2 Postdoc Opportunities at the University of Bologna: Due Jan 17, 2020

Call for application for two postdoc vacancies in the context of the Processing Citizenship Project, funded by the European Research Council (http://processingcitizenship.euhttps://bit.ly/2PFbBp7). The positions are opened at the University of Bologna, with Annalisa Pelizza as Principal Investigator.


  • One position in “Social studies of data infrastructures for population management”

Open to candidates wishing to focus their research on the socio-organizational aspects of data infrastructures, with attention to how circulation of third-country populations data shapes and is shaped by inter-organizational boundaries.

Strongly encouraged backgrounds: Science and Technology Studies, sociology of technology or sociology of organization with a focus on data infrastructures, social informatics, software studies or information science with a sociological sensitivity

  • One position in “European studies with a focus on multi-level governance of data infrastructuring for migration management”

Open to candidates wishing to focus their research on European multi-level and multi-sectorial governance, with attention to data infrastructuring for migration management

Strongly encouraged backgrounds: political science, EU public policy, European history, European law, International Relations or sociology, all with a focus on European integration

  • Where: University of Bologna, Department of Philosophy and Communication.

Bologna is one of the most sought after cities to live and work in Italy and Europe

  • Duration: 12 month, renewable
  • Salary: between 2.200 and 2.600 euro/month net
  • Start date: March 2020, a later date can be negotiated
  • Submission deadline: 17th January, 2020
  • Interviews: 5th (Social studies of data infrastructures vacancy) and 6th  (European Studies vacancy) February 2020, candidate decides whether in person or via videocall
  • Full-length call and submission link (tip: filter by department “Dipartimento di Filosofia e Comunicazione (post 240/2010)”)

For scientific questions, please contact the PI Annalisa Pelizza before 29/12 or after 12/01.

For administrative questions, please contact Ms. T. Mattioli, +39 051/2092202, tatiana.mattioli [at] unibo.it.

Open Call: Editorial Assistant, Backchannels 4S committee, Global South section

The Society for the Social Studies of Science (4S) is looking for an STS grad student, postdoc or junior scholar from the Global South (particularly from Africa) who can contribute as an assistant in the Backchannels 4S Committee. The person will be expected to share and disseminate (re-blogging) STS news from/about the southern hemisphere in the form of short academic writings. Besides some editorial skills, the assistant will encourage authors to contribute with their works about report-backs in STS from the global South. The Committee plans to collect, edit and publish 13-14 writings for 2019-2020. The volunteer will assist the collection, editing and publication of the writings in Backchannels.

This is an opportunity to become part of a collaborative network, that works voluntarily and with an excellent academic group, to become familiar with editorial tasks, and to get to know the STS community around the world.  We are looking for someone interested in being in this position for at least two years.

If you are interested, please send a short CV and a one-side letter expressing your interest to [mariaelisatorrescarrasco@gmail.com] & [gloria.baigorrotegui@usach.cl] by 7 February 2020.

CFP ElPub 2020


The 24th International Conference on Electronic Publishing ElPub will take place on 18-21 April 2020 in Doha, Qatar.

The conference will address the general theme Charting the Future(s) of Digital Publishing. It will be hosted by UCL Qatar, a centre of excellence in cultural heritage studies in Qatar located in the Education City in Doha. The local organising committee is working towards providing support to authors of accepted papers to attend (the request for support is part of the paper submission form).

This is the first edition of the conference coming to the Middle East after multiple events in Europe, North America and one South American edition. The Middle East is a great place to come together with colleagues from the East and West and hear more diverse points of view what will happen next and how changes in publishing influence the life of academics, learners and all citizens.

The event traditionally brings together academics and practitioners interested in digital publishing, librarianship and information studies, scientific communication, open access and open science. To reflect the diversity of participants and experiences the conference invites full and short papers, practitioners’ papers and posters.

