Mary Keen, Paradise and Plenty – the How and Wow of Lord Rothschild’s private garden on the Waddesdon Estate

Mary Keen is a writer, lecturer and renowned garden designer and will talk about the garden, its dedicated gardeners, past and present, and her book, which celebrates the tradition of excellence at Eythrope.

Jonathan Metzger (KTH, Sweden) will talk about the necessity of exclusion in environmental planning.

Abstract: A more-than-human sensibility is founded upon an awareness of the fundamentally entangled fates of humans and non-humans, from the individual body to the planetary scale. The purpose of this presentation is to probe some of the implications of such insights on planning theory and methodology, and to explore potential ways of studying the degree to which such insights actually influence existing planning practices.

In the first part of the presentation I briefly review some currently fashionable ‘radical’ planning theories from the angle of how they may contribute to enacting a more-than-human sensibility within planning processes. I suggest that their oft-repeated ambition of producing benefits ‘for all’ are deceitfully misguiding, since such claims effectively serve the function of covering up the ever-present biopolitical dimension of planning practice and the radical exclusions that necessarily must take place.

In the second part of the presentation I sketch the outlines of a research program investigating how urban planning and design professionals relate to the more-than-human biopolitical dimension of planning. I argue that it is necessary to focus not only on the degree of displayed reflectiveness regarding this type of issues, but also if/how this comes to affect their concrete professional practice.

Lincoln Leads
In Material Culture

In conversation with
Robert Kerr • Former executive at Burberry •
Dr Joshua Thomas • Fellow in Archaeology •
Sarah Bochicchio • MSt in Modern History – Elizabeth I’s wardrobe

Discussing
‘The Power of the Image’?

Inviting the SCR, MCR, JCR and Alumni to join the conversation

Although criteria for identifying autism have been established based on behavioral factors, researchers are still exploring and developing models to describe the cognitive and affective differences that lead to the known behaviors. Some of these models offer competing ways of understanding autism; some simply describe characteristics of autism. Significantly, these models tend to involve cognitive functions that are also cited in accounts of moral responsibility. This suggests that autism may be a reason not to blame an autistic person for some actions that transgress social, ethical, or legal expectations even when we would certainly blame a neurotypical person for the same action. Whether to treat autism as exculpatory in any given circumstance appears to be influenced both by models of autism and by theories of moral responsibility. This talk will focus on a limited range of theories: autism as characterized in terms of executive function deficit, and moral responsibility based on access to appropriate reactive attitudes. In pursuing this particular combination of ideas, I do not intend to endorse them. The goal is, instead, to explore the implications of this combination of influential ideas about autism and about moral responsibility. These implications can be quite serious and practical for autists and those who interact directly with autists, as well as for broader communities as they attend to the fair, compassionate, and respectful treatment of increasing numbers of autistic adults.

Public event, all welcome. Booking essential.

Member of the House of Commons from 1979-97 and Independent Crossbench Peer since 1997. Chair and a founder of the All Party Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief who has authored reports on North Korea, Sudan, Tibet and Pakistan; a founder of the Jubilee Campaign; author of twelve books including “Building Bridges: Is there Hope for North Korea?” with Rob Chidley (2013)

The fifth annual Ockenden International Prize for excellence in self-reliance projects among refugees and displaced people will be presented by Lord Alfred Dubs, Labour peer, on Tuesday 7th March 2017. Projects in Uganda, Egypt and Nepal will compete for the $100,000 prize. The two runners-up will each receive $25,000.

Saïd Business School is proud to welcome Kailash Satyarthi to speak at the School on Tuesday 25 April.

Nobel Peace Prize laureate Kailash Satyarthi will speak about the fight against modern slavery, sharing his experiences rescuing over 84,000 child slaves and labourers, the Global March that secured the first ever ILO definition on child labour and education campaigning in over 100 countries to ensure all children in the world get to go to school.

Mr Satyarthi will also introduce the new 100 million for 100 million campaign that was launched with 5,000 students and the President of India in December. It aims to be the biggest mobilisation in history and help globalise compassion at this increasing time of nationalism. Mr Satyarthi will also explain how individuals can make a difference and ensure all children are safe, free and educated.

Mr Satyarthi has been a tireless advocate of children’s rights for over three decades and is the founding president of the Global Campaign for Education, an exemplar civil society movement working to end the global education crisis.

