 |
 |
Dear all,
This is a most welcome critique, Pam, and so is
the suggestion below,
Hillary. As one of the conference organisers, I too
find difficulty with
this issue, along with the rest of the organisers. We
will be discussing
this matter at length for the sake of future conferences.
We are,
however, trying to accommodate low-wage and even unwaged
non-academics
as best we can, given no monetary resources at all except our
individual
pocket books and some minimal funding sources from two or
three
institutions.
In my view, part of the problem is also
ensuring that people that
receive low wages or unemployment welfare in, say,
Kigali, are not
treated as if they had the same income as a low wage or
unemployed in,
say, New York City. Affiliation and academic status is one way
to verify
and differentiate income level, but it is clearly not sufficient,
nor
necessarily justifiable (some might also find our
geographically-based
fee-differentiation problematic, too). However, given
the exiguous
resources at our disposal, it certainly helps us as organisers
to have
those problematic academically-centred categories in place and
make
exceptions as the need arises. The point, in the end, is to
redistribute
received funds in such a way as to be able to help those with
much
lesser economic means.
But I feel obliged here as well to counter
assumptions about what
constitutes "costs" and "abuse". Unlike mainstream
academic associations
(RGS, AAG, etc.), we are actually very few, unpaid, and
overworked with
logistics. So, costs may be marginal if only counted in
conventional
terms, as money/assets (and even those kinds of costs are
hardly
marginal to us!); they are certainly not marginal in terms of time
we
devote to organising the event (and when necessary a bit of our
personal
dosh). The matter of potential "abuse" is inapplicable here, since
the
conference is already "uneconomic" in mainstream economic terms. In
a
context of an often murderously abusive global system based on
surplus
extraction to benefit the few, the least we can do is to have those
that
have more economic means contribute more for the benefit of those
with
less. I would be more worried about the sort of abuse Hillary
describes
in a context of economic equality.
I hope this clarifies the
problem we are facing as organisers and more
such constructive critiques and
suggestions are certainly welcome.
saed
Dr Hillary Shaw
wrote:
> I totally agree.
>
> What are the marginal
costs of an extra person at a conference -
> surely pretty low, especially
if no food is provided. Even if they
> get a conference schedule,
the marginal cost of printing an extra few
> can't be large, and they
usually print a few extra to make sure all
> paying delegates have one
anyway.
>
> Of course if loads of 'low paid / unwaged' turned
up, or many waged
> abused this, the whole thing would become
uneconomic.
>
> Maybe conferences could adopt a policy
of - once the paying list is
> full - having a few places, limited
in number, for the first few
> 'unwaged / low waged' applicants
free. Say up to 5% or 10% of the
> total conference paid
places. A bit like the ancient idea of gleaning
> fields, leaving
the edges of your field unharvested, so the poor didnt
> have the
indignity of begging.
>
> Dr Hillary J. Shaw
> Business
Management and Marketing Group
> Harper Adams University College
>
Shrewsbury Road
> Newport, Shropshire
> TF10 8NB
>
www.fooddeserts.org <http://www.fooddeserts.org/>
>
>
In a message dated 15/08/2007 16:06:53 GMT Daylight Time,
>
[log in to unmask] writes:
>
> Has
anyone else wondered why the fees charged for the
Mumbai
> conference assume that everyone is either
Faculty or Postgrad,
> with no provision for
low-paid or unwaged? Given that both
>
Faculty & Postgraduates are liable to be able to shift all or
part
> of their fees, travel and subsistence onto
their departments,
> whereas unwaged people have
to find the whole sum themselves, it
> seems a bit
thoughtless to assume that all non-students can
afford
> to come at the higher rate. I tried
writing to one of the
> organisers back in April,
they said they'd think about it ...
>
> Pam
Shurmer-Smith
>
>
> Pamela
Shurmer-Smith
>
Portsmouth
>
UK
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For
Good
> <http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html>
this month.
>
>
>
--
Salvatore Engel-Di
Mauro
Department of Geography, SUNY New Paltz
1 Hawk Drive, New Paltz, NY
12561
tel: 1/845/2572991, fax: 1/845/2572992
e-mail:
[log in to unmask]
Senior Editor
Capitalism Nature Socialism: A
Journal of Ecosocialism
Editor
ACME: An international e-journal for
critical geographies
http://www.acme-journal.org/
--
This
message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
content by the NorMAN
MailScanner Service and is believed
to be clean.
The NorMAN
MailScanner Service is operated by Information
Systems and Services,
Newcastle University.