Events

Workshop

Mar 9 – Mar 11, 2023

Rare Diseases, Global Health, and Social Sciences: Counterbalancing Biomedical Reductionism

Work­shop

Work­shop at the Brocher Foun­da­tion, Her­mance, Switzerland

Venue: Brocher Foun­da­tion, Her­mance, Switzerland
Orga­niz­ers: Mal­go­rza­ta Raj­tar (Insti­tute of Philosophy
and Soci­ol­o­gy, Pol­ish Acad­e­my of Sci­ences) & Eva-Maria Knoll (Insti­tute for Social Anthro­pol­o­gy, Aus­tri­an Acad­e­my of Sciences)

The last two decades have wit­nessed the grow­ing impor­tance of the „Rare Dis­ease” (RD) cat­e­go­ry in the con­text of nation­al health poli­cies and Glob­al Health. Lack­ing a uni­ver­sal def­i­n­i­tion, RDs are defined as con­di­tions that affect no
more than 1 in 2000 peo­ple in the EU and Aus­tralia; they affect few­er than 200,000 and 50,000 in the US and Japan respec­tive­ly. It is esti­mat­ed that some 30 mil­lion peo­ple in the EU and 263–446 mil­lion glob­al­ly live with one of the over
6000 described RDs. In a 2021 res­o­lu­tion, the Unit­ed Nations pre­sent­ed the com­plex nature of the chal­lenges peo­ple liv­ing with a D and their fam­i­lies face as being intrin­si­cal­ly linked to both human rights and to the Sustainable
Devel­op­ment Goals. The 2021 report issued by the glob­al alliance Rare Dis­ease Inter­na­tion­al iden­ti­fied ten com­mon chal­lenges and needs that impact diag­no­sis, care, and treat­ment of the RD pop­u­la­tion glob­al­ly. A sig­nif­i­cant proportion
of the list­ed chal­lenges and needs lies beyond the realm of bio­med­i­cine and life sciences.

The work­shop Rare Dis­eases, Glob­al Health, and Social Sci­ences: Coun­ter­bal­anc­ing Bio­med­ical Reduc­tion­ism aims to bring togeth­er, enhance and fur­ther devel­op social sci­ence and med­ical human­i­ties approach­es to the glob­al­iz­ing RD field by address­ing these chal­lenges and con­cerns that include social accep­tance, equal­i­ty, inclu­sion, polit­i­cal recog­ni­tion, empow­er­ment, and geo­graph­i­cal and cul­tur­al con­sid­er­a­tions. In par­tic­u­lar, the work­shop pro­pos­es to address three the­mat­ic areas that have a sig­nif­i­cant and long-term impact on both the indi­vid­ual lives of peo­ple with a RD as well as on soci­ety, health poli­cies, economies, and pol­i­tics on nation­al and glob­al lev­els. These include (a) vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties of peo­ple with RDs, (2) the patient tran­si­tion to adult­hood and aging, and (3) the judi­cial­iza­tion of health with­in the field of RDs. The work­shop will also crit­i­cal­ly engage D ini­tia­tives that orig­i­nate in and are pro­mot­ed by the West­ern world, much like Glob­al Health ini­tia­tives, which have recent­ly received ample crit­i­cism for being dri­ven by bio­med­ical reduc­tion­ism. We invite con­tri­bu­tions from schol­ars in anthro­pol­o­gy, soci­ol­o­gy, the med­ical human­i­ties, bioethics, law, and relat­ed dis­ci­plines as well as patient orga­ni­za­tion rep­re­sen­ta­tives that address the social, polit­i­cal, and eco­nom­ic con­se­quences of bio­med­ical reduc­tion­ism in the field of RDs, includ­ing the above-men­tioned topics.

The work­shop will gath­er an inter­dis­ci­pli­nary group of schol­ars and experts who are involved in research, pub­li­ca­tion, and advo­ca­cy in RDs and Glob­al Health. Con­firmed speak­ers include Wales­ka Aure­liano (Rio de Janeiro State Uni­ver­si­ty, Brasil), Gior­gio Broc­co (Uni­ver­si­ty of Vien­na, Aus­tria), Nan­cy J. Burke (UC Merced, USA), Sangee­ta Chat­too (Uni­ver­si­ty of York, UK), Pauline McCor­ma­ck (New­cas­tle Uni­ver­si­ty, UK), and Samuel Agyei Wiafe (Rare Dis­ease Ghana Initiative).