This is the list of topics of particular interest:

  • Theoretical aspects of digital publishing

    • Methods to forecast future trends in digital publishing

    • Driving forces for changing the digital publishing landscape

    • New insights into readers and reading

    • Synergies of publishing and media

    • The evolution of business models in digital publishing

    • Regulation of publishing

    • Digital divide and the future digital publishing

  • New technological developments
    • Artificial Intelligence and scholarly publishing

    • Mobile publishing

    • Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) in publishing

    • Social networks and publishing

    • Tools for measuring quality in digital publishing and emerging metrics

  • Digital publishing, openness and academia

    • Digital publishing reshaped by open access and open science

    • Self-publishing

    • Publishing, metrics and research evaluation

  • New roles of libraries

    • Libraries as publishers

    • Data publication and management

    • Innovation labs for experimentation with digital content

    • New ways of supporting scholars and learners

  • Coping with scale

    • Scholarly communication infrastructures and publishing

    • Big scale digital publishing

    • Publishing and managing big data

  • Skills

    • New professional skills for the future of publishing

    • Digital publishing and new literacies

  • Other relevant topics

Please check the call for papers – submit your paper proposal and join this first of its kind edition of ElPub in the MENA region!

Dr. Milena Dobreva, UCL Qatar (General chair)

Dr. Jadranka Stojanovski, University of Zadar, Croatia (Programme chair)

For further information: https://milenadobreva.net/2019/11/17/charting-the-futures-of-digital-publishing-share-your-views-at-elpub2020-in-doha-qatar/

Post-doc opportunity (Hertie School of Governance, Berlin)

–Reposting from a friend–

To support research projects on Organizations, Institutions and Social Change and the Knowledge Initiative on Organizations and Society (KIOS) under the direction of Prof. Johanna Mair, the Hertie School is recruiting a Post-Doctoral candidate with expertise in qualitative and/or quantitative research methods and broad interests in organizations and their role in tackling social problems and societal challenges. As a school of public policy, The Hertie School of Governance in Berlin prepares exceptional students for leadership positions in government, business, and civil society. A renowned international faculty with expertise in economics, business, law, political and social science take an interdisciplinary, policy-orientated approach to the School’s teaching and research agenda.

The position

This is a part-time position (30 hours/week) with an initial contract for one year that  can be extended. The position is to be filled as of October 01, 2019.

Research tasks:

  • Advance a research agenda around the role of organizations in addressing social problems and transforming institutional contexts, with the goal of publishing relevant research  in leading peer-reviewed outlets
  • Examine a diverse range of alternative and traditional organizational forms (social enterprises, cooperatives, corporations, non-profit organizations; development organizations) that actively pursue strategies to alleviate a social problem, affect social change, and alter institutional arrangements.
  • Think through the complexities that tackling social problems involves and engage directly with organizations and initiatives. Empirical settings for advancing this research agenda include developing and developed economies.

Project management tasks:

  • Take the lead and work closely with the project leader and other members of the team to coordinate data collection, analysis, and writing. Other tasks may include grant applications and coordinating research colloquia.


  • Aim at producing high quality research, attending and presenting at the leading conferences across the social sciences (e.g. management, sociology, political science), and communicating your findings to researchers across related disciplines and policy-makers relevant to the field and the project

Your qualifications


  • The ideal candidate will have a PhD or an equivalent degree in organization and management theory, organizational/economic sociology, or comparative political economy
  • Regardless of background, a keen interest in the interplay of organizations and their institutional contexts is a must
  • Familiarity of and willingness to keep up to date with state-of-the-art research methods in the social sciences
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills in English
  • A self-driven, independent individual who is keen to lead and work in an international environment

Nice to have:

  • Familiarity with debates on the role of organizations in addressing societal challenges (e.g. social entrepreneurship, social movements, corporate forms of responsibility etc.)
  • Willingness to engage with related debates across the social sciences
  • Familiarity with data handling and analysis (e.g. through Stata/R) is a welcome asset
  • A record of or demonstrated potential to publish work in international outlets

To apply for this position, please visit 
hertie-school.dvinci-easy.com/en/p/en/jobs/152/…. Deadline for full consideration is August 31, 2019. For further questions, please contact Johanna Mair, Professor for Organization, Strategy and Leadership, at mair@hertie-school.org.

