Project acronym AFRISCREENWORLDS
Project African Screen Worlds: Decolonising Film and Screen Studies
Researcher (PI) Lindiwe Dovey
Host Institution (HI) SCHOOL OF ORIENTAL AND AFRICAN STUDIES ROYAL CHARTER
Call Details Consolidator Grant (CoG), SH5, ERC-2018-COG
Summary 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.
Summary
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.
Max ERC Funding
1 985 578 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-06-01, End date: 2024-05-31
Project acronym ALREG
Project Analysing Learning in Regulatory Governance
Researcher (PI) Claudio Radaelli
Host Institution (HI) THE UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH2, ERC-2008-AdG
Summary This four-year interdisciplinary project addresses the question what has been learned through the use of better regulation ? Better regulation is a flagship policy on the Lisbon agenda for growth and jobs. Its aims are to provide new governance architectures for law-making, to increase the competitiveness of the regulatory environment, and to secure wide social legitimacy for multi-level systems of rules. Whilst most of the research has looked at how better regulation is changing, this project will produce findings on what has changed because of better regulation. Theoretically, the project will use (and significantly improve on) theories of policy learning. Empirically, it will cover Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the UK and the EU including multi-level analysis and analysis by sector of regulation. Methodologically, the project will draw on comparative analysis of types of learning, experiments with regulatory policy-makers in six countries and the European Commission, large-n analysis of impact assessments, backward-mapping of legislation (to appraise the role played by better regulation in the formulation or laws in the UK and the EU), meta-analysis of case-studies and co-production of knowledge with better regulation officers. Dissemination will target both stakeholders (i.e., policy officers, civil society organizations, and business federations) and academic conferences in political science, law, and risk analysis, with a major research monograph to be completed in year 4 and a final interdisciplinary conference.
Summary
This four-year interdisciplinary project addresses the question what has been learned through the use of better regulation ? Better regulation is a flagship policy on the Lisbon agenda for growth and jobs. Its aims are to provide new governance architectures for law-making, to increase the competitiveness of the regulatory environment, and to secure wide social legitimacy for multi-level systems of rules. Whilst most of the research has looked at how better regulation is changing, this project will produce findings on what has changed because of better regulation. Theoretically, the project will use (and significantly improve on) theories of policy learning. Empirically, it will cover Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the UK and the EU including multi-level analysis and analysis by sector of regulation. Methodologically, the project will draw on comparative analysis of types of learning, experiments with regulatory policy-makers in six countries and the European Commission, large-n analysis of impact assessments, backward-mapping of legislation (to appraise the role played by better regulation in the formulation or laws in the UK and the EU), meta-analysis of case-studies and co-production of knowledge with better regulation officers. Dissemination will target both stakeholders (i.e., policy officers, civil society organizations, and business federations) and academic conferences in political science, law, and risk analysis, with a major research monograph to be completed in year 4 and a final interdisciplinary conference.
Max ERC Funding
948 448 €
Duration
Start date: 2009-09-01, End date: 2013-09-30
Project acronym BRIO
Project Bounded Rationality in Industrial Organization
Researcher (PI) Ran Spiegler
Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH1, ERC-2008-AdG
Summary "Economists' modern understanding of the functioning of markets is based on the behavioral assumption of individual rationality. Market agents are assumed to hold well-defined preferences and have perfect ability to draw Bayesian inferences in accordance with correct knowledge of the market model and market equilibrium. This research proposal is based on the premise that bounded rationality on the part of consumers is potentially a major source of market friction. My objective is to develop general theoretical tools to investigate this intuition, and to examine whether these tools can be insightfully applied to realistic market settings. So far, the literature on the subject has progressed as a sequence of specific models that capture one aspect of consumer psychology at a time. The challenge is to synthesize and generalize these models into flexible theoretical frameworks for modelling market interaction between profit-maximizing firms and boundedly rational consumers. Hopefully, various aspects of consumer psychology can be embedded into these frameworks, so that analytic results can be stated in terms of general, abstract properties of consumer behavior, rather than in terms of specific psychological effects. In turn, this general analysis is expected to lead to novel applications. Here are some of the general questions that I hope to address. Can we view certain aspects of firms' pricing and marketing strategies as responses to consumers' bounded rationality? To what extent are boundedly rational consumers vulnerable to exploitation by firms? Does competition protect them from exploitation? Does interaction between firms and boundedly rational consumers give rise to inefficiencies, and how are these affected by competition? What is the impact of various regulatory interventions in this context? Do market forces lead firms to ""educate"" or ""debias"" boundedly rational consumers? Does greater consumer rationality imply more competitive industry profits?"
