You are on page 1of 10

31ST MAY 2017, 9.30 - 18.

30
UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER
SIMON BUILDING, 4.3
Oxford Rd./Brunswick Str. M13 9PS
IMPACT AND ITS DISCONTENTS: Ethnography,
Accountability and Activism
Simon Building 4.38, University of Manchester

Oxford Rd/Brunswick Str. M13 9PS

09:30 - 18:30, 31 May 2017

Programme:
9:30 10:00 Registration

10:00 11:00 Keynote Lecture: What Are the Social Sciences If Not Extractive Industries?
Gillian Evans (University of Manchester)

11:00 12:00 Panel 1: Accountability and Ethnography


Rebecca Williams (UCL): Yes, I got a PhD, but these people died: Reflections on anonymity and
accountability
Leah Eades (UCL): Whose Impact is it Anyway? Issues of Subjectivity, Power, and Hierarchy in
Fieldwork with Unloved Groups
Chair: Piyush Pushkar (Univeristy of Manchester)

12:00 12:15 Coffee Break

12:15 13:45 Panel 2: Impact, Knowledge and Action


Ben Eyre (University of Manchester): Why good works: thinking through giving (as a technical
process)
Timothy McLellan (Cornell University): The Temporalities of Outcomes Thinking: Impact and Audit at
an Agri-Environmental Research Institute
Brendan Whitty: Tribulations of a Randomized Controlled Trial: coordination, rigour and temporality
in a development project
Chair: Kristian Hoeck (University of Manchester)

13:45 14:30 Lunch

14:30 15:00 Photo exhibition


Skyler Hawkins (University of Manchester): Forward Together Not One Step Back!: Finding
inspiration, solidarity and power in North Carolinas protests
Anglica Cabezas Pino (University of Manchester): Here is my face: Autobiographical Portraits on
HIV
James Bradbury (University of Manchester): The Limits of Participant Observation: a view from the
political sidelines
Chair: Jasmine Folz (University of Manchester)
15:00 16:00 Round Table: Three Perspectives on Impact
Panayiota Vassilopoulou (University of Liverpool)
Carly Chadwick (University of Manchester)
Karen Sykes (University of Manchester)
Chair: Theo Kyriakides (University of Manchester)

16:00 16:15 Coffee Break

16:15 18:15 Panel 3: Anthropologists and/or Activists: Doing things with Ethnography
Laura Harris (University of Liverpool): Impacts and the Arts: Notes from the Field
Andreas Streinzer (University of Vienna): Myriad consultations. Anthropology and impact in austerity
Greece.
Anglica Cabezas Pino (University of Manchester): Please Exit the Academic Comfort Zone: Can
Anthropology Smell Like Dead Practice?
Joshua Blamire (University of Liverpool): Rethinking Impact: Politically-Engaged Ethnography with
the Liverpool Anti-Austerity Movement
Chair: Jos Fajardo (University of Manchester)

18:15 18:30 Closing Remarks: Stef Jansen (University of Manchester)

18:30 Wine Reception


Wine reception to be held at Sandbar, 120 Grosvenor Street Manchester, M1 7HL
Presentation titles, speakers and abstracts

10:00 11:00: Keynote Lecture


Gillian Evans: What Are the Social Sciences If Not Extractive Industries?
Inspired by the examples of Stewart (1996) and Weston (2009), this paper is an experiment in narrative form. It
portrays the 'cultural poetics' (Stewart 1996) of lives lived in and through experiences of poverty in contemporary
London and considers the potential of long-term participant-observation fieldwork, and the development of
relations of mutual obligation in the field, to create a critical, collaborative anthropology de fined by a politics of
mutually transformative action. The article enters into debate about the effects of changing structural inequalities,
which differentially impact on the post-industrial urban neighbourhoods of the U.S.A., the U.K. and Europe
(Waquant 2008; 2012). Waquant's work is taken to be a rallying cry for Europe and the U.K. to wake up from the
American Dream of neo-liberalism. The 'utter desolation' (Waquant 2012: 66) of life in the worst of the U.S.A.'s post-
industrial urban housing projects and, to an extent, in France, demands a reaction from and suggests (especially
post-August 2011 riots), that the time is now to debate how to prevent further deterioration in British cities. The
paper has two parts in conversation with each other. The first section is an experiment in narrative form and hence
the reader is asked to bear with and consider the fruitfulness of the departure from conventional scholarly form. In
the second part of the article academic insight is drawn out in more standardized form, with a more usual
engagement with literature, highlighting of relevant points and movement towards the formation of argument.
Gillian Evans studied social anthropology at the School of Oriental and African Studies before completing her
Master's and PhD degree in the Social Anthropology of Children and Child Development in the Centre for Child-
Focused Anthropological Research (CFAR) at Brunel University. In 2006, Gillian published an ethnographic
monograph, entitled Educational Failure and Working Class White Children in Britain, based on her PhD research
about the post-industrial docklands of Southeast London. The book generated national debate about the position of
the white working classes in Britain, and Gillian went on to publish further work about the relationship between
social class, race, ethnicity and multiculturalism in Britain.
Gillian held a Research Council UK Fellowship from 2007-2012 in the Centre for the Study of Social and Economic
Change (CRESC), at Manchester, and undertook a long-term ethnographic study of the planning and delivery of the
Olympic Legacy in the post-industrial East End of London. Gillian has now published a new ethnographic monograph
based on this research.

