TRAJECTORIES OF AGING

Aging in Plural Ways

Living and ageing in 2023 means living and ageing in a complex, interconnected world in which the place of the elderly is a societal, geographic and individual challenge. The COVID-19 pandemic illustrated the extent to which, despite the logic of globalized and multiscalar interconnection, the contemporary world remains marked by numerous divisions, fractures, and tensions in its approach to aging and respect for the rights of the elderly.

However, as early as 2019, the United Nations (UN) reminded us in “World Population Prospects 2019” that ageing populations represent one of the major transformations of 21st century societies, alongside climate change, and are therefore a political priority. Faced with these challenges, the human and social sciences are constantly highlighting the diversity at the very heart and in the framing of ageing. In a world of multiple scales, varied and variable contexts, and diverse environments, living and aging in the plural refers to diverse life trajectories and evolving living spaces and places, whether social, like the family and the “home”, or physical, made up of the materiality of homes, neighborhoods, and cities. In this respect, it is important to pay close attention to the mechanisms and frameworks of municipal, regional, national, and international public policies.

On the one hand, the plurality of aging experiences and trajectories remains to be explored (Lord, Piché, 2018). Research on aging is increasingly focusing on issues associated with the diversity and quality of life experiences, satisfaction and well-being, analyzing not only the interrelationships between the major determinants of health, but also the different material, social, and cultural living conditions. The presence of various inequalities or inequities at the heart of these issues needs to be examined, considering the individual and collective pathways observed.

In this context, considering the plurality of trajectories of advancing age implies a revisiting of challenges around recognition affecting seniors, as well as the arrangement of circumstances and time, both and collective and personal, in relation to social ties and the power to act.

This invites us to critically explore the effects on the individual or resources of public policies when they address aging following the example of “Age-Friendly Cities and Communities” (Buffel et al., 2018; Moulaert, Garon, 2016) or support the quest for an “inclusive society” (Ngatcha-Ribert et al., 2022). Particular attention will be given to the individual and collective power of diverse collectives of retired people and seniors, in line with the many reflections undertaken by REIACTIS since 2007; whether it be collective action (Viriot-Durandal, 2012; Viriot Durandal et al., 2015), or more meso- and micro-sociological (Buffel et al., 2018; Ngatcha-Ribert et al., 2022), or in a specific geographic anchorage (Scheider et al., 2017; Moulaert et al., 2018).

On the other hand, the symposium will contribute to reflection on the diversity of environments and geographic regions in the face of ageing. For some researchers in the humanities and social sciences, the liberalization of goods and services, the weakening of the state’s regulatory power over players in the fields of aging and health, and the development of consumerism more broadly, should now lead research communities, citizens, and public decision-makers to rethink the question of the commons and the scope of intervention of the public sector or autonomous groups in structuring responses to the diversity of needs with advancing age. The translation of these dynamics (Davis, 2013; Hall, 2017) would produce direct time-optimizing and gain-maximizing effects in both private and public governance structures, as well as within geographic regions (Chouraqui, 2020).

Whether this plurality concerns individual and collective trajectories or those of geographic regions, the influence of public policies on such factors also deserves to be considered. The 7^th International Conference invites us to question public policy frames of reference, and in particular the effects of new public management (e.g. “à la carte” projects, “renewable budgets”, “competition” between different sectors and players) with respect to the plurality of needs and expectations of older people in fields as varied as housing, social services, health, or social, economic, and civic inclusion. Finally, the plurality of our world is not only reflected at the level of trajectories of aging or in terms of environments and geographies; today, we live in a set of temporalities that are constantly intertwining to form a world that is accelerating (Rosa, 2010).

Do these plural contexts and trajectories of aging, set in accelerated and partly uncertain rhythms of life, imply greater potential risks of inequality in old age?

Thus, “aging in the plural” means advancing in age in a more uncertain world, with multiple rhythms and under the principle of acceleration of time; it means living in environments and territories that vary and are variable according to a great diversity of factors and scales; it means experiencing a diversity of forms and individual trajectories of aging. Faced with this threefold plurality of aging, the 7th International REIACTIS Conference invites researchers in the humanities and social sciences to present their work on these themes and to discuss how their methodologies are impacted by these changes. To continue the dialogue and exchanges that have animated REIACTIS’ work for over 17 years on the relationship between academic and experiential knowledge, REIACTIS is also inviting political decision-makers, intervention professionals, and citizens to discuss these plural forms of aging.