Decolonizing scholarly data and publishing infrastructures

I was recently invited to write a post for the LSE Citing Africa podcast/blog series and am reposting below the final version of the post that originally appeared here. I want to also point your attention to the fast approaching deadline for ASAA call for individual papers and panels (closes on May 30th and June 15th, respectively)! As I argue in the post, the choice of which conference to attend is in fact a demonstration of ethical orientation and politics. Whose scholarship and institutions are you building through your participation and payment of conference fees? (I would urge you to support the African Studies Association in Africa).


books and laptop research

Where and how is scholarly knowledge produced and circulated, and with what effects? We must be wary of the over-production and representation of work from particular geographies, as well as the relegation of other locales as sites of data collection.

Existing scholarly infrastructures continue to enable and in fact re-entrench what Paulin Hountondji called ‘extroverted scientific activity’, where researchers on the African continent investigate subjects which are of interest first and foremost to a Western audience. Hountondji argued that while academic work can meet the theoretical needs and questions of the Western academy, it does not serve the societies within which the science is conducted.

This paradigm is reinforced by a growing reliance on exposure in conferences and academic journals with high Impact Factors based in the global North. An original signatory of the Budapest Open Access Initiative, critical development scholar Leslie Chan noted that often ‘the implicit message is that research from the South has to mimic that from the North, even if it means abandoning research that would contribute to local well-being, while favouring research with international appeal’. This speaks to the motivations of my own research. I ask fundamental questions about how and to whom researchers are held accountable and what role scholarly work should play in today’s late industrial moment.

I have come to understand that working outside conventional structures requires additional commitment, time, labour and social capital. For example, Abena Busia describes the challenges faced when working on the monumental Women Writing Africa (WWA) project: despite the women involved principally wanting to broadcast African women’s voices throughout the continent, the project being hosted within the US-based Feminist Press distribution network meant it was more readily available to North American and European audiences. In order to redress this issue, the co-founders together with the Feminist Press had to purposefully pursue African regional partners, volume by volume, to publish and distribute the series on the continent.

Nanjala Nyabola faced similar challenges when seeking a public library in Nairobi to launch her recent book on Kenyan politics. She was eventually able to host the event at a branch of the Kenya National Libraries, but doing so required on her part additional labour and effort. In most cases, this additional labour is neither valued nor promoted within academic review systems, and so it falls onto the shoulders of the individual scholar. To move their work outside of well-established, normative systems of scholarly knowledge circulation, these scholars must go beyond what is expected, accounted for and credited, in an already demanding system.

That this ‘double burden’ (also described elsewhere as a ‘second shift’) falls on the same scholars who already have to do more to diffuse their work is revealing of the politics and dynamics of knowledge production on/from the continent. ‘We feel pressure to do it [data and research output sharing] differently but I worry that we will not be able to,’ a Kenyan researcher admitted to me in a discussion about how communities felt exploited by normative practices of research data collection.

The drive for some scholars to work outside of conventional structures is rooted in a desire to combat an unequal representation in academic knowledge production. One proposed solution has been to increase African-authored scholarship. But focusing on the symptoms of extroverted scientific infrastructures, rather than the systems themselves, carries a risk of tokenising individuals. For example, in response to critiques about the lack of representation from the global South in Information and Communication Technologies in Development (ICTD) work, I observed at the 2015 ICTD conference an increase in rates of co-authorship between global North and global South scholars. Nonetheless, Northern scholars still appeared to drive the agenda. Although all of the research from the 24 co-authored papers at the conference took place in field sites located in the ‘global South’, only four had primary authors who hailed from institutions situated in the global South itself. Studies by Lam (2014) and Bai (2018) echo this finding.

Dependency on the Northern primary researcher who determines who they want to cite or bring into the academic system is therefore perpetuated: ‘I met an Ethiopian student in Ethiopia and I just decided to bring him to the US to be my student!’ a tenured professor at an American university mentioned to me. ‘I think my biggest impact to my academic field will be that I helped get more Africans into it.’ These examples illustrate the limit of what we can expect if we only focus on individual-led solutions to structural issues, and continue to rely on, and thus reify, traditional scholarly channels and practices.

