresenters\nMatt Barreto\, Professor of Political Science and Chicana/o Studies\, University of California\, Los Angeles\nJames McCann\, Professor of Political Science\, Purdue University\nMelissa Michelson\, Professor of Political Science\, Menlo College\nVeronica Terriquez\, Associate Professor of Sociology\, University of California\, Riverside \n  \nFraming Immigrants\nWhat explains the contours of public opinion towards immigrants (undocumented\, daca-mented\, documented)?  To what degree does public opinion distinguish between a) un/documented immigrants and b) between Latin American immigrants and Latinos?  How do immigrants respond to the anxieties of the receiving society—how do they respond to xenophobia?  Are there differences by legal status\, by region\, by national origin group? \nChair\nMichael Jones-Correa\, President’s Distinguished Professor of Political Science\, University of Pennsylvania \nDiscussant\nSara Wallace Goodman\, Associate Professor of Political Science\, University of California\, Irvine \nPresenters\nAbigail Fisher Williamson\, Associate Professor of Political Science and Public Policy and Law\, Trinity College\nShannon Gleeson\, Associate Professor of Labor Relations\, Law & History\, Cornell University\nSofya Aptekar\, Assistant Professor of Sociology\, University of Massachusetts\, Boston\nCecilia Menjívar\, Professor of Sociology\, University of California\, Los Angeles\nMatthew Wright\, Associate Professor of Political Science\, American University \n  \nPolicies of the State\nPolicies towards immigrants range from the inclusionary (extending social welfare) to the punitive (criminalizing and penalizing undocumented workers).  What explains the range of policies and laws that are adopted and what are the consequences for the immigrant community (documented and undocumented)?  What impact have these policies had on immigration and immigrants? \nChair\nDeborah Yashar\, Professor of Politics and International Affairs\, Princeton University \nDiscussant\nMarie Gottschalk\, Professor of Political Science\, University of Pennsylvania \nPresenters\nAmada Armenta\, Assistant Professor of Urban Planning\, University of California\, Los Angeles\nDavid Cortez\, Assistant Professor of Political Science\, University of Notre Dame\nRoberto G. Gonzales\, Professor of Education\, Harvard University\nKarthick Ramakrishnan\, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy\, University of California\, Riverside
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/immigration-the-politics-of-inclusion-and-the-politics-of-threat/
LOCATION:Social Science Research Council\, 300 Cadman Plaza West\, 15 Fl\, New York\, NY\, 11201\, United States
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/2165112419_0db5334d76_o.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190207
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190209
DTSTAMP:20210817T162659Z
CREATED:20201001T185245Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210817T162659Z
UID:10000640-1549497600-1549670399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Identity\, Community\, and Political Participation
DESCRIPTION:Identity\, Community\, and Political Participation  was a two-day research design workshop that took place at Social Science Research Council headquarters in Brooklyn\, New York on February 7 and 8\, 2019. The workshop convened primarily younger scholars to develop in-progress or planned research projects on how political participation is fundamentally shaped by individual identity and/or community membership (and vice versa). \nThe workshop was organized from an open call for proposals from the Anxieties of Democracy program’s Identity\, Community\, and Participation working group\, whose members provided feedback and commentary on research design presentations. Working group member Adam Seth Levine also presented on how to build relationships with practitioners. \nResearch Design Presentations\nSarah Bruch\, Assistant Professor of Sociology\, the University of Iowa\nOrganizing Authority for Citizenship: Examining the Civic and Political Impacts of Authority Relations \nBernard Fraga\, Assistant Professor of Political Science\, Indiana University\, Bloomington\nAn Inventory and Analysis of GOTV Efforts Targeting Communities of Color \nStacey Greene\, Assistant Professor of Political Science\, Rutgers University\nThe Effects of Cross Group Comparisons \nPhilip Jones\, Associate Professor of Political Science and International Relations\, University of Delaware\nThe Mobilizing Effects of Emphasizing the Sameness or Difference of LGBTQ Identities \nJoshua Kalla\, Assistant Professor of Political Science\, Yale University\nReducing Prejudice and Changing Policy Attitudes With Narrative Persuasion: New Field Experimental Results and Proposed Extensions \nSamara Klar\, Associate Professor of Political Science\, the University of Arizona\nBridging Political Polarization within American Communities \nBiko Koenig\, Assistant Professor of Government\, Franklin and Marshall College\nOrganizing and Mobilizing Class Identities in an Era of Rising Populism \nDaniel Laurison\, Assistant Professor of Sociology\, Swarthmore College\nWho “Feels Like a Voter?” How Poor and Working Class People Understand US Electoral Politics – the Pennsylvania Participation Project \nJulie Lee Merseth\, Assistant Professor of Political Science\, Northwestern University\nAsian American Political Activism: Mobilizing Group Identities \nEmily Pechar\, PhD Candidate in Environmental Policy\, Duke University\nUnderstanding Rural Identities and Environmental Policy Engagement in America \nBenita Roth\, Professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies\, Binghamton University\, SUNY\nMarginalized Voices and Activism Around the Opioid Epidemic in Upstate New York: Marginalized Voices\, Activism\, and Community \nLaFleur Stephens-Dougan\, Assistant Professor of Politics\, Princeton University\nDo All Lives Matter? To Whom? \nWorking Group on Identity\, Community\, and Participation\nClaudine Gay (co-chair)\, Edgerley Family Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences\, Wilbur A. Cowett Professor of Government and of African and African American Studies\, Harvard University\nZoltan Hajnal (co-chair)\, Professor of Political Science\, University of California\, San Diego\nAndra Gillespie\, Associate Professor of Political Science\, Emory University\nHahrie Han\, Anton Vonk Professor of Political Science and Environmental Politics\, University of California\, Santa Barbara\nAdam Seth Levine\, Associate Professor of Government\, Cornell University\nDara Strolovitch\, Associate Professor of Gender and Sexuality Studies\, Princeton University\nRich Yeselson\, Contributing Editor\, Dissent magazine
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/identity-community-and-political-participation-2/
LOCATION:Social Science Research Council\, 300 Cadman Plaza West\, 15 Fl\, New York\, NY\, 11201\, United States
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/alex-radelich-Evo4wmtRaPI-unsplash-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20190205T183000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20190205T210000
DTSTAMP:20210924T165402Z
CREATED:20210915T133338Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210924T165402Z
UID:10000688-1549391400-1549400400@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:2019 SSRC Fellow Lecture: Lorraine Daston
