Crafting an Alternative Politics of Debt - Spaces and places of politics as everyday action

债务政治指的是复杂而有争议的债务政治，它定义了当今英国的经济和文化生活。这个知识交流项目探讨了第三部门在围绕获得负担得起的信贷和与债务相关的问题形成更广泛的政治对话方面所发挥的作用。我们知道，在2008年金融危机之后，越来越多的公民社会倡议寻求让个人和社区参与进来，作为影响政治辩论的一种方式。对一些民间社会团体来说，重点是受紧缩措施不利影响的广大人民；对另一些人来说，这表明人们对政治和经济精英的信任严重丧失，或者用政治行动来试验个人和社区收回对自己生活的控制权的方式，以重振行使政治权力的实践。该项目探讨了民间社会网络的弹性，以及他们为塑造有关金融、债务和英国经济的更广泛辩论所做的努力。特别是，日常政治行动的数字空间和现实空间之间的界面。换句话说，这些群体如何被安置在大型抗议活动、办公室或教堂大厅等场所，这些场所当然不完全受空间的限制；但越来越多地使用数字平台来告知/煽动新的政治参与形式。这是通过与项目伙伴合作设计的四个相互关联的工作包来实现的：(1)绘制数字和现实世界行动者网络的地图，并创建一个网络网络“债务- cn”；(2)债务不平等的协同研究；(3)创建并支持一个标签实验，记录信用合作社服务机构“CURES”和替代信贷提供商“Fair for You”的推出；(4)小额贷款数字化转型的合作研究。提供一整套灵活的知识交流活动是一种相对较新的影响方法，它不仅仅是证明学术社会研究如何促进国民经济和推动政府政策的改进。我们采用嵌入式方法进行研究，包括与个人和组织网络密切合作，为组织实践提供切实的贡献。重要的是，我们正在试验新的数字论坛，这些论坛在社会科学研究中尚未得到充分的探索。例如，#ReinventCU实验复制了曼彻斯特大学和伦敦自治市议会的学者之间的#恩菲尔德实验，以制定当地的经济发展战略，以及# bbc预算，试图了解bbc用户如何与数字内容互动。影响可以比这更局部、更切实。在可能的情况下，我们应该致力于采用一种更“嵌入”的研究方法，这涉及在地方一级与公众和公共机构更密切地合作。关键的共同点是研究人员和从业人员之间的伙伴关系的存在，这种关系产生了相互的知识交流，从而提高了研究的质量和提供服务的某些方面。

The politics of debt refers to complex and contested politics of debt that defines much of economic and cultural life in present-day Britain. This knowledge exchange project explores the role the Third Sector plays in shaping the wider politic conversations around access to affordable credit and problems associated with indebtedness. We know that in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis a growing number of civil society initiatives sought to engage individuals and communities as a way of shaping political debate. For some civil society groups the focus is on the wide range of people adversely affected by austerity measures; for others it is articulating the profound loss of trust in political and economic elites or using political action to experiment with ways individuals and communities could take back power over their own lives to reinvigorate the very practice of exercising political power. This project explores the resilience of civil society networks and their efforts to shape the wider debate about finance, debt and the UK economy. In particular, the interface between the digital and real-life spaces of the everyday political action. In other words, how these groups can be located in places like large-scale protests, offices, or church halls, which of course are not entirely bound by space; but increasingly use digital platforms to inform/foment the new forms of political engagement. This is accomplished through four interrelated work packages designed in collaboration with project partners: (1) mapping the network of digital and real-world actors and creating a network of networks 'Debt-CN'; (2) collaborative research on debt inequality; (3) Create and support a hashtag experiment documenting the roll-out of the Credit Union Service Organisation 'CURES' and alternative credit provider 'Fair for You'; (4) Collaborative research investigating digital transformations in small-scale lending.Offering a flexible package of knowledge exchange activities is a relatively new approach to impact that is not simply about demonstrating how academic social research contributes to the national economy and drives improvements in government policy. We adopt an embedded approach to research that involves working closely with a network of individuals and organisations to deliver tangible contribution to organisational practice. Importantly we are experimenting with new digital forums that remain underexplored in social science research. For example, the #ReinventCU experiment replicates projects like #EnfieldExperiment between academics from the University of Manchester and London Borough council to develop local economic development strategy and the #BBCBudget that attempted to understand how BBC-users interact with digital content. Impact can be more local and more tangible than this. Where possible, we should aim to adopt a more 'embedded' approach to research which involves working more closely with the public, and public institutions, at a local level. The crucial common thread is the existence of a partnership between researchers and practitioners that generates a mutual exchange of knowledge which, in turn, improves the quality of the research and some aspect of service provision in tandem.