11:00 12:00: Panel 1: Accountability and Ethnography


Rebecca Williams: Yes, I got a PhD, but these people died: Reflections on anonymity and accountability
For many research ethics committees, the promise of maintaining informant anonymity is crucial to granting
approval. It is as though the altering of a name alters researcher accountability. Reflecting on ethnography
conducted amongst some of the most vulnerable members of British society, terminally ill undocumented migrants,
this paper asks what is in a name. In the UK, undocumented migrants are the only group to which publicly funded
end of life care can be actively denied; they often die alone and are buried unnamed. Situating the experiences of
these unnamed individuals alongside the ethical reasonings of authoritative bodies that allow for research to be
conducted amongst them, reveals how contemporary practices of anonymisation are deeply rooted in the colonial
enterprise of evidencing. In a very personal account of a researchers coming to terms with academic gain born out
of the almost unaccountable suffering of others, this paper asks that we revisit the impact of formalised anonymity
and calls for a reconsideration of its use in research approval. By demonstrating how current practices of anonymity
are related to notions of ownership, and inherently linked to issues of accountability, the moral implications of
formalised ethics can be re-examined. Raising questions over who exactly benefits from research sanitisation.
Finally, this paper argues that if researchers are accountable for giving accurate voice and representation to the
individuals and communities with whom they work, they must confront the power they hold in the giving or denying
of a name.
Rebecca Williams After a decade of working healthcare, specialising as a palliative nurse, Rebecca S. Williams is
undertaking an ESRC funded PhD at UCL, looking at end of life care provision for undocumented migrants in the UK.
With a BSc and MRes in Anthropology, she has previously conducted research in health service community
engagement, peer-led health initiatives, NHS referral process cost and patient experience. Her work engages with
critical theory in citizenship, representation and marginalisation in the practice of care.
Leah Eades: Whose Impact is it Anyway? Issues of Subjectivity, Power, and Hierarchy in Fieldwork with
Unloved Groups
My paper explores the utility of impact as a rubric in the context of anthropological research where the
anthropologist and the community they work with have differing agendas and goals. This is a subject that is
increasingly in my thoughts as I embark on a research project that will see me working with antiabortion activists,
although I am personally pro-choice. In the context of such research, the question of who gets to define and
measure impact and how is a complex one. Whom are we looking to impact: the studied community, or wider
society? What form should this impact take? And who gets to decide on these forms? Drawing on other
anthropologists experiences working with so-called unloved groups and the repugnant cultural other, I explore
the ambiguous nature of impact, which can be conceptualised as both an outcome and a mode of engagement. In so
doing, I highlight some of the notions problematic aspects, and draw attention to the inevitable processes of
interpretation and negotiation that arise when the concept is invoked in relation to the measurement of a research
projects success. I conclude by positing that the notion of impact requires further theorisation if we are to account
for issues of subjectivity, power, and hierarchy. This is particularly important moving into the future, as impact is
likely to continue to occupy a prominent position in funding and policy processes.
Leah Eades is a medical anthropology masters student at UCL. She is currently carrying out her dissertation fieldwork
in London, where she is investigating the role of biomedicine in the British antiabortion movement. Her research
interests span reproduction, science and technology studies, and applied anthropology. She also has a professional
background in science communication and is a Contributing Editor for Cultural Anthropology. You can follow her on
Twitter at @AnthropoLeah.

