This week we are delighted to interview Associate Professor Dr Serena Natile, for our Warwick Law School Staff Spotlight series.

Can you provide a brief overview of your academic background and professional experience in the field of law?

I hold an LLB (Laurea in Giurisprudenza) from the University of Siena, Italy and a MA (taught and research) in Law and International Relations from the School of International Studies, University of Trento, also in Italy. During my LLB I spent an academic year as an Erasmus visiting student at the University of Bristol, School of Law and that was my first experience of UK academia. In Italy we mainly have large lectures and are assessed via oral exams, so I really appreciated the discussions in small tutorials and to be able to do research and write essays. Studying in the UK in 2005-2006 also influenced the topic of my UG dissertation: a critical analysis of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act and its incompatibility with human rights. During my MA I had the opportunity to focus more on international relations and politics as well as international political economy and gender, and this defined my long-term research interests.

Throughout my university studies I was very fortunate to have a scholarship, but I also worked in hospitality and as a part-time journalist for a local newspaper, and I collaborated with organisations for the legal protection of migrant women in Italy. This work inspired my MA dissertation on ‘The status of immigrant women in the European Union: gender, migration, religion’. Towards the end of my MA I started working in Brussels: first as a research assistant for the Permanent Representation of Italy to the EU in the migration and asylum cluster, and later for the EU-United Nations Joint Migration and Development Initiative, where I worked on gender, migration and development. It was during this time that I was encouraged to apply for PhD scholarships and I decided to accept an offer from Kent Law School where I also joined the steering committee of the Kent Centre for Law, Gender and Sexuality. At Kent I had amazing mentors and the opportunity to work as a research assistant on various projects on gender, international law, development, and human rights. After completing my PhD in December 2016 I continued to lecture at Kent and later I worked as a postdoctoral researcher at King’s College London (2017-2018) and as a Lecturer in Socio-Legal Studies at Brunel University London (2018-2020) before joining Warwick in October 2020.

How long have you been in your role at Warwick Law School and what motivated you to pursue a career in academia?

I joined Warwick Law School in October 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic. I had already collaborated with colleagues at Warwick and I considered WLS one of the best places to develop my research and teaching: because of its feminist, socio-legal, law in context, critically internationalist traditions, and for its openness and collegiality. Joining during the pandemic was not easy because I didn’t have the opportunity to meet people in person and had to prepare a set of new lectures quickly rethinking my pedagogical approach to adapt to online teaching. It was a very intense time but students were extraordinary and we managed to build a vibrant and supportive learning space. Since then I developed new modules designed around my research expertise and I feel very privileged to be able to teach topics I care so much about and provide students with tools to look at the world critically, with insight and originality.

As an undergraduate student I never considered pursuing an academic career, I was the first in my family to go to university and I didn’t think academia was an option. At the time I wanted to work in the legal department of an international organisation such as the UN or Amnesty International and eventually become a human rights lawyer. Interestingly I decided I wanted to study law when I was very little after watching the film ‘Philadelphia’ on tv, there was a trial for discriminatory dismissal (on grounds of sexuality and disability) and when asked why he loved the law the main character (Tom Hanks), who was a lawyer, replied: ‘every now and again, not often but occasionally, you get to be a part of justice being done. That really is quite a thrill when that happens’. Growing up I developed a much more critical understanding about practicing the law, but research and writing was probably what I enjoyed the most. During my MA I had more opportunities to develop research projects and my supervisor at the time, Professor Luisa Antoniolli, strongly encouraged me to apply for a PhD. Having supportive and inspiring mentors has been a key driver of my academic journey and I’m immensely grateful to my mentors Toni Williams, Donatella Alessandrini, Ann Stewart, Judy Fudge, Susanne Soederberg, William Spurlin, David Nelken, among many others. In my work outside academia, particularly during my time in Brussels, one of my main tasks was to conduct research to write position papers and policy reports. I used to feel constrained about complying with the requirements of the organisations I was working for. As academics we can formulate our own research questions and develop path-breaking methodologies to answer them, and I consider this freedom thrilling and invaluable.

Could you describe your primary areas of research interest and expertise within the field of law? What inspired you to focus on these areas?