The seminar will take place at Saïd Business School and is open for anyone to attend. Please remember that registration is required.

‘Christian Perspectives on Death and Dying’ is an ecumenical initiative aimed at supporting engagement with current debates about death and dying. Join us for a day of conversation, reflection and debate – panels include:
Advance decisions and ‘living wills’ – making end of life decisions for yourself (3.15pm)
Withdrawing medical treatments – making decisions for those who have lost the ability to decide for themselves (11am)
Assisted dying – legal, social and theological perspectives (1.30pm)
The event will be complimented by an art exhibition exploring ethical and legal issues surrounding the care of people in a long-term coma and the experiences of their families. Attendees will have opportunities to ask questions, engage in debate and think about their own faith throughout the day.

Confirmed speakers include
Prof Derick Wade (neurorehab consultant)
Prof Dominic Wilkinson (Director of Medical Ethics & a Consultant Neonatologist)
The Lord Carey of Clifton (former Archbishop of Canterbury),
The Right Reverend Dr Lee Rayfield, (Bishop of Swindon),
Revd Canon Dr Joanna Collicutt (Diocese of Oxford),
Revd Canon Rosie Harper (Diocese of Oxford),
Revd Canon Dr Sarah Rowland Jones (Diocese of Llandaff),
Usha Grieves (from the charity ‘Compassion in Dying’),
Prof Sue Wilkinson (‘Advance Decision Assistance’),
Prof Jenny Kitzinger (Coma & Disorders of Consciousness Research Centre, University of Cardiff), and
Prof Celia Kitzinger (Coma & Disorders of Consciousness Research Centre, University of York).

Although it has been almost seventy years since Time declared C.S. Lewis one of the world’s most influential spokespersons for Christianity and fifty years since Lewis’s death, his influence remains just as great if not greater today. While much has been written on Lewis and his work, virtually nothing has been written from a philosophical perspective on his views of happiness, pleasure, pain, and the soul and body. As a result, no one so far has recognized that his views on these matters are deeply interesting and controversial, and perhaps more jarring. No one has yet adequately explained why Lewis never became a Roman Catholic. Stewart Goetz’s careful investigation of Lewis’s philosophical thought reveals oft-overlooked implications and demonstrates that it was, at its root, at odds with that of Thomas Aquinas and, thereby, the Roman Catholic Church.

https://www.facebook.com/events/841633872641617/

A charity in America is campaigning to get chimpanzees recognised as ‘persons’, giving them basic human rights. But with rights come responsibilities. Could a chimp ever be guilty of a human crime? Join primatologist Lewis Dean to examine what we know about the mental abilities of our closest evolutionary cousins.

Lewis Dean is a science communicator and primatologist. His research has focussed on the evolution of culture in humans and other animals. He has worked with a variety of primates, including chimps, capuchins, lemurs and human children.

—

7.30PM start at St. Aldates Tavern, and entry is free, although we do suggest a donation of around £3 to cover speaker expenses. We tend to get busy, so arrive early to make sure you get a seat. Come along and say hello! All welcome

http://oxford.skepticsinthepub.org/Event.aspx/10238/Chimps-on-Trial

Age is the only category of discrimination that includes all humans. However, ageing people are stigmatised in popular culture and discourse, and regarded with a disgust closely linked to fear. Dr Nussbaum argues that stigma against the ageing is a social problem, producing unhappiness and injustice such as discrimination in employment and social interactions, not to mention what she calls a ‘huge social evil’ – that of compulsory retirement.

Dr Martha Craven Nussbaum is the 2016 Kyoto Prize Laureate for Arts and Philosophy.

Christopher Hodges, Professor of Justice Systems, will deliver the 2017 Max Watson Annual Lecture to present his proposals to support an ethical basis for business practice and regulation.

Professor Hodges will present his research into the concept of Ethical Business Regulation (EBR), which aims to foster a business culture of mutual engagement, respect, learning, and constant improvement, based on social trust.

He will ask:

How do we stem the flow of corporate scandals (recently Rolls Royce, VW), save money on regulators (Better Regulation), and improve effective ‘compliance’, whilst observing the new ‘growth duty’?
Does the answer lie in deterrence, or behavioural psychology/economics, or structures (such as the Primary Authority scheme or ‘regulated self-assurance’), or ‘no blame’ cultures (such as aviation safety), or embedding ethical values?
The lecture will be a wide-ranging tour d’horizon of current theories and enforcement practice, and apply socio-legal empirical analysis to the evidence, with answers that some will find challenging.

