![]() ![]() It reaches out from one interest group to another without translating its own jargon. The term win-win aspires to generate power for wholesale change using the language of business as usual. And yet, the very risks these solutions hope to defuse were themselves the product of tradeoffs-what is climate change but a byproduct of the combustion engine as well as the policies and industries that leverage it? Indeed, the promise of no-guilt multi-benefit solutions has succeeded in forging significant alliances across seemingly disconnected resources like energy or water and diverse interests like homeownership or migrancy. ![]() The term win-win suggests there are no tradeoffs. It draws in skeptics with a language that echoes both the logic of economic growth inextricable from the term sustainability, and the compulsion common in neoliberal governance to quantify values like equity and environment as profits. The ability to absorb risk and not just deflect it promises to turn a threat into its own solution-that is, a win.įor resilience proponents, rhetoric pulled from game theory serves as a tool for coalition building. Achieving such elasticity would require big moves-reprogramming economic incentives, rewriting policy directives, investing in redundant infrastructures, and fostering diverse landscapes. For a society to be capable of withstanding the catastrophic reach of climate change, the thinking goes, it must be retooled to absorb shocks and still keep operating. As well as election to fellowships of the British Academy and the Academy of Medical Sciences, I am a member of the Academia Europaea and have been awarded the Koffka medal from the University of Giessen, and the Davida Teller Award of the Vision Sciences Society in recognition of “outstanding research contributions to Vision Research”.A common rallying cry of the resilience movement is that change can be a win-win. I have been an elected Visiting Professor in Oxford as well as my major appointment at UCL. With my colleague Oliver Braddick, I established and directed Visual Development Units, supported by the UK Medical Research Council, in Cambridge, UCL, and Oxford. My current collaborations in work on neurodevelopmental disorders are with groups in the Oxford Dept of Paediatrics (Dolphin study of dietary supplementation for infants at risk of cerebral palsy), the UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, Rome, Brescia, and on typical brain development through MRI, with the University of California, San Diego. My recent work has focussed on these areas of visuocognitive function, including the development and application of the Early Childhood Attention Battery (“ECAB”) to analyse the components of attention in children aged 3-6 years or mental age equivalent. Many of these problems can be seen in terms of the concept, which I introduced, of ‘dorsal stream vulnerability’ - the specific vulnerability in development of the cortical processing stream which underpins motion processing, visuomotor control, and many aspects of visual attention. I have applied this work on the milestones of typical development to the analysis of developmental problems, both genetic (for example in Williams Syndrome), perinatal brain injury and premature birth, and developmental ophthalmic disorders. This has included pioneering research on infant and child contrast sensitivity, binocular vision, motion and orientation sensitivity, focussing and refraction, global form and motion processing and attention. My research has focussed on the development, from the newborn period through childhood, of vision, visual cognition, and their underlying brain mechanisms.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |