Winter School Diary

The Head of the International Laboratory for Social Integration Research at HSE university, Elena Iarskaia-Smirnova, was responsible for providing the theoretical background. She informed the listeners about the sources and problematics of universal design. The development of universal design reached its peak in the 1970–1980s, along with the intensification of social movements struggling for the rights of people with disabilities. At the time universal design was being narrowed to physical objects available for all people with disabilities, without any adaptations or specifications. In the 2000s, the notion was re-examined, and began to include various areas of people’s lives, such as public sphere, virtual environment, etc.

Ronald Mace formulated the key principles of universal design: equality, flexibility, simplicity, visibility, acceptability of an error, little effort, appropriate size and space. The most important principle is justice: not only the starting positions must be equal, but also the probability of the final results. Nevertheless, in postmodern society characterized by fluidity and diversity, the notion of universal design was often criticized, as considering all the needs can be difficult when developing universal solutions. What some people need may be uncomfortable for others.

After the theoretical part of the seminar, practicians took the floor. Natalia Mazunina and Ksenia Kiryanova told about their research project called Easy to Visit. People with disabilities participate in this project and use their personal experience to evaluate the convenience of public places for persons with reduced mobility in the city of Moscow and Moscow Oblast. For instance, according to their research, the Gorky Park is accessible only at 55% for PRM. Among the problems that affect the quality of leisure, they paid specific attention to slippery wooden ramps without handrails, the lack of drop, high curbs, etc.

The lecture was followed by discussions in small groups – the participants of the Laboratory discussed the possibility of creating an absolutely “universal” design that would involve an open environment ready to hear the voices of people with diverse special needs. To achieve this, it is important to build communication with socially vulnerable groups and to ensure their visibility in public sphere. However, therein lies another problem: what if the inclusion of certain individuals would lead to the exclusion of others? So, in a present moment, universal design is regarded as a debatable notion, which will be further discussed during the following meetings of the Laboratory for Diversity Studies:

'Universal design is like the holy grail that knights strive to find, to achieve this ideal. Is this a myth? Most likely, it is not. This is more like an idea opened to criticism and upgrades' (Elena Iarskaia-Smirnova).

Director of the Center for Theoretical and Applied Political Science of the RANEPA Vladimir Malakhov spoke about the processes that preceded the criticism of the policy of multiculturalism in Europe. In the post-war period, Europe faced a labor shortage, but attracting immigrants solved the problem. In many countries, the authorities mistakenly viewed the influx of migrants as temporary. They did not pay enough attention to the integration of migrants into society with a long-term perspective, which led to the isolation of migrant communities. Against this background, the Council of Europe, in the 2008 «White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue», changed its rhetoric by introducing the term "interculturalism".

However, interculturalism should not be viewed as an alternative to multiculturalism. These terms are too general to determine which practices should be abandoned to solve existing problems. Vladimir Malakhov disclosed the vulnerability of these concepts. They assume a simplified view of culture as a closed system and cultural identity, which is determined through the correlation of an individual with a certain group. However, now a person can construct his own identity, and culture is a network of narratives that are in constant interaction with each other.

The second speaker, Artem Sløta, spoke about the autonomous non-profit organization of social and cultural programs and projects "Children of St. Petersburg". It helps children of immigrants to overcome access barriers to education and medicine for successful integration into Russian society. One of its work principles is “breaking the hierarchy, not dressing up in costumes”. Artem explained this by the fact that flirting with folklore instead of active actions often leads to the reproduction of inequality and the suppression of problems.

The topic was developed during workshops in small groups. Participants recognized the need for equal dialogue in the public sphere. We must strive to ensure that it is conducted between individuals, not cultures. The absence of relevant terms, the existence of different optics for the same events and the political context that sets the vertical may become obstacles to its development. The question of what privileges and experience a person should have in order to represent the interests of migrants (and other socially vulnerable groups) also remains open.

Sergei Sokolovsky, the chief researcher at the IEA RAS (Institute of Ethnology and Antropology, Russian Academy of Sciences), spoke about the legal peculiarities and contradictions of the status of indigenous peoples. 

Indigenousness is the property of 'being native.' In the legal context, its carriers are identified as 'indigenous peoples.' Their main distinguishing feature is the lack of desire for integration into modern civilization. There are two models for understanding indigenousness. According to the cultural-economic model, indigenous peoples are distinguished by their traditional way of life and an appropriating economy: they are engaged in hunting, gathering, and fishing. The chrono-territorial model is based on the principle of primordial population. In other words, we are talking about the earliest population or peoples living in the territory before the appearance of the colonists.

