 the major fund of UK research and innovation. And we're really excited that everyone's here to sort of share with us this journey that we've been on for the last two years, which is now culminated in the release of this report paper called Towards a Holistic Migration Research and Strategic Agenda, Integration, Partnerships and Impact. We want to briefly introduce that paper today. We thought as a way of celebrating it as well that we would have a panel with some of our key partners that we've been working with over the last couple of years. And then also we wanted to show you another one of our outputs, which is a short kind of beta version of a migration research support tool about which I'll explain more later. Before I start, I just want to go over a few logistics. We have over 90 people registered for this event. So we know that usually about half of those actually turn up still. It's a lot of people. So it's not really possible to keep everyone's microphones on and have that kind of an interactive discussion, which we would love to have had if we could have been in person. One of the, I guess one of the benefits of us being online has been that we can include people from around the world from all of these different conversations and those we haven't been able to speak with so far on this kind of virtual platform. But it does mean that we have to kind of work things in a slightly different way, which is to keep people's microphones muted and with the exception of the panelists who will be speaking, you'll be able to see videos there. We'd ask you to keep your video switched off if you can, just for the bandwidth, if you're not a speaker. But we still really want to hear from you and we'll be facilitating Q&A discussions using the chat function. So along the side, the right hand side of your screen, you should be able to see the chat function. If not, then go down to the bottom of your screen and click on the chat bubble and write your questions as they come up. You don't need to wait for a person to stop speaking in order to write your question. We're looking at it all the way, all the time and whoever's facilitating that particular part of the program will be putting questions together to set to the speakers. So please feel free to take part in that, to contribute in that way. We should also make you aware that we're recording the whole presentation, including the chat function. So just be a little bit careful about not sharing information that you're not happy to or that others would not be happy to share on a public space. We hope that's all right, that we're recording it. We want to make it available for people who because of time zones or other kinds of scheduling issues are not able to be with us live here today. I think that's about it. Let's get into the program. First of all, I wanted to introduce to you our team. Some of you, many of you have been part of at least one of the migration conversations that we've been holding over the last couple of years. But for those of you who haven't, I'm Laura, I'm the head of the team. We're together with Kavita Data and Elaine Chase. Kavita is at Queen Mary University of London. Elaine is at University College London and the Institute of Education. Helene Tumras is managing our slides today and she's our Zoom master, I guess we would say. And has been supporting the project as well as Luisa Brain, who's our project coordinator and Jennifer Alsop, who is not with us but has been with us for most of this journey. She's now moved on to take up a position at the New Migration Institute at Harvard. So we very much consider her still part of the team. Next slide, please. Can we see the next slide? Can you see the next slide now? Helene, are you there? Yeah. I'm gonna just go into the next slide then we'll be able to see it in there. There it is, sorry, that's all right. So yeah, no, back a slide, there you go. We want to just kind of orient you to the work that we've been doing. We were commissioned, we won a competitive bid from the UK Research and Innovation led by the Economic and Social Research Council and the Arts and Humanities Research Council to develop a shared strategy for migration research. The idea being that the ESRC and AHRC could usefully look at the synergies between their different migration research portfolios and try to bring them together but also try to look together at where there were remaining gaps, either geographically in terms of subject or in terms of the ways in which research got funded. So that was our first kind of brief and we decided to turn that into really a research question and a research process. We thought we could, we're all migration researchers, we could sit in our offices in the UK and write such a strategy but it would be much more interesting and richer if we could take us few of this kind of puzzles that we see and bring them to a wider audience by hosting a series of migration conversations throughout the world to focus on these key areas and I'll get into the more the substance of those but we were really motivated by wanting to know what do people think about some of the divisions that we see in our field between migration and forced migration, between research and different kinds of geography. So South Asia has a particular kind of a dynamic as does East Africa. How do those, what do those different dynamics look like and how do they relate to each other? What are we really interested in? We wanted to understand more about how the arts and humanities and the social sciences work both individually as well as together and how migration studies, which is largely by definition an interdisciplinary subject, how it engages with those other disciplines and what are some of the issues that arise when that kind of meeting of disciplinary backgrounds comes together. We're also really interested in the ways in which policy and practice work together. I think we can say that most of us involved in migration studies have some sort of policy focused outcome as at least if not the primary reason that we do the research then a real key kind of sub-objective of the work that we're doing. And we wanted to see what kinds of innovative ways of having policy and practice, of engaging with policy and practice could be found in the body of research that's going on there. So the migration conversations involved artists, researchers, policymakers, practitioners, whole museum curators, a whole range of different kinds of people to try to get, bring out the richness of those kinds of questions. And so that's why in the video we explained that we saw this as an experiment in co-production really from the start. We've at every stage tried to encourage this feedback that goes on between members within a room when a conversation is happening but also from one conversation to the next. We go to the next slide. We started off our conversations in Delhi in 2018. And in rapid succession, we've been to I think 12 different places. So we were at in Beirut, Brussels, Delhi, Glasgow, London, Medellin, Columbia, Johannesburg, South Africa, Nairobi, New York, Thessaloniki in Greece for the International Association for the Studies of Forced Migration and Barcelona for the Misco Conference which is more of a kind of migration policy oriented conference. And each conversation had a slightly different flavor depending on the kinds of issues that its participants are engaged in, the kinds of things they're thinking about, the challenges they're facing and the makeup of who came, who was in the room. So as we mentioned, there's this really quite wide ranging group of people who are taking part each time. We also had these kind of feedback loops where we have reports on each of the meetings which you can see on our website. We provided those back to the participants of the conversation as drafts and they fed into them. We also tried to have a kind of thread that went from one meeting to the next so that there was some kind of continuity and there was someone who could say, well, the last time a conversation was held in Medellin, for instance, now we're in New York, we can have some discussion about what was discussed there and how does that maybe influence some of the conversations that we're having at the next meeting. Next one. In all of these conversations, we had sort of three main areas of focus. One was around substance. We were looking at what are the gaps and the priorities in migration research. It was about what kinds of subjects are newly emerging, what kinds of things have less research going on in them than others. What are the interesting areas in which there are clusters of research that are happening where we could in a sense capitalize on or benefit from bringing it together and sharing those experiences and amplifying the effect of the kinds of research that's going on. So that was the first goal of the conversation. The second was to think about partnerships of all sorts of different kinds, to think about how we might strengthen and build better interdisciplinary, international partnerships, how we might think about early career researchers maximizing the opportunities and benefits they have from working with more seasoned, more experienced researchers, how to try to break down some of the divides between so-called researchers and practitioners, if you like. So a whole different series of ways in which we've been looking at partnerships and trying to find more equitable ways of working together and trying to really to use migration studies as almost a trailblazer to try to think about more broadly ways in which international research can be worked on more effectively and in a more collaborative nature. So we'll have more to say about that when we get into discussions about the paper. And the third thing is really about thinking about how to bridge the divide between migration research policy and practice. As I already mentioned, this is really something that I think most researchers, migration studies researchers go into, but we wanted to see what are the opportunities and what are the lessons that can be learned from the