Refugees, asylum seekers and migrants (R/AS/Ms) are varyingly yet systematically disadvantaged (EHRC, 2016) throughout their migration and resettlement journeys, as well as (typically) across the post-migration life-course (Allsopp, Sigona and Phillimore, 2014; BMA, 2021; Kemmak, Nargesi and Saniee, 2021). Inequitable access to health-care (physical and mental) and the ability to meaningfully access NHS/integrated care services, whilst fundamental to counteracting health disadvantage, is but one element in relation to improving wellbeing outcomes for these populations. Poor health experienced by the above groups result from inequitable access to services and opportunities across the social determinants of health (SDOH) including: language barriers, accommodation, employment, education, frequent (often enforced) movement, poverty, and discrimination (Castañeda et al., 2015; Davies, 2006; Marmot et al., 2020). So deep are these exclusions that experience of multiple disadvantage is common, and has been found to persist across the life-course, worsening exponentially for some individuals at particular life-stages, or resulting from possession of 'protected characteristics' (Aldridge et al., 2018; Borhade and Dey, 2018; Dagilyte et al., 2022; The Migration Observatory, 2020) Against this backdrop, our innovative co-created interdisciplinary research proposal which draws together expertise from a broad range of stakeholders from academia, policy professions, community development, healthcare (front-line practitioners, public health commissioners and Integrated Care Systems [ICS]), statutory and local government sectors, civil society agencies and creatives; has been designed. The key research aim (framed through understanding the experiences of R/AS/M migrant communities in relation to how diverse SDOHs impact wellbeing, and which by extension is transferable to wider populations) is: to generate an evidence-based conceptual framework for transdisciplinary interventions in health care that allow community assets to be efficiently integrated; in turn supporting cost-efficient, accessible, scalable services, delivered locally and regionally by ICSs and their key partners.

The coastline of the East of England has significant challenges. The East Coast has some of the most deprived communities in the entire UK. The coastal areas of East Anglia are characterised by seasonal and low skill/low pay work in care, tourism, agriculture/fisheries and leisure as well as high pre-Brexit levels of migration from Eastern Europe to service those sectors. The East Anglian coastline is also precarious. The East Anglian coast is subject to adverse effects from climate change, erosion and consequent loss of housing in some areas. Further, cutting across economic and geographical challenges, there are significant health inequalities in some areas. The long-term vision of the Partnerships for East Coast Communities programme (PECCs) is to generate sustained action in coastal communities that builds good work in the coastal economies and builds strong coastal identities. The geographical focus is on the coastal areas of East Anglia in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex, and the predominantly rural hinterlands close to the coast. The programme will have four interconnecting themes. These are: 1) Improving work inclusively by considering high skill sectors and low wage sectors along the East's coastline. This theme relates to jobs in sectors such as renewables, agriculture, tourism, creatives, and heritage. 2) Developing a sustainable green economy along the East's coastline, focusing on using the Eastern coast's assets for green energy production and the physical and cultural heritage of the Eastern coast. 3) Protecting and renewing the coast - to realise those benefits for jobs, the economy and for the wellbeing of residents of coastal communities. 4) Improving health outcomes along the Eastern coast through better jobs, a better coastal economy and strong coastal communities. The first phase of the research will be to determine those courses of action that are best suited to coastal communities and the needs and aspirations of their residents across the first three themes, and so address the fourth theme of the research - improving health outcomes. To make those decisions, the research will involve extensive dialogue with communities along the coast, business groups, charities and community groups and local government. This dialogue will be in the form of surveys of residents, visits to community events in coastal communities, conversations with key stakeholders and workshops with residents of coastal communities.

Coastal landscapes are contested places where human communities and natural forces regularly come into conflict. The reclaimed wetlands that fringe so many of our major estuaries are particularly threatened as they almost invariably provide large areas of flat land close to major urban, industrial and transport developments associated with the sheltered waters that these locations afford. The rich alluvial soils also make for fertile agricultural land that, with modern drainage techniques and agricultural intensification, has in many areas led to rich wetland habitats being replaced with arable praries. In many locations, rising sea levels are posing another threat as erosion is forcing the Environment Agency to decide whether to pump increasing resources into maintaining existing flood defences, or to adopt a more flexible approach by breaching sea walls in order to create new mudflats and allowing saltmarsh to regenerate, so acting as 'soft' flood defence (in contrast to the present concrete and stone clad 'hard defences'). Such managed re-alignment poses a threat to the rich cultural heritage of our coastal wetlands both in terms of the historic landscape - the present patterns of fields, roads, settlements and flood defences that make up today's countryside - and the buried archaeology that permanently high water tables have ensured are exceptionally well preserved. There is, however, one further way in which our coastal wetlands are a contested landscape: the sometimes conflicting objectives of different conservation bodies. As important natural habitats are lost, for example through major infrastructure developments, it is common practice, and indeed often a legal requirement under the European Union Habitats Directive, for nature conservation bodies to create equivalent or alternative environments nearby as a form of compensation. For example, when the Cardiff Bay Barrage was created, large lagoons were dug on the Gwent Levels to create alternative bird feeding grounds which led to a large area of medieval landscape being destroyed. With similar schemes proposed around the country there is a desperate need for heritage and conservation bodies to work more closely together; firstly in understanding the historical processes that have led to the creation of the present historic landscape, secondly in establishing what key character defining features of a wetland landscape it is most important to preserve, and thirdly how nature conservation enhancements can best be accommodated within these landscapes. This project will use the techniques of historic landscape analysis developed by the applicant, Professor Stephen Rippon, to inform the future management across the coastal wetlands of southern Essex including the South Essex Marshes Nature Reserve (expected to receive 350,000 visitors annually) that falls within the Thames Gateway development - western Europe's largest regeneration intiative. The project will work in partnership with the Historic Environment Service of Essex County Council and RSPB to produce five key outputs: a report, that will have both immediate and lasting value, informing future management of these landscapes; a series of seminars to facilitate discussion between the various interested parties including the Environment Agency and Natural England; a booklet, travelling exhibition and public meeting aimed at local communities; a 'toolkit' designed to explain the methodologies used in these case-studies in such a way that others can carry out similar work elsewhere; and a paper to be published in an international peer reviewed journal - Landscape Research - will disseminate the results of the project to a wider professional audience.