In different contexts, indigenous peoples recognition policies are implemented differently. For example, the UN distinguished self-reference as a key principle of recognition - representatives of such peoples should identify themselves as 'indigenous.' However, they can already be integrated into the modern society and not depend on the resources of the natural environment. In this case, they have no need for special rights and guarantees, which the legal status of 'indigenous people' gives. In practice, recognition policies are often inconsistent and Russia is not an exception.

Sergei Sokolovsky brought up several topics for discussion at the seminar. The most controversial was the question of who should be the subject of recognition as an indigenous people. The listeners concluded that this question cannot be answered unambiguously. At first glance, considering the community as a subject of recognition seems to be the most promising, but it may entail the construction of enclosed groups. It is also important to consider the diversity of cultures. Thus, it is necessary to have a diversified representation of those who claim the status of 'indigenous people' in the first place. Avoiding a unified system, which is formed under the influence of only one optics, will take into account their specific interests.

The debate on new ethics has been updated with the movement against sexual violence and harassment #MeToo. It is not so much about the 'renewal' of the ideas of moral and morality, but about the 'novelty' of the situation itself. A popular conversation emerges, in the center of which lies rethinking the right to violence and abuse of power. New ethics can be defined as a change in social norms in a space of uncertainty and lack of reference points. Global trends became the prerequisites for its formation. They are associated with gender and feminist agendas, new sensitivities, the development of an intersectional approach, etc.

At the same time, there has been a conservative turn against the expansion of women's sexual and reproductive rights. It is discursive pressure towards a return to the 'natural order' and traditional values. Conservative ideas benefit the state, and those in power refuse to accept norms that undermine their right to dominate. Therefore, the new ethics is causing fierce controversy, both abroad and in Russia.

Unlike the United States where the concept of 'harassment' is spelled out in legislation, in Russia the 'new ethics' is not formally specified, but instead is formed by the latest news stories – such as scandals and rumors. Moreover, English words, such as stalking or gaslighting, are typically used to describe such things. The lack of native terms makes it more difficult to understand such phenomena.

Daria Litvina has written about how the European University at St. Petersburg has developed mechanisms for resolving conflicts resulting from abuse of power. The need for such mechanisms arose in response to a precedent that could not be resolved on the basis of the existing provisions set out by the conflict commission. In the process of setting out new policies, the working group sought to avoid obscure legal terms, and to determine the extent to which the university is allowed to intervene.

The discussion regarding methods of control and abuse of power in various contexts was continued at the seminar. It was determined that clear and transparent regulations are needed. However, simply endorsing the paper text of the regulations is not deemed enough. Implementing them in practice is of paramount importance. It is also necessary to take into account the unique circumstances of individual cases. In addition to putting forth regulatory documents, the EUSP endorsed the Ombudsman’s approach, who participates in the mediation of each conflict. This approach was fruitful since it’s incredibly difficult to predict and enshrine in documents the wide variety of scenarios that may arise as a result of abuse of power.

Sociocultural ideas about a person's life stages influence how individuals construct their lives. Social institutions provide regulation and control over this process. For example, they determine at what age a child should go to school, and what sanctions await his parents if this does not happen. In modern culture, 'youth' and 'old age' have a hierarchical organization and often become the subject of academic comprehension. But what is in between?

Adulthood is the middle and longest part of a person's life. It is associated with gaining access to benefits that are not available to representatives of other age categories. There are three main approaches to determining it:

1. Adulthood as an achievement. This interpretation of adulthood is associated with the passage of certain events - education, work, separation from parents, the emergence of your own family and the birth of children.
2. Adulthood as a personally experienced status. From the point of view of this perspective, it is supposed to gain independence through financial self-sufficiency, taking responsibility for one’s life and autonomous decisions.
3. Adulthood as a recognition, which is expressed in a collective assessment of the fact or process of the individual becoming 'full-fledged.' In this case, he is granted autonomy and the status of a full citizen.

Growing conditions have changed significantly in the modern world. The boundaries of adulthood are being erased, as are the trajectories of achieving it. This was also confirmed by the seminar, where the participants attempted to reflect on their age status.

Nonetheless, adulthood acts as a guideline for children, adolescents and young adults. However, the old age that follows is often inclined to be perceived as pathology, since a healthy young body seems to be a more valuable capital.

