ERC FUNDED PROJECTS

Over the past decade, the media, international organisations, as well as policy-making bodies have voiced increasing concern about a growing overlap between the criminal and political spheres in South Asia. Many 'criminal politicians' are accused not simply of embezzlement, but of burglary, kidnapping and murder, so that the observed political landscape emerges not only as a 'corrupt', but also a highly violent sphere. This project is a collaborative and cross-national ethnographic study of the criminalisation of politics in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Bringing together local-level investigation, surveys and historical analysis, the project will produce comprehensive political ethnographies in sixteen sites across the subcontinent, providing empirical material and theoretical directives for further charting of the virtually unexplored terrain of extra-legal muscular politics in the region. Central to the proposed programme of research are the following interrelated objectives: 1) To further develop the method of collaborative political ethnography by designing, collecting and producing case studies which will allow us to write thematically across sites; 2) To generate policy relevant research in the fields of security, conflict, democracy and development; 3) To produce capability by forging an international network of scholars on issues related to democratisation, violence, crime and support the work and careers of the project's 4 Post-docs. The study capitalises on previous research and skills of the PI in the cross-cultural study of democracy and muscular politics in the global South. All members of the research team have expertise in ethnographic research in the difficult spheres of criminal politics, informal economies, and political violence and are hence well and sometimes uniquely equipped to pursue this challenging research thematic.

1 200 000 €

Start date: 2012-03-01, End date: 2016-02-29

This project is a comparative anthropology of conscience, ethics and human rights. Numerous international human rights documents formally declare their commitment to protect freedom of conscience. But, what is conscience and how do we know it when we see it? How do we distinguish it from self-interest or fanaticism? And what happens when the concept, often associated with a distinct Christian or liberal history, travels across cultural boundaries? The project will examine the cultural conditions under which claims to conscience are made possible, and the types of claims that are most persuasive when doing so. The project addresses these issues through the comparative analysis of three case studies: British pacifists, Sri Lankan activists, and Soviet dissidents. These case studies have been carefully chosen to provide globally significant, but contrasting examples of contests over the implications of claims to conscience. If claims of conscience are often associated with a specifically liberal and Christian tradition, mid-twentieth century Britain can be said to stand at the centre of that tradition. Sri Lanka represents a particularly fraught post-colonial South Asian counterpoint, wracked by nationalist violence, and influenced by ethical traditions associated with forms of Hinduism and Buddhism. Soviet Russia represents a further contrast, a totalitarian regime, where atheism was the dominant ethical language. Finally, the project will return specifically to international human rights institutions, examining the history of the category of conscience in the UN human rights system. This project will be ground breaking, employing novel methods and analytical insights, in order to producing the first comparative analysis of the cultural and political salience of claims of conscience. In doing so, the research aims to transform our understandings of the limits and potentials of attempts to protect freedom of conscience.

1 457 869 €

Start date: 2015-08-01, End date: 2020-07-31

Knowledge is an anthropological constant that is indissociable from the birth and interactions of human societies, but is at best a secondary concern for scholars of international relations and globalization. Contemporary global studies are thus unable to account for the co-constitution of knowledge and politics at a macro-scale, and remain especially blind to the historical patterns of epistemic development that operate at the level of the species as a whole and have shaped its global political history in specific, path-dependent ways up to now. ARTEFACT is the first project to pursue a knowledge-centered investigation of global politics. It is uniquely grounded in an anthropological approach that treats globalization and human knowledges beyond their modern manifestations, from the longue-durée perspective of our species’ social history. 'The global as artefact' is more than a metaphor. It reflects the premise that human collectives 'make' the political world not merely through ideas, language, or norms, but primordially through the material infrastructures, solutions, objects, practices, and skills they develop in response to evolving structural challenges. ARTEFACT takes agriculture as an exemplary and especially timely case-study to illuminate the entangled global histories of knowledge and politics, analyzing and comparing four increasingly inclusive 'global political systems' of the Ancient, Medieval, Modern, and Contemporary eras and their associated agrarian socio-epistemic revolutions. ARTEFACT ultimately aims to 1) develop an original theory of the global, 2) launch Global Knowledge Studies as a new cross-disciplinary domain of systematic empirical and theoretical study, and 3) push the respective boundaries of the anthropology of knowledge, global history, and international theory beyond the state-of-the-art and toward a holistic understanding that can illuminate how past trends of socio-epistemic evolution might shape future paths of global life.

1 428 165 €

Start date: 2017-09-01, End date: 2022-08-31

Driven by public outrage at bank bailouts during the financial crisis, many governments have since then tried to rewrite the rules governing finance. Yet the anger provoked by the bailouts has not subsided. In Europe and in North America, citizen fury against bankers continues to structure battles over financial regulation. It also affects broader perceptions of fairness in the political system and feeds anti-elite populism. Scholars of political economy have chronicled the clashes between states and large banks, and scholars of political behaviour have noted the failings of governments to respond to the will of democratic majorities. No one has explored the feedback loops between policies regulating banks, the public anger towards banking elites, and media discussions of finance. BANK-LASH fills this gap, using a cutting-edge, high-risk research design comprising three work packages to link policy outcomes with public opinion and media coverage. BANK-LASH 1will collect the first cross-nationally comparable data on public attitudes towards finance, including a series of innovative survey experiments that assess how different media frames affect emotions and preferences. BANK-LASH 2 will use supervised machine learning to measure the overall media environment of these countries for the last decade, assessing how much different national media systems discuss finance and how different national media systems frame the discussion of banking regulation. BANK-LASH 3 links the micro-level study of attitudes and macro-level media coverage with episodes of policy intervention in each country in order to determine when democracies have imposed significant new regulation on their banks. By harnessing these different intellectual tools within a single study, BANK-LASH brings together the concerns of political economy, behavioral research and policy studies to untangle the relationship between banks, public policy, and anti-elite sentiment in the wake of the financial crisis.

2 454 198 €

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