ways that's being done in different parts of the world. We also along the way, did some experimentation with using the arts to create degenerate impact. And so we worked with our friends and colleagues at Positive Negatives, which is a small group that works on research-based ideas to turn them into artistic productions, whether they're comics or animations or films or something like that. And so we did what was new for them as well, a stop-motion animation called Life on the Move, which turns into a very short film. And we entered it in the AHRC Research and Film Awards and it won for the best social media film, which we're very pleased with. There's us at the award ceremony and at the very end of this whole launch event, we'll send you out by playing that video in full just just the three or four minutes long. Today, just wanted to talk about what the plan is for today. So we are wanting to present the strategy really briefly. The strategy is right now going on live on our website. And if it's not up there yet, it should be by the time we're finished with this event. It is quite, of course, it's long, it's rich, it's got a lot in it and it feels like we're cheating it a little bit to just talk about it in a few minutes. So please, I really would encourage everybody to go and take a look at it and let us know what you think. We've done lots of feedback, consultations with all of the members of the network that have participated in conversations as well as a special event here in London with people who were new to the process. But we're still wanting this to spark a conversation and we hope that it will continue to receive feedback on it and generate discussion as we go forward. So we wanna do that. We also wanted to celebrate this network. This network now includes more than 450 people who have physically sat in a room with us and participated in these conversations and many more who have read, who have engaged with us on social media and who have been following the work of the team. So we asked four of our colleagues to join us in a panel discussion. Ranabeer Samadhar from the Calcutta Migration Research Group, Catalina Sanchez from the Moseo Casa de la Memoria in Medellin, Alexander Alenikov from the Zollberg Institute at the New School in New York and Alah Shahabi at the University College London who is also part of a major funded ESRC funded center called the Relief Center which operates out of Beirut. And we'll ask them to just give us 10 minutes of thinking about some of the challenges and major themes that they're facing, that they're dealing with and thinking about in migration studies right now. There'll be a chance for some back and forth, some interaction and question and answer. So please, as I said, write your questions in the chat boxes as we go along. And we will take you through a little bit as well of this on migration research online tool that we have in very few minutes and just briefly say something about our plans for the future. So just wanted to, that's the kind of by way of an introduction to set things up for where we're going now. And I'm going to hand over now to Kavita Dutta who is going to talk us through the strategy paper. Thank you. Great, thanks Laura. I love it and hello everyone. I hope you and your families are well and safe. So as Laura said, I'm just going to provide a brief overview of the migration research strategic agenda that we're launching today. So in terms of the overarching aim or the ambition of this agenda, that is to inform the direction of migration related research across the social sciences and the arts and humanities in the UK, in Europe and in other countries in the global north and the global south. And we provide a framework for considering the thematic priorities and migration research funding, the effective promotion of more equitable and efficient research partnerships and pathways to effective impact, both for researchers as well as for UKRI to maximize the engagement with and the impact of its migration research portfolio. In terms of methods, a range of methodological approaches and tools underpin the strategic agenda which are grounded in the principles of collaboration and co-production which are very important in the ways in which we frame this whole project. So we undertook a review of existing ESS, RC and AHRC migration research portfolios and we did this alongside discussion with the key informants at both of the research councils. We held 13 global migration conversations that Laura was speaking about and the three key strengths of these is just briefly to reiterate was the number of people that we were able to consult with. So some 450 participants, the diversity of these participants in relation to the fact that we had academics, practitioners, policymakers and representatives from migrant and refugee communities in each of these conversations. And finally, the fact that in each of these conversations, again, we had new, rich and embedded and situated sort of dimensions to discussions that were held. We were able to secure additional funding through the course of the project to host a workshop in Johannesburg to establish co-principals for equitable partnerships in relation to migration research and the Johannesburg principles as they're now called included in the strategic agenda. And we also throughout the whole process did a review of literature on migration research and policy. So to ensure that we had feedback at all stages, we had a workshop to discuss draft versions of the strategic agenda and we also received detailed comments from several peer reviewers and from the AHRC Strategic Advisory Group. So what you see before you today or what you will see very shortly is a thoroughly embedded agenda. In terms of the key recommendations, these are divided into three sections and the first of these relates to thematic priorities and the cross-crating priority of the strategic agenda is to support research which offers innovation in relation to four dimensions. The first is to advance conceptual understandings of migration and mobility. The second is to expand the geographical foci of research. The third is to promote interdisciplinary collaborations especially where disciplines are not working very well together or we're not working very well or not sorry, not working together very often and fourthly to break new ground or to promote methodological risk taking and the substantive thematic foci which have emerged in relation to this around issues such as who migrates, why people migrate, how migration is experienced with a specific emphasis on education and health, migration and securitization, international relations, governance and methodological innovation. With regards to equitable partnerships, we promote or we recommend a reflexive approach to partnership building and this requires we argue a collaboration at all stages of research from agenda setting to research design to research to resource allocation and distribution. In order for this to be realizable for equitable partnerships to be realizable, we need further investment in professional development and capacity bridging. When we talk about investment, we need to think about investment in time which is what we really need in order to build relationships as well as an investment in resources. We need to promote a meaningful engagement with migrant communities and we need to have a fair allocation of resources and recognition between the arts and the social sciences. So our key recommendation to the research councils in relation to equitable partnership building is to build institutional capacities and research leadership and to offer technical advice to support applications. Finally, in relation to impact, we recommend that research should have clearly identified desired impacts, that we should enable different partners to work towards different impacts or different impact outcomes across disciplines and across geographies. So that's really important to recognize the diversity of impact goals within a particular research project. We need to engage with a wide range of stakeholders, again, right from the inception of the project that was reiterated again and again through the migration conversations and as well as through the other workshops that we held that we need to think about impact from the start to the finish. We need to allocate adequate resources in order to realize impact in project design and we need really sort of importantly to recognize the potential of arts-based methods to reach new audiences. And here our key recommendation to the research councils was to ensure adequate funding for impact-related activities. So that's really a whistle-stop tour of the strategic agenda. As Laura said, it's much more detailed and much more nuanced and we would encourage you all to have a look and to have a read through it. But what we're gonna do for the next 10 minutes or so is to just respond to some of the issues that are coming up or to engage in some kind of conversation through the chat function. Yes, so I'm unmuting the team. Louisa, you should be able to... Hi. So we'll go into the Q&A now. So feel free to type into the chat function and we'll pick up your questions. The first one comes from Patricia. Thanks for your update. Laura, I wonder if you want to comment on Patricia's note around more funding towards the Global South as a place of knowledge and not only origin of migration. So I'll hand that over to you to speak to you if that's okay. Sure. Thanks, Patricia. As you know, probably most of you in our conversations have tried to make clear that we're really interested in having more research funding made available in a variety of different ways in so-called developing countries. And with my hat on as the Global Challenges Research Fund Challenge Leader on Displacement, I can say that that's a major focus of GCRF activities. So GCRF money comes to UKRI, but it's part of the UK's overall not 0.7% of its budget that should be given to development. So as much as possible, the spirit of that money is that it should be spent abroad in not just abroad, but in