DESCRIPTION:About the Lecture\nLong before there were computers or even reliable calculating machines\, there were algorithms\, recipes\, and other rigid rules. But for just as long\, stretching back to ancient Greece and Rome and continuing through the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century\, the rule-as-algorithm coexisted peacefully and fruitfully with another idea of a rule: the rule-as-pattern. For us\, who live in the age of algorithms\, this centuries-long cohabitation between the most rigid of rules—the algorithm to be followed to the letter—and the most supple of rules—the pattern or model to be imitated but not slavishly copied—seems paradoxical. Lorraine Daston’s new work analyzes how this paradox became thinkable\, and how rules became rigid. \nAbout Lorraine Daston\nDaston is director at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin. She has published on a wide range of topics in the history of science\, including the history of probability and statistics\, wonders in early modern science\, the emergence of the scientific fact\, scientific models\, objects of scientific inquiry\, the moral authority of nature\, and the history of scientific objectivity. Recent books include How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind: The Strange Career of Cold War Rationality (with Paul Erickson et al.\, 2013) and Against Nature (forthcoming\, 2019). Her current projects include a history of rules\, based on her 2014 Lawrence Stone Lectures at Princeton University; the emergence of Big Science and Big Humanities in the context of nineteenth-century archives; and the relationship between moral and natural orders. \nEvent Details\nLorraine Daston\nDirector of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin \nSpeaks on:\nMechanical Rules before Machines: Rules and Paradigms \nWith responses by: \nHelen Nissenbaum\nProfessor of Information Science and Director of the Digital Life Initiative\, Cornell Tech \nFrank Pasquale\nProfessor of Law\, University of Maryland Carey School of Law \nFebruary 5\, 2019\, 5:30 PM\nRoosevelt House Public Policy Institute at Hunter College\n47-49 East 65th Street\nNew York\, NY 10065
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/2019-ssrc-fellow-lecture-video-lorraine-daston/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/post_title_banner.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20190131T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20190201T170000
DTSTAMP:20210817T165921Z
CREATED:20200903T152520Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210817T165921Z
UID:10000610-1548921600-1549040400@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Political Institutions and Challenges to Democracy: America in Comparative Perspective
DESCRIPTION:The “Political Institutions and Challenges to Democracy: America in Comparative Perspective” conference\, co-organized by the Social Science Research Council’s Anxieties of Democracy program and Stanford University’s Global Populisms project\, brought together scholars of comparative and American politics to present research on the role of parties\, the legislature\, the judiciary\, the bureaucracy\, and other institutions in moments that challenge democracy. The conference was held in New York City January 31-February 1\, 2019. Questions addressed at the conference included: \n• What role\, if any\, do democratic institutions play in enabling or exacerbating the growth of antisystem sentiment and/or populist appeals? How do the responses of mainstream parties and politicians affect the electoral chances of antisystem candidates? \n• Can unresponsive or underperforming democratic institutions contribute to the popularity of populist or antidemocratic candidates? If so\, what causes institutions to be(come) unresponsive? What reforms can address these concerns? \n• What role do party primaries and other electoral rules play in the electoral success of antisystem politicians? How do the roads to power for populist candidates vary between electoral systems? \n• What are the consequences of populist leaders in power for state institutions\, such as the bureaucracy\, the courts\, and other branches of government? What are the consequences for democracy of hollowed out bureaucracies?
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/political-institutions-and-challenges-to-democracy-america-in-comparative-perspective/
LOCATION:Columbia University School for International & Public Affairs
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/kyle-glenn-TELAb4duebI-unsplash-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190131
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190202
DTSTAMP:20210923T151750Z
CREATED:20200930T170430Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210923T151750Z
UID:10000629-1548892800-1549065599@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Political Institutions and Challenges to Democracy: America in Comparative Perspective
DESCRIPTION:The “Political Institutions and Challenges to Democracy: America in Comparative Perspective” conference\, co-organized by the Social Science Research Council’s Anxieties of Democracy program and Stanford University’s Global Populisms project\, brought together scholars of comparative and American politics to present research on the role of parties\, the legislature\, the judiciary\, the bureaucracy\, and other institutions in moments that challenge democracy. The conference was held in New York City January 31-February 1\, 2019. Questions addressed at the conference included: \n• What role\, if any\, do democratic institutions play in enabling or exacerbating the growth of antisystem sentiment and/or populist appeals? How do the responses of mainstream parties and politicians affect the electoral chances of antisystem candidates? \n• Can unresponsive or underperforming democratic institutions contribute to the popularity of populist or antidemocratic candidates? If so\, what causes institutions to be(come) unresponsive? What reforms can address these concerns? \n• What role do party primaries and other electoral rules play in the electoral success of antisystem politicians? How do the roads to power for populist candidates vary between electoral systems? \n• What are the consequences of populist leaders in power for state institutions\, such as the bureaucracy\, the courts\, and other branches of government? What are the consequences for democracy of hollowed out bureaucracies?
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/political-institutions-and-challenges-to-democracy-america-in-comparative-perspective-2/
LOCATION:Columbia University School for International & Public Affairs
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/5b22c7fe70467.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190124
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190125
DTSTAMP:20210824T180639Z
CREATED:20200820T205452Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210824T180639Z
UID:10000578-1548288000-1548374399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:DATA2GOHEALTH.NYC Webinar
DESCRIPTION:Measure of America and the Nonprofit Coordinating Committee of New York present DATA2GOHEALTH.NYC in the webinar “Unlocking Potential: New Health-Related Data for Decision Making & Community Well-Being.”
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/data2gohealth-nyc-webinar/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Screen-Shot-2021-08-24-at-11.05.15-AM.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20190107T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20190107T180000
DTSTAMP:20210920T170731Z
CREATED:20210902T194436Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210920T170731Z
UID:10000720-1546851600-1546884000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:The Other Uncertainty: Social\, Political\, and Cultural Forms of Uncertainty in Weather Contexts.
