SCOS Update February 2017

Dear Scossers,
based on a few items I missed out of the last update, and the tendency for most new items to have an end of January deadline, I thought I’d contact everyone with a bit of an intermediate update. January is so busy! If it was up to me there wouldn’t be any deadlines in January, but then everything would be due at the same time… in the holidays!

Item 1 – SCOS Rome Conference ‘Carne’ – Final call for abstracts!

Item 2 – CfP Politics and Ethnography in an Age of Uncertainty
Item 3 – Vernon Press is looking for reviewers
Item 4 – CfP CMS 2017 Stream 43: Critical Perspectives on International Development: New geographies of inequality and the reconfiguration of the ‘Global South’ and the ‘Global North’
Item 5 – Creative research methods for research and community engagement summer school for PhDs and ECRs
Best
Laura ?
————————————————————————–
Item 1 SCOS 2017 in Rome ‘Carne’ – Final call for abstracts
 
With the usual apologies for cross-postings, please note our final call for abstracts due 30th January 2017. You can find the full Call for Papers here:
 
All conference enquiries can be addressed to scosxxxv@gmail.com
 
————————————————————————–
Item 2 Politics and Ethnography in an Age of Uncertainty
The 12th Annual Ethnography Symposium
University of Manchester: 30th August – 1st September 2017
CfP: (What’s New in) Visual Ethnography
Convenors: Harriet Shortt Un. of West of England; Garance Maréchal Un. of Liverpool;
Samantha Warren Un. of Cardiff. Stephen Linstead Un. of York;
In anthropological film icon Jean Rouch’s centenary year, we might well ask “what else is there left to say about visual ethnography?” Rouch and sociologist Edgar Morin, his collaborator on Chronicle of a Summer (the origin of cinema verité), pioneered a form of film-making that intervened in the life it observed. But in the field of management and organization studies, despite a great deal of discussion of the visual, we have not yet seen a flood of published empirical work emerge – there are still only a handful of articles available. This is certainly the case with researcher/participant generated imagery such as photo-voice studies, for example. So our first invitation is to those researchers who are engaged in real, active projects – finished or unfinished – to talk about real, active projects and to share what’s happening empirically.
We also want to ask “What makes visual ethnography visual?” (as opposed to just ethnography with still or moving images). Is it a matter of sensibility? Is the visual just a variety of sensuous ethnography? Is the idea of only five senses culturally bounded? How do senses like sound and vision combine in different media? What is the relation of the expressive power of the image to embodiment and affect? Can we “think” or theorise visually (Sinnerbrink 2011)? As JWT Mitchell (2007) provocatively tells us “there are no visual media” because it is a myth that it is only the eye that sees. Film philosophy following Bergson (1911) and Deleuze (1986,1989) has argued that visual understanding is cinematic, and this promotes the generation of a new kind of ethical relation – what Rob Sinnerbrink (2015) calls cinempathy – in which simultaneously seeing and feeling has moral consequences. Images and image sequences may reaffirm and/or resist dominant narratives, expose ideologies, and trigger the senses, engaging the violence, intensities, textures and rhythms of sensation. We are not merely disengaged producers and witnesses of these images, but are drawn into them and act as a result of them. Images both reveal and conceal, they also have political significance – they rarely only act as sources of evidence enabling the creation of documents accessing the ‘truth’ of social and organisational life. They can, for instance, to render visible the ‘invisibility’ of below the line production workers and other concealed labour within contemporary capitalist organisations. Is management and organization up to speed? What’s next?
Is visual ethnography defined by its use of augmented visual technologies? Carey Jewitt, Bella Dicks and Theo Van Leeuwen have argued for multimodal theorising (https://mode.ioe.ac.uk/). What role does the visual play when we have GPS tracking, GoPro POV cameras (see Noah Baumbach’s  2014 feature film While We’re Young for a fascinating take on the ethics involved), the ability to film and photograph through pens and spectacles and phones?  We’re interested in the use of new forms of visual technology and digital media as method but also as a way of relating to lives and communities and new visually literate cultures of what Gregory Ulmer (2004) called videocy – forming and communicating through media such as Snapchat and instagram (that will probably be outdated by the time you read this!). There’s already a Selfies Research Network http://www.selfieresearchers.com/. Do new forms of visually-enabled ethnography contribute to or contest the fetishisation of research practice? Are they more democratic and participatory? Do we know how to relate to others through technology rather than with (or even despite) technology?
Turning the lens back on ourselves – and our problematic role as authors or producers of images, much visual research implicitly or explicitly perpetuates a realist ontology but how does it relate to the textual and non-representational turn in anthropology since the 80s? Or John Mullarkey’s (2009) argument that film refracts rather than reflects reality? Have we properly digested sophisticated approaches like those of Roland Barthes (1981) and Victor Burgin to analyse the images  we and others produce, and the contexts of their production and consumption? How can a richer visual language be developed in organizational ethnography that isn’t just reproductive of the real but is also critical in rendering ‘visible’ key aspects of organizational life? What does this mean for our outputs in terms of narrative – as a means of creative non-fiction? Is it a matter of cultural performance, as Norm Denzin (2003) or Dwight Conquergood (2013) would advocate? If so, in what sense is image always political? How does visual authorship differ from textual authorship?
We will have facilities to show short films, stage exhibitions or include participative workshops as well as more traditional paper presentations. We invite any type of imaginative contribution that will help us to push back or even dissolve the boundaries of the understanding and practice of visual ethnography in the contested terrain of management and organization.
Barthes, R.(1981) Camera Lucida New York: Hill and Wang
Bergson, H. ((1998 [1911]).Creative Evolution, tr.,Arthur Mitchell, New York NY:  Dover
Burgin, V. (1982) Thinking Photography, Victor Burgin (ed.), [Burgin: Introduction, three essays, bibliography], London:Macmillan Press Ltd.
Conquergood, D. (2013) Cultural Struggles: Performance, Ethnography, Praxis Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Deleuze, G.    (1986), Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (trs.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze, G.   (1989), Cinema 2: The Time-Image, Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta (trs.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Denzin, N. K. (2003) Performance Ethnography: Critical Pedagogy and the Politics of Culture London: Sage
Mitchell, J.W.T. (2007). There are no visual media, in Grau, O. (ed.), Media Art Histories. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 395–406.
Mullarkey, J. (2009) Refractions of Reality: Philosophy and the Moving Image, Palgrave Macmillan,
Rouch, Jean. (2003) Ciné-Ethnography, edited and translated by Steven Feld. University of Minnesota Press,
Sinnerbrink, R. (2011) New Philosophies of Film: Thinking Images London: Continuum
Sinnerbrink, R. (2015) Cinematic Ethics: Exploring Ethical Experience through Film  ondon Routledge
Ulmer, G. (2004) Teletheory : Grammatology in the Age of Video New York: Atropos Press; 2nd ed.
Please submit a 500 word abstract or proposal by Tuesday 28th February 2017 to geoff.pearson@manchester.ac.uk. Decisions on acceptance will be made by 30th March
————————-