countries that are the focus of development. And so that includes doing more research in those places, but it also accrues to the questions of who does that research? How are budget structured? Who are the principal investigators? Who are the co-investigators? What kinds of research structures are fostered? And so if in the report, we talk a lot about the need to kind of decentralize, if you like, decolonize research budgets so that much more of those financial resources and responsibility and the structure of these research endeavors is kind of devolved to the places in which research is being done. We're also really key, really eager that this network that we've set up shouldn't just be about people in different places talking to us in the UK. It's also about different people in different places talking to each other across those spaces. Whether it involves us or not doesn't really matter in some ways. So the idea that our colleagues from Calcutta can speak directly to our colleagues in Nairobi or in Medellin is that's a signal of, I think, the success of this network. I think it goes beyond just the strategy paper itself. But it's a really, really good point and I hope that it comes across as a very strong kind of thrust of the paper that we've put out. Thank you. So the next question is more around partnerships. So Kavita, I might ask you to answer this one. That's from Lisa who is commenting on partnerships with those faced with resource constraints such as language issues, as well as the challenges of facilitating South-South knowledge sharing. Great, thanks, Louisa. Language issues came up repeatedly. Lisa, throughout the conversations, both in terms of sort of the different issues in relation to translation, but also in relation to our, the fact that our knowledge production is very much based upon or premised upon the literatures that are written in English and therefore sort of the lack of access that Northern researchers also have to two literatures that are written in different, in other languages apart from English. So that is definitely something that is taken up in the strategy in terms of the importance of including, for example, funding for translation and for sort of thinking about the language that underpins knowledge production and what that means in terms of the limits to the knowledge that is thus produced and therefore having these kinds of collaborations that are North-South, that are South-South open up bodies of work to all of us and so they increase all of our collective kind of capacities to engage and really engage in nuanced work. Thank you. The next one is a comment from Mukta in who works on internal migration in India who has experience working with migrants themselves in research. And yeah, something we comment on in the report is this as well. I wonder if Elaine, you wanted to speak to that point. Yeah, sure. So methodological innovation again came up hugely throughout the different conversations and that was a place where we could really think about the bridging between the arts and the social sciences. And I think it was in relation to not just modes of engagement but who gets to be involved, who gets to have a stay. The types of methods that can be used to engage people more widely and engage a wider set of constituents of people and also that people have choice over the modes of engagement in research as well. These are all sort of themes that came out throughout our conversations. Really, really important point and something that we've really pushed for in the strategic agenda. And I think following on from that point comment from Shashi around I guess the challenge of doing this kind of innovative work and kind of meeting requirements for quite time-bound projects. So I don't know if you wanted to add anything or if we move on. So the next one is around knowledge sharing from Paolo. So this is around which questions are important. So tensions that might arise between questions that we might have around who migrates, why they migrate, versus more policy-focused questions. Migrants and asylum seekers have themselves. Have we experienced this tension? Laura, I might hand that one to you to answer if that's okay. Yeah, sure. Hi Paolo, my colleague at SOAS. Certainly, it's a really important question. I mean, I think it's hard to speak on behalf of the entire migration studies community because we all enter into it with different kinds of interests and objectives. And we know that some research lends itself to policy change more than others. Some is not so much driven at that. Some is, as you suggest, really about trying to understand the processes migration, whether that has a policy outcome or not, it's still an important research endeavor. And so, yeah, we have tried to speak to that and also to make sure that in our recommendations about what should be funded, it's not just dictated by what are the hot policy topics. It's also about what are the key questions that researchers feel need to be looked at, whether or not they then have lead to a potential final research application, if you like. So what if you're an archeologist and you're doing research on the prehistoric migration patterns? Is there a policy output of that perhaps? But perhaps not, perhaps what's really interesting there is just understanding what those processes were as a contribution to the field of archeology and migration studies. So, and there are many, many other kinds of examples, but hopefully there should be a broad tent under which a lot of different kinds of research can, will recognize itself in the ways in which we've characterized it. So I hope that you'll feel that, but I hope you will also come back to us and tell us what you think of that. Should we move on to our panel discussion? I wanna make sure we have enough time for the contributions of our colleagues. Okay, great. So it's my great pleasure to be chairing the panel today. Laura's already introduced our panel, but in terms of running order, so they're all going to give some reflections on the state of sort of migration studies from different vantage points. We're gonna start with Ranabea Samadhar from the Calcutta Migration Research Group. Then we'll move on to Catalina Sanchez Escobar from Musea Casadela-Memoria Medellin, and then on to Alex Elena-Coff at the Zollberg Institute on Migration and Mobility in the New School, New York, and then on to finally on to Alah Al-Shahabi from UCL's Relief Project. So if we can start with Ranabea, each of our speakers will speak for 10 minutes. As Laura mentioned earlier, if you've got questions, if you can feed them into the chat space, that would be great, and we'll pick up those that we can. I'm gonna have to be very strict on time because we have a limited time. So each speaker will have just 10 minutes, and then we'll move on to the next speaker, and then we'll pick up the questions after all our speakers have given us their contribution. Okay, so Ranabea, big welcome. Can I hand over to you two? Please start. Yeah, so good afternoon to everybody, and participating to some extent in the global conversations of the migration leadership team. I benefited a lot, and I recall it because as I was listening to the reports and your reflections, I mean, I am still having conversation within myself and with myself as to what the present crisis means for those who do migration research, and by which I mean the pandemic or the epidemic. And what I should do in these 10 minutes is to maybe signal three or four points which I think force me to think of my work or other others who are working probably in a somewhat new light, and therefore I should very briefly comment on three, four points. One is that we have always seen that refugees and migrants, we always think of it in that manner, and that's the right way to think. And at times we think that we understand the refugee condition probably better if we have a good idea of what migration is all about, forced migration, et cetera. But on other occasions, we think that the migrant situation is better understood once we have an idea of who a refugee is and what a refugee life condition is. So in some way, we are back to the Hanarans who idea of the human condition, what is the condition? Which perhaps because legally and all that divides the groups into migrants or forced migrants and refugees, but in the situation that we are in India, where let us say by a conservative estimate at least, let us say four to five million people are stranded and they're trying to reach their destinations, their points of origin, completely shut out by conditions of lockout and reports are coming out each and every day. I'm quite sure the world is aware of what is happening in India. It's an unprecedented thing. And people are noticing that after partition we never had such a kind of long trick of the migrants and they are crossing 1500 kilometers, 1200 kilometers. So I was invited few days ago to write a paper on the root causes and I wrote where probably I shouldn't have used such a direct kind of bit of a rude reply in the sense that I'm not interested in the root causes anymore even though I've worked on it, simply because can you ascribe crisis to some root cause? The way we always think of root cause schematizes our migration research in a manner that doesn't take into account the whole notion of crisis. So while there was a comment I was hearing that people have thought that probably we give too much importance to crisis and we should have given importance to let us say structural origins and all that, but I do think that crisis is something like a break that gives us a window that offers us an opportunity as a social scientist or for that matter intellectual activists to look at migration completely from unanticipated light. So that would be my first comment where I still think that the crisis also enables us to see in India what we are happening is a surge of solidarity, different kinds of how would you put it militant philanthropy at grassroots level across the length and breadth of this huge country, exactly what you saw in your continent in Europe, I