DESCRIPTION:Earlier this month\, program staff from SSRC’s Scholarly Borderlands initiative attended the Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society in Phoenix\, where they hosted a series of panels entitled “The Other Uncertainty: Social\, Political\, and Cultural Forms of Uncertainty in Weather Contexts.” These multidisciplinary panels aimed to bring deeper understanding of the complex social aspects of uncertainty into conversation with a field that is primarily focused on eliminating uncertainty from probabilistic forecasting models. Invited speakers from across the social sciences spoke to the myriad sources of individual\, social\, and cultural ambiguity that emerge\, interact\, operate\, and propagate throughout the life cycle of hazardous weather events which are far less understood. \nOver the course of the presentations\, several themes emerged. The first concerned how individuals and groups interpret and process uncertainty and risk after it is communicated. Susan Joslyn (University of Washington) explained that this requires an understanding of the different mental models and schemata that people have to process information\, and therefore an understanding of the educational\, cultural\, and social diversity of what are in fact many “publics”. To understand how this information is then processed and shared\, Melissa Bica (University of Colorado\, Boulder) discussed the uses of qualitative methods to analyze social media engagement with images that depict probabilities and uncertainty over the course of extreme weather events.   Panelists also stressed that uncertainty is not merely a condition or context- it can be conceptualized as a produced commodity or a political tool\, especially concerning marginalized groups. Amber Wutich (Arizona State University)\, emphasized the importance of examining uncertainty both up and down the power continuum\, as it plays a drastically different role in each context. Likewise\, who decides what an “acceptable” level of uncertainty is and where that threshold lies for various populations is an incredibly political situation. Robert Soden\, (University of Colorado- Boulder)\, drew on his experience working on federal flood insurance maps to depict just how political the process of determining risk can be\, as government agencies and property owners attempt to resist and influence where supposedly objective lines of flood risk and probability are drawn. \nWhen examining the uncertainty that arises from extreme weather events\, social science methods and perspectives can help give a more nuanced view of how people process risk and make decisions in uncertain contexts. Jenniffer Santos-Hernández (University of Puerto Rico- Rio Piedras)\, observed that while much effort goes into giving people in uncertain situations the illusion of control\, this should not be the goal of weather scholars or practitioners. A more productive engagement with uncertainty acknowledges that is not a thing that can in fact be eradicated – while forecasters strive to provide the most accurate information in a clear way\, the goal is for people to make informed decisions based on a better understanding of their own circumstantial level of risk. Rather than prescribing what the “right” decision is for an individual\, family\, or group in an extreme weather situation\, social science research designed with inclusion in mind from the start (Tamara Marcus\, University of New Hampshire) offer a means to understand decision-making and behavioral processes to empower people in times of uncertainty. \nMore information about the panelists who participated in these sessions can be found here. A full recording of the day’s sessions will available through the American Meteorological Society.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/the-other-uncertainty-social-political-and-cultural-forms-of-uncertainty-in-weather-contexts/
LOCATION:American Meterological Society Annual Meeting
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/uncertainity_banner.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20190107
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20190110
DTSTAMP:20200827T155524Z
CREATED:20200827T155524Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20200827T155524Z
UID:10000590-1546819200-1547078399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Bi-Annual Fellows Workshop
DESCRIPTION:Nairobi\, Kenya – Fellows from the Social Science Research Council’s (SSRC) Next Generation Social Sciences in Africa (Next Gen) program gathered in Nairobi\, Kenya\, during the second week of January for the 14th bi-annual fellows workshop.  The event was held in partnership with United States International University-Africa (USIU-Africa)\, and in collaboration with the SSRC’s African Peacebuilding Network (APN) program\, which held its grantees workshop from January 9-11\, 2019. \n28 doctoral dissertation proposal development and research fellows from eight African countries were joined by five dynamic workshop facilitators and convened in Nairobi for the three-day event.  The workshop was designed to help early-career faculty engage in scholarly reflections\, research and writing.  Activities included a series of plenary lectures along with working and one-on-one sessions with facilitators on interdisciplinary perspectives relating to peace\, security and development. \nDuring the workshop\, dissertation proposal development fellows worked on creating networks while refining\, developing and strengthening research questions.  They also learned to align research questions to methods\, engage key literature in their fields\, and finalize their dissertation proposals.  Dissertation research fellows focused on further developing and strengthening their research while engaging with key literature in their fields\, preparing to embark on fieldwork-based research\, and developing their capacity for scholarly writing\, including academic publications. \nProfessor Paul Zeleza\, vice-chancellor of USIU-Africa\, opened the workshop on the first day with a brilliant keynote titled “Reckoning with the Pasts and Reimagining the Futures of African Studies for the 21st Century.”  He presented an engaging history of the development of African Studies and the struggle to decolonize the humanities and social sciences in Africa and ended with a call to action urging the discipline to confront its “racialized and racially fraught” history and abandon Euro/America-centric African Studies. \nThe following day\, a panel chaired by Ron Kassimir\, vice president of programs at the SSRC\, was convened to discuss “The State of Social Science Research in Africa: Interdisciplinary and Comparative Perspectives.”  Panelists included Dr. Mutuma Ruteere\, director of the Center for Human Rights and Policy Studies (CHRIPS)\, Steve Ouma Akoth\, director of The Pamoja Trust\, Anthony Diala\, a senior lecturer at the University of the Western Cape\, Joyce Omwoha\, a lecturer at the Technical University of Kenya\, and Charles Ukeje\, a professor at Obafemi Awolowo University. The panel included a conversation between the panelists and fellows in which questions were raised interrogating the practical limits of social science research and how knowledge could be disseminated more broadly. \nOn January 9\, workshop attendees participated in the first-ever joint session between APN and Next Gen\, designed to build synergies between the two programs and foster new connections between fellows and grantees.  This inaugural and historical event was headlined by a distinguished keynote from Ambassador Macharia Kamau\, the Kenyan Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  In his keynote\, Ambassador Kamau stressed the importance of peace\, security and stability and how fundamental they are in the transformation of peoples’ lives for the development of society.  He notably stated that\, “We live in an over-securitized and over-militarized world that has led to an underappreciation for peacebuilding initiatives that help sustain new democracies that create more inclusive societies.” \nAfter the morning’s joint session\, fellows and grantees from both programs visited the national Commission for Science\, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) where they were given a brief but illuminating presentation on how the organization was working to integrate science and technology into the daily lives of Kenyans.  Representatives from NACOSTI also discussed the process of being granted clearance in Kenya to conduct research\, which many bourgeoning research fellows found profoundly helpful. \nRon Kassimir\, who represented the SSRC at both workshops\, remarked that\, “With the quality of the discussions\, and the warm collegiality with which the participants engaged each other\, the workshop exceeded our (already) high hopes.”
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/bi-annual-fellows-workshop/
LOCATION:United States International University-Africa\, Nairobi\, Kenya
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20181218
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20181219
DTSTAMP:20211230T135043Z
CREATED:20181230T133545Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211230T135043Z
UID:10000576-1545091200-1545177599@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Anticipatory Social Research Working Group Inaugural Convening
DESCRIPTION:The Social Science Research Council was pleased to convene a group of seventeen esteemed scholars who have been working in ways that might be identified as Anticipatory Social Research (ASR). This group will begin the work of defining ASR\, identifying potential sites for ASR inside and outside the academy\, and ascertaining examples of emerging phenomena that may be opaque to existing methodologies and in need of a more anticipatory approach. \n \nAttendees\nCrystal Abidin \nSimone Browne \nCourtney Cogburn \nKate Crawford \nJen Croissant \nCarl DiSalvo \nGary Downey \nVirginia Eubanks* \nMarion Fourcade \nDavid Custon \nAva Kofman \nAndrew Lakoff \nBill Maurer \nShobita Parthasarathy \nFrank Pasquale \nLaurel Smith-Doerr \nFred Turner \nMatthew Zook \n  \n*was not able to attend\, but participated in the group
