To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In Chapter 9, the final example of the legal exile of humanity is provided, where toxicity in the environment from industry has been legally permitted to accumulate. Tort litigation in the US, using the example of oil and chemical spills, is discussed, noting the decline in strict liability for industrial defendants over the last century.
In evidence law, a privilege can prevent the discovery or evidentiary use of certain sensitive information. Many privileges apply to communication with specified persons such as lawyers, doctors, psychologists, accountants, clergy, or spouses. A major shortcoming of current privilege law is that it tends to protect relationships that are more common in higher economic strata. Low-income people do not benefit equally from privileges because their relationships are less likely to meet the requirements set forth in statutes and case law. The time has come to level the playing field and extend the valuable protections of evidentiary privileges more uniformly throughout society. Evidentiary privilege should not depend on economic privilege.
The field of global mental health (GMH) is in transition. Following its emergence in the mid-2000s, the field is currently grappling with critiques concerning the presumed universality of its concepts and approaches; the focus on treatments rather than addressing social determinants of mental health; and a lack of equity between actors in the Global North and South. With the field at this junction, we describe three ways in which structural injustice (SI) theories can respond to calls for change within GMH. Following a brief discussion of key characteristics of SI theories, such as those put forward by Powers and Faden (2006, Social Justice: The Moral Foundations of Public Health and Health Policy. New York: Oxford University Press; 2019, Structural Injustice: Power, Advantage, and Human Rights. New York: Oxford University Press) and Young (2011, Responsibility for Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press), we first discuss how they can contribute to GMH by strengthening often-called-for inter- and transdisciplinarity, using well-being as a boundary object or bridging concept. Second, we argue that SI theories can inform data collection and analysis by offering a theoretical lens for analyzing the role of social context in well-being. Third, we discuss the potential benefits of the normative dimensions of SI theory. Engagement with normative dimensions may assist in addressing unfair knowledge practices in GMH. In addition, attention to normative dimensions of SI theories may help to make GMH research more responsive to the deeper-rooted structural determinants of mental health and multi-sectoral strategies to remedy these. We posit that, in this time of transition, SI theories provide a versatile resource to engage in much-needed transformations in the field of GMH.
Health technology assessment (HTA) has advanced rigorous, transparent methods for informing resource allocation; however, persistent inequities, declining trust, and rapidly evolving technologies expose a gap between technical excellence and social justice. This perspective synthesizes Plenary Three of the HTAi 2025 Annual Meeting, which examined how HTA can contribute to more transparent, equitable, and fair health systems. Drawing on multistakeholder perspectives from patient advocacy, global health equity, health policy, industry, and HTA research, this article argues that transparency, equity, and trust must be treated as foundational principles rather than optional enhancements. It highlights persistent challenges, including opaque deliberation, context-dependent definitions of equity, limited feedback to patient contributors, and evidence bases that insufficiently reflect diverse populations. Emerging practices from leading HTA bodies illustrate practical pathways forward. The article concludes that HTA’s convening power can help transform it from a technical gatekeeper into a guardian of fairer health systems across diverse contexts.
In this chapter, we define health system reform as “changes produced out of explicit intention on the part of government or political groups to transform, for the better, the health sector.” We identify four levels where changes can be made: systemic, where the main goal is equity; programmatic, where the main objective is allocational efficiency; organizational, where the objective is technical efficiency; and instrumental, where institutional intelligence is developed for better system performance. Valuable change can happen at any of these four levels, but true reform must address all of them. We examine reform challenges in each of the five health system functions. We also analyze several key policy transitions and larger societal transformations that are shaping the future of health systems. Finally, we use the example of the Seguro Popular in Mexico to illustrate how these ideas come together in the actual design and implementation of a comprehensive health system reform.
This chapter focuses on how to evaluate and improve the performance of health systems. It frames performance as a relative concept: how well a system attains its goals compared to what is achievable under given circumstances. It examines how health system architecture, including vertical and horizontal integration, influences performance. We also argue that improving performance requires strengthening key system components and propose four priority areas (the “LIST” elements): leadership, institutions, systems design, and technologies. Finally, the chapter argues that health systems must be accountable for determinants they can influence, even if external, and stresses the importance of rigorous assessment methods to inform evidence-based policy and effective reforms.
This chapter provides a conceptual framework to organize the complex relationships between multiple determinants that underlie changes in the health conditions of a population. Specific relationships of determination take place within a basic frame comprised of the population, its genetic constitution, the physical environment within which it resides and its forms of social organization. It distinguishes between five organized levels – systemic, societal, institutional, household and individual, organizing them hierarchically to show how upper levels constrain lower ones. The model emphasizes the dynamic concept of risk, which operates at the population level, and susceptibility, which manifests at the individual level. Finally, the chapter stresses that health inequities often result from unfair distribution of determinants.