To address and consider the plurality of ageing, a cross-cutting theme and three thematic entries are proposed. Papers and workshops must be registered in one of these 4 options. A maximum of 3 papers may be submitted as first authors.

• Cross-sectional theme: Coping with time and change.
• Theme 1: Situating oneself between continuity, bifurcation and reversibility.
• Theme 2: Taking part in changes in living environments.
• Theme 3: Involving stakeholders in social and spatial transformations.

Cross-sectional theme: Coping with times and changes

Over the last few decades, research on advancing age has focused on the characteristics of aging, the effects of context and living environments, as well as the injunctions that frame it, whether described as “successful”, “healthy”, “productive” or “active” (Moulaert, Viriot-Durandal, 2013). Yet scientific literature tends to highlight plural, even hybridized forms of aging. This diversity of contexts goes far beyond the consideration of certain socio-economic or territorial characteristics, and calls for equally pluralistic approaches, conceptions and, interventions. Of course, public, association, or private initiatives, policies, and programs can put forward broad visions or conceptions of aging. However, they can also be based on a generic consideration of the “elderly person”.

It is thus both the meanings and the difficult operationalization of the society or city “for all” that we feel it is relevant to question. What about aging trajectories that break away from a linear model, or diverge from a path of aging that is standardized or favored by different forces?

The approach of a trajectory of aging enables us to address the issue from several angles, disciplines, and scales (individual, social, geographic, or societal). Trajectories involve a variety of mobilities, whether daily, residential or social, and imply psychosocial and physical changes in the experience of aging. While, on the one hand, older people are empowered to cope with these changes, on the other hand, they can pose risks of exclusion, social isolation, and dependency if they do not, or only partially, master them. The concept of “déprise” (in French), for example, can help to better grasp of these phases within aging by questioning seniors’ pathways based on different bifurcations or transitions (Clément, Montovani, 1999; Clément et al., 2018; Caradec, 2001, 2004; Meidani, Cavalli 2019).

Research has been prolific in highlighting the complexity of multiple processes at the level of geographic regions and societies that shape experiences of non-recognition of older people (e.g. civic and spatial representativeness), deprivation or non-recourse to the law (e.g. immigrants, deprived groups, abuse), social and spatial isolation (e.g. food or pharmaceutical desert, car dependency) (Bezzirgani, Lachapelle, 2020; Pedzirgani, Lachapelle, 2020). Bezzirgani, Lachapelle, 2020; Pednekar, Peterson, 2018; Negron-Poblete, Séguin, 2018) or accessibility to resources for certain profiles (e.g. disabilities, old age). Furthermore, while regional, social and societal changes, as well as individual trajectories, show that inequalities can be long-lasting, they can also be temporary or one-off. For example, seniors may be confronted with incapacitating situations or environments, yet not be deprived of their space for self-determination (Fougeyrollas, Boucher, Charrier, 2016).

What do we know about the dynamic processes that lead older people into or out of a situation of exclusion? In addition to better defining aging trajectories themselves and their scope in a context of change, it seems relevant to distinguish the cumulative effects of different inequalities and the bifurcations they may or may not provoke in an individual and collective trajectory.

Faced with the recomposition of time, a theoretical approach in terms of recognition (Fraser, 2005; Honneth, 2005) makes it possible to think from an inclusive perspective, where older people have the status of valued partners in their own rights in social interactions, regardless of belonging or prescribed identity factors. Recognition comes from the emotional bonds between individuals and groups, from rights within the societal sphere, and from solidarity in sharing and support. 

Does taking into account the trajectories of seniors projected into a changing society and territories change these perspectives of inclusion and recognition?

We are thinking here of various notions associated with these perspectives, such as respect for individuals and their groups, social and territorial justice, the social value of people, access to geographic regions and their resources, or gratitude towards people regardless of their situation and social position. In addition to this cross-cutting theme, which focuses on the logics and mechanisms at work in trajectories of aging, and which may enable us to question theories, concepts, methods, and epistemologies associated with change, three thematic axes may be explored by presenters.