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/anticipatory-social-research-working-group-inaugural-convening/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/default-bg.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T100000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20200930T165343Z
CREATED:20200930T165343Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20200930T165343Z
UID:10000621-1544176800-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Climate Change Working Group Meeting 2018
DESCRIPTION:The working group on climate change seeks to make the study of climate change a distinct and recognized area of study in the social sciences. Its steering committee convened to discuss several meetings and events of the past year\, as well as new initiatives.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/climate-change-working-group-meeting-2018/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T163141Z
CREATED:20201026T163141Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T163141Z
UID:10000663-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:The Netware of the New Asian Economy under the Industrial Revolution 4.0
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nSalvatore Babones\nAssociate Professor\, Sociology\, University of Sydney\nsbabones@sydney.edu.au \nVinh Duc Nguyen\nVice-Director\, Institute of Sociology\, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences\nnguyenducvinh@ios.org.vn \nCall for Workshop Papers\nSocial networks\, the sharing economy\, and the internet of things are all forms of netware: networks in which value is generated by bringing people and things together (consumers\, providers\, cars\, bicycles\, payment systems\, etc.). These digital networks are driving forward a “Fourth Industrial Revolution” or “Industrial Revolution 4.0.” The fourth industrial revolution builds on the electronics revolution (IR3.0) to connect people and things in digital networks. The electronics and computer hardware value chains of IR3.0 were central to the economic development of East Asia\, though the region largely missed out on the computer software boom that represented the maturity of this wave of innovation. Now we are seeing the emergence of a new kind of technology value chain for what might be called “netware” — platforms that bring people and things together to create value through integration. Netware is at the heart of IR4.0 and is ripe for sociological\, political\, and political-economic study. It has the potential to change not just business practice\, but the structure of society itself. \nThe new netware economy is even more focused on the Asia-Pacific region than was the hardware economy of IR3.0\, with major value chains seemingly concentrated either on the west coast of the United States or on the east coast of China. The position of China in the netware economy is particularly interesting because it is home both to a large\, semi-closed internet and to a large\, very open maker hub. Both of these Chinese networks are focal points for pan-Pacific production networks\, but neither is exclusively Chinese. The firewalled Chinese internet may be to some extent a walled garden\, but mobile access to it is dominated by Android and Apple operating systems and app stores. The world’s maker hub may be concentrated in southeastern China\, but it uses components from across Asia and attracts participants from around the world. Thus although China and California loom large in the netware economy\, the tentacles of the netware economy are especially thick in advanced technology hubs like Japan\, South Korea\, and Taiwan\, and they are increasingly reaching out to new assembly sites like Vietnam\, Indonesia\, and India. Success in netware is likely to be crucial for any of these countries (Chine included) if they hope to climb Asia-Pacific value chains like the Japan\, the Asian tigers\, or indeed China itself. \nWe invite contributions on all aspects of the Asia-Pacific netware economy: value chains\, production networks\, social networks\, creative commons\, open source software\, open source hardware\, maker culture\, hardware accelerators\, hackathons\, venture capital\, digital entrepreneurship\, blockchain\, fintech\, the sharing economy\, the internet of things\, and similar topics that we may not have heard of (yet). Given the emerging nature of this topic\, we welcome conceptual contributions as well as papers based on empirical data. We are especially interested in contributions from scholars who are at an early stage in their research processes.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/the-netware-of-the-new-asian-economy-under-the-industrial-revolution-4-0/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201026T162934Z
CREATED:20201026T162934Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201026T162934Z
UID:10000662-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:States of Fortification: Connecting Asia through Technologies of Food and Health
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nMelissa L. Caldwell\nProfessor\, Anthropology\, University of California\, Santa Cruz\nlissa@ucsc.edu \nIzumi Nakayama\nResearch Officer & Honorary Assistant Professor\, Hong Kong Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences\, The University of Hong Kong\nnakayama@hku.hk \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThis workshop will focus on how technological interventions in food and health have informed projects of modernity\, sovereignty\, empire building\, and subjectivity across Asia\, with particular attention to the temporal and geopolitical modalities that have shaped and been shaped by these phenomena. Central to the workshop will be considering how “Asia” and its regions might be retheorized and remapped – as places\, concepts\, or constellations of networks – through food technologies. We anticipate pursuing three interrelated themes. First\, what are the ways in which efforts to create and protect strong nation-states and subjects have harnessed technology to feed\, nourish\, and fortify the bodies and minds of the subjects who have constructed those nation-states? Second\, how have individual and state-level concerns with food and health productively generated new opportunities for technological innovation\, experimentation\, and intervention that have alternately connected and disconnected people and communities throughout this region? Third\, how does critical attention to the intersection of food\, health\, and technology provide new perspectives for scholarly research design\, analysis\, and collaboration across the social sciences and humanities? \nSocieties in Asia have been\, and continue to be\, shaped by historical experiences with food. Across this geopolitical region there has long been a mutual entanglement of food\, health\, and technology that has simultaneously connected and disconnected people\, their bodies\, their histories\, and the social worlds in which they live. For instance\, new methods to improve and ensure productivity\, efficiency\, quality\, and safety across all stages of the food system from production and distribution to consumption and disposal often foregrounded technological innovations not only for ensuring greater stability in food supplies\, but also for building stronger and healthier citizens\, societies\, and states. New chemical and mechanical technologies for agricultural production\, manufacturing\, and food preservation and storage enabled foods and accompanying values and philosophies to circulate through longer supply chains and into new networks\, thereby connecting people who were otherwise culinarily\, culturally\, and geographically distinct. At the same time\, the monopolization of raw materials such as salt\, sugar\, grains\, and tea by imperial powers distorted these circulations and established boundaries within communities. One key moment in the early 20th century was the introduction of Western nutritional knowledge that prompted Asian societies to grapple with fundamental challenges to “traditional knowledge” about health\, family rituals\, and household provisioning practices. \nToday these challenges continue\, as many Asian societies try to recover and return to “traditional” food practices such as pre-Western nutritional precepts\, rural farming\, native organics philosophies\, and other food-centered lifestyles. More recently\, technological advances from the digital and artistic worlds have enabled new modes of social and corporeal interactivity\, such as with social media that facilitate new relationalities at multiple scales\, wearable technologies that allow access into people’s most intimate\, bodily spaces\, or robots and artificial intelligence programs that replace the humans who labor as pickers\, processors\, cooks and chefs\, and health care professionals. We invite empirically rich\, historically sensitive\, and methodologically grounded projects that will shed light on the ways in which food and health technologies have been formative to projects of nation-state building and separation across Asia. We are especially interested in curating contributions representing different historical periods\, regions\, and scholarly disciplines that\, when put in collaborative conversation at the workshop\, will both facilitate greater understanding of the technological\, political\, and cultural processes that have inspired different modes of governance\, subjectivity\, personhood\, and reveal the dynamics by which modalities of cultural and regional sameness\, distinction\, convergence\, and divergence underlie constructions of “Asia.”