Summary
"Economists' modern understanding of the functioning of markets is based on the behavioral assumption of individual rationality. Market agents are assumed to hold well-defined preferences and have perfect ability to draw Bayesian inferences in accordance with correct knowledge of the market model and market equilibrium. This research proposal is based on the premise that bounded rationality on the part of consumers is potentially a major source of market friction. My objective is to develop general theoretical tools to investigate this intuition, and to examine whether these tools can be insightfully applied to realistic market settings. So far, the literature on the subject has progressed as a sequence of specific models that capture one aspect of consumer psychology at a time. The challenge is to synthesize and generalize these models into flexible theoretical frameworks for modelling market interaction between profit-maximizing firms and boundedly rational consumers. Hopefully, various aspects of consumer psychology can be embedded into these frameworks, so that analytic results can be stated in terms of general, abstract properties of consumer behavior, rather than in terms of specific psychological effects. In turn, this general analysis is expected to lead to novel applications. Here are some of the general questions that I hope to address. Can we view certain aspects of firms' pricing and marketing strategies as responses to consumers' bounded rationality? To what extent are boundedly rational consumers vulnerable to exploitation by firms? Does competition protect them from exploitation? Does interaction between firms and boundedly rational consumers give rise to inefficiencies, and how are these affected by competition? What is the impact of various regulatory interventions in this context? Do market forces lead firms to ""educate"" or ""debias"" boundedly rational consumers? Does greater consumer rationality imply more competitive industry profits?"
Max ERC Funding
1 098 637 €
Duration
Start date: 2008-11-01, End date: 2014-10-31
Project acronym CHRONO
Project Chronotype, health and family: The role of biology, socio- and natural environment and their interaction
Researcher (PI) Melinda MILLS
Host Institution (HI) THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH3, ERC-2018-ADG
Summary The widespread use of electronic devices, artificial light and rise of the 24-hour economy means that more individuals experience disruption of their chronotype, which is the natural circadian rhythm that regulates sleep and activity levels. The natural and medical sciences focus on the natural environment (e.g., light exposure), genetics, biology and health consequences, whereas the social sciences have largely explored the socio-environment (e.g., working regulations) and psychological and familial consequences of nonstandard work schedules. For the first time CHRONO bridges these disparate disciplines to ask: What is the role of biology, the natural and socio-environment and their interaction on predicting and understanding resilience to chronotype disruption and how does this in turn impact an individual’s health (sleep, cancer, obesity, digestive problems) and family (partnership, children) outcomes? I propose to: (1) develop a multifactor interdisciplinary theoretical model; (2) disrupt data collection by crowdsourcing a sociogenomic dataset with novel measures; (3) discover and validate with informed machine learning innovative measures of chronotype (molecular genetic, accelerometer, microbiome, patient-record, self-reported) and the natural and socio-environment; (4) ask fundamentally new substantive questions to determine how chronotype disruption influences health and family outcomes and, via Biology x Environment interaction (BxE), whether this is moderated by the natural or socio-environment; and, (5) develop new statistical models and methods to cope with contentious issues, answer longitudinal questions and engage in novel quasi-experiments (e.g., policy and life course changes) to transcend description to identify endogenous factors and causal mechanisms. Interdisciplinary in the truest sense, CHRONO will overturn long-held substantive findings of the causes and consequences of chronotype disruption.