Theme 1: Situating oneself between continuity, bifurcation and reversibility

A number of recent studies have focused on the recognition of different groups or profiles of seniors. Often limited to a cross-sectional perspective based on age, and perhaps longitudinal in some cases, this research still places little emphasis on the notion of trajectories of aging as a dynamic reality. Perspectives that fail to take biographical variability into account tend to obscure differential social positioning or regional conditions. Although there is a popular saying that “you age as you’ve lived”, life-course theory shows that individual trajectories are not linear, but made up of possibilities for bifurcation and reversibility, as well as evolving arrangements of roles, statuses and identities (individual and collective). This perspective invites debate on the forms of exclusion generated by societies and territories in a state of accelerated movement and change.

Under Theme 1, we are looking for contributions on the study of interactions between individual biographies and public or associative and community action mechanisms that aim to support the social inclusion of seniors in contexts of change. 

The idea of revisiting and adapting policies and supports to the changing contexts across geographic regions appears essential. Simultaneously, what are the needs for innovation that should or could encourage the evolution of existing programs, policies and ways of doing things? Do we need to rethink our approaches to aging, our research and analysis methods, and our intervention tools for people and regions, to take account of changes and life-course trajectories where change is inevitable? 

In this respect, certain trajectories can lead seniors to specialized housing (residences designed for aging populations), when they are pushed out of the market due to lack of availability or choice, leading to further moves later on. Other trajectories can lead to staying at home, despite a situation that is objectively problematic from the point of view of safety or autonomy.

Are seniors’ choices to stay in or move out of their homes free and informed? How are these choices made? Are seniors’ choices respected, or are attempts made to influence them? Which players can support them in making or updating these choices in a world of rapid adaptation, change, and shortages of support, resources, and housing?

Likewise, we are looking for proposals for papers that will enable us to question the way in which individuals feel “included” and “citizens” in their own right in a society with short timeframes and fragmented actions.

Finally, this theme can also invite proposals with a more theoretical and general scope, for example around a questioning of the “liquid society” (Beilharz, 2018). A liquid world implies a good capacity for individual and collective adaptation, and not simply the accumulation of solid capital (economic, financial, real estate). These frameworks complement and may even oppose the “social classes” approach as the main analytical benchmark and conceptual/political tool in the fight against injustice, by complicating the analysis of these processes at work. In a changing world, the accumulation of solid capital no longer necessarily refers to a notion of security and investment. On the contrary, liquidity leads to heterogeneity even within a group of individuals sharing common characteristics, as observed with different individual and social configurations regarding lifestyle arrangements (e.g. Kaufmann and Ravalet, 2019; Lord et al., 2015).

This perspective calls for the notions of inclusion and exclusion to be put back into perspective, and even surpassed. Exclusion can be relative, partial or multiple, depending on roles and status. The perspective of changes and aging trajectories also shows that exclusion can be temporary and reversible.

Theme 2: Taking part in changing living environments

Theme 2 includes several dimensions, both stable and changing, that relate to the spatial environment. People, like geographies, evolve. The morphology of living environments (buildings, urban forms) is highly permanent, while populations change much more rapidly. However, functional configurations (services, resources, etc.) are much more flexible and evolving, being part of the private, community, or public sphere, while also being dependent on the economy and demographics. Lastly, changes in living environments can be political. For example, in terms of citizen representation or the implementation of age-friendly programs such as the Age-Friendly Cities (AFC) program. These changes in living environments can lead to configurations that are more or less favorable to trajectories of aging. 

How do these changes relate to territories? Do difficulties in grasping the changing nature of living environments pose additional obstacles to the implementation of interventions such as AFC? 

We are looking for communication proposals that reflect the dynamic nature of living environments. In our questioning, the concept of a neighborhood emerges as a privileged notion to question the evolution of links and solidarity between people, neighbors, inhabitants, citizens, etc. A number of studies, including those by Golant (2003, 2014) and Nowick and Thalineau (2014), highlight the positive, yet relative, nature of aging in place. Some would also propose a “romanticization” of the home in the discourse of aging in place. An older person, aspiring to age in place in order to retain the dimensions of home, continuity and stability, will inevitably be called upon to transform a large part of his or her lifestyle, with mobility, social contacts and temporalities, among other things, being the object of the major adaptations required (Lord and Luxembourg, 2005; Lord, 2012; Després 2021). 