Rachel Strohm and Edwin Adjei critiqued the establishment of the Centre for Public Authority and International Development (CPAID), which is hosted at the LSE Firoz Lalji Centre for Africa in partnership with African universities, funded by a £5 million, five-year grant from the Economic and Social Research Council. While the CPAID centre works with local researchers, they noted that funders continue to invest in centres of knowledge about Africa hosted outside of Africa, rather than primarily support institutions and scholarly infrastructures based on the continent and focused on African audiences. Strohm asked: ‘Why are Northern academics so good at studying inequality and uneven post-colonial power dynamics in the South, and so bad at recognizing their own role in perpetuating inequality within the international scholarly community?’ She concluded: ‘We must be missing so many interesting voices, so many valuable contributions to knowledge, because we’re systematically underinvesting in African academics. Spending £5 million to set up a research centre in the UK rather than somewhere like Accra or Nairobi (or Tamale or Eldoret or Kisangani) only perpetuates the problem.’

Responses to Strohm’s post highlight that initiatives attempting to rectify such inequalities in investments in African research already exist. Adjei points to CODESRIA’s long-standing work since its founding in 1973 towards remedying the unequal circulation of African scholarship, as well as more recent work from the African Studies Association of Africa (ASAA), an Africa-based association which promotes Africa’s specific contributions to knowledge about the peoples and cultures of Africa and the Diaspora. The association’s third biennial conference will take place in Nairobi in October 2019; the choice of which conference to attend is in fact a demonstration of ethical orientation and politics. Whose scholarship and institutions are you building through your participation and payment of conference fees? (Note the ASAA call for panels closes on June 15th!)

Figure of the academic knowledge research production process

There is also a neglected commercial layer to these discussions. Emerging studies have shed light on the expansion of commercial publishers into all parts of the scholarly research life cycle, including data analytics for ‘impact factors’, university rankings and management of research data. The diagram above illustrates the extent of Elsevier’s expansion through its acquisitions (illustrated by logos) of companies across the research process. The growing consolidation of research infrastructure by private industry actors such as Elsevier make working outside of mainstream forms of knowledge production even more challenging. Given the high costs of non-participation in the system, many researchers, especially those in contexts with little government or funder support, have few options but to entrust their knowledge to these corporations. Given the already uneven landscape of publishing power, what are the implications for the diversity of knowledge production in such moves towards consolidation?

The map below illustrates the high imbalance in regional representation in published academic work in the Web of Science and demonstrates how existing academic publishing infrastructures privilege certain regions and types of knowledge. Scholars concerned with decolonising knowledge need to turn a critical gaze on the structures through which academic knowledge circulates and who owns and makes decisions about these structures.

World scaled by number of documents with authors from each country in Web of Science.

The ‘replication crisis’ highlighted by Laura Mann in her Citing Africa blog post has led many concerned scholars towards Open Science – the movement to make scientific research open access and accessible across society. The increasing push for pre-analysis plans, publishing of research instruments and datasets, among other demands, is viewed as a way to increase transparency and ‘better science’. As growing critiques of Open Science have argued, however, such practices and tools do not necessarily challenge the powerful actors governing the Science industry and may in fact be re-entrenching power by creating new technical boundaries and requirements. Who is able to publish ‘openly’? And if barriers to ‘openness’ remain, will we merely deepen the over-representation of some groups over others?

Working with the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet) over the last five years, I have observed that a ‘crisis of replication’ has indeed contributed towards a growing normative push for Open Science, with a focus on tools and technologies. Despite the revolutionary rhetoric, it appears that much of the mainstream Open Science movement continues to operate under the same values and structures of the pre-crisis era, albeit with new tools and norms to revitalise its credibility.

Furthermore, the frame of what ‘counts’ as valid knowledge should reach beyond the confines of the scientific academic journal article. During the last ASAA conference, Dr. Wangui wa Goro highlighted that the university should not be considered the only site of knowledge production, and forms of knowledge like hip-hop and jazz, which fall outside of normative scholarly frames, should also be valourised given that African scholars have long worked outside these frameworks. Groups like Critical Investigations into Humanitarianism in Africa (CIHA) have also highlighted poetry, photography, dance and other visual work as important when speaking of alternative forms of knowledge and remind us that the politics of language must also be part of these considerations. While writing this blog post, outside of the university Virtual Private Network, an article on decolonising knowledge would have cost $42 USD or 4,200 Kenyan Shillings. For whom are we ultimately creating such knowledge and for what purpose? To get towards a ‘pluriverse’, more multimodal ways of doing, acknowledging accessing and credentialing scholarship are needed.