Summary
The widespread use of electronic devices, artificial light and rise of the 24-hour economy means that more individuals experience disruption of their chronotype, which is the natural circadian rhythm that regulates sleep and activity levels. The natural and medical sciences focus on the natural environment (e.g., light exposure), genetics, biology and health consequences, whereas the social sciences have largely explored the socio-environment (e.g., working regulations) and psychological and familial consequences of nonstandard work schedules. For the first time CHRONO bridges these disparate disciplines to ask: What is the role of biology, the natural and socio-environment and their interaction on predicting and understanding resilience to chronotype disruption and how does this in turn impact an individual’s health (sleep, cancer, obesity, digestive problems) and family (partnership, children) outcomes? I propose to: (1) develop a multifactor interdisciplinary theoretical model; (2) disrupt data collection by crowdsourcing a sociogenomic dataset with novel measures; (3) discover and validate with informed machine learning innovative measures of chronotype (molecular genetic, accelerometer, microbiome, patient-record, self-reported) and the natural and socio-environment; (4) ask fundamentally new substantive questions to determine how chronotype disruption influences health and family outcomes and, via Biology x Environment interaction (BxE), whether this is moderated by the natural or socio-environment; and, (5) develop new statistical models and methods to cope with contentious issues, answer longitudinal questions and engage in novel quasi-experiments (e.g., policy and life course changes) to transcend description to identify endogenous factors and causal mechanisms. Interdisciplinary in the truest sense, CHRONO will overturn long-held substantive findings of the causes and consequences of chronotype disruption.
Max ERC Funding
2 499 811 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-11-01, End date: 2024-10-31
Project acronym CITSEE
Project The Europeanisation of Citizenship in the Successor States of the Former Yugoslavia
Researcher (PI) Josephine Shaw
Host Institution (HI) THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH2, ERC-2008-AdG
Summary CITSEE is a comparative and contextualised study of the citizenship regimes of the seven successor states of the former Yugoslavia (SFRY) in their broader European context. It focuses on the relationship between how these regimes have developed after the disintegration of SFRY and the processes of re-integration occurring in the context of the enlargement of the European Union applied in the region. It makes use of the varied statuses under EU law of the SFRY successor states, of which only Slovenia is so far a Member State. The processes at the heart of the study include the effects of previous and prospective enlargements of the EU and the broader stabilisation and association processes. CITSEE uses methods which look at legal and institutional change in its broader political context and applies the broad approach of constitutional ethnography. It has national case studies and thematic case studies of key issues which have a transnational dimension, including the status of residents of the former SFRY Republics resident in other Republics at the moment of independence, dual and multiple nationality, the granting or denial of political rights for resident non-nationals and non-resident nationals, the status of minorities such as the Roma, gender issues arising in a citizenship context, and the impact of citizenship concepts on free movement and travel across borders. While CITSEE s objectives are not normative in nature, and are not intended to supply answers as to best or worst practices in relation to citizenship regimes, or to evaluate the impact of Europeanisation as negative or positive, none the less such an evaluative study is likely to be of interest not only to researchers, but also to NGOs and to policy-makers in the region and in the EU and other international institutions because it fills in many gaps in our current knowledge and provides improved evidence on the basis of which policies may be developed in the future.
Summary
CITSEE is a comparative and contextualised study of the citizenship regimes of the seven successor states of the former Yugoslavia (SFRY) in their broader European context. It focuses on the relationship between how these regimes have developed after the disintegration of SFRY and the processes of re-integration occurring in the context of the enlargement of the European Union applied in the region. It makes use of the varied statuses under EU law of the SFRY successor states, of which only Slovenia is so far a Member State. The processes at the heart of the study include the effects of previous and prospective enlargements of the EU and the broader stabilisation and association processes. CITSEE uses methods which look at legal and institutional change in its broader political context and applies the broad approach of constitutional ethnography. It has national case studies and thematic case studies of key issues which have a transnational dimension, including the status of residents of the former SFRY Republics resident in other Republics at the moment of independence, dual and multiple nationality, the granting or denial of political rights for resident non-nationals and non-resident nationals, the status of minorities such as the Roma, gender issues arising in a citizenship context, and the impact of citizenship concepts on free movement and travel across borders. While CITSEE s objectives are not normative in nature, and are not intended to supply answers as to best or worst practices in relation to citizenship regimes, or to evaluate the impact of Europeanisation as negative or positive, none the less such an evaluative study is likely to be of interest not only to researchers, but also to NGOs and to policy-makers in the region and in the EU and other international institutions because it fills in many gaps in our current knowledge and provides improved evidence on the basis of which policies may be developed in the future.