Vernon Press Call for reviewers

Do you enjoy reading books in economics, social science, humanities? Join our community of book reviewers!

To join you must be an expert in one of the areas we publish ( https://vernonpress.com/ ) and be prepared to review at least one book every two years:

Benefits of joining

* Get to read and keep carefully pre-selected works, including cutting-edge research.
* Help fellow scholars develop their work into high-standard, high-impact contributions and be acknowledged for it.
* Get advance notice of exciting publication opportunities, occasional competitions and prize draws.
* First-time reviewers receive a small honorarium ($50) and deep discount on other titles.
* Experienced scholars may propose new series and receive additional benefits for their role as Editors (subject to publisher approval).
* Young scholars receive support from the publisher and fellow community members and gain valuable experience in the process of peer review.

To join please send a brief message expressing interest to: reviewers.community@vernonpress.com. In your message please mention your full name, academic affiliation, area(s) of expertise, and provide either a paragraph-long biographical note (and/)or a list of publications.

( More detailed information on this call at: https://vernonpress.com/proposal?id=2&uid=a172342947d9d2be39937e1e90524c49 )

————————–
CfP CMS 2017 Stream 43: 
Critical perspectives on International Development: New geographies of inequality?
 
Fabian Frenzel1, University of Leicester
Peter Case, James Cook University and the University of the West of England
Arun Kumar, University of York
Mitchell W Sedgwick, London School of Economics and Political Science
In this stream we seek to build on Critical Management Studies’ (CMS) engagement with and
criticisms of international development, which we now know well, has been predicated on a
geographical schism. The ‘South’ has long been used as a shorthand term to describe ‘underdeveloped countries’2 ; that is, a global geography where those in need of development
resided. The ‘North’, on the other hand, is used to designate the developed nations or liberal
capitalist democracies. It has had, we are led to believe, the knowledge, history, resources,
and readily available templates on which the ‘Global South’ is expected to model its
‘development’. The geographical schism is also evident in CMS’ criticism of managerialism of
international development. Cooke, for example, terms management a ‘First World’ discipline
that in its morphed avatar of development management now functions in the ‘Third World’
as part of its development3. Of crucial importance here are constellations of meanings and
practices that revolve around the structural and discursive divisions between the so-called
‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’.
These divisions are now under challenge in a wide variety of ways. Living under neoliberal
capitalism in the aftermath of austerity, the so-called developed countries are witnessing
continuous and rising poverty, including in the USA, UK and, most notably of late, in
southern European nations (Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal). This is evidenced from rising
childhood poverty, ‘rough sleepers’ existing cheek and jowl with City bankers, the on-going
diminishing of public services, and growing calls for reducing global development aid. At the
same time, the global refugee crisis has brought large-scale camps and urban ‘slums’ to the
‘North’ (at Calais for example). As such, the United Nations has had to refocus its rescue and
relief operations to parts of Mediterranean Europe. Meanwhile, growing private wealth in
parts of India and China, for example, has done little for the redistribution of wealth. The
persistence of poverty in the ‘South’ has not distracted its nation-states from collaborating
for the New Development Bank, which requires us to re-think prior and long-standing global
developmental hierarchies. The rise of emerging economies and their growing prominence
in international development is hardly an endorsement of international development. But its
nation-states are increasingly challenging the legitimacy of Western-liberal capitalist
developmentalism, its universalizing discourse of human rights, and its INGOs operating
variously through the rhetoric of national sovereignty, security and interest.
In this Stream, we invite submissions that represent explicitly critical perspectives (historical