As Laura Mann prompts in her Citing Africa post: why are we all doing this work? And how do we ensure that the socio-technical infrastructures that facilitate the work are in line with those values? I argue that no matter who we cite in our academic work, as long as we continue to publish and write within existing academic systems and genres, and follow established ethical standards and protocols to keep research data locked in university office filing cabinets, the contradictions and ironies will only become more glaring and apparent. We must take real steps to reassess the values inherent in scholarly processes and publishing.

Chan has recently written that Open Science requires us:

‘[T]o think beyond the confines of the genre of the academic journal and the narrow set of standards and quality markers designed and controlled by profit driven entities … there is a need to think about enabling infrastructure for data and diverse forms of outputs and processes … there needs to be more thought given to keeping infrastructure open and public.’

The academy is increasingly becoming a space where commercial publishers are leveraging ‘platform capitalism’. Legacy multinational publishers and new players from the global North have been able to concentrate and consolidate their control of the sites of knowledge validation and distribution.

A key component missing from conversations about Open Science is that ethics are not only articulated in institutional review boards and project proposals; ethics are demonstrated in data practices, in publication venues and in decisions about whether we support the companies involved in scholarly production. The challenges are clear. We are constrained by time, funding, deadlines and hierarchies of power within the academy and the scholarly publishing world. Yet scholars concerned with the global practices of science — those interested in articulating why we are here — must get involved in rethinking how scholarly infrastructures can be decolonised and decentralised for greater equity in knowledge production. As a small step towards these aims, I have drafted a set of reflective questions as part of a self-review of my own citational practice available under a Creative Commons license to reuse and remix. My ongoing research project also more deeply engages with these questions, looking at public qualitative research data infrastructures and their making in Nairobi.

Unless we critically assess what counts as ‘high quality’ scholarly knowledge and who determines what counts, we run the risk of reproducing the ‘savage slot’ and tokenism. Using a framework of cognitive justice to describe how decolonising knowledge systems might transpire, Maja van der Velden highlights that giving ‘voice’ to knowers, or being ‘tolerant’ of alternative knowledge, is not enough: ‘cognitive justice requires resisting the hegemony of the dominant knowledge system in the struggle for survival, peace and social justice’.

To radically reshape the way scholarship and scholarly knowledge is produced and communicated requires questioning who makes the decisions about it and why. Focusing our attention on the sociotechnical knowledge infrastructures can help spark these important conversations: what might decentralised, non-hierarchical and locally controlled forms of scholarly communications and knowledge look like? From that vision we can help pluralise forms of knowledge and bring its stewardship and care closer to the communities it most concerns.

I would like to thank Titilope Ajayi, Cecelia Lynch, Leslie Chan, Laura Mann, Laurence Radford and Leah Horgan for comments on an earlier draft of this post.

Call for Journal Submissions: Special Issue on “Political Ecologies of the Blue Economy in Africa” (Dec 15, 2017)

The Journal of Political Ecology is seeking contributions for a Special Issue on “Political Ecologies of the Blue Economy in Africa”.

Describing the potential contribution to human wellbeing provided by seas, oceans and their resources, the ‘blue economy’ and ‘blue growth’ agenda have variously become a guiding frame, policy discourse and set of practices across the globe. However, at the same time and with limited exceptions (e.g. Winder and Le Heron 2017), there has yet to be a sustained critical analysis which draws upon the fact that blue growth is simultaneously an economic, social, biological and geologic project. What are the political implications for scripting oceans and water as part of an economic imaginary of ‘progress’ and ‘growth’, and of separating it from landed ‘green’ economies’? As the ‘blue’ (like the ‘green’) is reworked spatially into a language of new ‘frontiers’, ‘opportunities’ and ‘alternative sustainabilities’ (Cavanagh and Benjaminsen 2017), what new political ecologies might emerge?

The blue economy narrative has been arguably nowhere more enthusiastically adopted in recent times than across the African continent. The African Union’s ‘Agenda 2063’ – the key policy framework for the continent’s future socio-economic development – makes explicit reference to the concept whilst in 2016 the UN Economic Commission for Africa developed a ‘policy handbook’ which describes maritime development as ‘the new frontier of African Renaissance’. Industries and practices that range from the established (such as aquaculture, offshore oil and gas extraction, fishing and tourism) to the prospective (deep-seabed mining, blue carbon sequestration, financing through ‘blue bonds’) are all seen as part of a future familiarly parsed as a ‘motor for development’. However, such impulses demand critical interrogation in the context of such new modes of accumulation and the spatial fixing and exploitation of ‘new’ resources.