Utility weighting in benefit–cost analysis (sometimes misleadingly referred to using the more general term “distributional weighting”) has, in almost all cases to date, been conducted with data on income ―and on costs and benefits― in income bins or at the geographic unit level, with weights computed at the bin midpoints or average income in a geographic unit. These methods have several shortcomings that cause bias: not accounting for taxes and transfers, not accounting for household composition, incorrect computation of weights, and not accounting for increasing or decreasing distribution of income or impact within bins. These shortcomings are addressed by using a recently developed method using microdata, which also allows for a wider range of applications. I apply this method to real world utility-weighting.
Critical scholarship on the state of archaeological labor has boomed and bloomed in recent years, demonstrating systemic harms, inequities, and patterns of exclusion in archaeological work. This body of historical and contemporary analysis has documented low wages, poor working conditions, and efforts to separate the intellectual work from the physical work of archaeology, resulting in diminished recognition and compensation for those performing supposedly “unskilled” labor. Research and reflections on archaeological labor have also demonstrated that such exploitation and marginalization especially affect archaeological workers of marked, nondominant, intersectional identities. With the problems of archaeological labor increasingly clear, this themed issue turns our attention to what can be done to improve working conditions for archaeologists in various sectors and geographic contexts. Recognizing the hierarchies and power structures in the field that position some individuals, groups, and institutions to take effective action to ensure more decent work for all who labor in archaeology, the authors in this issue articulate particular interventions that might be made by the people and institutions most ideally positioned to make change that leads to better labor conditions for all archaeologists and therefore to better archaeology. Here, I outline the robust global scholarship on archaeological labor to situate this themed issue and provide a trail map through the articles gathered here, which aim to ignite sparks for advancing labor management in archaeology.
A brand new chapter to this Edition of the Course Manual. Ethnicity and social background adversely affect maternal and perinatal outcomes. This chapter focuses primarily on the inequalities experienced by those of black, Asian and mixed ethnicity as well as those experiencing social deprivation. We explore the impacts of inequity and inequality, as well as strategic action and central support for local improvement. Key learning points: There is an immediate need to act and address inequalities and inequity within maternity services. Non-white ethnicity and social deprivation adversely affect maternal and perinatal outcomes. It is important for individuals and wider society, that women are healthy, educated, and feel safe in their environment. Equality and equity are not the same, both need to be provided for fair and inclusive maternity care. Unacceptable differences in perinatal mortality related to levels of deprivation and ethnicity have increased. Microaggressions and stereotypical assumptions are examples of inequalities that have been reported to contribute to substandard care for women. Research inequalities, and staff representation associated with non-white ethnicity and deprivation, impact clinical care. There are national recommendations to increase research in this area, provide education for staff and women, as well as a call for action to ensure that the quality of maternity care is improved for all.
Initially it may seem odd to many people to learn that a large proportion of our laws were not made by parliaments, but rather by judges. However the doctrine of precedent, combined with a commitment to judicial restraint, and combined also with the capacity of judges to rule in equity if the common law was inadequate, developed over time a consistent and sophisticated body of law which was that exported around the world during the period of colonial empires. Many of the characteristics of our legal system have their beginning in this gradual, incremental process under which judges took their lead from other judges in order to develop a coherent legal system. As we will note in this Chapter, the common law has advantages and disadvantages, but it was exported around the world by England during the age of colonialism, and has stood the test of time as a legal methodology. It remains in use in a range of nations as distinct as Australia, the United States, the Philippines, Kenya, India, the Cook Islands, and Canada. It is one of the world’s great legal systems.
Food security is a Human Right, but not everyone in Australia has the same opportunity to live a healthy life, free from hunger. The impacts of food insecurity are pervasive, influencing education, wellbeing, economic opportunities, nutrition and overall health. Its drivers are equally as diverse, many of which are beyond the remit of the health sector. As such, collective, cross-sector action is critical. Through the example of Gather + Grow (Queensland’s strategic response to food insecurity in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities), this review paper aimed to describe the success factors, learnings and strategic framework that has built momentum around food security action in Queensland. Specifically, a three-phase action planning cycle, priority areas for action, system enablers, governance and guiding principles for implementation are outlined and discussed. Together, they demonstrate how a systems response to a complex public health challenge, like food insecurity, is possible and invite other states and territories to leverage the learnings and activities of Gather + Grow.
The introduction of co-management is often associated with recognition and allocation of property rights. This chapter therefore provides definitions of the concepts of property, property rights and property regimes. Systems informed by economic theory to provide ‘user rights’ are reviewed in relation to collaborative governance, including Transferable Quota systems and Territorial User Rights for Fishing. Given that rights may be contested and not realised in practice, the chapter goes on to consider the pursuit and realisation of justice through co-management, differentiating between procedural, distribution and recognition justice. Insights from the application of a human rights based approach to natural resource governance and implications for co-management are then identified.
Social justice in psychiatric prescribing necessarily elevates the personhood of the patient, in the context of the relationship with the provider as well as in the larger societal milieu. Grounded in a historical narrative, we offer practical tools to apply a social justice framework to prescribing practices. Simple steps advise the reader to consider practice context, utilize nuance in formulation, and pursue quality improvement in three common scenarios. At the end of the chapter, we offer reflection questions to encourage ongoing social justice in your psychiatric prescribing practice.