REGENYSYS will create the enabling ecosystem for a circular bioeconomy of wellbeing (CBW) in the Thames Estuary. In a CBW organic resource loops are closed (material reuse/ recycling and energy recovery) to produce biomass or bioproducts, whilst also restoring local ecosystems and ecosystem services (provisioning, support, regulatory and cultural). The well-being of the local community improves due to increased access to locally produced, sustainable food and clean energy (provisioning services), healthier ecosystems (healthy soils, clean water, diverse local wildlife - supporting services), improved environmental regulation (carbon sequestration, hydrological management) and access to a beautiful environment with diverse recreational opportunities. The CBW provides new training, economic opportunities, and jobs for local people, creating new life paths for future generations living in the Estuary. This transformation increases the community's resilience to climate change and resource scarcity. The region of study stretches from Grays (Essex)/ Dartford (Kent) to the North Sea, encompassing the riverside areas of Kent and Essex, identified as being home to some of the most deprived wards in the country. Organic materials (sewage, food and agricultural waste) are currently under exploited in the region, yet could be used more effectively to produce biomass and bioproducts. Parts of the infrastructural system, activities and logistics chains required for a CBW are emerging. However, they are nascent and not linked-up. Local food producers are amongst the poorest groups in the Estuary. Food scarcity and energy poverty, due to dependence on fossil fuels and imported food, is problematic for the wider community. Yet there is local access to agricultural and marine food systems and renewable energy resources. There are innovative projects (aquaculture, fish local etc), spare capacity (e.g. under utilized greenhouses and agricultural land) and wasted potential (organic waste streams) in both food and energy systems, which could enable the CBW. Marine and land-based ecosystems are threatened by climate change (sea-level rise, flooding, and drought), development, agricultural and industrial pollutants. The adoption of a circular bioeconomy could improve this situation. However, the interactions between closing resource loops (biomass/bioproducts), ecosystem health (supporting, regulating, provisioning services particularly) and community wellbeing must be better understood, to determine the overall impact. The next generation will be responsible for implementing the CBW. However, currently there are limited job opportunities for the younger generation, perpetuated by skills shortages within the group. There is also a lack of awareness or interest in the stewardship of the local ecosystem amongst the young, which might be addressed by creating clear CBW development pathways. The project will create a regional Living Laboratory, with local stakeholders, in which to explore the potential for implementing the CBW. We will map current systems, their dynamics and identify leverage points supporting the emergence of the CBW in the Estuary. We will determine the synergies and conflicts between closing resource loops, restoring healthy ecosystems and generating community wellbeing. Together with local stakeholders we will co-design living experiments, building on existing local potential, to facilitate the emergence of a CBW. These experiments will help us to understand the factors affecting implementation and scale-up, whilst establishing a development pathway for young people wanting to engage in the CBW. The project will ultimately produce a development strategy, policy and design toolboxes, design process, training and outreach programmes, enabling the Estuary to transform, and helping other communities to do the same.

Organisations that provide services and create products often base their decisions on questionnaires and/or other explicit forms of communication with their user base (e.g. patients, customers, citizens). The aim of this information exchange between providers and users is to uncover the users' "reward function", i.e. what users actually want from their interactions and what issues exist with the current product/service line-up. Explicit forms of information exchange can be cumbersome and expensive to design for organisations and are intrusive to the user. Furthermore, response bias is a well-known problem for survey based methods, particularly around sensitive topics, where respondents maybe unwilling to engage due to social or cultural concerns. Some practical solutions to response bias are provided by indirect questioning methods (item count and randomized response techniques). However, none of these solutions are practical for large scale and real time settings. We postulate that ideally an organisation should try to elicit the reward function of its user base (i.e. what states are preferred by users) by using observational data generated from user activity. Inspired by recent literature in AI research, we propose a three-facet programme that aims to directly attack the problem of what users want by a) trying to infer the user reward function through the collection of behavioural data (e.g. website clicks, traffic behaviour, movie preferences); b) creating short, non-intrusive online questionnaires that will remove any uncertainties; and c) exploiting user preferences in order to improve service and product provision. The proposed research aims to contribute to developing methods that can be embedded in artificial intelligence systems which must elicit and understand preferences by interacting with humans in order to adapt their behaviour and allow for a more natural experience and interaction. Through this research we have four key objectives: (a) understand user preferences and develop methods to uncover and learn the reward function through data and behaviours; (b) develop interactive and conversational methods for eliciting responses and interactions from users that allow for a more natural user experience with automatic systems; (c) explore the social limitations of our approach (for instance, to what extend are personal rewards not dictated by individual preferences, but rather by social coercion?); and (d) investigate what steps can be taken to fully automate the procedure of provisioning new services and products through eliciting preferences via the methods developed under (a) and (b). This Fellowship provides a unique opportunity to bring together artificial intelligence techniques and social science to tackle problems that are faced by a range of businesses and organisations in dealing with clients and customers and attempting to elicit preferences and needs through behaviours and interactions. We will be working closely with our industry partners in this project, British Telecom (BT) and the Essex County Council (ECC), to investigate the issues and challenges of eliciting and understanding preferences as being faced in their own contexts to inform and shape the programme of work.