The work­shop is planned as an in-per­son event. There is no work­shop fee, how­ev­er, the costs of trav­el and
accom­mo­da­tions can­not be cov­ered by the organizers.

To apply, please send an abstract (300 words max.) and a short bio to Mal­go­rza­ta Raj­tar mrajtar@ifispan.edu.pl and
Eva-Maria Knoll eva-maria.knoll@oeaw.ac.atby Sep­tem­ber 30, 2022.

Permalink

May 24, 2023

Cholera in the Indian Ocean World since the Nineteenth Century

Work­shop

Work­shop at the Insti­tute for Social Anthro­pol­o­gy (ISA), Aus­tri­an Acad­e­my of Sciences

Keynote: Pro­fes­sor Eric Tagli­a­coz­zo, Cor­nell University

Cholera—first described in the Ganges delta in 1817—spread glob­al­ly in sev­en pan­demics dur­ing the past two cen­turies. Most recent­ly, some 30 coun­tries world­wide report­ed cholera out­breaks in 2022 and a Lancet report from Octo­ber 2022 revealed an alarm­ing short­age of cholera vac­cines that result­ed in a shift from a two to a less last­ing one-dose vac­ci­na­tion strat­e­gy. In fact, the 7th pan­dem­ic of cholera—which first was iden­ti­fied in the med­ical sta­tion of El Tor among pil­grims return­ing from Mec­ca in the ear­ly 20th century—is ongo­ing. A dis­cus­sion of the scarci­ty in vac­cines, how­ev­er, was large­ly lim­it­ed to rel­e­vant health chan­nels and only some out­break hotspots (such as Haiti in 2010) made it into the inter­na­tion­al media and gained schol­ar­ly atten­tion beyond the med­ical and aid fields.

Cholera is an acute diar­rhoeal infec­tion caused by food or water con­t­a­m­i­nat­ed with the bac­teri­um Vib­rio choler­ae. Left untreat­ed it might kill a per­son with­in hours. Despite the avail­abil­i­ty of a pro­phy­lac­tic Oral Cholera Vac­cine (OCV) since 1985, cholera still is a life-threat­en­ing dis­ease for the dis­ad­van­taged and the poor, rarely noticed in afflu­ent parts of the world. Main fac­tors that are con­ge­nial to the spread of cholera still include stressed water sup­plies, insan­i­tary hous­ing and the effects of envi­ron­men­tal dis­as­ters. These include in par­tic­u­lar earth­quakes, weath­er extremes and cer­tain hydro­log­i­cal events that are increas­ing­ly asso­ci­at­ed with cli­mate-change such as floods. Oth­er poten­tial­ly causal fac­tors are relat­ed to armed con­flict, under­re­port­ing of data on nation­al and local lev­els, the ongo­ing COVID-19 cri­sis and insuf­fi­cient­ly resourced nation­al health systems.

We take this alarm­ing sit­u­a­tion as an occa­sion to dis­cuss the V. choler­ae El Tor strain in both its his­toric dimen­sions and as a press­ing pub­lic health issue along two main method­olog­i­cal path­ways. First­ly, by trac­ing the his­tor­i­cal events of cholera in the lit­torals and inter­con­nect­ed hin­ter­lands of the Indi­an Ocean, known as the Indi­an Ocean World (IOW). The fac­tors con­duc­tive to the spread of V. cholera men­tioned above result­ed in recent out­breaks and pre­dis­pose coun­tries of the IOW to future out­breaks. We there­fore aim, sec­ond­ly, to bring new insight from the archives on IOW’s cholera his­to­ry in a fruit­ful dia­logue with the lived expe­ri­ences of recent and ongo­ing out­breaks in this region, includ­ing but not lim­it­ed to the civ­il war-induced cholera in Yemen, more local­ized out­breaks in Kenya or the annu­al mon­soon­al out­breaks of endem­ic cholera serotypes in Bangladesh.

We invite con­tri­bu­tions that focus on cholera in the Indi­an Ocean World and help to shed new light

- on the eco­log­i­cal geog­ra­phy and the diverse cul­tur­al and his­toric per­cep­tions of dis­ease cau­sa­tion, trans­mis­sion and control;

- on the mul­ti­lay­ered inter­ac­tions between cholera out­breaks and non/human mobil­i­ties; whether assumed, blamed or evi­dence based;

- on the lived expe­ri­ences of suf­fer­ers, care givers and health care professionals.