mean, in 2015, 2016. You can't understand it from a gradualist point of view. You have to have the idea of a break in the whole process of these kinds of migratory apps where the migrants actually claim autonomy and they speak with their feet. The fact that they come out in millions and the fact that they are ready to die, ready to, you may have heard of all the reports, actually give us a new meaning to the whole idea of autonomy of migration and I am completely aware of its conventional meaning, the discussions and all that, but I do think that crisis actually lends to the concept of migration, to the act of migration and new meaning and new historical significance. So that's coming. Number two is that I was also thinking and I was in a way questioning myself, why did I not give the question of public health the importance that it deserves in understanding migration? And given that I am coming, I stay in a post-colonial country, I am aware of the colonial history, yet we always connected migration with females. We connected migration with direct state, colonial violence, et cetera, et cetera, things which are known to any good researcher. But why is it that a public health crisis never featured in our work prominently? And whenever we talked of public health, we talked of refugee camp and public health, health of the refugees. In other words, there is a public health and there is something to be discussed on refugee health, what issues of health, et cetera, et cetera. So we assume that migrants are not part of the public. And the way this whole idea of a public health is a very bourgeois idea that developed, let us say from the 19th century. In India, if you see and I have been now, I've started working on the plague act of 1896, which was triggered by the outbreak of plague. And in those days, it actually profoked a migration of about 300,000 people. And today we have a public health crisis, which is being managed by the Indian state through a law and order approach and not through a public health approach. And the approach is based basically on the National Disaster Management Act. It's available online. You can see why I'm saying that the dominant approach to migration control and migration regulation has been law and order, even when a crisis appears in the form of a public health crisis. And I think we have to work much more on the whole question of public health to see how this idea of the public, the way develops actually excludes or differential includes different groups. They could be minorities, they could be refugees, they could be migrants. And public health suddenly has become one of the most, how would you put it again? The critical optics are the very crucial window through which you can see what is happening in the society. And public health crisis, again, this should have been discussed by us with its deeper significance. And had we done so, I think migration scholars in India, even though I must say they have risen up to the occasion, we are trying to do what we can. But our theoretical and intellectual preparedness for whatever was coming should have been much more. I think the third point is that, and this is the, I will end in another two, three minutes, which is that, I mean, I am recalling Foucault's discipline and punish where Foucault has this great chapter, the great confinement. Foucault actually speaks that how in the 16th century, France, when the plague breaks out, what does the government do? And if you look at the description of Foucault or other kinds of writings of the time, or even let us say, Susie Dai did his own work on the Peloponnesian War, again, you will see governmental technologies have changed, but they haven't changed much. In a way, the way migration was tackled in the 16th century down in France, and the idea of Foucault, that the idea of confinement and refining governmental technology, techniques of surveillance, techniques of disciplining people, confining people, supplying them with food items and punishing them if there is a plague victim in the family, et cetera, et cetera, we can go on and on. And Foucault says that the governmental technique to control leprosy and the governmental technique to control plague were different in some ways, where I join issue with him, but I think that there is so much to learn from him in the sense of the historical continuity of governmental techniques to control and regulate migration and people who are on food. And my last point is that in all these, migration is something which invariably compels you to be an amateur geographer, even if you aren't. But on the other hand, the notion and the idea, which is almost a naturalized idea that borders and boundaries are created by migration and mobility has something to do with the boundary making exercises. Again, I think should be, you know, inquired into deeply precisely because in this case, when we are thinking of mobile diseases, actually, the term mobile diseases is, how would I put it? It doesn't justify itself because you have to see it from the other point of view why do we call a disease a mobile disease? And what makes it mobile? Does it because it crosses a national frontier boundary? Is it not that within a country diseases are always mobile? And the idea that a virus in its effect can be homogeneous is standardized, seamless, that it would have the same effect that it had in China or for that matter in United States or for that matter in one state of India and it should be, this actually is a very political concept and I'm reminded with which I shall end is that this in this great book, The Emperor of Maladies which is a history of cancer, the author actually writes that it disease first wins politically in order to win medically. And I will end here. Right over there. And so really, can everybody hear me? Yeah, some really interesting reflections I think on migration studies in the context of the current crisis. And I'll give a plug to an amazing collection of work that Ranabe has coordinated with colleagues at the Kolkata Research Institute which is available online and an amazing set of reflections on the current crisis and the impact on migrant communities and the implications for migrant research more generally. I'd really, really recommend it. I'm gonna pass over swiftly now to Catalina Sanchez Escobar. Welcome Catalina and over to you. Thank you. Hello everybody, thank you for the invitation. It's a real pleasure for me to be sharing these small ideas here with you. I'm the director of the Museo Casa de la Memoria House of Memory Museum which is in Medellin, Colombia. And we have the pleasure to hold the last year conversation. And today I just want to invite you to three small things. So I think in listening to Ranabe here, I think it is very important to invite people to use the techniques we discussed in the migration conversation in our actual crisis and the importance of using the outcome for what is happening right now I want it next in our context. And also I think that it's very, very important to make a connection between experiences and situation in different continents and see how we can learn about each other. Making us more reference about what had happened in Medellin and one of the big issues I want to expose and which was very important in the Latin American conversation is how we need to think in long-term solution for IDPs and how these measures need to be extensive to the new Venezuelan immigration context in Latin America. What was interesting in Medellin conversation is that several migration related issues of specific importance to Latin American region among the synergies and differences between international and international migration, environmental and development in just migration and questions of terminologies surrounding big meat booth and survival and how this plays out over time. But what was very, very important and I want to concern in this idea is how some key thematic strengths of knowledge production in the region which were raised related to the question of history and memory bringing arts and culture to the general public to have a discussion about migration and his many forms. And also the importance of translating the value of the region's main reach normative and conceptual instruments into international discussion more broadly. And I was taking what Laura has said before about art and culture as part of the research. And this is, I think this is the main idea that we want to share today because actually for the conversation we made a migration laboratory and we thought about it as an open space to bring together college students, your leaders, artists and cultural managers who have an interest in migration issues. The idea was to get a word and let them to have a better understanding of the community's perception about different types of migration using an interactive methodology. And also what is very, very important is that it also aims to gather this opinion and perception as well as allowing the attendees to have a horizontal and conversation and a participatory dialogue with academic and practitioner experts on migration. And these artistic practices were used as a tool to have people to generate and prepare discussions and reflection. And I think one of our main ideas here in all the conversation that we have here is how we link art and culture to the research and how the issues or their resource are really, really useful to taking accounts for expert and for policy makers. I think that in our migration conversation and for we need to use social media, our practices and digital content. And also we need to think about new impacts of our outcome in terms to have an impact beyond the academic and policy sector and get into people which are related to migrants or even migrants themselves. And I think this is very, very important for us to have organization and academia united but also to hear the migrants to understand what they are really having or living. In Latin American case, migration issues are linked with the lack of material condition of development of public services. And in Colombia, particularly