In these often unconscious and implicit changes, what are the most sensitive tactics, strategies and levers of adaptation? What would you have to give up (or conversely, rely heavily on) to keep your home, and what would be left of it after such changes? 

The results of decisions to “stay” or “leave” the home can differ greatly in many directions and take several years to develop, while adaptation can be much quicker for others. 

How can we respond to the different trajectories of different players and regions? How can we avoid “nostalgic” visions that may influence interventions in living environments? How can we support the “helped” as well as the “caregiver” in changing adaptation conditions (operational, financial, psychological or relational)? What are the promises of living environments conceived as adaptive and evolving?

Theme 3: Involving players in social and spatial transformations

Theme 3 focuses on the role of seniors in responding to the changes they are not only experiencing but can also bring about. 

Given the current focus on participatory research and intervention approaches aimed at inclusion and mobilizing people’s power to act, how can we better engage seniors and their social networks, without reinforcing processes of normalization or instrumentalizing participation? What methods or tools should be chosen from the constellation of approaches available? 

If participation can enable people to see their political rights updated, it invites us to think about the willingness and ability of seniors to play an active, even contentious, role in the evolution of their lives. Social inclusion is a complex process that recognizes the possibilities and diversity of individual and collective modes of participation. The difficulty lies in positioning each individual in his or her different roles and status. Involvement with local associations, the development of local diagnostic tools, in-home support, and local travel are all examples of participation that are valued scientifically, socially and professionally.

Taking part in action and in changing living environments cannot happen without the recognition and redistribution of concrete and symbolic resources, nor without taking rights and powers into account.

We are looking for critical contributions that shed light on the place seniors wish to or currently occupy in these participatory, collaborative, creative or other schemes, as well as on the spin-offs of their involvement in civic, community, and political action where living environments are concerned, notably through the production or adaptation of housing and habitats, intergenerational places of collective use, and inclusive public spaces.

A number of issues concern ways of giving seniors access to powers and resources (income, government transfers, public, community and private care and services, etc.) so that they can play a genuine part in decisions and interventions in their living environments. The possible areas of participation are highly diversified and often fragmented along disciplinary or administrative lines, and on several spatial scales. The rapid expansion of AFC interventions in Quebec, as well as across the French-speaking world and beyond, clearly demonstrates the complexity of acting together for the well-being of seniors, a more inclusive society and a better way of living together. Several areas of action are concerned by the invisibility of profiles or groups of seniors on the territory.

This includes, but is not limited to, our desire to draw attention to the contexts and processes leading to the mistreatment of seniors and their loved ones, as well as to the development of public policies and intervention programs within living environments or at the end of life. 

The place of seniors in decision-making on regional management and planning is also an important subject of interest, particularly in contexts of instability and short timeframes in regional management processes.

The evolution, adaptation, and creation of innovative real estate projects and a range of adapted residential and transport options, as well as the ways in which they are managed by different types of players, are other issues we wish to explore.

Invited audiences and contributions 

The 7th International Conference of REIACTIS in Montreal is intended to be a meeting place for different types of knowledge and action on aging. On the one hand, we expect contributions from scientific researchersfrom research groups and networks in the world of research (university, academic, or extra-academic). Proposals from up-and-coming scientists are also strongly encouraged. On the other hand, the Conference’s organizing committee also wishes to address the ecosystem of intervention (professional, associative, community) with seniors, as well as the territories they inhabit, the spaces and organizations in which they participate, the services they consume or request, and the care and programs intended for them. This invitation includes associative or community stakeholders, or any organization working in the field of social, community and territorial innovation and intervention. Finally, papers from organizations, institutions or other groups (food, health, architecture, urban planning, development, transport, other), including creative and design firms or agencies (objects, furnishings, housing, buildings, public spaces) for which ageing is an issue for reflection or action, are also eagerly awaited.

Proposals for papers must be submitted on the 7th international REIACTIS Conference website between August 30th and October 10th, 2023. Proposals are expected from:

1) Scientific field

• Individual paper (maximum 5,000 characters, including spaces).
• Symposium (5,000 characters maximum, including spaces) with abstracts from all speakers (3,000 characters maximum, include           ing spaces).
• Poster (scientific project, final or provisional research results, presentation of methods, etc.) (maximum 5,000 characters, including spaces).