Max ERC Funding
2 240 000 €
Duration
Start date: 2009-04-01, End date: 2014-12-31
Project acronym CLaSS
Project Climate, Landscape, Settlement and Society: Exploring Human-Environment Interaction in the Ancient Near East
Researcher (PI) Daniel LAWRENCE
Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM
Call Details Starting Grant (StG), SH6, ERC-2018-STG
Summary Over the last 8000 years, the Fertile Crescent of the Near East has seen the emergence of cities, states and empires. Climate fluctuations are generally considered to be a significant factor in these changes because in pre-industrial societies they directly relate to food production and security. In the short term, ‘collapse’ events brought about by extreme weather changes such as droughts have been blamed for declines in population, social complexity and political systems. More broadly, the relationships between environment, settlement and surplus drive most models for the development of urbanism and hierarchical political systems.
Studies seeking to correlate social and climatic changes in the past tend either to focus on highly localised analyses of specific sites and surveys or to take a more synthetic overview at much larger, even continental, scales. The CLaSS project will take a ground breaking hybrid approach using archaeological data science (or ‘big data’) to construct detailed, empirical datasets at unprecedented scales. Archaeological settlement data and archaeobotanical data (plant and tree remains) will be collated for the entire Fertile Crescent and combined with climate simulations derived from General Circulation Models using cutting edge techniques. The resulting datasets will represent the largest of their kind ever compiled, covering the period between 8000BP and 2000BP and an area of 600,000km2.
Collecting data at this scale will enable us to compare population densities and distribution, subsistence practices and landscape management strategies to investigate the question: What factors have allowed for the differential persistence of societies in the face of changing climatic and environmental conditions? This ambitious project will provide insights into the sustainability and resilience of societies through both abrupt and longer term climate changes, leveraging the deep time perspective only available to archaeology.
Summary
Over the last 8000 years, the Fertile Crescent of the Near East has seen the emergence of cities, states and empires. Climate fluctuations are generally considered to be a significant factor in these changes because in pre-industrial societies they directly relate to food production and security. In the short term, ‘collapse’ events brought about by extreme weather changes such as droughts have been blamed for declines in population, social complexity and political systems. More broadly, the relationships between environment, settlement and surplus drive most models for the development of urbanism and hierarchical political systems.
Studies seeking to correlate social and climatic changes in the past tend either to focus on highly localised analyses of specific sites and surveys or to take a more synthetic overview at much larger, even continental, scales. The CLaSS project will take a ground breaking hybrid approach using archaeological data science (or ‘big data’) to construct detailed, empirical datasets at unprecedented scales. Archaeological settlement data and archaeobotanical data (plant and tree remains) will be collated for the entire Fertile Crescent and combined with climate simulations derived from General Circulation Models using cutting edge techniques. The resulting datasets will represent the largest of their kind ever compiled, covering the period between 8000BP and 2000BP and an area of 600,000km2.
Collecting data at this scale will enable us to compare population densities and distribution, subsistence practices and landscape management strategies to investigate the question: What factors have allowed for the differential persistence of societies in the face of changing climatic and environmental conditions? This ambitious project will provide insights into the sustainability and resilience of societies through both abrupt and longer term climate changes, leveraging the deep time perspective only available to archaeology.