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/states-of-fortification-connecting-asia-through-technologies-of-food-and-health/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201022T193653Z
CREATED:20201022T193653Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201022T193653Z
UID:10000661-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Sport Mega-Events as Hubs for InterAsian Interactions
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nSusan Brownell\nProfessor\, Anthropology & Archaeology\, University of Missouri-St. Louis\nsbrownell@umsl.edu \nGwang Ok\nProfessor\, Physical Education\, Chungbuk National University\, Republic of Korea\ngwangok47@gmail.com \nCall for Workshop Papers\nBetween 2018 and 2022\, three consecutive Olympics will take place in East Asia: the PyeongChang Winter Olympics (2018)\, Tokyo Summer Olympics (2020)\, and Beijing-Zhangjiakou Winter Olympics (2022). In the 122-year history of the Olympic Games\, this will be the first time that multiple installments will be held consecutively in one world region outside the cultural West. Further\, the 2022 FIFA World Cup will be held in Qatar\, only the second hosting of this event in Asia (after the 2002 Japan/Korea contest). The Asian Games are the world’s largest regional games\, including many more sports disciplines than the Olympic Games and nearly as many athletes. After the 2018 games in Jakarta\, the next two will be in East Asia: Hangzhou (2022) and Nagoya (2026). Pundits have wondered whether the geographic shift of mega-events indicates the decline of the West and the rise of Asia. Will the Asian events strengthen intra-regional solidarity\, or do Asian actors primarily strive to form relationships with Western counterparts? Does East Asia occupy a discrete role in Asia as a whole? \nScholars have argued that global mega-events (Olympic Games\, FIFA Soccer World Cups\, World Expos) operate as hubs of global flows of capital\, people\, knowledge\, and technology\, and perform important ritual and symbolic functions. However\, this general insight remains to be researched at a more concrete level. Furthermore\, although there has been a growing body of literature on sports\, Olympic Games\, and Asian Games in Asia in recent years\, few scholars have specifically focused on the way in which sports and sport mega-events serve as a platform for elite networking and the strengthening of regional social and cultural interconnections. Stefan Huebner’s focus on mega-events in the formation of Asian identity in Pan-Asian Sports and the Emergence of Modern Asia\, 1913-1974 (2016) pursued what is still a novel approach to understanding the construction of “Asia.” As he documented there\, official efforts to craft a pan-Asian identity run into countercurrents: sporting events are just as likely to inflame nationalist rivalries\, and different sporting legacies of colonialism and imperialism mark off different sub-regional identities (E.g.\, cricket in South Asia\, baseball in East Asia) and different preferences for mega-events (E.g. India’s hosting of the 2010 Commonwealth Games and South Asian hosting of the Cricket World Cup versus the East Asian hosting of Olympic Games or Qatar’s hosting of the Soccer World Cup). Further\, “national” sports such as kabbadi (India)\, wushu (China)\, or karate (Japan) serve to reinforce national identities and compete with each other for inclusion in the mega-event programs. \nThe proposed panel will be innovative in that it will focus on the question of whether mega-events strengthen regional Asian networks that serve as an infrastructure facilitating the emergence of a stronger Asian identity – which might not yet be evident. It will analyze how these mega-events form a multi-layered system of “hard” and “soft” infrastructures including construction mega-projects\, technology\, and finance\, but also the “transfer of knowledge” (the organized process by which know-how is transferred from one event to the next)\, cultural borrowing\, social networking\, and the sharing of emotions. It will provide an open-ended forum for identifying all of the different types of connections that Asian sport mega-events generate. At the same time\, it will identify the obstacles that might obstruct potential connections\, such as nationalist sentiments\, legal limits on the mobility of people and capital\, wealth disparities between nations and social classes\, or hierarchies within elites and sport organizations. By pulling together a picture of the networks that historically coalesced around Asian sport mega-events – and are now coalescing around the upcoming events – this panel will produce a larger picture of globalization and Asia’s position in it.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/sport-mega-events-as-hubs-for-interasian-interactions/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201022T193719Z
CREATED:20201022T193425Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201022T193719Z
UID:10000660-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Sacred Forests and Political Ecology: Cosmological Properties and Environmentality
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nBixia Chen\nAssistant Professor\, Agricultural Science\, University of the Ryukyus\nchenbx@agr.u-ryukyu.ac.jp \nChristopher Coggins\nProfessor\, Geography/Asian Studies\, Bard College at Simon’s Rock\nccoggins@simons-rock.edu \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThis workshop analyzes the political ecology of sacred forests in East\, South\, and Southeast Asia\, convening scholars engaged in field and archival research on the relationship between forests and the production of sacred space. Working within the theme of environmental humanities in Asia\, we examine the vast geographic range of sacred groves in these regions in light of the diversity of cosmologies\, ecologies\, traditional local resource management practices\, and environmental governance systems developed during the pre-colonial\, colonial and post-colonial periods. Sacred forests are typically common property resources (aka common pool resources) ascribed with qualities of sacrality and inviolability due to their association with sources of transcendent authority. Such authority may be derived from large-scale\, canonical\, ecclesiastical religions; from local\, animistic\, indigenous religions; or from a combination of both. The spiritual beliefs governing sacred landscapes\, in conjunction with the rituals that instantiate them\, tend to change over time\, be inscribed or appropriated by state interests\, and mediate between local\, regional\, and national power. Western scholars and conservationists have often romanticized sacred groves as the antithesis of secular\, profane spaces of materialist productivism\, a perspective infused with Orientalism. Coincident with the globalization of environmental thought\, policy\, and everyday practice\, sacred sites have also become both foci and catalysts for the syncretism of religion and modern nature conservation\, and for the making of environmental subjects (environmentality). We present our work on sacred groves through the lens of the tripartite framework of: \n\nPlacing the Sacred Forest: dynamic ethnographic and longitudinal approaches to community and regional cosmology;\n(Re)Conceptualizing spiritual common properties: analyses of both real and imagined dichotomies between land tenure\, resource utilization patterns\, and social inclusion/exclusion within sacred groves and beyond them; and\nGoverning the Sacred Forest Commons: examinations of how state nature conservation policies involving sacred landscapes give rise to new conceptions of nature\, cultural\, sacrality\, profanity\, and thus new environmental subjects.\n\nAll three themes relate to questions recursively affecting the cosmology and propriety of sacred forests\, all of which bear on the sacred forests as small parts of larger material and ideational landscapes. What are the general geographic distributions of sacred forests in each region and how does this affect their formal and informal management? What happens to underlying cosmologies when sacred forests are reconfigured as habitat patches\, biological fragments in need of connective corridors\, or other elements of “conservation landscapes?” Given the abundance of sacred groves in East\, South\, and Southeast Asia\, what general socio-ecological conditions do they share? How do major religious traditions\, such as Hinduism\, Buddhism\, and Daoism inform sacred forest practices within and across specific regions? How are Asian sacred groves similar to\, and different from\, sacred groves and other sacred common pool resources in other parts of the world? Why are trees and groves special subjects of veneration and how is this expressed? How does the sacralization of forests and trees inform discourse on the “Anthropocene” and attendant calls for individual and collective reconceptualization and realization of new relationships between humans and non-humans\, nature and culture\, and economy and ecology? To engage with these questions\, we welcome scholars in cultural studies\, geography\, political science\, anthropology\, history\, sociology\, environmental studies\, and the humanities broadly defined.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/sacred-forests-and-political-ecology-cosmological-properties-and-environmentality/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201021T191549Z