It will build on Professor Hodges’ ideas previously published by the UK Government in their Review of Ethics for Regulators conducted by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, and in his FLJS Policy Brief, Ethical Business Regulation.

To reserve your place, please complete the form.

The Max Watson Memorial Lecture was established in 2015 to commemorate the life of Max Watson (1946–2014), FLJS Board Member and Fellow of Wolfson and St Antony’s Colleges.

Oxford India Speaker series and Saïd Business School presents:
Ajay G. Piramal in conversation with Dean Peter Tufano

The event will span a range of topics including entrepreneurship, the future of the Indian economy and business ethics.

Mr Ajay Piramal is one of India’s leading industrialists, philanthropists and social entrepreneurs. He is the Chairman of a business conglomerate, Piramal Group & Shriram Group (market cap: $7.5 billion; Revenue $3 billion), with activities in healthcare, financial services, real estate, information services, glass packaging and more.

The seminar is open for anyone to attend and will take place at Saïd Business School on Tuesday 13 June followed by a short networking drinks reception until around 7.30pm. Please remember that registration is required to attend this event.

The first synthetic virus self-replicated in 2002. Its DNA molecules were created in a laboratory, using genetic information copied from nature. In 2016 an international project, the Human Genome Project – Write, was launched to synthesise and recode entire human genomes.
Join a panel to discuss biosecurity and ethics, science fiction, practical limits and
possible futures related to our species.

Marianne Talbot is a bioethicist and Director of Studies in Philosophy at the University
of Oxford Department for Continuing Education.
Piers Millett is a Senior Research Fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute, where he
focuses on pandemic and deliberate disease and the implications of biotechnology.
Justina Robson is a science fiction author. Her novel Natural History, was reviewed by The Guardian: “clarity of vision now demonstrates itself as her major asset, making her one of the very best of the new British hard SF writers.”

A one-off screening of recent documentary release Citizen Jane: Battle for the City. The film will be followed by a panel discussion featuring four local experts talking about how the themes in the documentary relate to issues for our own city — both past and present.

The panel is made up of four women who will discuss the issues raised in the film from four different perspectives — urban planning, architecture, local history and art.

Dr Sue Brownill, an urban policy expert at Oxford Brookes University, will chair the discussion and will be joined by: Dr Annie Skinner, local historian and author of ‘Cowley Road: a History’; Dr Igea Troiani, Senior Lecturer in Architecture at Oxford Brookes; and Rachel Barbaresi, an artist with interest the social aspects of urban space whose work is currently on show at Modern Art Oxford’s Future Knowledge exhibition.

Numerous free talks, walking tours and workshops over two days in central Oxford. Visit the webpage to find out more and book into sessions.

The lively topic of whether moral expertise and moral experts exist has been vividly discussed in recent contributions in ethics and, particularly, in bioethics. I hold the view that moral expertise exists and that some moral philosophers can be considered as moral experts in the full sense, who have moral expertise, while some are not. In this talk, however, I focus on the question of whether moral experts must follow their own expert advice in order to remain experts. This is an important issue because my analysis will respond to the vital question of whether a “moral expert” has (necessarily) both cognitive and practical skills in order to be considered a proper moral expert.

Talk followed by questions and discussion

All welcome

What does it mean to be a feminist? Who can be a feminist? And is there a right and wrong way of doing it?

Join us on a unique journey through feminist history, adding your voice as we discuss key moments in literature, art, politics, music, sport, and science to develop our understanding of feminism.

You’ll discover knowledge you didn’t realise you had as we join together the pieces of feminist history and women’s achievements in this fun, interactive workshop.

We will identify different stages and criticisms of feminism and consider intersections with race, LGBTIQ, age, and disability politics. We look for silences and unacknowledged voices, and consider the privileges and biases in our own perspectives.

The first of three lectures by Professor Larry S. Temkin.