This special issue is co-edited by John Childs and Christina Hicks (Lancaster University). It is envisaged that the special issue will contain 6-9 papers following a standard, high quality double blind reviewing process closely managed by the co-editors in collaboration with the Journal Political Ecology team. With reference to an African context, we invite proposals that:

•       Critically analyse blue growth narratives (its construction, endorsement and resistance).
•       Rethink the ‘place’ of the ocean in the ‘blue economy’ by drawing upon/examining alternative ways of ‘knowing’ the ocean.
•       Investigate how political agency is distributed among different (human and non-human) actors in formulations of the blue economy.
•       Study the emergence of new ‘terrains of struggle’ (both materially and conceptually) across the continent (coastal and/or land-locked states) in the context of the blue economy.
•       Highlight strategies of inclusion/exclusion from the blue growth agenda.
•       Engage with different spatio-temporalities of maritime environments (coasts, seawater, seabed etc.) and their political formations/possibilities.

Please note that other topics and approaches are welcome so long as they contribute to political ecological approaches, broadly defined. The special issue is aiming for both methodological and conceptual diversity. For interested authors, abstract submission guidelines and relevant dates:

•       Extended abstracts of no more than 500 words should be submitted by email to by December 15, 2017.  Affiliation information of the corresponding author (including email) and affiliation of all co-authors should be included.  The co-editors will consider all abstracts before inviting a selection to submit full papers for peer review by January 10, 2018.
•       Full papers will have a maximum length of 9,000 words (including main text, abstract, references, tables, figure captions, etc. check full guidelines for authors). First draft papers will be due by May 2018 and, subject to review, due for publication in late 2018.

For any enquiries about this Special Issue, please contact Christina Hicks (christina.hicks@lancaster.ac.uk) and/or John Childs (J.childs@lancaster.ac.uk)

Dr. Simon Batterbury

Professor of Political Ecology, LEC, Lancaster University, UK, Europe

Call for Applications: Social Media Postdoctoral Researcher (Due Dec 1, 2017)

The Social Media Collective at Microsoft Research New England (MSRNE) is looking for a social media postdoctoral researcher (start date: July, 2018). This position is an ideal opportunity for a scholar whose work draws on anthropology, communication, media studies, sociology, and/or science and technology studies to bring empirical and critical perspectives to complex socio-technical issues.

Application deadline: 1 December 2017.

This year, we will also consider applications for a possible candidate slot, based in SMC, bridging SMC and one or more areas of the MSRNE lab, including machine learning, bioinformatics, cryptography, algorithmic game theory, and economics.

Microsoft Research provides a vibrant multidisciplinary research environment, with an open publications policy and close links to top academic institutions around the world. Postdoctoral researcher positions provide emerging scholars (PhDs received late 2018 or to be conferred by July 2018) an opportunity to develop their research career and to interact with some of the top minds in the research community. Postdoctoral researchers define their own research agenda. Successful candidates will have a well-established research track record as demonstrated by journal publications and conference papers, as well as participation on program committees, editorial boards, and advisory panels.

While each of the Microsoft Research labs has openings in a variety of different disciplines, this position with the Social Media Collective at Microsoft Research New England specifically seeks social science/humanities candidates with critical approaches to their topics. Qualifications include a strong academic record in anthropology, communication, media studies, sociology, science and technology studies, or a related field. The ideal candidate may be trained in any number of disciplines, but should have a strong social scientific or humanistic methodological, analytical, and theoretical foundation, be interested in questions related to technology or the internet and society or culture, and be interested in working in a highly interdisciplinary environment that includes computer scientists, mathematicians, and economists.