and contemporary) on global and incipient geographies of inequalities; and its implications
for, and challenges to, our conceptions of development and managerialism. We would
welcome contributions that deepen or widen CMS’s engagement with Development Studies,
more generally.
Indicative topics might include:
– Deconstructing the South/North divide
– Poverty eradication and its discourses; and their differences in the North/South
– Emerging forms of inequalities in the North/South
– Development and sustainability: conceptions, conflicts and convergence
– International Development Policy and Global Governance
– Relevance of Global Governance Institutions (G8, G20, UN, IMF, World Bank)
– Emergent International Development Institutions and their roles
– Geographies of ‘Corruption’
– Critical analyses of international development discourse(s)
– International development and critical project management studies
– Subaltern studies and postcolonial criticisms of international development
– Global, regional, and national inequalities.
The convenors would also welcome creative interpretations which challenge the boundaries
set by this call for papers.
Abstracts of up to 500 words can be sent to ff48@le.ac.uk. Deadline for submission of
abstracts for inclusion in the stream is 31st January 2017. Decisions will be communicated by
the Stream Convenors by February 15, 2017.
Please feel free to circulate this call far and wide. We look forward to seeing you in
Liverpool!
Notes
1 Lead Convenor, email: ff48@leicester.ac.uk
2 The convenors reject the implicit ideologies and agendas connoted by the terms ‘developed’ and ‘developing’ as they reproduce a ‘civilized/uncivilized’, ‘advanced/backward’, ‘modern/non-modern’ dualities which this stream is eager to challenge. Nonetheless, these concepts do form part of common parlance and it is important to acknowledge how, at a minimum, they align with the economics-language driven, neo-liberal discourse that drives international development in the contemporary world.
3 Cooke, B (2014) ‘Managing the (Third) World’, Organization 11(5): 603-629.
4 Formerly known as the BRICS Development Bank, where BRICS is an acronym standing for an association of so called ‘emerging economies’: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
————————————————————————-
Item 5 Creative Methods for Research and Community Engagement Summer School
 
Creative Methods for Research and Community Engagement Summer School
6-8 July 2017, Keele University

PhD students and Early Career Researchers are welcome at this event organised by the Community Animation and Social Innovation Centre (CASIC) at Keele University.

The Summer School will be held in central England at the New Vic Theatre, Newcastle-under-Lyme (6-7 July) and Keele University campus (8 July), where you will experience the KAVE (https://www.keele.ac.uk/pharmacy/digital/kave/) and our Makerspace facilities (https://www.keele.ac.uk/make/).

 

The facilitator will be Dr Helen Kara, author of Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Speakers will include:

  • Professor Mihaela Kelemen – CASIC Director
  • Dr Lindsay Hamilton – Keele Management School, Keele University
  • Véronique Jochum – Research Manager, National Council for Voluntary Organisations
  • Dr Emma Surman – Keele Management School, Keele University
  • Dr Ceri Morgan – School of Humanities, Keele University
  • Professor Rajmil Fischman – School of Music, Keele University
  • Sue Moffat – Director of New Vic Borderlines, New Vic Theatre

 The Summer School will enlighten, inspire and guide ECRs and students at all stages of scholarly or professional doctorates. Each day will be packed with interactive hands-on sessions addressing six broad topics:

  • Arts-based research
  • Transformative research frameworks
  • Mixed-methods research
  • Knowledge co-production
  • Research using technology
  • Writing creatively for research

 

We are offering an “early bird” price of £230 for bookings received and paid by 21 April. After that date the price will be £270. The cost includes refreshments and lunches and a complimentary copy of Dr Kara’s book on creative research methods.

 

There will be a dinner and performance of ‘Around the world in 80 Days’ at the New Vic Theatre on July 6th, at an extra cost of £20.

 

For more information go to https://www.keele.ac.uk/casic/summerschool2017/

 

Please follow #CRMSS17 on Twitter for pre-event updates.