Con­tri­bu­tions might have a rather schol­ar­ly or an applied char­ac­ter, draw­ing on archival stud­ies or on field work; they might be sit­u­at­ed inside or between med­ical anthro­pol­o­gy, med­ical his­to­ry, geog­ra­phy, IOW stud­ies, pub­lic health and allied fields or with­in the work expe­ri­ence by health pro­fes­sion­als and aid organizations.

As the ongo­ing COVID-19 cri­sis has upend­ed inter­na­tion­al trav­el, we intend to orga­nize the work­shop in a hybrid mode: both in a webi­nar for­mat as well as an in-per­son pre­sen­ta­tion at the Insti­tute for Social Anthro­pol­o­gy, Aus­tri­an Acad­e­my of Sci­ences in Vienna.

Please send an abstract of about 300 words and a short bio by Jan­u­ary 15, 2023 to
eva-maria.knoll@oeaw.ac.at and vivekneelakantanster@gmail.com

The work­shop Cholera in the Indi­an Ocean World since the Nine­teenth Cen­tu­ry is co-fund­ed by and con­tributes to the SSHRC Part­ner­ship Apprais­ing Risk.

Permalink

Jun 30 – Jul 1, 2023

Natur machen: Wissen, Praktiken und Technologien der Umweltgestaltung in der zweiten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts

Work­shop

Inter­diszi­plinär­er Work­shop am His­torischen Sem­i­nar der Uni­ver­sität Siegen

Die 1950er Jahre gel­ten als Zäsur der Umwelt­geschichte. Davon zeu­gen Schlag­worte wie jene des „1950er Syn­droms“ (Pfis­ter), der „Großen Beschle­u­ni­gung“ (McNeill/Engelke), aber auch des Anthro­pozäns, dessen Beginn bisweilen auf die Nachkriegszeit datiert wird. Die tief­greifend­en Umwälzun­gen gesellschaftlich­er Naturver­hält­nisse gin­gen indes ein­her mit einem weniger beachteten Wan­del des Stel­len­wertes „der Natur“ inner­halb indus­tri­al­isiert­er Gesellschaften. Auch wenn sich der Beginn dieser Entwick­lung auf ver­schiede­nen Feldern bere­its in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhun­derts aus­machen lässt, war Natur ab den 1950er Jahren flächen­deck­end nicht mehr etwas, von dem es sich zu emanzip­ieren galt, noch etwas zu Kon­servieren­des. Vielmehr rück­te das Her­stellen von Natur in den Fokus – Natur wurde auf eine jew­eils neue Weise prob­lema­tisiert, in poli­tis­che Ratio­nal­itäten inte­gri­ert und erhielt spez­i­fis­che Funktionen.

Exem­plar­isch dafür kann die Geschichte des Naturschutzes in bei­den deutschen Staat­en nach dem Zweit­en Weltkrieg betra­chtet wer­den. In der Bun­desre­pub­lik stand der soge­nan­nte „Glas­glocken­naturschutz“ in der Kri­tik, die planer­isch-gestal­ter­ische Lan­despflege set­zte sich als Mod­ernisierungsange­bot durch. Ganz ähn­lich galt in der DDR der kon­servierende Naturschutz als Relikt bürg­er­lich­er Naturäs­thetik und wurde in die Land­schaft­spflege – bald „sozial­is­tis­che Lan­deskul­tur“ – inte­gri­ert. Aus Naturschutzge­bi­eten wur­den „Frei­land­lab­o­ra­to­rien“, Wis­sensprak­tiken wie jene der Veg­e­ta­tion­skartierung ließen sich in ein anwen­dung­sori­en­tiertes Forschung­spro­gramm zur (Re-)Konstruktion von Ökosys­te­men umschreiben.