The world is filled with people who are badly off. Each day, many die from hunger or disease, much of which seems easily preventable. Yet the world is also filled with many who are well off, some extraordinarily so. This vast inequality, between the world’s well off and the world’s worst off, gives rise to an age-old question. What, if anything, ought those who are well off to do on behalf of those who are badly off? In these Uehiro Lectures, I aim to explore the nature and basis of our obligations, if any, to the needy, and some problems that may arise when the better-off attempt to ameliorate the plight of the worse-off. In doing this, I will explore a wide-range of empirical and philosophical issues.

In this first Lecture, I introduce a version of Effective Altruism, which holds, roughly, that insofar as the well-off give to charity, they should identify and contribute to the most effective international relief and development organizations. I then present an alternative, pluralistic approach, arguing that in addition to the sort of consequentialist-based reasons for aiding the needy favored by Effective Altruism, there are virtue-based and deontological-based reasons for doing so. I then present Peter Singer’s famous Pond Example, which has had a profound effect on many people’s thinking about the needy. I note that Singer’s example is compatible with both Effective Altruism and my pluralistic approach. I then offer variations of the Pond Example, together with other considerations, in support of my approach.

My discussion shows that despite its far-reaching impact, Singer’s Pond Example doesn’t actually take us very far in answering the question of what we should do, all things considered, to aid the world’s needy. Unfortunately, my discussion isn’t much better in that regard, except that it reveals that there are a wide-range of morally relevant factors that have a bearing on the issue, and that we must be fully responsive to all of them in considering what we ought to do in aiding the needy. The “act so as to do the most good” approach of Effective Altruism reflects one very important factor that needs to be considered, but it is not, I argue, the only one.

The second of three public lectures by Professor Larry S. Temkin.

Peter Singer famously argued that just as we have compelling moral reason to save a drowning child, so we have compelling moral reason to aid the world’s needy. In this Lecture, I raise a number of worries about the relevance of Singer’s Pond Example to whether we should be donating money to international aid organizations.

I consider a number of possible disanalogies between saving a drowning child and giving to an international relief organization. These include whether those needing help are members of one’s own community, whether they are near or far, whether one’s aid requires the assistance of many intervening agents, whether one is actually saving lives, whether corruption is a worry, whether those needing assistance are innocent and/or not responsible for their plight, whether the needy are victims of an accident or social injustice, and whether anyone stands to benefit from one’s intervention other than the needy themselves. I show that some of these disanalogies may have important normative significance, making the case for contributing to international aid agencies much less clear than the case for saving the drowning child in Singer’s famous example.

In addressing these topics, I argue that we must be attuned to the many direct and indirect ways in which international aid efforts may inadvertently benefit the perpetrators of grave social injustices, incentivizing such injustices. Similarly, we must be aware of the possibility that our aid efforts may end up rewarding corrupt leaders whose policies have contributed to hybrid natural/man-made disasters, thus encouraging such disastrous policies. Furthermore, I note that aid organizations have every incentive to emphasize the good that they accomplish, and to not look for, ignore, or even cover up any bad effects that may result from their interventions, and that independent agencies assessing aid effectiveness may lack the means of accurately determining all the negative effects to which international aid efforts may give rise. Thus, however compelling it may be, Singer’s Pond Example depicts a simple situation that is a far cry from the complex reality with which international development agencies have to contend. Accordingly, much more needs to be considered before one can pass judgment on the overall merits of funding international aid organizations.

In this third Uehiro Lecture, I consider a number of worries about the possible impact of global efforts to aid the needy. Among the worries I address are possible unintended negative consequences that may occur elsewhere in a society when aid agencies hire highly qualified local people to promote their agendas; the possibility that highly successful local projects may not always be replicable on a much larger regional or national scale; the possibility that foreign interests and priorities may have undue influence on a country’s direction and priorities, negatively impacting local authority and autonomy; and the related problem of outside interventions undermining the responsiveness of local and national governments to their citizens.

I also discuss a position that I call the Capped Model of Moral Ideals, which may have a bearing on the intuitively plausible approach of always prioritizing the greatest need when making one’s charitable contributions. Another issue I discuss is the possibility that efforts to aid the needy may involve an Each/We Dilemma, in which case conflicts may arise between what is individually rational or moral, and what is collectively rational or moral. Unfortunately, it is possible that if each of us does what we have most reason to do, morally, in aiding the needy, we together will bring about an outcome which is worse, morally, in terms of its overall impact on the global needy.
The lecture ends by taking stock of the main claims and arguments of all three Uehiro Lectures, and considering their overall implications for our thinking about the needy. I consider the implications of my discussion for Peter Singer’s view, and the implications of my view for the approach and recommendations of Effective Altruism. I also consider where my discussion leaves us given my pluralistic approach to thinking about the needy. I have no doubt that those who are well off are open to serious moral criticism if they ignore the plight of the needy. Unfortunately, however, for a host of both empirical and philosophical reasons, what one should do in light of that truth is much more complex, and murky, than most people have realized.