migration, especially IDPs are connected with the re-indication of justice through a reparation in a context of armed conflict. And right now we are dealing that with culture and with art. So we think that it is important to think in terms of migratory studies to introduce and to take account how art and culture can help us to increase and to understand more. Also it is important to talk about the importance to have an active participation of the migrants in our action. We need to involve them as an active part of the discussion and the goals. And in addition to that, we need to create political social initiative that allows them to have a visualization of their voices and concerns, leaving the example of what we do, for example, in Casa de la Memoria Museum that we are always working with with community. I think that migration research that not just require us to count migrants and document their experience, but also to explore how migration shapes communities. And vice versa. And I think that to finish with my intervention because what I wanted to do was having the idea that Rana said before is how always we have discussed how we put it into practice in nowadays crisis. So how COVID crisis make us to use all the techniques and the methods, but also to invite researchers, experts and policy makers to take into account arts practices needs to be integrated into projects rather than include as an ad or an ad to communicate outcome. It's not that a way to communicate our resolve is a way of creating new knowledge because as we have experienced the art allowed us to talk about what is hard to say. And it's a way to express not only our feelings but also the experience that can help us to understand what's going on and what really is needed to know and to be applied for the migrants. And just to finish, I think that is, I think that we have to ensure that the integration of our practices with proposal is reflected in both the budget and research design, that the contribution of artists to research is fully recognized and acknowledged sometime in research outcome and publication and that artists and culture outputs can be benefit from deep and reciprocal engagement with the research. So also I think that foster strong collaboration in the region between our arts, culture and knowledge are very useful. And here in Latin America and in Middle East, I think that the idea and the relation that we have with culture and we are for us and how we think migration helped us to make some culture outings stronger is an invitation and a reflection that we want to invite you from what we have said at the conversation in the Museum Casa de la Memoria last year. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Catalina. I think that's such a nice overview of the way that the arts have been used, the modes of engagement, democratizing participation. I'm raising these big questions about what is impact? What is the research that we're doing for? Who is it for? These are really, really important questions. In the discussion feed, there are questions raised about how we can actually widen the ideas that you've implemented in Medellin to other contexts as well. So hopefully we can pick up some of that in our discussion. Thank you. Okay. I'm gonna hand over to Alex now. Alex Zelenikov from the Zolberg Institute. Many thanks, Alex, for joining us. Over to you. Well, thanks to you. I'm really delighted to be here. And congratulations to the team on really a remarkable report in terms of the worldwide consultation and the comprehensiveness of the topics that are discussed. Zolberg Institute was pleased to be one of the sites of the meetings. We were able to bring together scholars and also members of the New York arts community, which is a very vibrant community, of course. I wanna make just a comment on two topics here. There's so much to talk about in the report here, but let me start with just two. And I wanna think about the word mobility. So the title of the report Towards a Holistic Migration Research Strategic Agenda makes sense because we define ourselves as a set of scholars interested and policymakers interested in migrations and scholars and activists in the field see this movement. We see it everywhere. Some of it forced, some of it voluntary, but we see it as a constant in our world. Some people say it's what it means to be human is to be able to move and to move. Political philosophers talk about migration as a fundamental right of a fundamental human right. This has led some people to begin to talk about a mobility bias in our fields, our various fields. And I wanna say here that I share this concern that we sometimes lose sight of the fact that the vast majority of people in the world don't move. And not because they can't, but because they don't want to move for obvious reasons. They wanna be close to family. They wanna be in cultures that they are a part of and grew up in. They wanna live with religious communities. They wanna have jobs related to work that others have done. So for all these kinds of reasons, 95% of the world's population will never cross an international border to move elsewhere. And a very large number won't move very far from their initial home. So we need, I think, to focus on this vast majority of people who don't move. Migration studies has to think about immobility, both enforced immobility, which can be quite harmful, but also the choice to be immobile. And I think the report, I'm just pulling a sentence out of the report that says it would be beneficial to understand better the motivations and basis of decision-making of those who decide to leave and those who decide to stay. And obviously I'm underscoring that point. Now, there are obviously policy implications for the fact that many don't move and many choose not to move. And I don't wanna talk about that. I wanna think more about this conceptually in the following way. So I start with the assumption that's borne out by the research here. That the decision to move is largely a decision to improve one's or one's family's economic situation. Those who move move to places where they can do better, where they can find a job or get a better job, where they get higher wages, where they're gonna be part of better systems of social protection. Doesn't mean people don't move because of conflict and fear and those refugee movements are substantial, but the vast majority of people who actually choose to move and live elsewhere do so for well-being reasons for economic well-being. So from this, I mean, you could see movement as an exercise of a fundamental right, the right to move to where one can live a more robust life, but I wanna flip this a little bit and say that I see increasingly, I'm thinking about movement and mobility as a marker of disequilibrium in the world. What I mean by that is that if we really had a world without great social injustice and without great global inequality, which in fact is our world, far fewer people would seek to move because they would be, as we say, generally wanna stay where they are and comfortable and able to take care of themselves, but movement is largely a function of these great inequalities around the world. And from this perspective, borders are not just a limit on the human right to move, to settle anywhere because we all possess the earth and common in some ways of our humanity, but I view borders primarily, their function is primarily to preserve privilege. That's why we have borders, is people who have wanna keep people out who may wanna come in and benefit from being in that society. So it's a different view, I think, of borders, perhaps than the way we talk about them somewhat. Now, there's a danger in thinking about it this way that that leads obviously to people saying, oh, so immigrants are coming to take our jobs or to get social benefits from our generous welfare state and we don't wanna do that, but really what people are saying there's, we don't wanna give up our privileges. Those kinds of statements are recognitions of the privileges that borders protect. And the answer here is one answer that we hear sometimes from the advocate community as well, actually all people crossing the Mediterranean should be seen as refugees and they're actually forced migrants and et cetera, but and even I think in the movie that showed up front here, we need to show that migration is actually a largely mixed flow from many kinds of motives. And the argument then would be that migration benefits destination states as much research demonstrates. I guess the phrase I would use here is that migration really is an opportunity multiplier, both for those who leave and for the places they arrive in and actually for the sending states as well. So I try to flip this in two ways. One, the first C migration as an indication of immobility, I'm sorry, as an indication of disequilibrium, but the actual movement itself is an opportunity multiplier. The second point I'll do quickly here is related to the first and it goes to the new drivers of migration which the report talks about. Ron Abir briefly mentioned that we're gonna have to add COVID probably to that list. I'll probably say something about that. In the questions, but I wanna talk here about the effects of climate change. And we know that hundreds of millions of people are going to move due to environmental events over the next few decades, much of it due to the climate crisis. Movement due to climate is different than the traditional refugee flows we're used to that are based on conflict and violence in a couple of respects. First, it's more likely that through important measures, we can actually help people stay home who wanna stay home. It's difficult to do that in situations of conflict and violence, but with climate, there actually are adaptation measures that could be taken and resilience measures that could be taken that would help people stay home despite the fact that climate is changing around them. And this implicates the role of development actors more in terms of thinking about root causes than has been done in the past. Secondly, we