[2] Good Soup?
The last two weeks have still felt a bit manic, with the first 2-day intensive (Exclusion & Inequality aka Toolbox) and prepping for the second (Postdigital Society). I’ve had to introduce myself so many times I think I might just write a short bio and store it somewhere so I can copy and paste it haha. It’s taken me a moment to get back into reading academic content after a summer of ‘light reading’. Luckily some of the content for Toolbox I had already read. I did really enjoy the 2-day intensive, certainly came away with lots of thoughts and a new understanding of the different ways inequality can be created and perpetuated. Reading ahead of the course made me feel a bit despondent. Ignorance really is bliss and coming from a year of Philosophy (which can make you feel a bit detached) and a nice summer, it’s been hard to dive-in to some of the more challenging topics.
I did come away thinking more deeply about the use of data in research though. One point that came up is that ‘all data is biased’ and this is true – because what you collect is by nature exclusionary and how you ‘ask questions’ of that data will inform the answers you get. Quite literally sh!t in, sh!t out. But it got me thinking about big data and schemaless databases and how with poverty because there are so many facets to it (causes, side-effects, impacts of interventions) this could be helpful – or not.
Note to self: go look at how advances in data processing are changing our understanding of poverty.
The ‘thin’ Interdisciplinary course is incredibly chaotic and I’m not sure I’m learning anything new from it. Perhaps if I came from a single discipline background, or had no commercial experience it might make more sense. As it is, I already live in a very ‘interdisciplinary’ world having done a multi-discipline undergrad (PPE) and work in an environment that blends data science, service design, software development, ‘customer’ research and gamification. It’s also an incredibly chaotic 2-hour session where I’m not sure the fusion model gives any benefits as the online cohort get siphoned off to do activities together – we might as well be just taught separately.
The Postdigital prep has been really fun. Had a good debate with some of my colleagues about the concept this week. It was interesting that they all had stories of young children who exhibited frustrations that the ‘real world’ didn’t interact like the virtual did. We hear about cyber-bullying and how our more impressionable communities (i.e. teenagers) are struggling with reconciling online experiences with the offline world. It’s really made me think about what it is like to be truly digitally native and how a lot of our assumptions about human behaviour might not hold true in the very near future. Are we now post-Nozick where most people would ‘plug-in’ to the experience machine than not? What does this mean for those who can’t?
- Prep for Toolbox – read a lot of content around the themes of poverty, inequality in work & labour, healthcare, policing and surveillance, resource flows and built infrastructure. Focused more on work & labour. Added quite a few of the texts to by TBR list (as if it needs to be any longer).
- Toolbox 2-day intensive – reviewed with classmates (colleagues?) concepts of inequality; the different disciplines and thought processes behind our understanding of inequality; how data is used to highlight, hide and generate inequality; how geography and time can give different perspectives on inequality.
- Prep for Postdigital – read about what Postdigital is (‘beyond digital’) and some methods of studying. Quite liked the statement ‘simple clear descriptions don’t work if what they are describing is not itself very coherent’ [After method, J. Law pp2]. Aligns with why I didn’t think a purely economic background / approach to poverty reduction is appropriate. Thought about things that are already potentially ‘Postdigital’ like money, shopping, entertainment etc. Look forward to hearing about how to really investigate this.
- Interdisciplinary Week 2 & 3 – had to write some thoughts on a Ted Talk about what interdisciplinary meant. Found the text explaining difference between disciplinary, multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary useful. Made me really think about the difference. It seems so obvious, but I guess it’s a good reminder to not assume everyone has the same way of understanding the world and what is ‘obvious’ might not actually be so.
Still no idea on a project, though as we have to pick a topic for the reflective essay for Toolbox I’ve been thinking about the PIP (Personal Independent Payment) system here in the UK. It is designed to finanically support those who need extra assistance, such as with a physical or mental disability. It’s a system I’m familiar with as my mother has MS and has required support on-and-off my whole life. I’ve recently had the (dis)pleasure of helping her renew her claim.
I came to the course interested in more general cash transfer programs like UBI or MIG, but for now PIP could be an area to consider while I explore if there are ways I could look at other cash transfer programs. At the end of the day it is a cash-transfer program designed to prevent vulnerable people from falling into poverty.
I should also be re-asking myself: Why do I want to even study cash-transfer programs? Fundamentally I believe that we cannot ‘go on’ in our current form. We need to change the current financial system drastically as it is causing so many existential crises: climate change, social division and unrest, poor mental and physical health outcomes for individuals etc. We literally won’t survive with our current system and a part of me believes that UBI could be the lifeline we need – though I appreciate this is far more complex of a solution to consider for nations that have a large informal economy or have a highly individualistic philosophy. More exploration needed.
