Print

Print


I agree with Andre 100%, Unfortunately when anything interesting is posted to crit geog, 80% of the time it is ignored, 15% of the time it is flamed down as being e.g.  'not critical enough', and 5% of the time it might just get 1 or 2 responses, then die off.      99.5% of us seem too scared to post anything (except article requests and CFPs)  in case it offends someone, and the other 0.5% just can't be bothered posting anymore (maybe my last post for 2014, sad but true)

Dr Hillary J. Shaw
Director and Senior Research Consultant
Shaw Food Solutions
Newport
Shropshire
TF10 8NB
www.fooddeserts.org



-----Original Message-----
From: André Carmo <[log in to unmask]>
To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:50
Subject: Re: Unsubscribe

I guess massive exodus is what happens when critique is reduced to articles request.

...sign of the times...


2014-01-30 Krisztina Szalai <[log in to unmask]>:
Hi,
 
Can you please remove me from your mailing list?
 
Thank you.
 
Best wishes,
Krisztina
__________________________________________________________ 
 
Krisztina Szalai | Postgraduate Research Student |
University of Nottingham | School of Geography| Nottingham | NG7 2RD
 

 

From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bridget Newsham [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 30 January 2014 14:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Unsubscribe

Hi all,

I need to be removed from this list. A little too overwhelming! Cheers

Bridget Newsham 

On Jan 30, 2014, at 4:00 AM, Louise Waite <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Apologies for cross-posting. Please see 2nd CFP below:
 
Call for Papers: RGS-IBG International Conference London 26-29 August 2014
Unfreedom through forced labour: ‘modern slavery’ knowledge formation
Paper session sponsored by The Geographies of Justice Research Group
 
Louise Waite, University of Leeds
Hannah Lewis, University of Leeds
Late 2013 saw intense media attention around the case of three women who claim to have been held as slaves in forced labour (domestic servitude) for three decades in a London house. Although this has been perhaps the most explosive case to emerge, there have been a number of other high profile cases of forced labour in the UK over the last decade that have received significant media attention. These include the Morecambe Bay tragedy in 2004 when 19 Chinese migrants drowned whilst cockle-picking under gangmaster control; the 2013 Connor family case who made huge sums of money from homeless men and others in labour exploitation; and the discovery in September 2013 of alleged forced labour on a Newport farm in Wales. Partly in response to these cases, the UK government has signalled its intention to introduce a ‘Modern Slavery Bill’. However, critics have argued that the Bill is focused firmly on tackling the specific symptoms rather than the wider causes of forced labour. Indeed, the government is currently pursuing two divergent policy tracks by publicly posturing against forced labour, and in particular trafficking, while simultaneously overseeing a reduction in UK labour market regulation during times of austerity.
Despite the government’s assertion that the Bill will effectively ‘tackle the scourge of modern slavery’; recent research is showing that forced labour is not a simple matter, nor is effective intervention easily achieved (Dwyer et al., 2011, Geddes et al., 2013). Any situation of severe labour exploitation is likely to result from a complex set of overlapping factors: rising employment precarity, restricted access to welfare, poverty, destitution, insufficient labour regulation, plus immigration status insecurity can all combine to contribute to individuals’ entry into, continuation in, or preclusion of exit from forced labour. This means that efforts to tackle labour exploitation through prosecution of a few severe cases is unlikely to significantly reduce wider labour injustices. This session invites multi-disciplinary reflection on these issues in different sectors of the UK or other geographical contexts, and/or consideration of any of the below questions:
o   What do the recent UK cases of forced labour tell us about the dynamic locations for knowledge formation about such ‘modern slavery’?
o   How do different processes (e.g. policy proposals & interventions, media portrayals, research agendas, empirical evidence) co-produce knowledge on this topic and reinforce/trouble binaries such as free & voluntary/unfree & enslaved, trafficking/smuggling and choice/coercion?
o   What do we know about different parties’ involvement in the creation of unfreedom (e.g. employers, third parties, state policies, migration regimes, economic contexts of austerity etc.)?
o   What possible forms of exchange and dissemination are under discussion to tackle forced labour and how can these be critically appraised?
Please send a 250 word abstract with your title, institution and email contacts to [log in to unmask]  and [log in to unmask] by 7th February 2014.
References:
 
--------------------------------------
Dr Louise Waite
Senior Lecturer in Human Geography

School of Geography
University of Leeds
Woodhouse Lane
Leeds  LS2 9JT
Tel +44 (0)113 343 3367
Email [log in to unmask]
Web www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/l.waite
For info on Precarious Lives ESRC research project, please visit:
 
--------------------------------------
Dr Louise Waite
Senior Lecturer in Human Geography

School of Geography
University of Leeds
Woodhouse Lane
Leeds  LS2 9JT
Tel +44 (0)113 343 3367
Email [log in to unmask]
Web www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/l.waite
For info on Precarious Lives ESRC research project, please visit:
 

 
 

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.




--
«you can´t be neutral on a moving train»

André Carmo