know that most of the movement due to climate will be internal. That's true for some refugee flows as well as a lot of twice as many IDPs as refugees in the world. But it also means that the refugee system is not the best place to think about this new kind of new driver of migration of climate change because it's largely gonna be internal. And thirdly, most important, and this is what ties to the first point here, is that there's an obligation of the international community to develop a system and processes to assist people who'll be moving. And we don't have that system now. We have a climate discussion that's broken into sometimes it's a refugee issue, sometimes a migration issue, sometimes it's put in the bucket of the climate change research in the UNFCCC. And there's no central place, there's no one agency, there are no set of norms or practices that handle climate mobility as a whole. And why would the international community have a particular responsibility here? I think it goes beyond the general view that the international community should step in when there are humanitarian crises around the world as it does when there are earthquakes or large refugee flows due to conflict. And the reason is just this, is that most of the people move, most of the people adversely affected by climate change are living in countries that were not responsible, were not for the causes of the climate change. Those are happening largely in the global North elsewhere. And so you have a part of the international community creating the harm that is falling on people in some of the situations we're least able to deal with that. And in that situation, it seems to me there's a responsibility and obligation of the international community to step in. And this way, I mean, it goes back to this point I made in the first point that we're living in a world of great global inequality that movement is a function of that inequality and the structures that maintain that inequality. And part of that inequality has been states that have been able to develop and create these increases in CO2 levels that are having impacts elsewhere. So if the first point is conceptual, the second point I end really with a policy recommendation here that the international community needs now to think hard about what kind of international structures processes, maybe in support largely of regional structures can deal with this coming environmental mobility. Thanks. Thanks very much, Alex. That we covered a lot of ground there, but I think something that what your contribution has captured is the shifting nature of migration studies that the constant need to rethink things conceptually, rethink things at a policy level and rethink things methodologically as well. And we've tried to sort of capture some of that need for flexibility in the strategic agenda, but it's a big challenge. And we constantly need to be on our toes rethinking how we approach these things. So thanks very much for that. And then finally, I'm going to hand over to Ala, Ala Alshabi from the Release Center at UCL. Welcome, Ala. Thanks so much for joining us. Hi, Elaine. Thank you. Hi, everyone. Thanks for inviting me to speak with such a wonderful panel. And congratulations on this report. That's very thorough and I'll point to sections of it that I thought were particularly worth noting. I work in the Relief Center, which is a five-year multidisciplinary project funded by the ESRC, focusing on prosperity in Lebanon in the context of mass displacement. You may know that Lebanon has quite a large population of refugees, about one in five. And the way this project was curated was thinking about displacement as context. So it's not a refugee project as in just focusing on refugees or the refugee condition. It's focusing on general prosperity and development in Lebanon and displacement being a feature of the current global system. So it exists. How do we then think about development in the context where people are forced to move? And in that sense, we think of displacement. We talk about displacement more than migration and expulsion, you know, to Eke Sasaki assassin, that expulsion is a feature of the relocation of labor and resources around the globe. And with increasing climate change, of course, that migration is this condition or feature in which we have to think about everyone's prosperity and everyone's development. So Relief has been a particularly interesting project because it's long-term, I mean, it's five years. It's rather large. We have around 25 researchers and that space and scope allows us to have taken experimental approach with our research. So we have architects, social engineers on the team, anthropologists, educationalists, and we're running lots of programs. And these programs are inclusive. So they include everyone, both Lebanese and non-Lebanese whether they're Palestinian refugees who've existed in Lebanon in camps. As refugees since for over 70 years or the more recent wave of refugees that have come from Syria since 2011. And in that sense, Lebanon as a country has always had to deal with a refugee influx. Whether that's a crisis in the sense of a crisis is something else, if the crisis is recursive, is that a crisis if it's always there? If wave after wave of refugees are moving because of capitalism, because of war, because of colonial rule, because of neo-colonial rule and so on. So in that sense, Relief is sort of held up as an example of this kind of project that takes a broader view on refugees and uses displacement as a lens into wider problems in society. Now, having said that, I wanna just point to a few features in the report. And what I particularly liked was the focus on not just understanding the context of migration, the who, what and the how, but changing the terms of the conversation, changing the terms of collaboration and how we conduct international research, how we partner, who we work with and understanding that with funding and with these kind of collaborations there's an inherent level of inequality that gets expressed within these kind of international projects. And in that sense, I thought the report was really good in highlighting that. And this comes from kind of a particular wave in the UK, which is to think about decolonizing the university, decolonizing research and what do we mean by that? And this then comes to the root of what knowledge production is within these kind of global collaborations, which is fantastic if you have, the way funding is moving into encouraging global collaboration, moving resources that's being sort of channeled through higher education to the two other countries in the global south that they're working with, this I think has forced us to really think about how do we become equitable within our own research practices? So when we also then come to think about impact, impact then becomes about the research process itself, the process of knowledge production as well as the outcome. So it's not just a summative, it's not just what are we gonna produce at the end of this project, it's also about how we do our research. And in that sense, I felt the report highlighted certain elements of decolonial practice quite well, issues around acknowledging and recognizing inequalities, power inequalities, capacity inequalities. When you wanna partner with someone in the global south where their institution that may not have the capacity to deal with the bureaucracy and the paperwork and the administration, I thought that was kind of really good to point out. And it's something that we face in practice. And the fact that the research is sort of always curated and designed around the Western university schema that it begins here. And then we think about who do we add as partners? That I think the report has highlighted that. I think in the course of your conversations, how that practice is sort of changing or needs to be encouraged by donors as an issue to think about constantly. On that front, I wanted also to add particularly, bringing it back to the current challenges we're facing at the moment, even though, you know, migration is a sort of mode, is a mode of our condition or a reflection of our human condition. Yes, we are facing a global crisis at the moment. And what does knowledge production mean for us in the face of the current global pandemic that we're facing. And here, you know, to echo us to your hall, crisis can be a moment of reconstruction. This has forced all of us to stop and rethink our research. You know, in the beginning we froze, we thought, you know, what could our research possibly do to help anyone in the situation to rethink about what impact is, what is my role as a researcher to bring about positive change in the current, you know, quite debilitating environment for everyone. And to understand that in the countries in which we work, it's particularly difficult at the moment, you know, in Lebanon at the moment with a million people and refugee camps, particularly the question of hunger, the question of energy and water and all of these things being exacerbated. So the current crisis has worsened already difficult and challenging situation. So we've had to really kind of rethink our, you know, we paused, we had to rethink what we're doing and actually, what do we need to continue? So a lot of the work actually gets kind of sort of not necessarily reconfigured, but rethought, but re-emphasized. So one of the projects, for example, that I was working on that got stopped was conducting a citizen assembly on the energy transition. So this was highlighted when you have a longer term project that allows you to experiment and think about things as emergent to act and change your research kind of agenda around the issues that emerge. So one of the issues is energy in Lebanon, you know, 40% of the state deficit that's really has caused its bankruptcy, I would say at the moment and the currency crisis is the fact that, you know, 40% of the state budget is going to fund energy subsidies. So it's also energy, for example, is a topic that affects everyone. I mean, people living in refugee camps are not even