CREATED:20201021T191549Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201021T191549Z
UID:10000659-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Eurasia’s Islamic Socialist Ecumene
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nEren Tasar\nAssistant Professor\, History\, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill\netasar@email.unc.edu \nMustafa Tuna\nAssociate Professor\, Slavic & Eurasian Studies\, Duke University\nmustafa.tuna@duke.edu \nCall for Workshop Papers\nFor much of the twentieth century\, Muslim intellectuals in virtually all the countries of Eurasia engaged with socialism as a utopian vision of progress and liberation for Muslim peoples. A vast constellation of figures promoted some form of socialism as a vehicle for national liberation and decolonization\, from members of the ‘ulama sympathetic to socialism’s egalitarian tenets; to secular intellectuals educated in Westernized universities; to atheist communists who retained some connection to a sense of Muslimness (often through their ethnic affiliation); to (eventually) authoritarian dictators such as Muammar al-Gaddafi who adopted brands of socialism as their official ideology. These figures have been studied in their national contexts\, and the links between socialist movements in Muslim countries and the Soviet Communist Party have similarly been explored in some depth. At no point\, however\, have Muslim socialists been identified as a transnational network (or collection of networks). This workshop proposes to interrogate Islamic socialists as an intellectual community-albeit a fluid one-spanning the Eurasian continent from Turkey to China and from Russia to India. It also suggests that the religious component of being Muslim and socialist needs to be taken seriously\, and that\, therefore\, relationships\, gatherings\, and exchanges of ideas between Islamic socialists constitute an InterAsian religious network of varying scope depending on the decade in question. \nTo account for the tremendous diversity of Muslim figures embracing or experimenting with socialist ideas\, and to acknowledge the lack of mobility experienced by Muslim socialists living in authoritarian (and especially communist) countries\, this workshop proposes the idea of an Islamic socialist intellectual ecumene\, which can be analyzed in terms of three categories: networks of people\, the flow of ideas\, and the circulation of texts. Unlike a network\, the concept of an ecumene allows for the inclusion of both connections and convergences; to analyze not only the relationships between socialists across time periods and different Muslim cultures\, but also to compare the engagement with socialism in areas geographically distant from one another. \nBy soliciting contributions from scholars engaged with historical figures representing a range of Muslim communities across a broad spectrum of the last century\, this workshop aims to illustrate the Eurasian dimensions of Muslim intellectual engagement with socialism\, and to thereby transcend the limitations imposed by nationalist and Moscow-centric historiographical approaches. The workshop organizers are open to a wide variety of submissions\, including those related to the following topics: \n\nTransnational socialist conferences\, such as the Baku Congress of the Peoples of the East (1920)\nSocialist movements formed in opposition to established Communist Parties in Muslim countries\, such as the Socialist Society of the Iranian Masses (1948)\nSocialist interpretations of fiqh\nThe role of socialism in anticolonial nationalist movements\nThe relationship between communist movements and the ‘ulama\, especially in the early\, formative decades of communism (the 1920s in the USSR and the 1950s in China)\nAutobiographies of prominent socialist intellectuals in Muslim countries\nPeriodical literature targeting the reading public in Muslim countries
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/eurasias-islamic-socialist-ecumene/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201021T191145Z
CREATED:20201021T191145Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201021T191145Z
UID:10000658-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Divine/Transcendent Rulers of Imagined Communities: The Rise and Fall of Royal Nationhood in Asia
DESCRIPTION:Workshop Directors\nWasana Wongsurawat\nAssistant Professor\, History\, Chulalongkorn University\nwwongsurawat@hotmail.com \nMichael K. Connors\nAssociate Professor\, School of Politics History and International Relations\, University of Nottingham\, Malaysia Campus\nmichael.connors@nottingham.edu.my \nCall for Workshop Papers\nThe myth of the divine or virtuous ruler—the son of heaven\, the Buddha reincarnated\, the avatar of Vishnu\, the descendant of the sun goddess\, etc.—is just about as visceral and grounded in lived existence as the imagined community that is the modern nation-state\, a form which has become dominant in the postcolonial era. And they largely shared the same technologies of propagation. Yet\, these two imaginaries that have competed to organize national life have often been regarded in very different light—the nation-state\, and the political projects it was to emulate\, being considered the hallmark of an emerging modernity while the monarchy was perceived as an archaic remnant of ancient regimes antithetical to authentic national life. Dividing them\, definitionally\, is the ‘horizontal comradeship’ of nationalism against the hierarchal order of various royalisms. Nonetheless\, in many parts of the Asian continent\, there were dedicated attempts—with various degrees of success—to transform the monarchy into a symbolic structure and foundation for culturally conservative nation-states\, but no less modern. In a few cases\, the myths of the monarchy and the nation-state seemed to complement each other—the nation lending a façade of modernity to the monarchy while the monarchy provided a touch of spirituality to the modern nation—and the transitions were successful. In some other cases\, the marriage of myth and modernity appeared unconvincing and the magic of royal nationhood failed to materialize in the long term. \nIt is important to take into consideration that\, in the same way that the modular nation-state was a novel invention – a pastiche of past fragments and innovations within an expanding state apparatus – of the modern era\, the monarchies that survived to rule these seemingly modernized regimes must also have been significantly transformed to meet the socio-political and cultural demands of the modern world. But where were the models? The recently published Transnational Histories of Royal Nationhood\, examines significant institutional learning across dynasties\, mostly within Europe. But if modern monarchies of Asia were also inventions of the 19th and 20th centuries\, we must note that they were idiosyncratically framed to different notions of time and articulations of subjecthood/citizenship. And if Asian sovereigns were less entwined than their European counterparts\, so perhaps was learning less shared\, or was it? \nThe modern monarchies drew legitimacy from the historical and spiritual narrative of having predated the modern nation and being the essence of the to be produced cultural homogeneity that would be the nation-state fashioned in royal cloth; or legitimacy flowed from being the arbiter of cultural pluralism. In many cases it was the narrative of the archaic monarchy that provided a sense of history for the nation-state. It seemed as though there had always been a royal sovereign and therefore\, it would have been more plausible that there had always been the nation-state waiting to mature under the sovereign’s watch. While nationalists wanted a stilted birth forced\, monarchists wanted ordered incubation and hatching. The strategies and processes of marrying these two inventions of the modern era to make convincing political entities that are both modern and archaic\, both spiritual and scientific\, both traditional and innovative at the same time\, is undoubtedly much more than a bit intriguing. \nBuilding on the pioneering work of Transnational Histories of Royal Nationhood\, but focusing on the Asian histories of royal nationhood from a range of methodological starting points\, this workshop seeks to explore the following questions: What were the reasons behind the seeming success of some regimes in the transition from archaic to modern of the royal nation? How was the question of the locus of sovereignty resolved in the face of popular claims? How could the apparent failures of other royalist regimes in Asia be understood in the context of the modern and contemporary eras and were those failures observed and applied as lessons by the survivors? Were there institutional borrowings that suggest a robust global history? How did the successful monarchies maneuver through turbulent periods of external political influence—both the height of colonialism in the 19th century and the Cold War of the mid-to- late-20th century? Does the existence or prior existence of a monarchy impact a society’s ability to liberally democratize or to revolutionize into the norms of the socialist bloc? What is the future for the modern monarchies that remain in this day and age\, and what are the prospects for restoration?
