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: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: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;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;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;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: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: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
END:VCALENDAR