connected to the national grid. So what does it mean to be off grid? How do people then have the means to get basic services, you know, water, food, energy, things like that to meet their quality of life. But this is also a problem shared by the Lebanese themselves. So we were planning to conduct a citizen assembly, for example, which got halted. The need for it is still there. We just can't because of the situation at the moment and how do you then begin to have a public space and a public space and a public conversation online, digitally, if that physical presence is muted and doesn't exist for the time being, at least I hope it doesn't last too long for everyone's sake. But other really good examples, for example, we were always running an online moops, online courses, which our team at the Institute of Education have been designing. And particularly when this lockdown happened, the relevancy of that became even more apparent and urgent. So we've been running courses on how do you run online courses? So even though we were running courses on other topics, now it became training people at the Lebanese University on how do you run online courses. And finally, in terms of this collaboration, it's what do you do in times like this, where, for example, even our partners are really struggling. AUB, which is the strongest university in the Middle East. It has a revenue of 800 million, one of the oldest, one of the strongest, is facing a 60% revenue cut. The colleagues that we partnered with always had long-term contracts of themselves facing precarious situations. We don't know if they're going to have a job by September. Within a month, they'll be announcing major cuts. So in that sense, it's a difficult time at the moment. It's very, very difficult. And institutionally, this pandemic is going to have major implications institutionally for us. And so in terms of donors, it'll be how do we reconfigure our funding to address this challenge. Thank you. Thanks so much, Ella. I mean, that really captures some of the real-time challenges of conducting research and collaborative research in the current context and being able to respond to those. And how do you respond to those collaboratively as well? What's the kind of process of just deciding and defining how we respond? These are really, really important questions. We have very little time, and there's been an amazing discussion going on in the chat. So I'm just going to pick up a couple of the questions that are coming out. But the transcript of this discussion will be available along with the recording. So people can perhaps pick them up and continue the conversation. There are a number of questions that relate to, and perhaps I'll pitch this at you first of all, Catalina, that relate to the arts and participatory engagement and how you can shift away from things not being tokenistic. So the arts, yeah, everyone loves the arts. How do you work in a way that really unsettles power, structures, and modes of engagement and participation? Actually, we can talk about the experience from the museum because this is the way we work. All the contents we do at the museum talking about victims. Actually, it's a memory museum from the Colombian conflict, but from the voices of the victims. So we did a civilized all the victims under a story. So what we wanted to do at the laboratory last year was to introduce this methodology and the techniques we normally use. And it's really a real participation. We are always working with community. If they are victims, if they are migrants, it depends on the subject we are working on, but we can do it. We are doing workshops or we do labs, or we can do also some focus group. And we are always taking their testimony, their experiences into account. And some of the practices are after being part of the exhibition because as the museum, we do some temporary exhibition. And this year, for example, it's about migration, force migration, and we are starting to have this kind of conversation. And now we are doing it virtually because normally we do it in physical and we do some real art workshops. But our experience from the eight years we have been working with, it is very, very useful. And everything we can learn from them, and you can see it in the publication and the exhibition is just to learn how to do the technique and how to involve really the migrants and the arts and the culture practices in the research and how you have to be clear of what do you really want to have and to ask, and then let the art flow and show, but artists and not also artists, but cultural organization and artistic organization, the more of them, not all of them are professional. I have led us to learn a lot of things. So I think the idea is just to gather them, to talk with them, and to make together like the project of what we really want. And for us, it's just not symbolic. We really work with them. And they see themselves reflected into our researchers or our exhibition. So the first is the trust. So you have to have a really strained relationship. So it's not something you just call and have them to answer your request. But it's also to start having all this close relationship and start working with them, having discussion and spaces where they really can express and you can really learn and win a lot from their experience. And we can have this discussion and share our experience from the museum. But while we try to show you last year, show us that it really, really works that way, having into account and making them a real participant of the elaboration and the research itself. Thanks, Catalina. They're really good points. And talking about the kind of length and engagement, these aren't one-off sort of snapshot chats with people. It's very much a kind of investment in time and resources over a period of time. Great. One of the questions that's come up in the chat is, is the crisis an opportunity to rethink the notion of public or of the public from the perspective of migrants or migration? And maybe, Ranabee, you might like to respond to that one. I think it's a very significant question. And my brief comment would be that, yes, crisis is a kind of window to understand, but the methodological implication of this idea is that we have to also unpack the notion of the crisis itself. I mean, if you take the way, again, in India, but elsewhere also to the extent I get reports, that governmental response to what you can say as a public health crisis has been broad-ranging from financial reforms, structural reforms, bureaucrat administrative reforms, everything. Why is it so? Partly because the health crisis is always posed before us as a crisis of life and crisis of the entire nation, entire society, which is preceded significantly by a massive financial crisis. So you can see that states almost everywhere will now use this, the public health crisis, to address, quote-unquote, other crisis. So when I say crisis, I meant that we have to understand the significance of the whole idea of conjuncture of certain things, conjuncture of certain moments that then produces what we call a public health crisis. And the other comment linked to that is that, again, it also speaks of the method that we use in our research. Why is it that certain things to which we were used as acknowledging, as I said, gradual and almost natural presence in our life, but why is it that something which is called public health, and if you divide this phrase into public and health, you find that actually it has now one of our other competing notions, let us say community health. I'm not saying community health is a very great idea or it's a better idea than public health, but the genealogical understanding of this whole idea of public health, which now faces a crisis. So it's not merely a crisis of our own lives, but it's also a crisis of this whole idea of public health, which had been institutionalized in several ways, whether in India or for that matter, in European countries, et cetera, et cetera. So I think it is important to understand the notion of break in our researches, the idea that a genealogical mode of understanding the colonial roots and how the Indian state as far as India is concerned, this idea of public health begins, we eradicated malaria. Malaria was the greatest scourge. Millions of Indians died each year and the most massive migrations happened. So we end with recordings, in fact, something when I was reading those remarks is, for example, Mike Davis, this fascinating book about the late Victorian Holocaust and the making of the Third World, where he speaks of the Elinofemines and then the kind of plague outbreaks and the malaria outbreaks from 1870s, 80s onward and then releases massive migrations, if he speaks of China and India and I think Brazil, but India and China, these are the other things that I recall very well. And so what is it that lends health to a notion of crisis and therefore the challenge to the seamless idea of the public we had got used to? We only thought, oh, refugees had to be included or the camp has to be clean or they have to be given access to certain things, but we never interrogated the notion of public health itself. Thanks very much, Ranabea. I don't know about anyone else, but I could carry on having this conversation for the rest of the day, but unfortunately we are out of time now. I hope you can continue the conversation. We're gonna talk about continuing the network and engagement later on before we close. But big, big thank you to our panelists and for all their input and for all the discussion that's been going on. It's really, really fascinating. Thank you. Thanks. Great, thanks. Thanks, Elaine, and thank you to all of our panelists here. Makes me miss these conversations that we've been having and want to start them all over again. But, and also it really is a great advertisement for this network to keep it going and to keep these conversations going. So we'll come back to that in a few minutes. I wanted to just really briefly, before we finish up, share with you another product that we've been working on with a team of