12:15 13:45: Panel 2: Impact, Knowledge and Action


Ben Eyre: Why good works: thinking through giving (as a technical process)
This paper addresses the role of impact in contemporary philanthropy in the City of London. Drawing on the
anthropology of 'good works' (Benthall 2012), I consider assertions that philanthropy is not 'just' charity but an
effective and appropriate solution to the problem of poverty in East Africa. The bold claims made for
'philanthrocapitalism' can be assessed critically when we take them seriously. To do this this, I think beyond
philanthropy's 'technical' qualities (Li 2011) by considering them as a departure point for analysis. I do this by
engaging with the French 'technologie culturelle' (Lemonnier 1992). Thinking about how 'good' works in this case
reveals a distinction that rests on impact. But this offers an ambiguous endorsement of philanthropy and points to
relations and processes that could unsettle the premises of this putative impact. Finally, I reflect on why
interrogating 'the good' works for anthropology, reinvigorating critique by embracing contradictions and
contestation.
Ben Eyre is a first year MAAR/PhD student in anthropology at the University of Manchester, funded by the ESRC. His
research focuses on contemporary philanthropy in Tanzania with a particular focus on technological innovation in
agriculture. His work builds on more than a decade of experience in emerging markets and impact investing, as well
as philanthropy, with a number of global funds and foundations.
Timothy McLellan: The Temporalities of Outcomes Thinking: Impact and Audit at an Agri-Environmental
Research Institute
You must become more outcomes focused, the global director for impact science told colleagues at the China
office of The Institute for Farms and Forests (IFF), an international agri-environmental research organization.
Responding to such demands from IFFs Africa-based headquarters as well as from donor organizations, scientists at
IFFs China office are now learning to do outcomes thinking. Outcomes thinking is a collection of techniques
including theories of change, impact pathways, and outcomes mapping that allow scientists to imagine a
pathway from research to targeted impact. Having devised these pathways, outcomes thinking scientists employ
audit or monitoring and evaluation (M&E) techniques to measure progress towards their planned-for impact upon
the world.
For IFF scientists in China, coming to grips with outcomes thinking has been a frustrating process. Central to these
frustrations is a temporal incongruity between outcomes thinking and conventional models of scientific knowledge
production. Through outcomes thinking, scientists imagine a future world they want to build, and then to make
strategic plans for bringing this world into being. This implies a mastery of the future an ability to shape the future
to scientists designs that contrasts dramatically with scientists conventional understandings of the futures of their
work. I argue that the emergence of techniques like outcomes thinking demand not only that we interrogate the
temporalities of emerging audit cultures, but also that we reflect upon the temporalities in which we as
anthropologists should imagine our own engagements with the world.
Tim McLellan is a PhD candidate in anthropology at Cornell University. His research investigates the work of agri-
environmental scientists at The Institute for Farms and Forests (IFF) in Southwest China. Tim has a B.A. in Law and
Chinese from The School of Oriental and African Studies, and an MSc in Law and Anthropology from The London
School of Economics. His PhD field research was funded by a National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation
Improvement Grant. Tim is currently writing up, and expects to graduate in 2018.
Brendan Whitty: Tribulations of a Randomized Controlled Trial: coordination, rigour and temporality in a
development project
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) lay claim to the most rigorous and robust statements of impact. Rather than
problematising these claims, the present article analyses the practices by which the meaning of a particular RCT was
coordinated within an international development donor agency. Specifically, the case concerns the decision to
prolong a womens empowerment project following disappointing findings from an RCT. Drawing on the recent so-
called ontological turn in Science and Technology Studies, it follows Annemarie Mol (2002) in suggesting that the
nature of an object in this case the development project is enacted through multiple practices and is emergent in
nature. In contrast, the RCT and the planning logic imply a singular project whose key properties may and indeed
should be known. The paper concentrates on the coordination practices in the donor office by which the RCT
findings were digested, debated and accommodated. It shows that key officials drew on multiple data sources, on
their personal exposure to various aspects of the project and to the narrowness of the RCTs data. Temporal
arguments were crucial to alter the expectations of impact. The paper suggests that the nature of the project as a
changing, multiple-faceted object resulted in the authority of the RCT vulnerable to being stranded by shifts in the
project logic.
Brendan S Whitty is a post-doctoral scholar interested in applying insights from Science and Technology Studies and
the anthropology of policy to the field of development studies. His recently completed PHD thesis (2016) comprised
an ethnography of a UK Department for International Development country office. It analysed how bureaucratic
practices and professional expertise were shaped by social and organizational structures. His work builds on fifteen
years practical experience as a practitioner, evaluator and policy professional in the development sector. He holds a
Bachelor of Laws from the University of Edinburgh (2001) and a Master of Laws from Columbia University (2003).

