For decades, IVF relied on relatively crude methods for assessing embryos: either visual inspection of embryo morphology or genetic probes. These methods targeted only some chromosomes and necessarily reduced embryonic viability into a binary outcome: ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’. The introduction of next-generation sequencing technologies in the mid 2010s disrupted this neat interpretive framework. Rooted in the principles of precision medicine, an approach that seeks to tailor healthcare decisions to each patient’s unique genetic, molecular, and environmental profile – these technologies offered a far more granular view of the embryo’s genome. The newfound visibility of mosaicism destabilised established decision-making frameworks and raised urgent practical and ethical questions. This chapter uses the evolving guidelines issued by the Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS) and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) on mosaic embryos as central reference points and sites of narration, with a view to exploring how the same body of evidence can be interpreted/narrated in divergent and at times conflicting ways, both in formal recommendations and in terms of public uptake. Divergent interpretations raise broader questions in reproductive medicine, including what types of knowledge are recognised as evidence and what role technological advances play in compelling us to reconsider concepts as fundamental as normality and abnormality.

This chapter critically examines trust-based leadership (TBL), arguing that its core principles – trust, empowerment, and autonomy – function within a managerialist framework to reproduce, rather than redress, asymmetrical power relations between managers and workers. Drawing on Scandinavian reform examples and contemporary studies, the chapter presents TBL as a managerialist concept. It shows that trust, empowerment, and autonomy are typically granted conditionally by managers, constrained by managerial definitions of ‘trustworthy’ behaviour and bounded by strategic and administrative prerogatives. Rather than realising workplace democracy or redistributing authority, TBL often consolidates managerial discretion, produces an illusion of participation, and reframes worker agency as something to be authorised. The ‘dark side’ of TBL therefore lies not in implementation failures but in the principles themselves as deployed within managerialism: they normalise managerial authority while obscuring the political dimension of labour, agency, and collective governance.

Climate change and democratic erosion are interconnected crises that threaten humanity’s future. Climate change, driven by fossil-fuel–based economic systems, contributes to and is exacerbated by the weakening of democratic institutions. Despite the systemic nature of these crises, dominant psychological and policy approaches often overemphasize individual behavior change, obscuring the role of structural influences. This chapter argues that responsibility for addressing climate change and democratic erosion must be understood in relation to policymakers, corporations, global systems, and ideologies that shape collective outcomes. We propose that citizens’ primary responsibility lies in collective empowerment, shifting shared beliefs, and fostering alternative social, political, and economic arrangements. Drawing on social psychological theory and research, the chapter provides an accessible and practical framework for understanding system-level change, highlighting how structural awareness and a sense of empowerment via prefigurative acts can support transformative responses to the climate crisis, even in increasingly undemocratic contexts.

Power is fundamental to co–management in numerous ways. In this chapter, key theoretical approaches to the concept of power are reviewed, drawing on conceptions of ‘power over’, ‘power to’ and similar. The chapter then investigates the concept of power in three ways: what power sharing means and how it is experienced, what dominant power relations are observed in co-management and what empowerment means in the context of co–management. In relation to power sharing, it is found that power is often unequally shared, with government having greater power than resource users, evidenced in control of resources and decision-making. Dominant power relations include elite capture, patron–client relations and gender relations. Constraints on the potential for co–management to be empowering for resource users are found to be related to power dynamics and unequal power sharing, encouraging a more technical approach to empowerment being taken rather than a more critical, political approach.

This chapter proposes to show that reading Martin Amis’s representation of women in his London Trilogy today raises a number of issues related to the elusive nature of the author’s voice and values in the text. In Money and London Fields in particular, the violence women are submitted to by the male narrators and characters, even though partaking of the satire Amis brushes upon British society in the 1980s, tends to systematically portray women as victims. However, it must not be forgotten that Amis also introduces a number of female figures of relative empowerment in his novels, whose various forms of agency (murderees, authors, femmes fatales) are worth pointing out. The question as to the reality of this agency has to be raised, however, in the context of the general economy of the simulacrum which Amis’s novels denounce and promote. If Amis’s carnivalesque satires leave nothing unscathed and celebrate the death of all great narratives, how can the feminist narrative be applied to them? It seems that Amis’s own beliefs in the powers and of language and language games provide a key to beginning to answer this question.

Recognising the processes of social marginalisation to which they were subjected, some patients found rhetorical power in their disadvantaged position. They used asylum periodicals to challenge the distinction between sanity and insanity, evoke sympathy and better understanding, and foster a sense of solidarity among fellow inmates across institutions. These sentiments found their clearest expression in Excelsior (1857–1878), the publication of the James Murray Royal Asylum in Perth, Scotland. Though edited by the physician superintendent, William Lauder Lindsay, this periodical was especially militant in its attack on the misrepresentation of mental illness and keen to cultivate a sense of an existing tradition of lunatic literature and a cross-institutional imagined community of patients. This chapter assesses the successes and failures of this mission. Despite tensions and antagonism behind the scenes, it argues that Excelsior was a space where the clashing voices of different actors could be reconciled and united around the common goal of representing the asylum and its inhabitants before the outside world.