Die an diesem Prozess beteiligten Akteure begrün­de­ten die Notwendigkeit Natur herzustellen – ob großflächige Land­schaften oder klein­teiligeres Stadt­grün – oft­mals damit, dass sie etwa ökonomis­che, medi­zinis­che und ökol­o­gis­che Funk­tio­nen erfülle. Darunter fie­len mit jew­eili­gen Kon­junk­turen solche der Erhol­ung sowie gesund­heit­spoli­tis­che Auf­gaben im All­ge­meinen oder auch solche der Reg­u­la­tion von Umweltme­di­en sowie des Kli­maschutzes. Lassen sich manche dieser Vorstel­lun­gen bis um die Jahrhun­der­twende zurück­ver­fol­gen, wur­den sie nun ver­wis­senschaftlicht in umfängliche Pla­nung­sprozesse über­set­zt. Natur galt aus dieser Per­spek­tive als Mit­tel gegen jene neg­a­tiv­en Effek­te, die mit der „Großen Beschle­u­ni­gung“ ver­bun­den wur­den. Dafür bedurfte es jedoch nicht nur Natur-Wis­sen, son­dern eine anhand dieses Wis­sens gestal­tete Natur. Nicht sel­ten war dieser Zugriff auf die äußere Natur des Men­schen verknüpft mit Vorstel­lun­gen sein­er inneren Natur. Etwa dann, wenn eine dem Men­schen naturgemäße Umwelt gefordert wurde, da sie der gesellschaftlichen Reg­ulierung diene. Natur­poli­tik und ‑gestal­tung sind in diesem Sinne auch als Regierungs- und Sozial­tech­nolo­gien zu analysieren.

Natur machen beschreibt dieses het­ero­gene Ensem­ble. Im Zen­trum ste­hen Wis­sens­for­ma­tio­nen, Prak­tiken und Tech­nolo­gien wie etwa jene der Rena­turierung und ‑kul­tivierung, der Landschafts‑, Stadt- und Humanökolo­gie, der Inge­nieur­biolo­gie und Land­schaft­s­pla­nung, des Arten- und Biotop- sowie des Prozesss­chutzes. Deren Beginn fällt zwar bisweilen in die erste Hälfte des 20. Jahrhun­derts: Sys­tem­a­tis­che Forschung, umfängliche Anwen­dung und Insti­tu­tion­al­isierung erfuhren sie in der Regel jedoch erst ab den 1950er Jahren. Darin unter­schei­den sie sich von Ein­grif­f­en in den Land­schafts- und Naturhaushalt im All­ge­meinen sowie von länger eingeübten Prak­tiken, etwa der Melio­ra­tion. Es geht nicht um die „Eroberung der Natur“ (Black­bourn), son­dern um ihre bewusste (Re-)Konstruktion in Form arti­fizieller Natur-Rep­li­ka. Ein Beispiel dafür ist die seit den 1970er Jahren ver­stärkt auszu­machende Prax­is der Flussre­na­turierung, die auf eine jahrhun­dertealte Prax­is der Begr­a­di­gung reagierte. Ger­ade darin zeigt sich indes die Wider­sprüch­lichkeit des Natur Machens. Ein­er­seits lassen sich diese neuen Naturen nur als tech­no-sozio-nat­u­rale Assem­bla­gen denken, ander­er­seits erfüllen sie ihre Funk­tion als Sim­u­lakrum darüber, dass sie ihre sozio- und techno­genen Anteile ver­schleiern. Auch daher gin­gen Prozesse der Her­stel­lung häu­fig ein­her mit ontol­o­gis­chen und ethis­chen Debat­ten darüber, was Natur ist – und was sie in der indus­tri­al­isierten Gesellschaft sein soll.

Der Work­shop will sich diesem The­ma aus ver­schiede­nen Per­spek­tiv­en näh­ern und sucht nach Beiträ­gen aus den Geistes- und Sozial­wis­senschaften, die obige Gedanken aufnehmen. Sie kön­nen sowohl the­o­retisch als auch empirisch aus­gerichtet sein und sich auf die Geschichte des Natur Machens im gesamten 20. Jahrhun­dert beziehen. Neben his­torischen Fall­stu­di­en etwa der Rekul­tivierungs- und Rena­turierung­sprax­is – von dev­astierten Flächen des Tage­baus über Stadt­be­grü­nung bis zur (Wieder-)Herstellung von Ökosys­te­men – und ihrer Rezep­tion inter­essieren auch Analy­sen obiger Diszi­plinen und Prak­tiken. Aus the­o­retis­ch­er Per­spek­tive stellen sich etwa Fra­gen der Mate­ri­al­ität und hybri­den Ontolo­gien inner­halb der Prozesse des Natur Machens sowie auch nach der Anwend­barkeit von in jün­ger­er Zeit disku­tierten Konzepten wie jen­em der Öko-Gouvernementalität.