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/divine-transcendent-rulers-of-imagined-communities-the-rise-and-fall-of-royal-nationhood-in-asia/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181204T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181207T170000
DTSTAMP:20201021T190619Z
CREATED:20201021T190538Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201021T190619Z
UID:10000657-1543910400-1544202000@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:China’s OBOR Initiative and Its Impacts for Asian Countries
DESCRIPTION:WORKSHOP DIRECTORS:\nAnh Nguyen Dang\nVice-President\, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences\ndanganhphat1609@gmail.com \nWenfei Winnie Wang\nSenior Lecturer in Human Geography\, University of Bristol\nw.wang@bristol.ac.uk \nCALL FOR WORKSHOP PAPERS:\nIn 2013\, Chinese premier Xi Jinping announced a pair of new development and trade initiatives for China and the surrounding region: the “Silk Road Economic Belt” and the “Twenty-First- Century Maritime Silk Road\,” together known as “One Belt\, One Road“ (OBOR). Along with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)\, the OBOR policies represent an ambitious spatial expansion of Chinese state capitalism\, driven by an excess of industrial production capacity\, as well as by emerging financial capital interests. \nSeveral “corridors” will link specific Chinese regions with countries throughout Asia. A massive “Silk Road Fund” will finance infrastructure projects\, like deep water harbour construction\, satellite towns and fast railroads. Financial and business circles are by and large enthusiastic about the OBOR project and expect high profits for banks and the construction industry. Massive investments are planned and construction has started on several mega projects such as deep water harbour construction\, land traffic infrastructure projects and large scale urban development projects. The development plan also includes the building of a network of fast railway lines\, connecting China with Central Asia\, Southeast Asia\, India and eventually Europe. \nThe increasing dominance of the Chinese economy throughout Asia and beyond is\, however\, clearly visible. As the Chinese Government has embarked on the new strategy of OBOR\, there will be obvious commercial benefits to economies along the Southern Silk Road\, but also geo-political effects like increasing political dependency due to Chinese capital investments and acquisition of property rights in ports and estates. \nThe Chinese government insists that the OBOR strategy is peaceful and directed at only one aim economic prosperity for all countries involved. China’s leaders have stressed the shared benefits of “peaceful development and prosperity” brought about by the OBOR initiative\, while many scholars and political scientists considered it as a tool for China to control the “pivot area” of Eurasia for benefits and geopolitical domination. There will be long-term predictable and un-predictable outcomes for Asia countries who critically need policy to deal with OBOR and China’s influences. A different picture of Asia may emerge with OBOR’s impact. Who is going to benefit in the long run; whether peaceful development is maintained in Asia will have to be seen. \nThis workshop concentrates on the present and future impacts of China’s OBOR initiative. We invite contributions on all aspect of OBOR\, particularly its present and future impacts on Asia and its integration. We welcome papers from authors coming from various disciplines\, especially those who can bring intensive ideas and different perspectives to the workshop.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/chinas-obor-initiative-and-its-impacts-for-asian-countries/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hanoi-.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20181204
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20181205
DTSTAMP:20211013T165356Z
CREATED:20211013T165356Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211013T165356Z
UID:10000778-1543881600-1543967999@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:VASS and SSRC Sign Memorandum of Understanding 30 Years after First MOU
DESCRIPTION:The President of SSRC and the President of the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences signed a memorandum of understanding to extend over 30 years of collaboration in research\, training\, and scientific collaboration. \n \nMeeting participants: (Seated left to right) Alondra Nelson and Nguyen Quang Thuan.(Standing left to right) Van Tran\, Mary McDonnell\, Dang Nguyen Anh\, Nguyen Thanh Ha\, Nguyen Thi Hoai Le\, and Nguyen Duc Vinh. \n  \nThirty years after signing the first historic memorandum of understanding in September 1988\, SSRC and VASS affirmed their intent to continue to cooperate in social science research\, training\, exchange\, knowledge and data sharing\, and policy consultation. The agreement expressed SSRC and VASS’ commitment to collaborate based on four integrated modalities: \n1. Training to equip social scientists with new and interdisciplinary knowledge and skills to investigate rapid socioeconomic change and its social implications\, and to communicate their findings and implications; \n2. Research on current and future social dimensions of socioeconomic development; \n3. Policy consultation to inform both the decision-makers and the environment in which policies and decisions are made; and \n4. Sharing knowledge and data. \n  \nProfessor Thuan thanked SSRC for over 30 years of support and praised highly the effectiveness of the interdisciplinary social research methods training program in advancing the capacity of VASS researchers. The program has been institutionalized within VASS’ Graduate Academy of Social Sciences (GASS)\, where it continues to be a part of the core curriculum. President Alondra Nelson also expressed the Council’s appreciation for VASS’ support over the years and for the excellent hosting of the recent Conference on InterAsian Connections VI in Hanoi\, December 4-7\, 2018. \n     \n(Left) Dr. Mary McDonnell gives opening remarks at the Conference on InterAsian Connections VI\, providing an overview of SSRC’s work in Asia and highlighting ongoing work in Vietnam. (Right) Drs. Prasenjit Duara\, Alondra Nelson\, and Dang Nguyen Anh present in a panel on Social Knowledge and Boundary Crossing.\n  \nSince the mid-1980s\, the Council has partnered with VASS to: \n\npromote academic and information exchange between Vietnamese researchers and foreign counterparts;\ndevelop short workshops on social science concepts and methods;\ncollaborate with the Southern Institute of Social Sciences on a project to enhance research\, training\, institution building\, and network creation by examining poverty and socioeconomic mobility in the context of rapid urbanization in southern Vietnam;\ntrain 120 researchers—most of whom were from VASS—in the first ever interdisciplinary social science research training program in Vietnam (this program is now institutionalized within GASS);\norganize study programs in the US for delegations headed by the president and vice president of VASS on various topics\, including the rule of law (2004)\, humanities (2006)\, international relations (2009)\, social work and public policy graduate degrees for GASS (2012)\, human rights (2013)\, US involvement in Vietnam from 1954-1975 (2017)\, and disciplinary\, state\, and regional encyclopedias (2017);\nreview Doi Moi in 1990 and 2005\, looking at Vietnamese youths under 20 years of Doi Moi;\ncarry out the longitudinal Provincial Population Health Study in three provinces in Vietnam\, hold training workshops\, and disseminate key findings (2008-2018); and\norganize the Conference on InterAsian Connections VI in Hanoi (2018).\n\n  \nAlso present at the ceremony were director and associate director of the SSRC’s Vietnam Program\, Mary Byrne McDonnell and Van Bich Thi Tran\, and leaders from VASS\, including: Professor Dr. Dang Nguyen Anh\, Vice President of VASS; Mr. Nguyen Thanh Ha\, Director of the International Cooperation Department; Associate Professor Dr. Nguyen Thi Hoai Le\, Director of the Scientific Management Department; and Associate Professor Dr. Nguyen Duc Vinh\, Director of the Institute of Sociology.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/vass-and-ssrc-sign-memorandum-of-understanding-30-years-after-first-mou/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181203T160000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181203T200000
DTSTAMP:20211019T175043Z
CREATED:20200924T151054Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211019T175043Z
UID:10000613-1543852800-1543867200@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Abe Global Washington\, DC | Japanese and American Innovation in the Global Age