Abstract: This presentation will consider the ethical dimensions of Brexit. Specifically the case will be made that there are profound ethical questions posed by Brexit that have not properly been considered. The focus of the public debate has been largely on the pragmatic, economic and political reasons for and against Brexit. It is important to supplement these with a consideration of the ethical questions raised by it. In a book he edited entitled Political Restructuring in Europe: Ethical Perspectives (1994) Chris Brown made a case for constitutive theory as a way of approaching the ethical issues involved in proposals for restructuring Europe in the wake of the break-up of Yugoslavia. In this talk his analysis will be extended, illustrating how constitutive theory produces surprising, enlightening and important results that have so far been absent from the debate. The insights point to a set of political imperatives that ought not to be ignored.

Mervyn Frost is Professor of International Relations in the Department of War Studies at King’s College, London. Publications include: Towards a Normative Theory of International Relations (CUP, 1986), Ethics in International Relations (CUP, 1996), Constituting Human Rights: Global Civil Society and the Society of Democratic States (Routledge, 2002) and Global Ethics: Anarchy, Freedom and International Relations (Routledge, 2009). He edited a 4 volume reference work entitled International Ethics (Sage 2011). His recent work, with Dr Silviya Lechner, is focused on the “practice turn” in International Relations. Their book Practice Theory and International Relations is to be published by CUP in 2018.

Jonathan Spencer is Regius Professor of South Asian Language, Culture and Society at the University of Edinburgh. He has carried out research in Sri Lanka since the early 1980s. His most recent book, Checkpoint, Temple, Church and Mosque (2014) concerns the role of religious organizations in the Sri Lankan civil war, and was co-authored with a team of Sri Lankan and European researchers.

This talk is a progress report from the midpoint in a 5-year comparative project on the Anthropology of Conscience, Ethics and Human Rights. For the Sri Lanka case study in this project the researchers have been interviewing dissenters, Sinhala and Tamil survivors of the 30-year civil war who took a stand against the violent claims of rival ethnonationalisms. The talk will combine some reflections on the translatability of the idea of “conscience” with preliminary analysis of the dissenters’ accounts of their lives and motivations.

The South Asia Seminar is co-funded by the Ashmolean Museum, the Asian Studies Centre of St Antony’s College, the Contemporary South Asian Studies Programme at the School of Interdisciplinary Area Studies, the Department for International Development and Faculty of History and the Faculty of Oriental Studies.

What is the social responsibility of the sciences? In recent times, ethical conflicts surrounding race, gender, and the natural sciences have surfaced again. A recent editorial in Nature defending memorials to J. Marion Sims, who experimented on enslaved black women, and Thomas Parran, who oversaw the Tuskegee syphilis study, led to widespread criticism. How should STEM scholars incorporate questions of social justice and ethical responsibility into their research and teaching?

Join us for a pre-dinner conversation on these issues. Cedric Tan, a biologist and college lecturer at Wadham, will present on „Shying or crying: a personal experience on communicating sensitive issues in biology (same-sex behaviour, trophy hunting and illegal logging)” and Juliane Borchert, DPhil candidate in physics will explore the controversy surrounding indigenous rights and the construction of the Thirty Metre Telescope on Mauna Kea.

The annual Nabeel Hamdi Lecture, presented by CENDEP and the Oxford Human Rights Festival. Emeritus Professor Nabeel Hamdi is the founder of the MA in Development and Emergency Practice and long term director of CENDEP and one of the most distinguished academics in our field. On his retirement from Oxford Brookes he set up the Nabeel Hamdi Lecture Series. We are honoured to welcome human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell to deliver this year’s lecture.

Peter Tatchell discusses the flaws and limits of international human rights law in relation to the conflict in Syria. He will look at some of the options that could have been used to defuse the war and save lives, but were not actioned by the UN or any countries. This failure points to the need to reform international human rights law and create improved mechanisms for its enforcement.