2) Intervention field

• Panel (3 to 5 speakers maximum) (6,000 characters maximum, including spaces). A round table is a meeting proposed by a sponsor, bringing together researchers and non-researchers to discuss a given theme
• Presentation of a local project, study or initiative (5,000 maximum, including spaces).
• Poster (professional, association, community or other projects) (maximum 5,000 characters, including spaces).

Important Dates

For further information, please contact us: montreal2024@reiactis.net

References

Beilharz P (2018) The legacy of Zygmunt Bauman. Journal of Sociology 54(3) : 294-299.

Bezirgani A, Lachapelle U (2020) Étude sur l’accès à l’alimentation des personnes âgées de Montréal et Laval : apport potentiel de l’épicerie en ligne ? Montréal : Département d’études urbaines et touristiques de l’Université du Québec à Montréal.

Bickel J-F, Hugentobler V (2018) Les multiples faces du pouvoir d’agir à l’épreuve du vieillissement. Gérontologie et société 40(157).

Buffel T, Handler S, Phillipson C (2018) Age-Friendly cities and communities: A global perspective. Bristol, University Press.

Caradec V (2001) Sociologie de la vieillesse et du vieillissement. Paris, Nathan.

Caradec V (2004). Les « supports » de l’individu vieillissant. Retour sur la notion de « déprise », In Matériaux pour une sociologie de l’individu, Caradec V et Martuccelli D (dir.), Perspectives et débats. Villeneuve-d’Ascq, Presses universitaires du Septentrion (p. 25-42).

Chouraqui J (2020) Les réformes et l’État et la transformation des services publics : des tendances internationales au local, quels effets pour les territoires ? Annales de géographie 2(732) : 5-30.

Clément S, Drulhe M, Mantovani J, Membrado M (2018) Genèse de la déprise. Gérontologie et société40(155) : 27-32.

Clément S, Drulhe M, Mantovani J, Membrado M (2018) Genèse de la déprise. Gérontologie et société40(155) : 27-32.

Clément S, Mantovani J (1999) Les déprises en fin de parcours de vie. Gérontologie et société 22(90) : 95-108.

Davis M (2013) Hurried lives: Dialectics of time and technology in liquid modernity. Thesis Eleven 118(1): 7-18.

Després M (2021) Vieillissement et mobilité quotidienne : regards croisés sur les stratégies de déplacements d’individus vieillissants résidant dans les régions de Montréal et Laval. Montréal, Université de Montréal, thèse de doctorat (Ph.D. aménagement). 

Fougeyrollas P, Boucher N, Charrier F (2016) Un modèle à l’épreuve du temps : le point sur le Modèle de développement humain et du Processus de production du handicap (MDH-PPH 2). Déficience intellectuelle et trouble du spectre de l’autisme 8(1) : 6-13.

Fraser N (2005) Qu’est-ce que la justice sociale ? Reconnaissance et distribution. Paris, La Découverte.

Golant S (2014) Age-friendly communities: Are we expecting too much? Institute for Research on Public Policy Insight 5: 1-20.

Golant SM (2015) Residential normalcy and the enriched coping repertoires of successfully aging older adults. Gerontologist 55: 70-82.

Hall JR (2017) Bauman liquide. Socio 8: 57-70.

Honneth A (2005) Invisibilité : sur l’épistémologie de la « reconnaissance ». Réseaux 1(129/130) : 39-57.

Kaufmann V, Ravalet E (2019) L’urbanisme par les modes de vie : outils d’analyse pour un aménagement durable. Lausanne, Métis Presses.

Lord S (2012) Vieillir dans un milieu dédié à l’automobile. Évolution des rapports à soi et à l’autre dans l’expérience de la mobilité quotidienne, In Les défis territoriaux face au vieillissement, Viriot-Durandal J-P, Pihet C, Chapon PM (dir.), Paris, La Documentation française (31-46).

Lord S, Negron-Poblete P, Torres J (dir.) (2015) Mobilité et inclusion, quelles relations ? Québec, Collection études urbaines, Presses de l’Université Laval.

Lord S, Piché D (2018) Vieillissement et aménagement. Perspectives plurielles. Montréal, Presses de l’Université de Montréal.

Meidani A, Cavalli S (2019) Figures du vieillir et formes de déprise. Paris, Érès, coll. L’âge et la vie – Prendre soin des personnes âgées et des autres.