My research interests lie at the intersections of international law, feminist political economy, labour rights, and digital technologies. My work is mainly concerned with how the law enables, reproduces, or can disrupt the unequal distribution of wealth, power and responsibilities on grounds of gender, race, class and geopolitical location. Methodologically I bring together socio-legal inquiry and international political economy analysis to examine issues of coloniality, social reproduction and maldistribution and, more generally, the relationship between law and social (in)justice. My first monograph, based on my PhD research, is titled The Exclusionary Politics of Digital Financial Inclusion: Mobile Money, Gendered Walls and was published in 2020 (RIPE Series in Global Political Economy, Routledge). This book provides a socio-legal critique of the narratives, institutions, and governance of digital financial inclusion as a development strategy for gender equality, and argues for a decolonial politics of redistribution to guide digital finance as well as international law and development. During my postdoc at King’s College London I worked with Professor David Nelken on the topic of ‘Digital Humanitarianism’, mapping how digital technologies are changing the governance of humanitarian assistance and analysing the law and policy dilemmas resulting from these changes. My current research projects include: ‘Feminist Recovery Plans for Covid-19 and Beyond: Learning from Grassroots Activism’; ‘Rosa Luxemburg & International Law’ (with Professor Christine Schwöbel-Patel); ‘Pluralising Law and Social Reproduction’ part of the ‘Pluralising Social Reproduction network’ led by Professor Shirin Rai (SOAS); and ‘Transnational Social Security Law in the Digital Age: Towards a Grassroots Politics of Redistribution’ for which I have been awarded the Independent Social Research Foundation (ISRF) Early Career Fellowship.

How would you describe your teaching philosophy?

My teaching philosophy has been shaped by my experience as a learner and a teacher and has developed in line with the idea of ‘teaching for justice’ theorised by feminist and critical pedagogy scholars. In my teaching I draw upon Paulo Freire’s dialogic approach as co-construction of knowledge and reciprocity (Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Penguin Books, 1979); bell hooks’ idea of engaged teaching as activism and healing (Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom, Routledge, 1994); and Jacqui Alexander’s idea that we all have ownership of a vision of justice that should be ‘collectively imagined, collectively guarded and collectively worked out’ (Pedagogies of Crossing, Duke University Press, 2006, p. 133). These approaches consider universities as places of collective learning and experimentation, where students can be engaged in an educational experience that creates, transforms and not only transfers knowledge; and can learn to think more critically about the impact of the law in the material world, and to use their education to bring about meaningful social change.

In the description of the modules I convene and teach, I add a note on pedagogy explaining my teaching philosophy and I invite students to define our reciprocal commitments and reflect on bell hooks’ words: “As a classroom community, our capacity to generate excitement is deeply affected by our interest in one another, in hearing one another’s voices, in recognising one another’s presence.” I remark my commitment to create an engaging, inclusive and intellectually challenging learning space, to be open to suggestions and willing to make adjustments, but also the expectation that students will be respectful, interested, prepared and kind to each other. My purpose is to approach both teaching and learning in a reflexive, critical and constructive way and I try to use these principles in UG and PG teaching as well as for PhD supervision.

Are there any specific teaching methods or approaches you find most effective in engaging students?

My teaching methods are very much inspired by my teaching philosophy. Of course any teaching practice depends on the subject, cohort and learning outcomes, but every teacher has some guiding principles. In designing and planning my teaching I pay particular attention to three aspects: providing students with tools for critical and imaginative thinking and make this part of the assessment; openness and experimentation; and a reflexive and collaborative approach.

Teaching should provide students with tools to interrogate assumptions and develop new ways to look at the world with insight and originality. These tools include, for example, conceptual and methodological frameworks through which students can ‘learn to learn’ instead of being provided with answers. Students should be able to acquire motivation, confidence and the ability to analyse, research, write and think for themselves. Critical and imaginative thinking also means to challenge students with a variety of complex and interdisciplinary readings and encourage them to ask questions and not just look for answers. It is important to design assessments that are fully part of this learning process and evaluate students on these different skills and not just on the amount of knowledge they absorb. Diversifying and pluralising reading lists and learning resources is necessary to develop engaging and grounded teaching practices and such practices need to be the result of collaborations and conversations with both colleagues and students.