Our Marriages: When Lesbians Marry Gay Men 奇缘一生 —Documentary Screening and Talk with Director He Xiaopei and Dr Bao Hongwei

The Oxford Chinese Studies Society welcomes all to an exclusive screening and discussion of “Our Marriage: When Lesbians Marry Gay Men” with Director He Xiaopei and Dr Bao Hongwei.

How do gays and lesbians negotiate their social identities in postsocialist China? Are the so-called “fake marriages 形式婚姻” between them a pragmatic choice made out of social pressure or a queering act of subversion against the traditional institution of marriage? How do these phenomena tie into China’s revolutionary past and connect to Asia’s current wave of gay marriage legalisation and rising pink economy? These are the questions provoked by Dr. He Xiaopei’s documentary Our Marriage.

“The film, Our Marriage, is an exploration of the lives of four lesbians who decided to marry gay men in order to secretly pursue their relationships with their girlfriends and at the same time fulfil their families’ deep-seated desire that they get married. The sense of respect and responsibility that the marriage partners feel towards their parents, and the avoidance of social ridicule and tricky questions about their child’s sexuality, also play a large role in their decision to stage elaborate and glamorous sham ceremonies…In China, as one of the women in the documentary explained, nobody is allowed to be single. Whilst a burgeoning lesbian social scene is becoming more visible in large cities, heteronormative attitudes force people, heterosexual and homosexual alike, into marriages which they would rather avoid. Marriage can provide social acceptance, but it also gives you certain economic benefits such as access to social housing. Whilst homosexuality is not illegal in China there are no plans to introduce same sex marriage. Activists like He have argued against campaigns for same sex marriage suggesting that the institution of marriage itself should be challenged as it supports patriarchal norms and is detrimental to all people, whether they are gay, straight or bisexual.” — Kate Hawkins, Sexuality and Development Programme International Advisory Group

This event will be of interest to those of you who work on Chinese society, queer studies, film studies, as well as gender studies. The documentary is 45 minutes long, followed a brief talk on queer filmmaking and LGBT activism in China by Dr Bao Hongwei from the University of Nottingham, and then both of them will engage in audience Q & A and discussions.

Speaker biography:
Dr He Xiaopei completed a PhD at the University of Westminster in 2006, titled ‘I am AIDS: Living with the Epidemic in China’. She co-founded an NGO called the Pink Space Sexuality Research Centre in Beijing to promote sexual rights and sexual pleasure among people who are oppressed.

Dr Hongwei Bao is Assistant Professor in Media Studies at the University of Nottingham, UK. He holds a PhD in Gender Studies and Cultural Studies from the University of Sydney, Australia. His research primarily focuses on gay identity and queer politics in contemporary China. He is author of Queer Comrades: Gay Identity and Tongzhi Activism in Postsocialist China (Copenhagen: NIAS Press, forthcoming in 2018).

We hope you had a good start of the week. We would like to introduce next week’s event: “Life Lessons of a Christian Scholar: Things I Have Learned from Working 45 Years in Cancer and Palliative Care”

In this reflective talk, retired nurse and clinical specialist Ginny Dunn will speak to us about her experiences of caring for cancer patients and their families, from diagnosis through death and the grieving process. Throughout her career, in four different countries (USA, Canada, UK, and Ireland) and across more than 45 years, she has helped both cancer patients and their medical staff to confront issues around pain and dying. She has also co-written a book on the topic, Alongside the Person in Pain: Holistic Care and Nursing Practice. Finally, Ginny studied theology while on sabbatical at Regent College in Vancouver, where she met her husband, Nigel Biggar, a professor of moral theology at Christ Church, Oxford.

As a committed Christian, having practised and researched in this field, Ginny has found her work important and challenging and hopes to share some of the insights she has gained with us on Monday night.

The World Health Organization identifies antibiotic resistance as a global challenge so serious that it threatens the fundamental achievement of modern medicine. Looking at human use and the use of antibiotics in meat production – what can we do to stimulate research into new antibiotics and to regulate the current use of antibiotics? How does collective responsibility and its ethical implications play its part?

Part of the Hilary Term Lecture Series Health:fresh perspectives”

For further information and registration: https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/event/2524