Graduate Fellow

Matt Atwell is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Sociology at Temple University. Matt holds a master’s degree in applied economics from George Washington University. Before enrolling at Temple University, he was a public policy researcher based in Washington, DC.

Project Description
In July 2022, the Philadelphia 76ers announced plans to build a basketball arena (dubbed “76 Place”) on the doorstep of the city’s 150-year-old Chinatown. Nearby residents, business owners, and allies immediately opposed the arena, viewing it as an existential threat. Over the following two years, the proposed arena was contested in the public sphere. It eventually garnered the support of Philadelphia’s Mayor, Cherelle Parker, and passed through City Council until the owners of the 76ers abruptly abandoned the proposal in January 2025. Matt’s work explores how 76 Place fits into broader development trends within Philadelphia and the dynamics of the city’s racial politics that set the stage for the arena proposal, Mayor Parker’s and City Council's support of the project, and its eventual abandonment. This research contextualizes the proposal in terms of previously planned mega-projects within Chinatown, such as the Vine Street Expressway and the Pennsylvania Convention Center which stand today. More recent proposals, however, were abandoned after community resistance, including a baseball stadium, a casino, and a federal prison. His project explores why organizers have been successful in rebuffing these projects and why developers keep returning to the neighborhood despite opposition. His work sits at the intersection of racial capitalism, urban sociology, and social movements.

Research Team Fellow

Yu-Heng (Steven) Chen is a PhD student in the Department of Criminal Justice at Temple University. He holds a bachelor’s degree in crime prevention and corrections from Central Police University in Taiwan, a master’s degree in human rights and international politics from the University of Glasgow, and a master’s degree in criminal justice from Temple University. Before pursuing his doctoral studies, he worked as a correctional officer in Taiwan. His research interests include corrections, reentry, substance use, life-course criminology, human rights, and comparative justice

Project Description 
Steven’s dissertation project aims to explore the unique challenges faced by older incarcerated individuals, focusing on their distinctive lived experiences and the role of specialized programs tailored to this demographic. Although only a few correctional facilities in the US offer dedicated spaces or specialized programs and interventions for older incarcerated individuals in response to the rapid growth of this population, the roles of such programs and interventions remain largely unclear. Moreover, while the incorporation of lived experiences has gained increasing attention in criminology and criminal justice research, the lived experiences of older incarcerated individuals remain significantly underexplored. To address these research gaps, his study employs multiple qualitative methods, including field observation, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups conducted at a state correctional facility in Pennsylvania. The findings of this study will have several implications. He seeks to expand life-course theories by incorporating the distinct perspectives of older incarcerated individuals. Practically, the findings can inform policymakers in developing more policies accommodating older incarcerated individuals, including specialized programs and interventions that can address the distinct needs of this population as well as potential reforms to early release mechanisms based on the specific challenges older incarcerated individuals face.

Faculty Fellow

Dr. Nate Ela is Assistant Professor of Law in the Beasley School of Law at Temple University and a Faculty Affiliate in the Department of Sociology. His research focuses on the political economy of urban resilience and on the law of democracy.

Project Description​​​​​​​Dr. Ela is currently working on a project that asks why American law and political economy permits the pervasive disuse of economic and civic resources. Building on the concept of “Slack” developed by mid-twentieth-century scholars of organizations and politics, he explains how incumbents benefit from and defend rules that leave property and civic capacity lying idle. The project synthesizes findings from his prior research on struggles to put urban land to use, increase voter turnout, and forge a path to multiparty democracy in America. During the fellowship, he will also conduct interviews and archival research for his next book project on how people have tried to bolster urban resilience by studying and governing cities as socio-ecological systems.

Faculty Fellow

Dr. Brian Hutler is Assistant Professor in the Philosophy Department at Temple University and a Faculty Affiliate in the Beasley School of Law and the Center for Health Justice and Bioethics. His research focuses on law, justice, and health care.

Project Description
Dr. Hutler is working on a book defending a theory of human rights that emphasizes the participatory power of rights-holders in institutions and processes that affect their lives and wellbeing. On this theory, the human right to health, for example, can provide a legal mechanism for communities to confront and oppose discriminatory patterns of access to healthcare. The book will also argue that respect for human rights requires participatory processes to counterbalance the lack of accountability and loss of relationships caused by an increasing reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) in high-stakes decisions. Moreover, the book argues that human rights law provides a reservoir of legal content that judges in all legal systems can draw on when they interpret and apply their own laws. Turning to US law, then, the book suggests that individual rights protections in US constitutional law align with the participatory human rights framework, allowing rights to act as tools of collaboration and justice promotion, rather than mere limits on government action.

Graduate Fellow

Ali Berk Idil is a PhD student in the Department of Political Science at Temple University. He studies comparative political economy of developing countries with a focus on monetary policy.