Moulaert T, Garon S (2016) Age-Friendly Cities and Communities in International Comparison. Political Lessons, Scientific Avenues, and Democratic Issues. New-York, Springer.

Moulaert T, Scheider M, Viriot-Durandal J-P (dir.) (2018) Vieillissement et territoires. Défis démographiques, enjeux démocratiques (2). Retraite et société (79)

Moulaert T, Viriot-Durandal J-P (2013) Le « vieillissement actif » sur la scène internationale : Perspectives méthodologiques pour l’étude d’un référentiel polymorphe. Les politiques sociales 1(1-2) : 10-21.

Negron-Poblete P, Séguin A-M (2018) L’usage généralisé de l’automobile chez les personnes âgées : choix ou contrainte ? In Les vieillissements sous la loupe. Entre mythes et réalités, Billette V, Marier P, A-M Séguin (Dir.). Québec : Les Presses de l’Université Laval (85-93).

Ngatcha-Ribert L, Simzac A-B, Moulaert T (2022) Société inclusive et vieillissement : discours, pratiques et controverses. Gérontologie et société 44(167) : 11-21.

Ngatcha-Ribert L, Simzac A-B, Moulaert T (2022) Société inclusive et vieillissement : discours, pratiques et controverses. Gérontologie et société 44(16       7).

Nowik L, Thalineau A (dir.) (2014) Vieillir chez soi. Les nouvelles formes du maintien à domicile. Rennes, Presses universitaires de Rennes, Le sens social.

Pednekar P, Peterson A (2018) Mapping pharmacy deserts and determining accessibility to community pharmacy services for elderly enrolled in a state pharmaceutical assistance program. PLoS ONE 13 (6).

Rosa H (2012) Accélération. Une critique sociale du temps. Paris, La Découverte.

Scheider M, Moulaert T, Viriot-Durandal J-P (dir.) (2017) Vieillissement et territoires. Défis démographiques, enjeux démocratiques (1). Retraite et Société (76).Viriot-Durandal J-P (dir.) (2012) Le pouvoir gris : Du lobbying au pouvoir sur soi. Gérontologie et société35(143).Viriot-Durandal J-P, Raymond E, Moulaert T, Charpentier M (dir.) (2015) Droit de vieillir et citoyenneté des aînés. Pour une perspective internationale. Québec, Presses de l’université du Québec, coll. Problèmes sociaux & interventi.

Conference Organization

Organized by University of Montréal in partnership with Université Laval, University of Sherbrooke, University of Moncton, the Centre collégial d’expertise en gérontologie du Cégep de Drummondville and the International Chair Société Inclusive et Avancée en Age (SIAGE) at University of Lorraine, the 7th International Conference, “Ageing Trajectories. Considering the Plurality of Contexts and Time” continues REIACTIS’ ambition to promote research on aging and dialogue with society.

The event will bring together various groups of researchers, scientific networks and learned societies from Québec and abroad. Its Scientific Advisory Board is made up of over 80 members from universities and other research institutions in the Americas, Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Based in Montréal, the 7th edition of the REIACTIS International Conference offers a rare opportunity to compare points of view on international and interdisciplinary levels, in the spirit of openness between French- and English-speaking areas, while inviting other cultural areas, particularly Spanish-speaking ones, to join in this exchange.

The REIACTIS 2024 International Conference is designed to bring together the domains of research, practice and public decision-making, and is open to civil society actors in the field of ageing.

Organizing Committee

• Sébastien Lord, Université de Montréal
• Julie Castonguay, Centre collégial d’expertise en gérontologie du Cégep de Drummondville
• Radoslav Gruev, Université de Lorraine
• Mélanie Levasseur, Université de Sherbrooke
• Mathilde Loiselle, Université de Montréal
• Ruth Ndjaboue, Université de Sherbrooke
• Paula Negron-Poblete, Université de Montréal
• Mario Paris, Université de Moncton
• Émilie Raymond, Université Laval
• Samuèle Rémillard-Boilard, Université de Sherbrooke
• Edgar Schnepp, Université de Montréal
• Jean-Philippe Viriot-Durandal, Université de Lorraine