There are some examples of teaching practices that I find effective in my modules. I try to design the lectures and seminars using current issues close to students’ interests as entry points. For instance, in my Labour Law in Context module I have used topics such as the legal status of interns/trainees, ongoing workers’ strikes, recent cases of discrimination in the workplace and the challenges posed by the gig economy. In my PG module Gender, Law and the Global Economy students are encouraged to think about themselves as part of global value chains, for instance as consumers who buy clothes made by people in other parts of the world, who work in precarious and often exploitative conditions. Recognising and discussing these connections aims to raise questions about ‘care’ as a participatory rather than a top-down aspect of education and to consider different ways in which the law can hinder or be instrumental to social justice.

In organising my modules I make sure to suggest key readings, but I also encourage students to select sources according to their own interests to then exchange views in class. For instance, in my Gender & the Law in the Global Context module I try to provide a range of feminist perspectives from different contexts and disciplines and I fully involve students in this task. I also try to design different assessments. For Gender & the Law students need to formulate their own research question. For Labour Law in Context students need to produce a group policy brief in addition to an individual research essay: group work, although not always easy, encourages them to negotiate with others and share accountability and success in the achievement of a common goal. Examples of group policy briefs can be seen here. Various feedback opportunities are built throughout the classes to make sure that the assessment is fully part of the learning journey and not just a final stage. More creative teaching practices and assessments can also be developed via collaborations, for instance in my previous position I worked with the university Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Manager to actively involve my students in the design of the University Sexual Violence and Harassment Policy as a form of assessment (I have written about this in the Handbook for Creating a Gender-Sensitive Curriculum: Teaching and Learning Strategies available here).

I am on research leave this academic year, but next year I will resume the teaching of my modules: the UG modules Labour Law in Context (LA3A6, 15-CAT), Gender & the Law in the Global Context (LA3C4, which will run for the first time next year as a 15-CAT module, while at the moment is part of the 30-CAT module Gender & the Law) and the PG module Gender, Law and the Global Economy (LA964). Students can email me if they have any queries!

Are you currently working on any research projects or publications? Could you provide some insight into these projects?

This academic year I’m on research leave to work on my research project ‘Transnational Social Security Law in the Digital Age: Towards a Grassroots Politics of Redistribution’ for which I have been awarded the ISRF Fellowship. This project considers transnational social security law, not yet an established disciplinary field, as the global responsibility to guarantee decent living standards and access to essential resources and services for all people worldwide. The project is motivated by the urgency to address the increasing global inequality and maldistribution of wealth and power and investigate whether/to what extent digitalisation can improve the provision of social security. The increasing promotion of private sector-provided digital technologies as a quick fix for inequality has moved attention away from international law’s responsibility for global redistributive interventions, while creating new forms of vulnerability and value extraction via fees and data.

The project asks whether a grassroots-inspired legal framework for transnational social security can contribute to disrupt the unjust mode of wealth and power distribution legitimised by international law and exacerbated by new technologies, and whether it can create new mechanisms for global accountability and redistribution. To answer this question the project develops a methodology that brings together a feminist political economy critique of international economic law and a prefigurative law-making approach. The feminist political economy framework interrogates the assumption that trade and financial relations (economic production) should be regulated internationally while social security (the distribution of the wealth created) is the responsibility of states alone or should be provided via aid, charity and philanthropy. This regulatory mismatch results in the unequal distribution of benefits and responsibilities that affect more vulnerable countries and communities. The prefigurative law-making methodology brings together prefigurative politics in the form of grassroots activists’ calls for global redistribution and an imaginative law-making approach that gives them the power to act as if they have the right to remake international law. This imaginative legal framework will be developed via consultations with stakeholders including international organisations, NGOs and grassroots activists. This framework will be applied to four case studies of digital social security programmes (in Kenya, Brazil, South Africa and India) to understand whether and how the adoption of such legal intervention can have a different distributive potential towards global socioeconomic justice.

I hope this project will inspire a new module on Transnational Social Security Law.

---

Thank you for completing our interview Serena!