Project Description
Since the 1990s, there has been a wide belief among economists and policymakers that independent central banks, isolated from the political pressures of governments and electoral cycles, will help ensure price stability. Such conventional wisdom led to a policy diffusion among both developed and developing countries which resulted in independent central banks all over the world. However, the causal mechanisms through which central bank independence (CBI) was established are underspecified. To further complicate things, there has been a backlash against this institutional configuration, particularly in developing countries. We have even fewer theories explaining this backlash against CBI. Ali Berk’s study aims to understand the set of scope conditions under which central banks gain or lose independence, hoping to arrive at a more unified theory that explains both the establishment and the retrenchment of CBI. He aims to conduct a mixed-method study which will incorporate longitudinal data on de jure CBI along with statistical models investigating the relationship between CBI and inflation rates. Further, using a cross-country comparative case study, he aims to conduct process tracing and explore and test the causal mechanisms that potentially explain the variation of CBI levels, especially in developing countries.

Faculty Fellow

Robin Kolodny is Professor in the Department of Political Science at Temple University. She researches how political parties, candidates, and donors influence elections in the United States.

Project Description Dr. Kolodny is working on a project tentatively titled “Political Law in Washington, D.C.: How Law Firms Shape the Policy Process.” Before the start of the second Trump administration, little attention was paid to these law firms. President Trump has since targeted 26 of these firms, all of which are at the center of Dr. Kolodny’s current research. There are many interests wishing to mold public policy in their favor. Since the 1970s, the number and type of governmental activities have exploded, and the demand for disclosure of interested activities has increased. To even monitor policy, interests need lobbyists, campaign tools, compliance with ethics laws, and responses to proposed regulations. Law firms offer guidance in campaign finance, government ethics, compliance services, and public communications strategies. The expansion of these services led directly to the creation of the subfield of “political law.” Many full-service law firms now offer guidance and representation on corporate political activity (CPA). Do interests engage in multiple methods of influence guided by their leadership or on the advice of their attorneys? If her hypothesis is correct, we may need to shift our thinking about how business exercises influence public policy. Elite intermediaries, who notoriously avoid the spotlight, may hold the answer.

Research Team Fellow

Belinda Peter is a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at Temple University. Her research focuses on how democratic backsliding impacts voter behavior. In particular, she studies how voters in India can overcome knowledge gaps to sanction undemocratic leaders.

Project Description
Belinda’s research project is based on the intuition that developing interventions that convince voters to sanction undemocratic incumbents is challenging because voters might not understand the consequences of seemingly subtle democratic violations, or voters’ partisan identities might outweigh concerns about democracy. Though the consequences of incremental democratic erosion can be disastrous, complete democratic breakdown might seem to voters like only a distant possibility. Therefore, she asks: When are voters willing to pay attention to and prioritize threats to democracy? To study this research question, She focuses on two distinct periods of democratic backsliding in India that allow her to compare an overt instance of democratic backsliding with more inconspicuous democratic transgressions.

Graduate Fellow

Gabrielle Reagan is a PhD student in the Department of Geography, Environment and Urban Studies and is pursuing the Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies Certificate at Temple University. Her research examines the intersection of food, bodies, health, and environment through the lens of pleasure. Drawing from critical food studies, feminist and visceral geographies, public health, and critical fat studies, her research explores how the new era of weight-loss drugs may suppress sensory enjoyment, ultimately diminishing both individual and collective food experiences with wider political and societal implications.

Project Description
Gabrielle’s dissertation project investigates how semaglutide (marketed as Ozempic and Wegovy), a drug originally prescribed for diabetes and now widely used for weight loss, impacts the felt experience of food pleasure among users. While much of the current discourse surrounding semaglutide focuses on its physiological effectiveness in reducing weight, this research shifts the focus toward its affective, sensory, and cultural consequences—specifically the diminishing experience of food pleasure. Grounded in feminist theory, food studies, and visceral geography, the project examines how this pharmaceutical intervention interacts with entrenched narratives about obesity, morality, and the body. The study combines ethnographic research with interviews and discourse analysis to explore how pleasure is experienced, policed, and potentially lost through semaglutide usage. It asks: What is at stake—politically, socially, and culturally—when a drug suppresses appetite, cravings, and food enjoyment? This research fills a crucial gap in understanding the broader societal implications of pharmacologically altered food experiences and argues for the importance of centering pleasure as a critical metric of wellbeing in health and nutrition policy.

Graduate Fellow

Esmeralda Soriano is a PhD student in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience with a concentration in developmental psychology and quantitative analysis at Temple University. Her research focuses on risk and resilience factors that influence psychosocial and behavioral adjustment outcomes among youth from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Project Description
The primary focus of Esmeralda’s project is to understand how risk factors across multiple contexts may be differentially associated with delinquent behaviors for minority and White youth. Racial and ethnic minority youth are disproportionately represented in the juvenile justice system—a disparity shaped by systemic and contextual influences. While extensive research has established that risk factors across various domains contribute to delinquent behaviors and potential juvenile justice involvement, fewer studies have examined whether and how the strength or direction of these associations differs by race and ethnicity. It is possible that certain risk factors may be associated with delinquent behaviors for minority youth and not for White youth, and vice versa. Alternatively, the same risk factors may be associated with delinquent behaviors for all youth but with varying degrees of strength. Her research seeks to clarify these nuanced patterns with the goal of informing more equitable and targeted prevention efforts and policies aimed at reducing racial/ethnic disparities within the juvenile justice system.

Faculty Fellow

Dr. Kimberley Thomas is Associate Professor and Graduate Chair in the Department of Geography, Environment and Urban Studies and Director of the Climate Justice Field School at Temple University. Her research on environmental justice and agrarian change in South and Southeast Asia examines the political economy of climate adaptation and the relational production of security and insecurity.

Project Description
State and development organizations have long sought private-sector investment to help bankroll social projects ranging from household water provision to upgrading transportation infrastructure. In the face of skyrocketing costs of climate change impacts, such groups are increasingly looking to private firms to finance adaptation measures. However, private sector participation hinges on the promise of profitable returns, which raises critical questions about the nature, implementation, and outcomes of private-financed adaptation interventions. Dr. Thomas’s project focuses on efforts to scale up production of farm, forest, livestock, and aquaculture products as a market-based approach to attract private adaptation finance and reduce climate vulnerability in Asia and beyond. She argues that responding to climate change through export commodity production reproduces the ahistorical and apolitical developmentalism of generations past by rendering climate vulnerability as a primarily economic and technical problem rather than what it is—a product of colonial racial capitalism.

Research Team Fellow

Dr. Rely Vîlcică is Associate Professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Temple University. Her research focuses on advancing understanding of criminal justice decision making and policy, especially as they affect individual liberty (e.g., bail/pretrial release decisions and practices, the criminal adjudication process, and correctional processes and interventions). During the fellowship Dr. Vîlcică will expand her research program on correctional policies and incarceration effects by focusing on the role of prison visitation with special attention given to the aging prison population. The project is titled “Unpacking the Complexity of Prison Visitation: Impacts on Incarcerated Individuals' Coping Mechanisms and Well-Being.”

Project Description
In collaboration with her research partner, doctoral student Steven Chen, Dr. Vîlcică will use the PPL fellowship for a research project that aims to unpack the effects of prison visitation and its various dimensions on incarcerated individuals’ well-being while in prison and subsequent post-release behavior. Extant research indicates that visitation can alleviate the hardships stemming from incarceration and has the potential to affect post-release outcomes, though the exact mechanisms have not been fully explored. Additionally, older incarcerated individuals receive significantly fewer visits than their younger counterparts, which adds to the myriads of other challenges regarding the unique needs of this correctional population and underscores the importance of further understanding how older incarcerated individuals adjust and develop coping skills. Their research will address these research gaps through both quantitative and qualitative inquiries that will examine variation in prison visitation by individual characteristics, the impacts of different types of visitors on incarcerated individuals’ behavior pre- and post-release, and how visitation attrition affects older incarcerated individuals. For quantitative analyses, the study will draw on a rich dataset from a large random sample of parolees from Pennsylvania. For the qualitative inquiry, they will collect original data by conducting semi-structured interviews with incarcerated individuals in one large Pennsylvania prison. The project will have important implications related to potential inequalities in prison visitation and can contribute to meaningful reforms, such as developing correctional policies that specifically address the special needs and barriers to visitation faced by the aging prison population.

Research Team Fellow

Dr. Adam Ziegfeld is Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Temple University. His research examines a range of questions and topics related to political parties and elections, primarily in the context of India.

Project Description
Can voters be counted on to vote politicians out of office if they have subverted democracy? Historical evidence from India suggests that they can. In 1975, India's prime minister, Indira Gandhi, declared a national "Emergency"—suspending civil liberties, imprisoning political opponents, and postponing elections. Shortly after Gandhi ended the Emergency in 1977, elections took place, and her party suffered a humiliating defeat and lost power. Conventional wisdom has long framed the 1977 election as a rebuke to Gandhi's authoritarianism and a vote for democracy. However, this claim has never been subjected to empirical scrutiny and rigorously tested. In this project, with his collaborator, Belinda Peter, Dr. Ziegfeld intends to test whether voting patterns in the post-Emergency election are, indeed, consistent with a popular backlash to authoritarianism. In particular, they ask whether the extent of the ruling party's losses correlate with the egregiousness of authoritarian-era abuses. They also examine a crucial alternative explanation, asking whether ruling-party losses were instead better predicted by the defection of high-quality candidates from the ruling party. More broadly, the team aims to contribute to the growing body of scholarship exploring how mass publics respond (or not) to the erosion of democracy.