Alexandra Shchetkina spoke about the «Alzrus» Foundation, which helps people with dementia. Dementia is a syndrome that affects a person's cognitive functions (memory, thinking, behavior, orientation in space, the ability to perform everyday activities). Elderly people with dementia are often forced to stay alone at home for their own safety. In order for them to continue to participate in social life, the foundation created the Alzheimer's Cafe «Forget-Me-Not». Tea sessions with workshops and dancing are organized for guests. This case shows that under favorable conditions, older people can also socialize and develop despite body limitations.

The earliest definitions of disability were related to a religious context. In various cultures, people with visible physical features were perceived as a threat or, on the contrary, as the chosen ones of the gods. However, in modern society, prevails the medical model, in which disability is a biologically determined, individual and static condition. The disease is associated with all the problems of people with disabilities, therefore intervention with the aim of 'treating' them, 'correcting' them is perceived as a blessing. The main disadvantage of this model is in determining the personality of a person with disabilities through his diagnosis, which leads to social consequences. Perceiving the individual human being as a «sick person», society excludes him from many social practices and roles.

The social model of disability is an alternative to the medical approach. It is focused not on the property that distinguishes one individual from others, but on the relationship between this property and its perception by society. Disability is defined as a characteristic that is imposed through exclusionary practices. Thus the intervention should be directed not at transforming the body of the individual but at adapting the environment. It should become more accessible for people with disabilities so that they can fully participate in social interactions.

Today's understanding of disability is connected with a shared identity. It brings together people with different health conditions in solving common problems. For example collective associations make it possible to fight against ableism – discrimination against people with special needs. Maria Rumyantseva shared her experience of participating in the 'Inclusion' theater projects. People with different types of disabilities are involved in their preparations. Through creativity they gain new experience, socialize and change public opinion about themselves.

During the seminar the participants of the Laboratory discussed other strategies to combat ableism. In particular, the issue of employment of people with disabilities was touched upon. Most organizations are either not ready to adapt the working environment or do not know how to do it. A contradiction arises between the declared openness to inclusion and real practice. To resolve it, it is necessary to hear people with special needs and stop evaluating them in terms of costs and benefits.

Poverty is a notion that is linked to the standard of living criteria. It is measured with regard to the ability of individuals to satisfy material and spiritual needs. There are several approaches that allow us to determine the boundary between 'poor' and 'not poor' people.

In the optics of absolute poverty, outside observers (the state, international organizations, or expert researchers) play a key role. They define an indicator of poverty that corresponds to actual aims and circumstances. It is absolute and does not correlate with anything, which distinguishes the logics of an absolute poverty from that of a relative poverty – the indicator of a relative poverty is calculated by comparison with the average living standard in a particular country.

In its turn, subjective poverty is fundamentally different, it is determined not by standardized methods, but by individuals’ subjective assessments of their capabilities and limits of poverty. In other words, a person may not be considered poor in the logic of absolute or relative poverty, but still feel anxious about their current financial situation. That is why the level of subjective poverty allows to evaluate the social tension in a particular society.

The methodological variety leads to the fact that, because of different approaches, by 'the poor' we do not always mean the same people. They may encounter deviations from the standard of living, but can be protected from the lack of money, and vice versa. Different methods should be used considering the tasks of the implemented policy, which are not always solved within the framework of the same logic. This also applies to measures to address poverty problems. In some cases, categorical aid will be more effective; in others, a targeted one.

According to statistics, the poor are more and more frequently stigmatized by society, which leads them to the social inclusion. Maria Efremova, Leading Research Fellow at the Institute for Social Policy of NRU HSE, explained why helping the poor is not so widespread in society. During a socio-psychological experiment, it turned out that people prefer to help if the causes of poverty are external – for instance, when an individual was laid off due to the bankruptcy of a company. On the contrary, if they become indigent for internal reasons (for example, when a person is fired due to systemic delays), people are less inclined to helping behavior. It is explained by their need to believe in a just world where everyone gets what they deserve.

On the meeting of the Laboratory, the participants discussed the ways to attract people’s attention to the problem of poverty. It is important to show that the aid provided to representatives of poor groups is significant and can really lead to qualitative changes. At the same time, people should be constantly reminded that everyone can cross the 'poverty' line, regardless of external or internal nature of the causes. Mass media, in turn, should represent the poor more accurately, as the media is often responsible for creating stereotypes that negatively affect the society’s perception of socially vulnerable groups.