Vorschläge für einen Vor­trag (20 Minuten) im Umfang von ca. 300 Wörtern sowie ein kurz­er akademis­ch­er Werde­gang wer­den bis zum 31. Jan­u­ar 2023 erbeten per E‑Mail an: martina.huttner@uni-siegen.de

Vor­be­haltlich zur Ver­fü­gung ste­hen­der Mit­tel kön­nen Reise- und Über­nach­tungskosten über­nom­men werden.

Für Fra­gen ste­hen die Organ­isatoren des Work­shops zur Verfügung:

Prof. Dr. Noy­an Dinçkal, Europäis­che Wis­sens- und Kom­mu­nika­tion­s­geschichte der Mod­erne, Uni­ver­sität Siegen (dinckal@geschichte.uni-siegen.de)

Dr. Philipp Kröger, Geschichte der Gegen­wart, Uni­ver­sität Siegen (philipp.kroeger@uni-siegen.de)

Permalink

Sep 13 – Sep 14, 2023

Socialist Governmentality? Healthcare, technologies of the self, and subjectification in European state socialism, 1945–1990

Work­shop

Work­shop at the Insti­tute for the His­to­ry of Med­i­cine and Ethics in Med­i­cine – Char­ité Uni­ver­sitätsmedi­zin Berlin

The two-day work­shop aims to dis­cuss the ques­tion, whether and how Michel Foucault’s ideas on lib­er­al (and cap­i­tal­ist) “gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty” can be pro­duc­tive­ly applied on con­tem­po­rary or his­tor­i­cal social­ist soci­eties. It intends to take a clos­er look at gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty, not from the per­spec­tive of pol­i­cy mak­ers or the pow­er appa­ra­tus, but by using the exam­ple of health­care in post-1945 Social­ist Europe.

Socialist Governmentality? Healthcare, technologies of the self, and subjectification in European state socialism, 1945–1990

After the col­lapse of the Cold War two-bloc sys­tem in 1989/90, his­to­ri­og­ra­phy and social sci­ences tend­ed to sharply con­trast post-World War II social­ist and non-social­ist soci­eties. Recent­ly, the focus has shift­ed to a more com­pre­hen­sive and nuanced per­spec­tive inter­est­ed in dif­fer­ences as much as par­al­lels, includ­ing inter­sec­tions and con­ver­gences between the two sys­tems. Some even ask, if the Iron Cur­tain might not be bet­ter described as a per­me­able Nylon Cur­tain. In this con­text, a more gen­er­al ques­tion has emerged: whether and how Michel Foucault’s ideas on lib­er­al (and cap­i­tal­ist) “gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty”, first for­mu­lat­ed in 1977/78, can be pro­duc­tive­ly applied on con­tem­po­rary or his­tor­i­cal social­ist soci­eties. After all, at first glance the lib­er­al and indi­vid­u­al­ized tech­nolo­gies of the self stand in sharp con­trast to the ide­o­log­i­cal­ly shaped and admin­is­tra­tive­ly medi­at­ed for­ma­tion of a “social­ist personality”.

It is hard­ly con­tro­ver­sial that the Fou­cauldian con­cept of “biopol­i­tics” – secur­ing and enhanc­ing “life” of the gov­erned “pop­u­la­tion” – is a very use­ful tool for ana­lyz­ing both social­ist and non-social­ist gov­ern­ment poli­cies when it comes to, for exam­ple, birth reg­u­la­tion and prona­tal­ism, agri­cul­tur­al poli­cies or pre­ven­tive health­care regimes. “Gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty” as defined by Fou­cault, how­ev­er, char­ac­ter­izes a kind of biopol­i­tics which seems to be specif­i­cal­ly con­nect­ed to a way of live in neolib­er­al-demo­c­ra­t­ic and cap­i­tal­ist soci­eties. The con­cept focus­es on “pri­vate” lifestyles (diet and phys­i­cal activ­i­ty, sex, emo­tions, etc.). The shap­ing of indi­vid­ual behav­ior and sub­jec­tiv­i­ty through a “con­duct of con­duct” ensures that the individual’s striv­ing for auton­o­my and their capac­i­ty for self-con­trol, self-reliance, and reflex­iv­i­ty serve the (pre­sumed) com­mon good. Gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty, then, describes how self-con­duct simul­ta­ne­ous­ly “gov­erns” oth­ers by gov­ern­ing one­self in ways that are desir­able for the poli­ty and accept­able to the governed.