14:30 15:00: Photo exhibition


Skyler Hawkins: Forward Together Not One Step Back!: Finding inspiration, solidarity and power in
North Carolinas protests
This photo series represents one path through which my project explores the places at which life and legislation, the
personal and the political, and the symbolic and the system overlap. In contemporary politics, protests are seen in a
multitude of ways as an effective means of advocacy, a physical manifestation of ones own political, moral or
social leanings, a disruption to progress, and a powerful tool for like-minded people to express their concerns or
outrage. From rallies to town hall events, sit-ins to advocacy days, the photos gathered here attempt to capture the
ways in which the citizens of North Carolina have used protest as a key part of collective action for change.
Skyler Hawkins is a visual anthropologist with interests in the anthropology of race, gender and political culture.
Based on research carried out during 2016 and early 2017 in Raleigh, North Carolina with a group of left-leaning,
female elected officials, mostly women of color, this ethnographic project sought to both study the ways in which
women work, interact and are understood in a modern, political environment, and explore and critique the ways in
and points at which women of color are limited, silenced and symbolically erased. A North Carolina native, Ms.
Hawkins is a graduate of Georgetown University with a degree in women's and gender studies and government,
holds a masters in anthropology from The Australian National University, and is a current PhD Candidate and
Graduate Teaching Assistant at The University of Manchester.
Anglica Cabezas Pino: Here is my face: Autobiographical Portraits on HIV
Here is my face: Autobiographical Portraits on HIV is a photographic exhibition, which is the result of a collaborative
research project conducted with men living with HIV/AIDS in Chile. The collaborators were challenged to create their
own biographies choosing events from past, present and future lives. By this, they created different mise-en-scne to
give an account of their journeys, recalling and re-signifying the relations with their own bodies, the syndrome and
their own life stories. This is a small set of photographs from the exhibition selected for this event.
Anglica Cabezas Pino is a Visual Anthropologist and Documentary Filmmaker, currently on her last year of the PhD
in Anthropology, Media and Performance; an interdisciplinary program between the Arts and Anthropology at the
University of Manchester. She is working in collaboration with men who live with HIV in Chile, trying to create
personal strategies to overcome stigma using collaborative visual methods.
For this project some collaborators created photographic autobiographies based on their experience in relation to
social stigma and HIV. From this visual and reflexive work, they articulated new discourses to reframe their political
standing point, their bodies and identity.
James Bradbury: The limits of participant-observation: a view from the political side-lines
Kolkata is known as a city of processions and observing political protests was a large part of my research with the
Communist Party of India (Marxist). Nonetheless, the party cadre which takes to the streets for rallies, processions
and sit-ins is defined by strict membership and disciplinary norms. Moreover, such events involved routine arrests
and could sometimes spill over into clashes with security forces. Whilst activist ethnography values engagement
with the political projects of our informants, my experience as a foreign researcher in a political environment throws
the limits of ethnographic engagement into relief. Ultimately, photography allowed me to participate through
documenting political practices, and defined my presence in such events, even as the views from the camera testify
to my place on the political side-lines. The photos displayed here are a small selection from my efforts at
documenting Kolkatas communist political culture through public protest.
James Bradbury is a PhD candidate in Social Anthropology at the University of Manchester. His research looks at the
social life of Bengali Hindu refugee colonies in Kolkata, India. His thesis focuses on the place of Hindu religion and
communist politics in community formation and senses of communitarian belonging in these neighbourhoods.