The Social Media Collective is comprised of full-time researchers, postdocs, visiting faculty, Ph.D. interns, and research assistants. Current projects in New England include:

– How does the use of social media affect relationships between artists and audiences in creative industries, and what does that tell us about the future of work? (Nancy Baym)

– How are social media platforms, through algorithmic design and user policies, adopting the role of intermediaries for public discourse? (Tarleton Gillespie)

– What are the cultural, political, and economic implications of on-demand contract work as a new form of semi-automated, globally-distributed digital labor? (Mary L. Gray)

– How do standards, defaults, and infrastructures encode our assumptions about human behavior and perception? (Dylan Mulvin)

– How are public and private institutions training people for the future of work, and deciding who should be included in that future? (Dan Greene)

SMC postdocs may have the opportunity to visit and collaborate with our sister Social Media Collective members in New York City. Related projects in New York City include:

– What are the politics, ethics, and policy implications of big data science? (Kate Crawford, MSR-NYC, AI Now)

– What are the social and cultural issues arising from data-centric technological development? (danah boyd, Data & Society Research Institute)

Postdoctoral researchers receive a competitive salary and benefits package, and are eligible for relocation expenses. Postdoctoral researchers are hired for a two-year term appointment following the academic calendar, starting in July 2018. Applicants must have completed the requirements for a PhD, including submission of their dissertation, prior to joining Microsoft Research. We encourage those with tenure-track job offers from other institutions to apply, so long as they can defer their start date to accept our position.

Microsoft does not discriminate against any applicant on the basis of age, ancestry, color, gender identity or expression, genetic information, marital status, medical condition, national origin, physical or mental disability, political affiliation, protected veteran status, race, religion, sex

CFA: Workshop on “Participant Observation and Collaboration in STS Ethnography” (April 2018)

Reposting this call for those who might be interested…

Call for application for an early career workshop on:

“Participant Observation and Collaboration in STS Ethnography: Generating
Methodographic Sensibilities for Science & Technology Studies”

Continue reading “CFA: Workshop on “Participant Observation and Collaboration in STS Ethnography” (April 2018)”

Research Methods Workshop for Internet Policy & Advocacy in Africa – Due Nov 10

Research Methods Workshop for Internet Policy & Advocacy in Africa
Feb 26 – Mar 3, 2018
Kampala, Uganda
Application Due: Nov 10, 2017

The Annenberg School for Communication’s Internet Policy Observatory has teamed up with the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), Research ICT Africa, Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet), Unwanted Witness, Paradigm Initiative, and YoungICTAdvocates to organize the fourth regional Research Methods Workshop for Internet Policy and Advocacy in Africa. The workshop, taking place from Feb 26 to March 3 in Kampala, seeks applications from young scholars, activists, lawyers, and technologists working across Africa for an intensive practicum on using methodologically rigorous, data-driven, and contextually appropriate research for advocacy.

The workshop seeks to provide a venue for stakeholders in the region to build collaborative possibilities across sectors, expand research capacity within practitioner and digital rights advocacy communities, and to provide the skills and know-how to strategically use research and data to advance advocacy efforts. Sessions will cover both qualitative and quantitative methods and will provide the space for hands-on activities and the development of individual and group research interests. The workshop aims to create opportunities to connect scholarly expertise with advocates and improve working synergies between emerging African networks of civil society organizations, academic centers, think-tanks, and policymakers.

Sessions will include workshops on stakeholder analysis, conducting interviews, researching laws and regulations, social network analysis, network measurement, survey methods, data visualization, and strategic communication for policy impact.

We encourage individuals from Africa in the academic (early career), NGO, technology, and public policy sectors to apply. Prospective applicants should have a particular area of interest related to internet governance and policymaking, censorship, surveillance, internet access, political engagement online, protection of human rights online, and/or corporate governance in the ICT sector. Applicants will be asked to bring a specific research question to the program to be developed and operationalized through trainings, group projects, and one-on-one mentorship with top researchers and experts from around the world. Several partial and full scholarships will be made for the most competitive applicants to participate.

The course will be conducted in English and applicants should have high proficiency in English in order to interact with experts, lecturers and other participants who will come from diverse backgrounds. Please also note that we require all participants to have a laptop to use for the duration of the program.
For more information about the program please visit:

For questions, please email Laura at lsh@asc.upenn.edu.

To apply for the workshop, please fill out this form
by November 10: https://goo.gl/forms/NYzOYSfVqj7Tkv3x1