DESCRIPTION:Event Livestream\n \nOverview\nBoth the United States and Japan have long taken pride in their robust scientific research communities’ contributions to economic growth and human welfare. But the slowing pace and rising costs of research\, along with strong competition from China and India\, have challenged both governments to rethink their approaches to science and technology policy and set agendas that encourage innovation towards solving demanding social problems. \nThe Abe Fellows Global Forum will bring together experts to discuss how the United States and Japan are responding to these challenges\, as well as the rapidly rising innovation hubs in China\, India\, and Singapore. Panelists will consider institutional factors that encourage or discourage innovation; the impact of big data and AI on innovation policies and strategies; cultures of innovation in Japan\, the US and other Asian countries; conflicts between the interests of companies\, national populations\, and global welfare; and challenges for the future of scientific innovation. \nOver the last 25 years\, the Abe Fellowship Program has supported a number of fellows whose research projects address the issues and mechanisms of innovation. For this event\, a selection of these expert fellows from the fields of economics\, political science\, political economy\, engineering and public policy\, and organizational sociology engaged with the opportunities and challenges of innovation in a global age. \n  \nA new initiative of the Abe Fellowship Program\, the Abe Fellows Global Forum (Abe Global) is designed to bring Abe Fellow research and expertise on pressing issues of global concern to broader audiences. Abe Global will host several events each year in partnership with academic and civic organizations throughout the United States. The Abe Fellowship Program is a partnership between the Social Science Research Council and the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/abe-global-washington-dc-japanese-and-american-innovation-in-the-global-age/
LOCATION:Carnegie Endowment for International Peace\, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW\, Washington\, DC\, 20036\, United States
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Untitled-design-copy.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181201T150000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181201T193000
DTSTAMP:20210811T152953Z
CREATED:20200924T150738Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210811T152953Z
UID:10000570-1543676400-1543692600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Abe Global Atlanta | Japanese and American Innovation in a Global Age
DESCRIPTION:Overview\nBoth the United States and Japan have long taken pride in their robust scientific research communities’ contributions to economic growth and human welfare. But the slowing pace and rising costs of research\, along with strong competition from China and India\, have challenged both governments to rethink their approaches to science and technology policy and set agendas that encourage innovation towards solving demanding social problems. \nThe Abe Fellows Global Forum will bring together experts to discuss how the United States and Japan are responding to these challenges\, as well as the rapidly rising innovation hubs in China\, India\, and Singapore. Panelists will consider institutional factors that encourage or discourage innovation; the impact of big data and AI on innovation policies and strategies; cultures of innovation in Japan\, the US and other Asian countries; conflicts between the interests of companies\, national populations\, and global welfare; and challenges for the future of scientific innovation. \nOver the last 25 years\, the Abe Fellowship Program has supported a number of fellows whose research projects address the issues and mechanisms of innovation. For this event\, a selection of these expert fellows from the fields of economics\, political science\, political economy\, engineering and public policy\, and organizational sociology will engage with the opportunities and challenges of innovation in a global age. \nReception to follow the event. \n  \nA new initiative of the Abe Fellowship Program\, the Abe Fellows Global Forum (Abe Global) is designed to bring Abe Fellow research and expertise on pressing issues of global concern to broader audiences. Abe Global will host several events each year in partnership with academic and civic organizations throughout the United States. The Abe Fellowship Program is a partnership between the Social Science Research Council and the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/abe-global-atlanta-japanese-and-american-innovation-in-a-global-age/
LOCATION:Georgia Institute of Technology\, Clary Theater\, Bill Moore Student Success Center\, 225 North Ave NW\, Atlanta\, GA\, 30332\, United States
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/abe-global-nyc-japan-and-the-leadership-of-the-world-trading-system-1-e1600960044251.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181130T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181130T170000
DTSTAMP:20210817T171737Z
CREATED:20200930T190914Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210817T171737Z
UID:10000633-1543568400-1543597200@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:Politics of Distribution Conference
DESCRIPTION:On November 30th\, 2018\, the Anxieties of Democracy program’s working group on the Politics of Distribution will convene at Yale University for the presentation of book chapters. The book chapters will explore many topics\, including: the roots of urban-rural sectionalism\, perceptions of wealth inequality\, and the spatial geography of wealth and precarity in the United States.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/politics-of-distribution-conference/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/annie-spratt-Iqwnr00mfQM-unsplash-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181130T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181130T170000
DTSTAMP:20210924T163543Z
CREATED:20210924T163543Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210924T163543Z
UID:10000774-1543564800-1543597200@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:2018 Albert O. Hirschman Prize Ceremony
DESCRIPTION:Friday\, November 30\, 2018\nHarold Pratt House\, 58 East 68th Street at Park Avenue | New York\, NY 10065\nCocktail Reception at 4:30 p.m. | Lecture at 5:30 p.m. \nOn November 30\, 2018\, the Social Science Research Council\, in collaboration with the Institute for Advanced Study\, awarded the 2018 Albert O. Hirschman Prize to Sheila Jasanoff\, Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. Professor Jasanoff spoke on “Theory\, Critique\, and Discipline in a Post-Truth Age.” \nAwarded every two years\, the Albert O. Hirschman Prize is the highest honor of the Social Science Research Council. It recognizes excellence in research\, theory\, and public communication\, in the tradition of German-born American economist Albert Hirschman’s pioneering role in social science and public policy.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/2018-albert-o-hirschman-prize-ceremony/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/5dc065452448b.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20181115T080000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20181116T170000
DTSTAMP:20201001T181433Z
CREATED:20201001T181433Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201001T181433Z
UID:10000637-1542268800-1542387600@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:SSRC-IFS Workshop: "The Will of the People"
DESCRIPTION:This workshop\, held at Columbia University\, is the fourth in a series of convenings organized as part of a collaboration between the SSRC’s Anxieties of Democracy program and our namesake European partner program\, Anxieties of Democracy\, at the Swedish Institute for Futures Studies. \nThe workshop explores the idea of popular sovereignty and how to define “the will of the people.” Questions addressed include: \nWhat does it mean for the people to be sovereign? What is “the will of the people”?  By what criteria and by whom should this will be ascertained\, judged\, and acted upon? What is a valid method to assess this “will” and how can biases and distortions caused by “wrong” methods of measurement be avoided? The “will” of the people is continuously changing: what forces and mechanisms play a role in this ongoing will-formation? \nThe workshop is generously supported by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond and co-hosted by Columbia World Projects.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/ssrc-ifs-workshop-the-will-of-the-people/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20181113
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20181114
DTSTAMP:20210824T181138Z
CREATED:20200820T205712Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210824T181138Z
UID:10000579-1542067200-1542153599@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:APHA Annual Conference
DESCRIPTION:Measure of America presents its latest youth disconnection report “Two Futures: The Economic Case for Keeping Youth on Track” about the long-term impacts of disconnection at the American Public Health Association’s Annual Conference in San Diego\, CA.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/apha-annual-conference/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.ssrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/mche-lee-PC91Jm1DlWA-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20181030
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20181101
DTSTAMP:20201001T181649Z
CREATED:20201001T181649Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201001T181649Z
UID:10000638-1540857600-1541030399@www.ssrc.org
SUMMARY:“Democracy at a Crossroads” co-sponsored conference
DESCRIPTION:The SSRC proudly co-sponsored the “Democracy at a Crossroads” conference\, held in Mexico City\, Mexico on October 30-31\, 2018. The event was hosted by the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE) with support from the SSRC’s Anxieties of Democracy program\, Columbia University\, and Universidad de Guadalaraja. \nThe conference brought together scholars from Latin America\, the United States\, and Europe\, to discuss popular legitimacy\, drugs and security\, inequality\, populism\, and neoliberalism\, among other topics.
URL:https://www.ssrc.org/events/democracy-at-a-crossroads-co-sponsored-conference/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR