People with mental health problems experience significant inequalities including high levels of early mortality, morbidity, unemployment, poverty, isolation and social exclusion. This also presents major health, social and economic challenges to wider society. Our International Network unites leaders from academia, policy, practice, business and community organisations from the EU and US. Each partner has an impressive track record of leading evidence-based policy and programme development at a national level and each has pioneered participation in research of people with lived experience of mental health problems. This transatlantic network will share and build upon state of the art knowledge in four key areas of social inclusion: citizenship, recovery, stigma and public policy. Our collaboration will enable new knowledge, synergies and solutions to emerge by connecting our diverse national and disciplinary perspectives with the lived experiences of people with mental health problems. Through the network we will enhance the skills and career opportunities for researchers and practitioners, and contribute towards the sustained inclusion of people with lived experience. This grant will enable us to share our learning in profound ways to understand ‘what works’ in very different social contexts, including through interaction between the four themed work packages. There is a strong commitment amongst partners to maintain the network long term. As partners we have considerable experience in supporting participatory mental health research with migrant citizens, people who are homeless and diverse ethnic minorities. Social exclusion is often intensified for women who encounter gender-based discrimination and cumulative adversity. Therefore, throughout this proposal, we will pay particular attention to issues of intersectionality in relation to gender, and consider how promoting social inclusion, citizenship and rights must take account of social identities.

The PRIME project will broaden understanding of online harm and how it can be mitigated through new systems, tools and processes by focusing on Minority Ethnic (ME) communities' experiences of digitalised services, particularly in the areas of housing, health and energy. We will draw on knowledge, methods and skills from social policy, cyber security and privacy, data mining and machine learning; human computer interaction, applied linguistics and educational technology. Working closely with REPHRAIN, we will engage with a wide range of individuals from ME communities, community organisations, public agencies and energy suppliers to identify and categorise the nature of the harms experienced, and assess the adequacy of existing systems and processes to counter them. We will translate this knowledge into the co-design and co-production of novel, effective and scalable social and technological harm-mitigating solutions through a Citizen-led Race Equity Living Lab (CREL). The outputs will include policy guidance in the fields of housing, health and energy as well as cross-cutting recommendations for improving online services more generally; educational resources for harm mitigation to enable individuals and organisations to more effectively protect themselves; as well as better privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) that counter discriminatory processes in digitalised services. We will also produce benchmark datasets, tools and models to enable organisations to address ethnic inequalities in service provision and demonstrate more accountability to the public in terms of greater transparency and equitable service outcomes.

As interaction on online Web-based platforms is becoming an essential part of people's everyday lives and data-driven AI algorithms are starting to exert a massive influence on society, we are experiencing significant tensions in user perspectives regarding how these algorithms are used on the Web. These tensions result in a breakdown of trust: users do not know when to trust the outcomes of algorithmic processes and, consequently, the platforms that use them. As trust is a key component of the Digital Economy where algorithmic decisions affect citizens' everyday lives, this is a significant issue that requires addressing. ReEnTrust explores new technological opportunities for platforms to regain user trust and aims to identify how this may be achieved in ways that are user-driven and responsible. Focusing on AI algorithms and large scale platforms used by the general public, our research questions include: What are user expectations and requirements regarding the rebuilding of trust in algorithmic systems, once that trust has been lost? Is it possible to create technological solutions that rebuild trust by embedding values in recommendation, prediction, and information filtering algorithms and allowing for a productive debate on algorithm design between all stakeholders? To what extent can user trust be regained through technological solutions and what further trust rebuilding mechanisms might be necessary and appropriate, including policy, regulation, and education? The project will develop an experimental online tool that allows users to evaluate and critique algorithms used by online platforms, and to engage in dialogue and collective reflection with all relevant stakeholders in order to jointly recover from algorithmic behaviour that has caused loss of trust. For this purpose, we will develop novel, advanced AI-driven mediation support techniques that allow all parties to explain their views, and suggest possible compromise solutions. Extensive engagement with users, stakeholders, and platform service providers in the process of developing this online tool will result in an improved understanding of what makes AI algorithms trustable. We will also develop policy recommendations and requirements for technological solutions plus assessment criteria for the inclusion of trust relationships in the development of algorithmically mediated systems and a methodology for deriving a "trust index" for online platforms that allows users to assess the trustability of platforms easily. The project is led by the University of Oxford in collaboration with the Universities of Edinburgh and Nottingham. Edinburgh develops novel computational techniques to evaluate and critique the values embedded in algorithms, and a prototypical AI-supported platform that enables users to exchange opinions regarding algorithm failures and to jointly agree on how to "fix" the algorithms in question to rebuild trust. The Oxford and Nottingham teams develop methodologies that support the user-centred and responsible development of these tools. This involves studying the processes of trust breakdown and rebuilding in online platforms, and developing a Responsible Research and Innovation approach to understanding trustability and trust rebuilding in practice. A carefully selected set of industrial and other non-academic partners ensures ReEnTrust work is grounded in real-world examples and experiences, and that it embeds balanced, fair representation of all stakeholder groups. ReEnTrust will advance the state of the art in terms of trust rebuilding technologies for algorithm-driven online platforms by developing the first AI-supported mediation and conflict resolution techniques and a comprehensive user-centred design and Responsible Research and Innovation framework that will promote a shared responsibility approach to the use of algorithms in society, thereby contributing to a flourishing Digital Economy.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is a major international human rights treaty to which the UK is a signatory. The UK will soon be formally reviewed by the CRPD treaty body (the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) in order to assess UK progress towards CRPD-compliance. This AHRC impact and engagement project will support the UK's preparation for the UN Engagement Process. It will ensure that the UK representative is informed by recent research on legal and ethical issues pertaining to CRPD-compliance, and it will co-ordinate a series of consultations to develop a broad consensus as to the best path towards CRPD-compliance in the UK. The project will focus upon the provisions of law in three distinct legal jurisdictions (England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland) as regards persons with impaired decision-making capacity. Some persons with disabilities suffer from impaired decision-making capacity. A person suffering from dementia may have difficulty thinking through important financial information; a person with a learning disability may not be able to make decisions about medical treatment; a person with a brain injury may not be able to make a decision about a proposed settlement from an insurance company, etc. In the UK, legal arrangements governing such circumstances are devolved. There is one statute that governs England and Wales: The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In Scotland, the Adults with Incapacity Act 2000 (AWI) applies. In Northern Ireland, matters pertaining to adult incapacity are currently governed by case law, but a new piece of legislation is being prepared for consideration by the Northern Ireland Assembly. This legal diversity presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is to ensure that the UK representative in the UN Engagement Process has the benefit of adequate research as regards progress towards CRPD compliance across the UK. The opportunity is to use this legal diversity as a tool in identifying the best ways to deal with circumstances of incapacity while ensuring respect for the rights of persons with disabilities and compliance with the UK's obligations under the CRPD. The issues around compliance with the CRPD are sensitive and contentious, and the stakes are high. For example, in England and Wales, the MCA provides for "best-interests decision-making" on behalf of persons lacking in decision-making capacity. In Scotland, the AWI avoids any mention of "best interests." The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has maintained that "the best interests paradigm must be abolished." Does this mean that England and Wales must repeal or amend the MCA? If so, does the AWI present a better alternative? What strategy should Northern Ireland adopt, as it prepares to legislate on this matter? The AHRC-funded Essex Autonomy Project (EAP) is an interdisciplinary research and public policy initiative with expertise on the ethical and legal imperative to respect the autonomy of persons suffering from mental disorders or other mental impairments. It has played a key role in educating policy makers about the legal and ethical challenges associated with CRPD-compliance. In 2014, the EAP co-ordinated a consultation exercise and provided technical research support to the UK Ministry of Justice in developing a formal legal opinion as to whether the MCA is compliant with the CRPD -- and about what to do if it is not. In this project the EAP team will collaborate with the Centre for Mental Health and Incapacity Law, Rights and Policy (Edinburgh Napier University) in order to assess CRPD-compliance on mental capacity/adult incapacity across all three jurisdictions of the UK. The project will ensure that the UK is prepared for the UN Engagement Process, and contribute to the international reform of law and practice as regards persons with impaired decision-making capacity.

The 'MARCH' Network proposes that Assets for Resilient Communities lie at the heart of Mental Health (M-ARC-H) and is dedicated to advancing research into the impact of these assets in enhancing public mental health and wellbeing, preventing mental illness and supporting those living with mental health conditions. Specifically, it will advance our understanding of the impact of social, cultural and community assets including the arts, culture, heritage, libraries, parks, community gardens, allotments, leisure centres, volunteer associations, social clubs and community groups, of which there are an anticipated 1 million in the UK. The network will bring together a Disciplinary Expert Group of researchers with a Policy Group of major national policy bodies, a Patient Public Involvement Group of national mental health charities, and a Community Engagement Group of national organisations. Across three years, our network will unite research with policy and practice to tackle critical questions of research priorities, methods, and implementation in this field; understand and resolve barriers to mobilising community assets; and provide training and support to the next generation of researchers. Specifically, our network will address questions organised in two core work streams (WS): WS1. Cross-disciplinary research and challenges: (a) What evidence is there, from a cross-disciplinary perspective, for how and why community assets impact on public health and wellbeing and the lives of those living with mental health problems, and where are the gaps for future research? (b) How can we use a cross-disciplinary approach to provide meaningful data to different stakeholders and users? WS2. Equity of engagement and access innovation: (a) Who amongst the UK population, demographically and geographically, currently engages with these programmes and how does participation vary dependent on mental health? (b) What are the current barriers and enablers to engagement at an individual, organisational and policy level and how can we develop innovative approaches to enhance engagement, especially amongst the vulnerable? This research work will be complemented by a rich portfolio of impact, engagement and training activities (see 'Impact Summary'). This network aligns with strategic priorities of the AHRC and ESRC as well as having a secondary relevance to the priorities of the MRC (through its consideration of the role of community assets and social prescribing to support medical approaches to mental health), NERC (through its exploration of the impact of green spaces) and EPSRC (through its focus on the opportunities provided by technology for driving research forwards). It has also been designed in response to the Network Plus Research Agenda. In addition to the objectives already discussed in the prior Je-S section, it is responsive to many of the mental health challenges cited in the agenda. For example, the call specification noted that only 25% of people with mental health problems receive ongoing treatment. Whilst there are recognised economic and resource constraints with delivering sufficient mental health services, this Network proposes to focus on the role that existing community assets could play in providing support to a much wider range of people in the UK including those on waiting lists. As another example, the call specification raised that 70% of children and adolescents with mental health problems have not had appropriate interventions at an earlier age. This Network will involve working with policy makers and community organisations to see how research could help overcome barriers to access with the aim of engaging more young people and those who are hard to reach. Overall, the network will seek to understand and support future research into how community assets could be mobilised to encourage more resilient individuals and communities with a greater understanding of and capacity for self-management of mental health.