Scientific Committee

• Argoud, Dominique, Maître de Conférences, Université Paris-Est Créteil, LIRTES, France
• Balard, Frédéric, Maître de Conférences, Université de Lorraine, 2L2S, France
• Beaulieu, Marie, Professeure retraitée et associée, Université de Sherbrook, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l’Estrie, Canada
• Bédard, Marie-Ève, PhD en gérontologie, Cégep de Drummondville, Université de Sherbrooke, Canada
• Behladj-Ziane, Kheira, Professeure des Universités, Université de Lorraine, 2L2S, France
• Béland, Daniel, Professeur en science politique, Université McGill,  , Canada
• Berg, Nicolas, Docteur, CHU de Liège,  , Belgique
• Berthod, Marc-Antoine, Professeur, Haute école de travail social et de la santé Lausanne (HETSL) Haute école spécialisée de Suisse occidentale (HES-SO),  , Suisse
• Bertillot, Hugo, Enseignant chercheur, Université Catholique de Lille, HADéPaS, ETHICS, France
• Bolzman, Claudio, Professeur honoraire, Haute école spécialisée de Suisse occidentale, Suisse
• Bonnet, Magalie, Professeure de psychologie, Université de Franche-Comté, Besançon, France
• Bosquet, Antoine, Docteur (MD), Assistance-Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Louis-Mourier, Université Paris Cité, France
• Bresson, Maryse, Professeure de sociologie, Université Paris-Saclay -Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Laboratoire Printemps, France
• Caradec, Vincent, Professeur de sociologie, Université de Lille, Centre de Recherches « Individus, Épreuves, Sociétés, France
• Castelli Dransart, Dolores Angela, Professeure ordinaire, HES-SO Haute école de travail social Fribourg, Suisse
• Castonguay, Julie, Chercheur, Cégep de Drummondville, Centre collégial d’expertise en gérontologie, Canada
• Cavalli, Stefano, Professeur, Haute école spécialisée de la Suisse italienne (SUPSI), Suisse
• Chopard-dit-Jean, Aurélie, Psychologue, Docteure en psychologie de l’Université de Lausanne, Université de Lausanne (Suisse) et de l’Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté (France), Laboratoire de psychologie de l’Université de Franche-Comté, France
• Desjeux, Cyril, Directeur scientifique, Handéo, France
• Gramain, Agnès, Professeur des Universités, Université de Lorraine, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, France
• Gruev, Radoslav, Docteur en sociologie, Université de Lorraine, REIACTIS, 2L2S, France
• Gucher, Catherine, Maîtresse de conférences, HDR., Université Grenoble Alpes, Laboratoire PACTE, France
• Hamez, Grégory, Professeur de géographie, Université de Lorraine, LOTERR, France
• Hintermeyer, Pascal, Professeur émérite, Université de Strasbourg, France
• Jory, Hervé, Maître de conférences en sociologie, Université de Lorraine, 2L2S, France
• Kern, Dominique, Professeur des Universités, Université de Haute Alsace, Laboratoire Interuniversitaire des Sciences de l’Éducation et de la Communication, France
• Kornfeld, Rosita, Retraitée et consultante, Université Catholique du Chili, Université Catholique du Chili,  , Chili
• Kushtanina, Veronika, Maître de conférences, Université de Franche-Comté, LASA, France
• Labit, Anne, Maître de conférence en sociologie, IUT de l’Indre/Université d’Orléans UMR CITERES/Université de Tours, France
• Labidi, Lassaad, Professeur de l’enseignement supérieur, Université de Carthage, Institut National du Travail et des Études Sociales, Tunisie
• Le Borgne Uguen, Françoise, Professeure de sociologie, Université de Brest, Labers, France
• Leleu, Myriam, Maître-assistante, Enseignante-chercheure, Haute École Louvain en Hainaut, Belgique
• Levilain, Hervé, Professeur de sociologie, Université de Lorraine, 2L2S, France
• Lord, Sébastien, Professeur d’aménagement, Directeur de l’Observatoire Ivanhoé Cambridge, Président du REIACTIS, Université de Montréal
• Lucas, Barbara, Professeure ordinaire, HES Haute école de travail social, HES-SO Genève, Suisse
• Macia, Enguerran, Directeur de Recherche, CNRS, ADES, France