15:00 16:00: Round Table: Three Perspectives on Impact


In this round table discussion, speakers will offer different perspectives on Impact from their respective fields and
experience. The idea is to problematize the impact paradigm and stimulate a lively debate. Those invited to lead the
round table discussion are:
Panayiota Vassilopoulou
Dr. Yiota Vassilopoulou (University of Liverpool) is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, Director of the MA in Arts,
Aesthetics and Cultural Institutions, and Public Engagement Champion for the Faculty of Humanities and
Social Sciences. She has previously held the position of 'Philosopher in Residence' at Bluecoat, Liverpool.
Karen Sykes
Prof. Karen Sykes (University of Manchester) is a Professor of Anthropology in the School of Social Sciences at the
University of Manchester. Karen is also a fellow at Clare Hall, the University of Cambridge, and has been a visiting
professor at the Australian National University and L' Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris. Karen
obtained her PhD from the Princeton University.
Carly Chadwick
Dr. Carly Chadwick (University of Manchester) is the Knowledge Exchange and Impact Officer for the School of Social
Sciences at the University of Manchester. Carly has worked as a Project Officer for the Trafford Housing Trust and as
a Research Intern at the University of Nottingham. Carly obtained her PhD from the University of Salford, where she
also worked as a Graduate Teaching Assistant.

16:15 18:15: Panel 3: Anthropologists and/or Activists: Doing things with Ethnography
Laura Harris: Impacts and the Arts: Notes from the Field
For ethnographers engaging with arts organisations (such as myself), Impact is an inescapable concern. Not only is
Impact a growing concern within the ethnographic method, as this conference demonstrates, it is also an orienting
principle within the arts and culture industry. This is partly due to a policy atmosphere which instrumentalises the
arts and culture as a means to effect social change, distributing financial support accordingly. Bound up with
attempts to justify state-funded arts and culture, this has resulted in arts organisations skewing their practice
towards projects which evidence Impact (which may not be the same as achieving it). This trend is clear in Arts
Council literature (see Arts Impact Fund, How to Evidence your Impact, How we Make an Impact). As such,
Impact is increasingly shaping the relationship between ethnographer (or researcher more widely) and arts
organisation; a researcher is invited in, with the implicit assumption that their findings can be used by the
organisation to evidence Impact.
This paper will briefly introduce the role of Impact on arts and culture organisations, with an emphasis on
contemporary policy. It will then propose that just as ethnographers build forms of engagement and outcomes into
the design of their research, so do to arts organisations predicate their actions on the Impact imperative. Finally, it
will introduce the dilemma facing ethnographers of arts institutions: how does the institutions vested interest in
hosting research which evidences Impact impact, in turn, on the shape and nature of ones project?
Laura Harris is a first year PhD student in the Sociology and Philosophy department at the University of Liverpool.
Her research is based at Bluecoat, Liverpools centre for contemporary art. Her PhD looks at the role of Bluecoat and
will entail an ethnography of the exhibition making process. Laura has an MA in Aesthetics and also works as an arts
writer and editor.
Andreas Streinzer: Myriad consultations. Anthropology and impact in austerity Greece.
My paper will be both analysis and reflection of my doctoral fieldwork with anti-austerity activists organising a local
currency in Volos, Greece (between 2014-17). The activists shared the observation that they were not achieving a
prosperous alternative local economy and their aims of more solidarity and mutuality. They gave different reasons
why they thought so, what exactly was going wrong, and why and what should be done about it. This theme was of
constant concern during the following years, with several local currency consultants, social science scholars, and
other activists coming to Volos to consult the currency activists on their challenges and failures. These consultations
led to a myriad of advices on how to achieve more solidarity, more turnover, more embedding of the economy, in
short: more impact.
In my paper, I want to reflect on these social lives of knowledge production between friendly observers, experts,
supporters, colleagues and others on how to achieve what, how to know about it and why to do so. The aim of my
paper is to present "thinking through impact" as a fruitful strategic entry point into studying the way social actors
orient their action using ambigous, anticipated potentialities as justifications. My paper ends with an argument for
acknowledging and reflecting the impact of our knowledge on such anticipated futures and their justifications.
Andreas Streinzer is a PhD candidate in Anthropology at the University of Vienna and Fellow of the Austrian
Academy of Sciences (DOC team). His current work is on household provisioning, and notions of resistance and
complicity among urban households in Volos, Greece. In his MA he worked on value creation in NGO - business
relations in Ethiopia and Austria. In May, he is/ was visiting researcher at the sociology department in Lancaster.
Anglica Cabezas Pino: Please Exit the Academic Comfort Zone: Can Anthropology Smell Like Dead
Practice?
In this paper, I argue that We as anthropologists, must go beyond our comfort zone and well known practices, to
engage with ethnographies of shared knowledge production, with a work that does not operate from within the
same well-known paths of knowledge articulation.
Relying on concepts that anthropology has standardized, our discipline usually takes off from similar epistemological,
theoretical and political terms, articulated mostly White, Male and Western. By proposing an accountable
anthropology, one that welcomes others epistemologies, I argue that knowledge can be created in the relation
(between collaborators), rather than in the collection (of data), following a horizontal and multi-vectorial logic.
We create knowledge.
We. As in you and me.
Together.
We as in collaborators, not as in anthropologist and subject, separated
Activism plays a key role here, as this is a project entangled with an ethical and political practice that does not step
away from our social accountability.
By criticising my own work, as an attempt of an Anthropology from the South, I will rely on texts by Boaventura de
Sousa Santos, and Orlando Fals-Borda among others, to address how other epistemologies can inspire and inform
our anthropological and/or ethnographic work. By radicalizing our critical practices, I intend to convey a
conceptualization of an anthropology that brings politics to the front, at the same time balancing the particularities
and beauty of our discipline.
(Biography: please see above)