Hi Rhi, I feel like we need to have more direct discussions – UBI is something I have been more interested in lately and I also share some similar sentiments about other things you mentioned. Thanks for sharing your personal stories through your blog and when you contribute in class. I hadn’t considered the post digital course – but those are some interesting insights so I may have to reconsider. I know my teenager dislikes online school classes and prefers a good old phone call to communicate (although it may sometimes come with video). I think it’s interesting how people resist technology and digital in some ways and in other ways it’s the only way to go! One example I can think of is the tons of photos we take now using digital devices so we can get the right image. Back in the day, I remember we had only 24 shots on a roll of film and we never knew until we got through the whole roll of film, then had it processed, whether we got the perfect image. I much prefer digital in this case, but I miss not having printed photos around to share. For me, I dislike drawing on a tablet – give me charcoal or pencil and paper and I am in my element.
Hey Darcie – this is really good to know that you are also interested in UBI. I’ll definitely reach out to you in the next couple of weeks for a chat once I’ve got the bulk of my assignments in. Meeting others who are also wanting to look into or similar systems it is a big part of why I wanted to do a MSc! I liked your comment about how we reject digital in some forms but not others and all of your examples – it resonated with me too as I prefer an e-reader for books but still prefer to write notes rather than type them. I love that your daughter still talks on the phone, I do worry it is become a lost art in someways. Hope your week has gone well 🙂
Hi Rhi, firstly I love the yellow theme. It’s so refreshing to see on a page visually and has my creative senses tingling 🙂 I like that in each blog you reflect on your how your thoughts and feelings shape where you are at and where you would like to be. With the programme and life in general being pretty busy, it’s easy to otherwise cruise through.
Coming from a banking background, I certainly agree that there needs to be radical change in the way the current financial system works. However, I have had limited exposure to banking structures beyond the West. For example: I’ve heard how drastically different Islamic Finance in the way it works, but when I joined the Bank I worked for, they’d just discontinued the proposition because it wasn’t profitable enough. That being said, I wonder whether there is some benefit in comparing cash transfer programmes across markets and jurisdictions?
Thanks for calling out the yellow – it’s a ‘happy’ colour for me so I think I’m trying to trick my brain into associating this process with good vibes!
As mentioned on our group call your thoughts on the comparisons across jurisdictions for cash transfer programs is super useful – sometimes when trying to reshape a system looking at how others work is a first step and I hadn’t really considered this yet, so thank you.It’s certainly a whole different kettle of fish trying to create a new welfare system in somewhere like India where a significant portion of the population isn’t even ‘in’ the system!
Thanks for exploring the ‘why’ behind your interest in cash transfer programs. The existential crises undergirded by the current dominant financial system is also what motivated one of my research projects, but I ended up coming at it from a different angle: the role of money creation in fuelling unsustainable environmental and social extraction. Because money is created when private banks lend out interest-bearing debt (where only the capital is created but not the interest), this system requires perpetual exponential economic growth (to keep up with interest payments), which ultimately drives ever increasing social and environmental extraction. This led me to look at alternative types of models, such as mutual credit systems.
We’re going to learn a lot more about mutual credit systems, UBI, and other kinds of cash transfer systems in Inclusive Society (aka Sandbox), including inviting expert practitioners to discuss with us. But let me know if you’d like a sneak peak at that part of the reading list. 😉
What are the kinds of methods you think will be feasible and enjoyable to you? For instance, you might approach these cash transfer topics via a larger comparative analysis as Maryam suggested, which would imply desk research and maybe also some zoom interviews. Or would you like to rely mostly on new empirical data? For instance, a few months of participant observation and user interviews within a particular cash transfer programme. This would have implications for time and travel and make some geographies more practical than others. Have a think about it from this perspective to see if it helps narrow down the kind of study you want to do (and where).
Also – what happens when cash transfer programmes are digitised? Could this be a way of welding together your initial questions about advances in data processing, measures of poverty, and cash transfer project impact indicators?
Thanks for the commentary Juli and also the insight into some of your research. I’ve made a note to add your study to my tbr – it resonates with the discomfort at the moment with the current political narrative being so focused on ‘growth’ and it’s genuinely unsustainable aims. Nothing can continuously bloat, even the best guesses on the universe is that it is expected to stop expanding at some point.
Please do send across the reading list if you have time, that would be really helpful 🙂
The steer on the methods is also super useful, I’m giving it a ponder and will look to include some thoughts in a future blog.