ERC FUNDED PROJECTS

A half century since it came into existence, the discipline of Film and Screen Studies remains mostly Eurocentric in its historical, theoretical and critical frameworks. Although “world cinema” and “transnational cinema” scholars have attempted to broaden its canon and frameworks, several major problems persist. Films and scholarship by Africans in particular, and by people of colour in general, are frequently marginalised if not altogether excluded. This prevents exciting exchanges that could help to re-envision Film and Screen Studies for the twenty-first century, in an era in which greater access to the technological means of making films, and circulating them on a range of screens, means that dynamic “screen worlds” are developing at a rapid rate. AFRISCREENWORLDS will study these “screen worlds” (in both their textual forms and industrial structures), with a focus on Africa, as a way of centring the most marginalised regional cinema. We will also elaborate comparative studies of global “screen worlds” – and, in particular, “screen worlds” in the Global South – exploring their similarities, differences, and parallel developments. We will respond to the exclusions of Film and Screen Studies not only in scholarly ways – through conferences and publications – but also in creative and activist ways – through drawing on cutting-edge creative research methodologies (such as audiovisual criticism and filmmaking) and through helping to decolonise Film and Screen Studies (through the production of ‘toolkits’ on how to make curricula, syllabi, and teaching more globally representative and inclusive). On a theoretical level, we will make an intervention through considering how the concept of “screen worlds” is better equipped than “world cinema” or “transnational cinema” to explore the complexities of audiovisual narratives, and their production and circulation in our contemporary moment, in diverse contexts throughout the globe.

1 985 578 €

Start date: 2019-06-01, End date: 2024-05-31

The project will develop a new ethnography of statehood through architecture. It goes beyond conventional approaches to statehood, which describe states as an objectively existing set of tools used to run a country, and critical approaches that understand them as discursive constructs. Instead, this research understands statehood as a result of the relationship between functions and symbols, and will read it through an innovative new methodology, namely a study of state architecture. The study will focus on state buildings in Africa. African statehood, uncertain and often ambiguous, in many cases profoundly shaped by colonial heritages and post-colonial relationships, is reflected in classical-colonial, modernist-nationalist and post-modern or vernacular styles of architecture. African state buildings reveal the complex interplay of ideas, activities and relationships that together constitute an often uncomfortable statehood. They symbolise the state, embodying and projecting ideas of it through their aesthetics; they enable its concrete functions and processes; and they reveal what citizens think about the state in the ways they describe and negotiate them. The study is comparative, multi-layered and interdisciplinary. It focuses on seven countries (South Africa, Tanzania, DR Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea Bissau), exploring politics and statehood on domestic, regional and international levels, and drawing on theory and methods from political science, history, sociology, art and architecture theory. It employs innovative ethnographic methods, including the collection and display of photographs in interactive exhibitions staged in Africa to explore the ways citizens think about and use state buildings. This project will provide an innovative reading of how African statehood is expressed and how it looks and feels to African citizens. In doing this, it will make a distinctive new contribution to understanding how statehood works everywhere.

1 870 665 €

Start date: 2018-09-01, End date: 2023-08-31

Why is the world green? Because predators control herbivores, allowing plants to flourish. This >50 years old answer to the deceptively simple question remains controversial. After all, plants are also protected from herbivores physically and by secondary chemistry. My goal is to test novel aspects of the “green world hypothesis”: ● How the importance of top-down effects varies with forest diversity and productivity along a latitudinal gradient? ● How the key predators, birds, bats and ants, contribute to top-down effects individually and in synergy? I strive to understand this because: ● While there is evidence that predators reduce herbivore abundance and enhance plant growth, the importance of top-down control is poorly understood across a range of forests. ● The importance of key predatory groups, and their antagonistic and synergic interactions, have been rarely studied, despite their potential impact on ecosystem dynamics in changing world. I wish to achieve my goals by: ● Factorial manipulations of key insectivorous predators (birds, bats, ants) to measure their effects on lower trophic levels in forest understories and canopies, accessed by canopy cranes, along latitudinal gradient spanning 75o from Australia to Japan. ● Studying compensatory effects among predatory taxa on herbivore and plant performance. Why this has not been done before: ● Factorial experimental exclusion of predatory groups replicated on a large spatial scale is logistically difficult. ● Canopy crane network along a latitudinal gradient has only recently become available. I am in excellent position to succeed as I have experience with ● foodweb experiments along an elevation gradient in New Guinea rainforests, ● study of bird, bat and arthropod communities. If the project is successful, it will: ● Allow understanding the importance of predators from temperate to tropical forests. ● Establish a network of experimental sites along a network of canopy cranes open for follow-up research.

1 455 032 €

Start date: 2018-12-01, End date: 2023-11-30

BEHAVFRICTIONS will use novel models focussing on information-processing frictions to explain choice patterns described in behavioral economics and psychology. The proposed research will provide microfoundations that are essential for (i) identification of stable preferences, (ii) counterfactual predictions, and (iii) normative conclusions. (i) Agents who face information-processing costs must trade the precision of choice against information costs. Their behavior thus reflects both their stable preferences and the context-dependent procedures that manage their errors stemming from imperfect information processing. In the absence of micro-founded models, the two drivers of the behavior are difficult to disentangle for outside observers. In some pillars of the proposal, the agents follow choice rules that closely resemble logit rules used in structural estimation. This will allow me to reinterpret the structural estimation fits to choice data and to make a distinction between the stable preferences and frictions. (ii) Such a distinction is important in counterfactual policy analysis because the second-best decision procedures that manage the errors in choice are affected by the analysed policy. Incorporation of the information-processing frictions into existing empirical methods will improve our ability to predict effects of the policies. (iii) My preliminary results suggest that when an agent is prone to committing errors, biases--such as overconfidence, confirmatory bias, or perception biases known from prospect theory--arise under second-best strategies. By providing the link between the agent's environment and the second-best distribution of the perception errors, my models will delineate environments in which these biases shield the agents from the most costly mistakes from environments in which the biases turn into maladaptations. The distinction will inform the normative debate on debiasing.

1 321 488 €

Start date: 2018-06-01, End date: 2023-05-31