Joshua Blamire: Rethinking Impact: Politically-Engaged Ethnography with the Liverpool Anti-Austerity
Movement
The problematic of combining academic research with political activism has plagued radical scholars in the academy
over the past few decades (Fuller, 1999). Amidst this broader participatory turn within human geography, and the
pursuit of social justice, scholars have wondered how to appropriately navigate the dual positionalities of activist and
academic (Halvorsen, 2015), where ethnographic methods have played a critical role. Routledges (1996: 400)
seminal text suggested creating a thirdspace between academia and activism, whereby neither site [] holds
sway, where one continually subverts the meaning of the other. Juris (2007: 165), instead, has advocated militant
ethnography, whereby the researcher deploys collaboratively produced ethnographic methods, which aim to
dissolve the chasm between research and practice by co-producing knowledge as an active participant within the
movement milieu and by facilitating ongoing activist (self-)reflection regarding movement goals, tactics, strategies
and organisational forms. Militant ethnography, therefore, represents the identification of some problematic or
contradiction inherent within a social movement, and then striving to understand and contribute to the collective
surpassing of this paradox (Russell, 2014: 225). This research constituted eighteen-months of politically-engaged
ethnographic research, and could be characterised as existing in-between these third-space and militant
ethnographic approaches. Reflecting upon my experience as a doctoral student and activist within the anti-austerity
movement in Liverpool, I critically consider issues concerning engagement, accountability, ethics and impact in
relation to conducting ethnographic research with campaigns for social justice. The paper, in turn, explores the
possibilities and contradictions posed by politically-engaged ethnographies to assist and contribute towards
movement struggles.
Josh Blamire is a postgraduate researcher in the Department of Geography & Planning at the University of Liverpool.
He completed his BA(Hons) in Geography in June 2012, and received his MA in Geographies of Globalisation &
Development (Research Methodology) in September 2013, both from the same institution. His research examines
anti-austerity resistance within Liverpool, and explores whether alternatives to austerity and capitalism are
emerging from this resistance. Can Liverpool be the hotbed of anti-austerity dissent, the site where radical
alternatives can emerge (a la the socialist Liverpool council of 1983-87), or are the protests, as one senior Labour
Party city councillor described, just simply not credible? The research therefore examines the transformative
political potential of the different (and competing) anti-austerity discourses that are being (re)produced by both
Liverpool City Council and grassroots campaigns for social justice.
18:15-18:30: Closing Remarks
Stef Jansen is a Senior Lecturer in Social Anthropology at the University of Manchester (UK). Based on long term
ethnographic research in the post-Yugoslav states, his work is primarily concerned with hope, the state, home-
making, borders, identitarianism and postsocialist transformations.
See http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/stef.jansen

Other information
Lunch and coffee will be provided for presenters and those registered.

All events will take place in Room 4.38 of Simon Building at the University of Manchester.

For up to date information see:

https://www.facebook.com/events/1686337031669152/?ref=br_rs

http://manchesterimpact2017.weebly.com/

To reduce our negative impact on the environment: Please download this programme to your electronic device or
print out if needed.

Travelling to the venue:

By Bus:

If you are coming from Piccadilly Train Station or the National Express Terminal, it is a short walk to the main bus
station Piccadilly Gardens. Take bus 42, 43, 142 or 143 from Piccadilly Gardens to University Shopping Ctr. (see
walking route below). Single tickets are 1.50.

By taxi:

Taxis from Piccadilly Train Station or the National Express Terminal to the University cost around 5-6.