Chapter 3 explores children’s digital books as a powerful illustration of what well-designed EdTech can achieve when grounded in learning science. It begins by showcasing diverse examples of digital books and mapping their rapid global expansion, highlighting their growing role in early literacy. The chapter examines evidence demonstrating that digital books, when designed with research-based principles, can enhance vocabulary, comprehension, and engagement, sometimes outperforming print. Connecting this to the science of reading, it explains how features such as responsive narration, sensory supports, and adaptive scaffolding can strengthen foundational literacy skills. The chapter also emphasises the inclusive potential of digital books, offering accessible reading experiences for children with special needs and for families with limited access to print materials. It concludes by reviewing research on effective digital book design and emerging studies on children’s digital libraries, showing how carefully developed platforms can expand reading opportunities at scale.
Despite growing recognition of racial and ethnic exclusion in the life sciences, mechanisms for achieving structural change remain underdeveloped. Grassroots organisations have emerged as key drivers of equity within the life sciences, yet their sustainability is regularly constrained by voluntary labour, financial precarity, and omission from institutional decision-making. Using the REED (Racial & Ethnic Equality & Diversity) Ecological Network as a case study, this paper examines how grassroots initiatives can advance racial and ethnic inclusion in academic and professional institutions. Founded in 2020, REED has grown into a UK-based, community-led network supporting ecologists from underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds through training, mentorship, advocacy, and institutional partnership. Drawing on evidence from qualitative testimonies, self-report survey data (n = 20), and organisational records, we extract key principles and propose a four-pillar framework for institutional allyship: (1) dedicated funding streams, (2) structured mentorship programmes, (3) peer-led training for retention, and (4) equitable representation in decision-making spaces. We argue that institutions adopting this partnership-based model, centred on grassroots expertise, create a viable pathway to racial and ethnic equity across the life sciences, which can build more diverse research cultures and strengthen the epistemic foundations of science.
Māori comprise 17.4 per cent of the total population of Aotearoa New Zealand. They are a relatively young population, with a median age of 25.5 years for males and 27.6 years for females, compared to the national median age of 37.0 years for males and 39.1 years for females. Contemporary Māori, like their pre-colonised counterparts, are diverse in their identity, with many having connections to iwi (tribal nations) or hapū (constellations of whānau, or extended family networks). Today, rather than being defined solely by iwi and hapū differences, Māori are also diverse regarding their histories of colonisation, their levels of disconnection from te ao Māori (Māori world) and their contemporary social experiences. Disconnection from te ao Māori means not all Māori know their whakapapa (genealogical) connections.
This article introduces the global Women’s Safety Index (WSI), outlining its rationale, purpose, and potential applications. The Index consist of three dimensions: Equity, Protection, and Resources, identified as foundational to women’s safety. Key indicators within each dimension are selected based on theoretical relevance and empirical evidence. We detail the statistical methodology and framework used to construct the Index and present validation analyses demonstrating its ability to capture changes in women’s safety, particularly in response to external disruptions. The WSI is available on an interactive digital platform, enabling users to explore, visualize, and compare women’s safety data across regions and over time.
Chapter 7 begins with a discussion of how colonialism and the climate issue in the MENA are strongly linked, and how this relationship affects not only development trajectories, but also the status of the climate as a policy area and women’s representation. The second part of the chapter covers Othering, that is, the portrayal of women as vulnerable victims or saviours, focusing on the dangers of feminizing vulnerability and responsibility, whilst also showcasing how Othering of women in the Global South occurs among female parliamentarians in the MENA. In terms of the global climate crisis, this has led to a situation where the climate issue is not prioritized as much as it could be if the female parliamentarians were more accountable to the electorate and identified more strongly with a broader group of women, that is, beyond the narrow elite segment of the population from which they themselves were recruited. At present, those that are the most passionate about combatting the climate crisis are the youth, whereas those who stand to gain the most are marginalized women — two groups that are nothing like the female parliamentarians, who are supposed to act in their interest.
This chapter deals with the question of the sources of international law, that is, how one distinguishes between what is law and what is not. This is governed essentially by art. 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. Historically, the first source is custom, which is composed of two elements: the actual conduct of states and the belief that such conduct is carried out in the belief that it is ‘law’. What is counted as state practice is examined, as is the critical belief requirement (opinio juris), which is often harder to ascertain. The process of change is discussed, as is the concept of local or regional custom. The second source, of increasing importance today, is international agreements or treaties, which are binding on all states parties to the particular agreement and is the focus of a later chapter. The third source is termed ‘general principles of law’, which seeks to cover gaps in the law by recourse to accepted principles of the system or of domestic law and includes the notion of equity. Finally, the chapter looks at subsidiary means for the determination of law, including judicial decisions and writings. Other possible sources of law are noted, and the work of the UN International Law Commission is referenced.