This chapter explores the construction of Twa as global development subjects within the Rwandan context and asks how they position themselves within that landscape, formed by the intersection of the global development narrative and Rwanda’s unity and reconciliation agenda. This chapter interrogates the state’s development narrative in the context of the global development discourse and examines its ability to offer a believable and accessible vision of progress. The Twa in our study push back against the de-politicising effect of development and its processes, whereby the emphasis is placed on the individual and their mind-set. However, they do so not to emphasise their ethnic apartness but to assert their right to the attributes of Rwandanness, notably land. Their answer is thus not to refuse to participate in the modern Rwanda but actively to seek it by demanding equal care.

This chapter examines Indigenous nation-building as a critical strategy for bridging gaps between policy intent and meaningful connection to Country, focusing on the Western Australian Aboriginal Empowerment Strategy. It highlights persistent disparities stemming from settler-colonial governance, where institutions often fail to address Indigenous cultural, social, economic, and ecological priorities. The analysis shows how empowerment efforts encounter resistance when they challenge entrenched power dynamics, reflecting systemic reluctance toward transformative change. In contrast, Indigenous nation-building provides a self-determined framework for governance, development, and community empowerment rooted in Aboriginal worldviews. The chapter assesses Western Australia’s Closing the Gap Implementation Plan 2023–2025 through this lens, underscoring the importance of cultural integrity, truth-telling, genuine partnerships, and shared decision-making. It concludes with recommendations for institutional reform, arguing that only deep systemic change can deliver equity and improved outcomes for Aboriginal communities.

This chapter sheds light on how Tencent leveraged digitalised human resource management (HRM) practices to enhance employee creativity and drive organisational innovation. Recognising that organisational innovation depends on employees’ skills, motivation, and engagement, Tencent has taken a leading role in applying digital technologies and products to HR practices. Its systematic use of digital HR products not only improves operational efficiency but also creates value for both employees and the organisation. Guided by a user-centred philosophy, Tencent treats employees as internal users, focusing on their needs and experience. Using a productisation approach, HR teams design tools that go beyond administrative functions to serve, support, and empower staff. These digital HR tools are designed not only to enhance service quality but also to foster motivation and creativity, aligning HR innovation with the company’s broader goal of value creation through digital transformation.

This chapter examines the meteoric rise of WeChat, one of Tencent’s most iconic innovations. Originally launched in 2011 as a messaging app, WeChat rapidly evolved into a multifunctional platform and an all-in-one super app, integrating services such as WeChat Pay, Moments, Mini Programs, and Video Channels. The chapter analyses how WeChat’s success lies in its deep understanding of user needs, achieved through a blend of first-principles product thinking and iterative refinement. It highlights how WeChat embodies invisible, compound, and continuous innovation across technological, product, procedural, and business model dimensions. The chapter also explores its pivotal role in cultivating an open, decentralised ecosystem that supports shared growth. This ecosystem emerged through three key mechanisms: enhancing internal product capabilities; empowering partners through fair, decentralised value creation; and supporting third-party service providers. WeChat offers a compelling illustration of how digital platforms can shape adaptive, multifunctional ecosystems that serve a broad spectrum of market demands.

Understanding the cues of safety has become paramount for ensuring that healthcare professionals and their patients feel safe in their respective environments. Historically, healthcare has been rooted in cognitive psychology, which focuses on the workings of the mind, but PVT’s holistic approach reshapes our understanding, urging us to also consider the state of the body. As we delve into evidence-based clinical measures and techniques, the transformative potential of the PVT becomes increasingly evident. This chapter equips healthcare practitioners with essential polyvagal-informed strategies to use and teach to staff and patients. Additionally, this chapter explores somatic (body-centered) psychology interventions and group dynamics that can collectively empower everyone on the journey toward health and well-being.

In situations of aparadigmatic transitions, where formal transitional justice mechanisms do not exist, or may only partially exist, ‘victims’ are typically the most active drivers behind a range of intersecting justice struggles. Based on the author’s fieldwork in Kabul with war victims since 2008, this chapter underlines the importance of a bottom-up and victim-centred approach towards memorialisation and accountability efforts. This approach emphasises participation, agency and empowerment. In particular, it elaborates on the meaningfulness of methodologies used in the Theatre of the Oppressed to engage, raise awareness, and create participatory forums for war victims in Afghanistan from 2009 to August 2021. These methodologies offer various perspectives on understanding the protagonism of victims, and require us to embrace and recognise different approaches to engaging in the justice process.