• Marchal, Hervé, Professeur de sociologie, Université de Bourgogne, Laboratoire interdisciplinaire de recherche Sociétés, sensibilités et soins, France
• Marcilhac, Anne, Maitre de conférences HDR, Directrice de l’ITEV, École Pratique des Hautes Études, France
• Mascova, Elena, Sociologue, responsable de projets, Initiatives et Recherches sur le Travail d’Emancipation (IRTEM), France
• Meidani, Anastasia, Maître de conférences HDR, Université Toulouse-Jean Jaurès, GESTES, France, Grèce
• Morales, Yves, Maitre de conférences HDR, Université de Toulouse, CRESCO , France
• Moulin, Pierre, Maître de conférences en psychologie sociale, Université de Lorraine, CREN, Centre de recherche sur les médiations, France
• Negron, Paula, Professeure agrégée, Université de Montréal, Canada
• Ngatcha Ribert, Laëtitia, Chercheure associée, Université le Have Normandie, IDEES, France
• Ogg, Jim, Chercheur associé à l’unité de recherche sur le vieillissement, CNAV, Grand Bretagne
• Oris, Michel, Professeur, Conseil Supérieur Espagnol de la Recherche Scientifique, Université de Genève, Laboratoire de démographie et d’études familiales, Belgique
• Paris, Mario, Professeur, travail social, Université de Moncton, Canada
• Perez Salanova, Mercè, Docteure en psychologie, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Espagne
• Perret-Guillaume, Christine, Professeur des universités-praticien hospitalie (gériatrie), CHRU Nancy, France
• Perrin, Claire, Professeure des universités, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Laboratoire sur les Vulnérabilités et l’Innovation dans le Sport, France
• Pihet, Christian, Professeur émérite de Géographie, Université d’Angers, Laboratoire de géographie humaine, France
• Polesi, Hervé, Maître de conférences associé, Université de Strasbourg, France
• Pott, Murielle, Professeure HES ordinaire, Haute Ecole de Santé Vaud (HESAV), HES-SO, Lausanne, Suisse
• Pouchadon, Marie-Laure, Maître de conférences en sociologie, Université Bordeaux-Montaigne, IUT Bordeaux-Montaigne, Laboratoire Passages, France
• Prieto Lobato, Juan Maria, Professeur, Université de Valladolid, Espagne
• Rémillard-Boilard, Samuèle, Professeure adjointe, Université de Sherbrooke, Canada
• Rochot, Justine, Docteure en sociologie, Centre d’Étude sur la Chine Moderne et Contemporaine (Hong Kong), France
• Rodríguez Sumaza, Carmen, Senior Lecturer, Université de Valladolid, Espagne
• Rouamba, George, Enseignant-chercheur, Université Joseph Ki Zerbo, Les Afriques dans le monde, Burkina Faso
• Roulet Schwab, Delphine, Professeure ordinaire, Haute École de la Santé La Source, Haute École Spécialisée de Suisse occidentale, Suisse
• Sajoux, Muriel, Maître de Conférences en Sciences Économiques, Université de Tours, CITERES (CItés TERritoires Environnement et Sociétés), France
• Scheider-Yilmaz, Marion, Docteure en sociologie, Université Grenoble-Alpes, Laboratoire PACTE, France
• Serfaty-Garzon, Perla, Maître de Conférences, Université de Strasbourg, Faculté de psychologie, France
• Simzac, Anne-Bérénice, Docteure en sociologie, Responsable pôle recherche Generacio, France
• Spini, Dario, Professeur ordinaire, Université de Lausanne, Institut de psychologie, Centre LIVES, Suisse
• Trouvé, Hélène, Docteure en économie, Cheffe de projet, URV, Direction statistiques, prospective et recherche, CNAV, France
• Van de Velde, Cécile, Professeure de sociologie, Université de Montréal, Chaire de recherche du Canada sur les inégalités sociales et les parcours de vie, Canada
• Vanneste, Damien, Enseignant-chercheur en sociologie, Université catholique de Lille, HADéPaS/ETHICS, France Viriot Durandal, Jean-Philippe, Professeur en sociologie, Titulaire de la Chaire internationale SIAGE, Université de Lorraine, 2L2S-Metz, France

Location

Pavillon Jean Brillant – Université de Montréal

3200 Rue Jean-Brillant

Montréal, QC H3T 1N8

For further information, please contact us: montreal2024@reiactis.net