Max ERC Funding
1 498 650 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-01-01, End date: 2023-12-31
Project acronym CLD
Project China, Law, and Development
Researcher (PI) Matthew ERIE
Host Institution (HI) THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
Call Details Starting Grant (StG), SH2, ERC-2018-STG
Summary The world is in the midst of a sea change in approaches to development. The rise of nationalist politics in the U.S., U.K. and Europe have questioned commitments to global governance at the same time that China has emerged as a champion of globalization, a turn of geo-political events that would have been unfathomable ten years ago. Through its own multi-lateral institutions, China is setting a new agenda for development from Europe to Oceania. China’s approach differs from Anglo/Euro/American approaches to “law and development” (LD). Whereas LD orthodoxy has sought to improve legal institutions in poor states, Chinese do not foster rule of law abroad. Instead, Chinese view law as one set of rules, among others, to facilitate economic transactions and not to foster democratization. This distinction has sparked a global debate about the so-called “China model” as an alternative to LD. Yet there is little empirical data with which to assess the means and ends of China’s expanded footprint, a question with long-term implications for much of the developing world. This project addresses that problem by proposing that even if Chinese cross-border development does not operate through transparent rules, it nonetheless has its own notion of order. The project adopts a multi-sited, mixed method, and interdisciplinary approach—at the intersection of comparative law, developmental studies, and legal anthropology—to understand the nature of China’s order. The project has two objectives:
1. To establish the conceptual bases for the study of China’s approach to law and development by developing the first systematic study of the impacts of Chinese investment on the legal systems of developing economies.
2. To experiment with a comparative research design to theorize how China’s approach suggests a type of order that extends through a conjuncture of regional and local processes and manifests itself differently in diverse contexts.
Summary
The world is in the midst of a sea change in approaches to development. The rise of nationalist politics in the U.S., U.K. and Europe have questioned commitments to global governance at the same time that China has emerged as a champion of globalization, a turn of geo-political events that would have been unfathomable ten years ago. Through its own multi-lateral institutions, China is setting a new agenda for development from Europe to Oceania. China’s approach differs from Anglo/Euro/American approaches to “law and development” (LD). Whereas LD orthodoxy has sought to improve legal institutions in poor states, Chinese do not foster rule of law abroad. Instead, Chinese view law as one set of rules, among others, to facilitate economic transactions and not to foster democratization. This distinction has sparked a global debate about the so-called “China model” as an alternative to LD. Yet there is little empirical data with which to assess the means and ends of China’s expanded footprint, a question with long-term implications for much of the developing world. This project addresses that problem by proposing that even if Chinese cross-border development does not operate through transparent rules, it nonetheless has its own notion of order. The project adopts a multi-sited, mixed method, and interdisciplinary approach—at the intersection of comparative law, developmental studies, and legal anthropology—to understand the nature of China’s order. The project has two objectives:
1. To establish the conceptual bases for the study of China’s approach to law and development by developing the first systematic study of the impacts of Chinese investment on the legal systems of developing economies.
2. To experiment with a comparative research design to theorize how China’s approach suggests a type of order that extends through a conjuncture of regional and local processes and manifests itself differently in diverse contexts.
Max ERC Funding
1 499 381 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-01-01, End date: 2023-12-31
Project acronym COMMIOS
Project Communities and Connectivities: Iron Age Britons and their Continental Neighbours
Researcher (PI) Ian ARMIT
Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH6, ERC-2018-ADG
Summary Recent breakthroughs in ancient DNA and isotope analysis are transforming our understanding of diversity, mobility and social dynamics in the human past. COMMIOS integrates these cutting-edge methods on a scale not previously attempted, within a ground-breaking interdisciplinary framework, to provide a radically new vision of Iron Age communities in Britain (800 BC – AD 100) within their wider European context.
At the broad scale, we will conduct the first concerted programme of genome-wide ancient DNA analysis on Iron Age populations anywhere in the world (c. 1000 individuals in the UK, 250 in Europe), mapping genetic clusters to shed light on ancient populations themselves and on their relationships to modern genetic patterning. Together with isotope analysis, and underpinned by both osteoarchaeological and cultural archaeological approaches, this will also enable us to directly address critical issues of population movement and inter-regional connectivity in Iron Age Europe. We will utilise the power of these new scientific methods to examine the structure and social dynamics of Iron Age societies in Britain, including household and kin-group composition, the identification of familial relationships, gender-specific mobility, and the development of social inequalities. Previously the preserve of cultural anthropologists studying recent societies, we will draw these questions into the archaeological domain, opening up new areas of enquiry for prehistoric societies.