In the last decades, the con­cept of gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty helped to under­stand how neolib­er­al­ism made cit­i­zens respon­si­ble for the for­mer tasks of the post­war-wel­fare state and how the mar­ket redis­trib­uted those tasks to the indi­vid­ual (sub­ject). From this the­o­ret­i­cal stand­point, gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty seems incom­pat­i­ble with social­ist ide­ol­o­gy, state con­trol, phys­i­cal repres­sion, and the pre­rog­a­tive of the col­lec­tive. In recent years, how­ev­er, we learned that pur­su­ing a bot­tom-up per­spec­tive can pro­vide addi­tion­al or even deep­er insights into the com­plex­i­ties of social­ist real­i­ties. This is the aim of the pro­posed work­shop: To take a clos­er look at gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty, not from the per­spec­tive of pol­i­cy mak­ers or the pow­er appa­ra­tus, but by using the exam­ple of health­care in post-1945 Social­ist Europe.

We pro­pose to explore con­crete exam­ples from every­day health­care set­tings – in psy­cho­log­i­cal coun­sel­ing, clin­i­cal social work, and com­mu­ni­ty med­i­cine, in treat­ing chron­ic dis­eases and in pre­ven­tive health­care, in school edu­ca­tion and the work­place, in healthy leisure activ­i­ties, and in shap­ing a hap­py fam­i­ly life. What mech­a­nisms of dis­sem­i­na­tion, recep­tion, and medi­a­tion of self-tech­niques can be found and ana­lyzed? Were ele­ments or pat­terns of gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty trans­ferred from the West to the East or do we also find “home-grown” inven­tions? Were social­ist soci­eties more “lib­er­al” than they realised and want­ed to be? If so, what does this mean for the way we look at gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty in “West­ern” societies?

The work­shop will be held in Berlin on Sep­tem­ber 13–14, 2023. We plan this to be a fair­ly small group of peo­ple to make the dis­cus­sions as open and live­ly as pos­si­ble. To facil­i­tate a pro­duc­tive dis­cus­sion, we invite papers from ongo­ing research that will be dis­trib­uted to par­tic­i­pants (and com­men­ta­tors) in advance. Expens­es for trav­el and hotel will be cov­ered. We wel­come abstracts in Eng­lish of no more than 300 words. Please send an abstract and a short CV by e‑mail (henriette.voelker@charite.de) by Decem­ber 19, 2022.

The work­shop is orga­nized by Dr. Alexa Geisthöv­el and Lau­ra Hot­ten­rott (both ERC Leviathan) and Prof. Dr. Vio­la Balz (FOR “normal#verrückt”). We grate­ful­ly acknowl­edge the sup­port of the Euro­pean Research Coun­cil (ERC Grant 854503) and the Ger­man Research Foun­da­tion (DFG FOR 3031). Please do not hes­i­tate to con­tact us if you have any questions.

Kon­takt

alexandra.geisthoevel@charite.de
laura.hottenrott@charite.de
viola.balz@charite.de
volker.hess@charite.de

Permalink

Past workshops

2022

Nov 02 , 2022

Alone in a crisis: Reflections on recent personal, financial, and health shifts  

Workshop

Virtual Workshop at the University of Western Australia

Link to this event

Oct 27 - Oct 28, 2022

Environmental Dis-ease. Co-productions of Toxic Politics

Workshop

Workshop at the University of Vienna

Link to this event

Aug 24 , 2022

Körperkulturbewegung in der Weimarer Republik

Workshop

Workshop der BBF | Bibliothek für Bildungsgeschichtliche Forschung des DIPF | Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation | Berlin

Link to this event

Jun 30 , 2022

Bodies After COP26. Biosocial Medical Responses to the Climate Emergency

Workshop

One-day workshop, collaboratively hosted between colleagues at UCL Anthropology and the Institute for Global Health and supported by UCL Anthropocene

Link to this event

Jun 17 - Jun 18, 2022

Moving and Being Moved. Healing, Conversion, Trance, and Transnationalism

Workshop

Workshop organized by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie project THETRANCE, the School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, University of Oxford, and the HEAL Network for the Ethnography of Healing, and it is funded by the European Union.

Link to this event

1 2