website web developers, which is one of the challenges that we faced as we were looking at UKRI's massive portfolio of funded research projects is trying to figure out what actually fell into our remit. So we developed this tool to think through and to help navigate UKRI's migration research. And this could be useful for the councils themselves of which there are several council members on the call here on the line, but also for researchers. So right now, for instance, there's just recently been announced a GCRF Agility call on COVID-19. So if you are thinking about applying to that, you might want to know what else is going on in this space, what else is going on with regard to economic migration, refugees, whatever it is. So I just want to take you through this really briefly and see if this maybe helps. It is not yet public, so you're getting your very first view of it. I hope you can all see it now. But it will be publicly available on the UKRI website very soon. So this is just a quick, really whistle-stop tour through and we'll let you know when the link is up and you can play around with it yourselves. But what this tool enables you to do is to do a bunch of navigation. So here by theme, by geography, by discipline, by funding, and by the leave councils. And you can do that in a variety of ways. It sort of cross-tabulates itself. So here on the left side, obviously, is the graphical representation of what you're looking at, which are migration themes. These are key words that when people applied for grants, they, there's usually a place that says, what key words would you identify with your project? And so the words that people put in are the words that appear here. So if the first question will be, why isn't this word in there? Because it hasn't been identified as a key word by an applicant. On the right-hand side is a variety of different kind of cross-tabulation variations you can look at. So theme, discipline, country, region, status, whether it's active or it's a finished product, leave council, funding mechanism, the years. So I'm not gonna go through all of that, but I just wanted to go through the major tabs here just to show you in a way how something like this could work. I wanted, for instance, to look at all of the projects on demographics. I could just go here and then click on this. It will give me all the different subcategories and then even within that, the list of the different projects. And again, if you click through with this, which I'm not gonna do now, it'll take you to a brief summary of the project that was supplied by the applicant when they sent in their application. Another way of thinking about that is to look at the geographical spread of the migration research portfolio. In this case, you can go to a particular country and I don't know why the zoom isn't working. It is working, it's just slow. And find out, for instance, since I've got it right in front of me, what's happening in Egypt and it will tell me which two projects related to migration are taking place in Egypt and you could pick multiple countries as well to see. So if you're working in Columbia, for instance, we were in Columbia and we thought that this was an under-researched area and we found there are actually quite a lot of UKRI projects that are being funded there. So which doesn't mean that that's not a reason not to keep funding, but it's a great reason for those who are involved in research in the same places, perhaps on different themes to possibly come together for certain things or for researchers on similar themes across geographies to come together. So it's a way of trying to help create different sub-communities within migration studies. There's also a focus on discipline. Again, this is a massive list of disciplines and this is just because these are the boxes people tick when they apply for grants. But so just to make it simpler, let's just click on anthropological categories here and it will just show you a sub-sector that within the migration portfolio, there are these 22 different projects which are related to anthropology, that which may be useful if you're an anthropologist or if you're not an anthropologist and you're looking to make linkages with people who are in that field. This is a kind of a distribution of the different funding that is associated with migration. You have to take numbers a little bit with a pinch of salt just because what counts as migration funding, some of it will also be related to climate research or to conflict research or to labor studies more generally or whatever it is, but you can play around with this and you can separate it out by different councils or different areas. Again, I won't do that, but just to sort of show you what's possible here. And then the final thing is the leave councils and these here, the only tags for this, there are seven research councils, but three of them tag migration projects, ESRC, AHRC, and what's called the BBSRC, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council. So within that you can see, you could click through to looking at these 222 projects, but you could also define it down more into a different, a set of just looking at demographics, for instance, what kinds of things are funded by which kinds of councils. So that might be useful if you're thinking about, you have an idea of a research project and you're not sure which council to apply to in their open call round, for instance, you could see that AHRC and ESRC both fund a whole range of different projects related to migration and demographics. So that might be a suitable place to look. So again, this is really just a really whistle-stop tour of this tool. I should give a shout out to Claire Heffernan, who's the head of the London International Development Centre, who first gave us the idea as we were applying for this grant. I think it was a great idea and it's still just got a couple of little bugs that need to be worked out, but then very soon it will be publicly available and it's potentially could be used, it could be expanded into other areas as well. I'm not gonna, I won't open it up for a discussion really about that, but if you have specific questions about how the tool works, you can certainly get in touch and let us know. We're just about out of time, but I wanted to say something about our kind of plans for the future. So we've finished our funding under this grant, but we really feel that we've created a really strong network which has so much potential to be used in a variety of ways. So we're looking at different kinds of funding sources that the migration leadership team itself might apply for in combination with some of our partners in the network. We'd love it if partners themselves found other sources of funding or other kinds of activities that they could do together that might involve us, but as I said previously, it doesn't have to involve us. And we know we will commit ourselves to keeping this as a sort of space for people to get in touch with each other to contact each other and hopefully to collaborate with each other in a variety of ways. And so if you're willing to stay part of the network, we'll continue to keep in touch with you. We also wanna really thank the Economic and Social Research Council, the Arts and Humanities Research Council and the London International Development Center who made this collaboration possible. It's been a really wonderful experience and we've all learned a huge amount from it. And just being on this launched call today and seeing all of the different people who have checked in from around the globe who've been part of this conversation makes me miss everybody even more and really look forward to future collaboration. So I just wanted to thank all of you who are taking part in this process with us, this experiment. I hope that it leads to really heightened research, more equitable research, new exciting research opportunities for us and for others to work on together. And that's really what I wanted to leave you on. We did want to just play out as we said at the end, we're just officially out of time but we're gonna finish off by just playing the video that we won our social media award for in research in arts, sorry, research in film awards this year. So we'll just play off that last video as we say goodbye to everyone but please do keep in touch with us, stay involved in the social media and let us know what you're up to and we hope that we'll be able to continue to engage for the coming years, thank you. Even though I was born in Yemen, I was of Somali heritage and was always treated as a foreigner. It's made me want to volunteer to help refugees but soon the same kids who had brought me became refugees themselves. I left with my family, boarding a boat for three nights that was built for 40 that carried 350. I just worked in a cafe with my father and that's where I met my husband. He came in for an Americana and left with my heart. After 25 years in Finland, I decided to return home. I opened a dialysis clinic that serves my whole country and region. Some of my generation still don't feel they belong in Europe and want to return home. Life in my village is getting critically hard so we left. And one night, my eldest son disappeared. A smartphone is why he left. His friends in Europe sent beautiful pictures that I don't own a smartphone. If I did, the Libyan kidnappers who took my son would send videos of them hurting him. I could not live seeing that. As a single mom, I struggled to bring up my kids and being a minority wasn't easy. So I decided to return to my motherland. There are many reasons migrants move and many different destinations worldwide. Migration is not a problem unless it is unsafe or forced. In fact, human movement has occurred throughout history showing our determination to thrive. To find out more about innovative research in migration and displacement studies and to learn how this animation was produced, visit our website. You can also join the conversation on Twitter. Thank you, everyone. Thanks for joining. Thank you so much, everyone. Hope to see you soon. Thank you.