The scope and scale of the project represents a new departure for European archaeology, made possible by the coming-of-age of new analytical methods. Many of these have been pioneered by the project team, which comprises world-leaders in the fields of ancient DNA, isotope analysis, osteoarchaeology, chronological modelling and cultural archaeology. Although focussed on Iron Age Britain, the project will establish a new benchmark for future analyses of other regions and periods in Europe and beyond.
Summary
Recent breakthroughs in ancient DNA and isotope analysis are transforming our understanding of diversity, mobility and social dynamics in the human past. COMMIOS integrates these cutting-edge methods on a scale not previously attempted, within a ground-breaking interdisciplinary framework, to provide a radically new vision of Iron Age communities in Britain (800 BC – AD 100) within their wider European context.
At the broad scale, we will conduct the first concerted programme of genome-wide ancient DNA analysis on Iron Age populations anywhere in the world (c. 1000 individuals in the UK, 250 in Europe), mapping genetic clusters to shed light on ancient populations themselves and on their relationships to modern genetic patterning. Together with isotope analysis, and underpinned by both osteoarchaeological and cultural archaeological approaches, this will also enable us to directly address critical issues of population movement and inter-regional connectivity in Iron Age Europe. We will utilise the power of these new scientific methods to examine the structure and social dynamics of Iron Age societies in Britain, including household and kin-group composition, the identification of familial relationships, gender-specific mobility, and the development of social inequalities. Previously the preserve of cultural anthropologists studying recent societies, we will draw these questions into the archaeological domain, opening up new areas of enquiry for prehistoric societies.
The scope and scale of the project represents a new departure for European archaeology, made possible by the coming-of-age of new analytical methods. Many of these have been pioneered by the project team, which comprises world-leaders in the fields of ancient DNA, isotope analysis, osteoarchaeology, chronological modelling and cultural archaeology. Although focussed on Iron Age Britain, the project will establish a new benchmark for future analyses of other regions and periods in Europe and beyond.
Max ERC Funding
2 499 872 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-10-01, End date: 2024-09-30
Project acronym CONANX
Project Consumer culture in an age of anxiety: political and moral economies of food
Researcher (PI) Peter Jackson
Host Institution (HI) THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
Call Details Advanced Grant (AdG), SH3, ERC-2008-AdG
Summary Food safety and security are high priority issues throughout Europe at present, the subject of intense government concern, public interest, media speculation and academic scrutiny. With few exceptions, academic research on food has been fragmented with too little interaction between food scientists, health researchers and social scientists. This application builds on the success of a recently completed research programme (Changing Families, Changing Food, 2005-8) which brought together an inter-disciplinary team of over 40 researchers from the food, health and social sciences to address the complex relationships between families and food which lie at the heart of current concerns about food safety and public health. The current proposal aims to take forward the findings of that programme regarding the socially embedded nature of contemporary food choice and to make a step change in our understanding of contemporary consumer anxiety through a focused and concerted programme of research on the political and moral economies of food. The project focuses on consumer anxieties about food at a range of geographic scales, from the global scale of international food markets to the domestic scale of individual households. By taking a whole chain approach -- examining food production and consumption at all points along the chain from farm to fork -- the findings of our research will enable a major advance in our understanding of contemporary anxieties around food, with tangible effects on public health (including the reduction of obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease).
Summary
Food safety and security are high priority issues throughout Europe at present, the subject of intense government concern, public interest, media speculation and academic scrutiny. With few exceptions, academic research on food has been fragmented with too little interaction between food scientists, health researchers and social scientists. This application builds on the success of a recently completed research programme (Changing Families, Changing Food, 2005-8) which brought together an inter-disciplinary team of over 40 researchers from the food, health and social sciences to address the complex relationships between families and food which lie at the heart of current concerns about food safety and public health. The current proposal aims to take forward the findings of that programme regarding the socially embedded nature of contemporary food choice and to make a step change in our understanding of contemporary consumer anxiety through a focused and concerted programme of research on the political and moral economies of food. The project focuses on consumer anxieties about food at a range of geographic scales, from the global scale of international food markets to the domestic scale of individual households. By taking a whole chain approach -- examining food production and consumption at all points along the chain from farm to fork -- the findings of our research will enable a major advance in our understanding of contemporary anxieties around food, with tangible effects on public health (including the reduction of obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease).
Max ERC Funding
1 684 460 €
Duration
Start date: 2009-01-01, End date: 2012-12-31
Project acronym DEVORHBIOSHIP
Project The Developmental Origins of Health: Biology, Shocks, Investments, and Policies
Researcher (PI) Gabriella CONTI
Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
Call Details Consolidator Grant (CoG), SH1, ERC-2018-COG
Summary What are the origins of inequalities in health? A recent literature in economics has established causal impacts of early life shocks, investments and policies on lifelong health. However, several unknowns remain. The mechanisms through which shocks, investments, and policies interact are just beginning to be understood. Our knowledge of sensitive periods is imprecise. Little is also known about the impact of shocks and policies across different ages. Commonly used health capital measures, such as birth weight, lack sensitivity and specificity. The interplay between genes and environments in the formation of health inequalities is poorly understood.
To fill these gaps, I will build on insights from my earlier work, and use a combination of high-quality data, more sensitive measures, robust identification strategies and richer models to untangle the complex interactions between biology, shocks, investments and policies.
First, I will investigate causal impacts and mechanisms of two public health policies on child health and development: medical treatments for pregnancy complications and prenatal home visiting programmes. Second, I will examine the effects of two environmental shocks (pollution and influenza) on the formation of early health and human capital, and their interplay with maternal investments in nutrition. Third, I will study interactions between shocks, investments and policies from birth to adulthood, to understand the dynamic interplay between SES and health. Throughout, I will explore their interactions with genetic susceptibility or potential.
I will analyse administrative records, registries linked to survey data, cohort data with biomarkers; and a randomized controlled trial. I will use state-of-the-art econometric techniques for observational and experimental data. My findings will have direct policy implications and will help understand whether and to which extent early life interventions are a cost-effective mean to promote health.
Summary
What are the origins of inequalities in health? A recent literature in economics has established causal impacts of early life shocks, investments and policies on lifelong health. However, several unknowns remain. The mechanisms through which shocks, investments, and policies interact are just beginning to be understood. Our knowledge of sensitive periods is imprecise. Little is also known about the impact of shocks and policies across different ages. Commonly used health capital measures, such as birth weight, lack sensitivity and specificity. The interplay between genes and environments in the formation of health inequalities is poorly understood.
To fill these gaps, I will build on insights from my earlier work, and use a combination of high-quality data, more sensitive measures, robust identification strategies and richer models to untangle the complex interactions between biology, shocks, investments and policies.
First, I will investigate causal impacts and mechanisms of two public health policies on child health and development: medical treatments for pregnancy complications and prenatal home visiting programmes. Second, I will examine the effects of two environmental shocks (pollution and influenza) on the formation of early health and human capital, and their interplay with maternal investments in nutrition. Third, I will study interactions between shocks, investments and policies from birth to adulthood, to understand the dynamic interplay between SES and health. Throughout, I will explore their interactions with genetic susceptibility or potential.
I will analyse administrative records, registries linked to survey data, cohort data with biomarkers; and a randomized controlled trial. I will use state-of-the-art econometric techniques for observational and experimental data. My findings will have direct policy implications and will help understand whether and to which extent early life interventions are a cost-effective mean to promote health.
Max ERC Funding
1 738 763 €
Duration
Start date: 2019-04-01, End date: 2024-03-31
