Chapter 8 approaches diversity through cultural and moral lenses. It concerns the acceptance of EU intervention, the legitimacy of its action in a sensitive field, ripe with moral and ethical controversies. The EU’s approach can broadly be divided into three strands, which are not mutually exclusive. The first is the Europeanisation of choice, most apparent in tobacco regulation, where the EU has adopted a quasi-prohibitionist stance with seemingly broad support from Member States. Strikingly, this occurs in the absence, both legally and politically, of arguments grounded in individual rights and autonomy. The second is an approach of insulation, relevant to alcohol and certain ‘heritage’ foods, where national regulatory choices remain shielded from European influence, either because of the EU’s reluctance to act or because of political deadlock. The third concerns the application of proportionality in free movement cases, and the extent to which cultural and moral arguments are accommodated in the adjudication of national restrictive measures.

The scale of social-ecological systems – spatial and temporal – matters for co-management as very often multiple actors and sectors are involved, operating at and across different administrative levels, including across national boundaries. This creates challenges for building relationships, delivering on accountability and transparency, and for fair and effective participation. Geographically dispersed actors involved in collaborative governance may lead to fragmented systems and processes. Responses to such challenges within natural resource governance have included the adoption of multilevel, network and polycentric governance. Collaboration in relation to each of these approaches is investigated, with review of the concepts of scale, networks and polycentricity to identify implications for the concept and practice of co-management.

Errors of a certain kind have the potential of releasing parties from their contractual obligations. In such circumstances, the contract is said to be vitiated on account of ‘mistake’. The errors are principally of three kinds.

First, the parties may be agreed as to the terms of the contract, but may be labouring under a shared mistaken assumption about some fact that is essential to the agreement. The statute offers a simple example where one party agrees to buy a horse from another party, but neither party is aware that the horse was dead at the time of the bargain. The agreement is void. We refer to this as ‘common mistake’, and it is addressed in Section 20 of the Contract Act.

Second, where only one of the parties was labouring under a mistaken assumption of fact regarding the terms of the contract and the other party knew of that mistake, the contract may be voidable at the instance of the mistaken party. We refer to this as ‘unilateral mistake’. Section 22 sets out the rule that unilateral mistake of one party will not normally render a contract void. In our view, any exception to that rule on account of a party's knowledge of a mistake as to terms made by the other party must be generated through judicial development of the Indian common law of contract. Third, there may be a lack of consensus between the parties as to the terms of the contract, such that there is no agreement at all. The parties are at cross-purposes. This is less a case of mistake (because there is no mistaken assumption as to a fact) and more a case where there is no correspondence between offer and acceptance. We refer to it as ‘mutual misunderstanding’.

In the remainder of this chapter, we elaborate on each of these types of mistakes and assess the extent to which they will lead to the vitiation of a contract.

Chapter 6 examines the development and implementation of Peru’s 2009 Universal Health Insurance (Aseguramiento Universal en Salud (AUS)) reform. Unlike other Latin American cases, Peru’s party system at the time was highly fragmented and non-programmatic – political parties lacked core values and were therefore disengaged from health policy. This void allowed technocrats, particularly those supported by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the private sector, to dominate the process. The AUS reform provided formal insurance coverage to millions but failed to specify long-term funding or infrastructure development. Debate around the reform was limited, and key decisions were made by a small group of technocrats and advisors rather than through participatory party politics. As a result, the law was poorly specified, with insufficient attention to state capacity and the practical challenges of expanding healthcare access. The reform led to dramatic increases in theoretical insurance coverage, but actually achieving access to care was hampered by resource shortages, inconsistent funding, and limited political commitment. The Peruvian experience highlights how non-programmatic party systems defer policy authority to technocrats, risking unsustainable reforms that do not deliver on their promises, particularly in times of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

This chapter employs the timestamp of the World Indigenous Peoples’ Conference on Education (WIPCE), emphasising that elements of education relating to both First Nations communities and the teaching profession are central to transversing and bridging the two knowledge traditions of Indigenous and Western knowledges. Within this timestamp, we will look at the foundations we have created, the distance we have travelled and the new challenges we face for what remains as unfinished business.

Chapter 5 examines the creation and evolution of Mexico’s Seguro Popular, a health reform implemented in 2003 to expand insurance coverage for the uninsured. Despite the existence of institutionalized political parties, the legislation was driven mainly by technocrats rather than by programmatic party commitment. The National Action Party (Partido Acción Nacional, PAN), in power at the time, endorsed the reform but did not participate in shaping its content because it did not align with its core values. The Health Secretary and the Seguro Popular technocratic team introduced the initiative, lobbied for support, and were in charge of key decisions. The reform was passed in Congress, largely because it promised increased resources to state governments, rather than due to ideological consensus. Its implementation met with significant challenges. Coverage increased, but funding and infrastructure lagged, limiting access to services. Political parties failed to ensure sustainable funding and robust oversight. The reform ultimately struggled with insufficient programmatic commitment from PAN, PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional; Institutional Revolutionary Party), and PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática; Party of the Democratic Revolution), which undermined the quality of the legislation and its long-term success. Seguro Popular was replaced in 2020, and its end reflected both partisan competition and the original lack of cross-party support and detailed policy design.

In this chapter, I consider the deployment of the dominant philosophical conception of hope within political theory. I introduce different contexts in which political theorists ascribe hope an instrumental value, based on its suggested power to motivate agency: these theorists claim that belief in the possibility of a specific future can generate the confidence to engage in important political action. After discussing the relationship between agency and hope (found originally in Aristotle), I consider an ambitious neo-Kantian attempt (put forward by Jakob Huber) to vindicate the instrumental value of hope for democratic politics on a non-contingent basis. I argue that this attempt fails but does so instructively, as the power it ascribes to hope comes from an auxiliary concept, which is faith. I find further endorsements of hope that depend on a prior commitment to faith (in a moral sense) in the thought of Kant himself, and (in a predictive sense) in the Marxist tradition, and I suggest the value of separating these two ideas.

As co-management often involves resource-using community participation, understanding of what is meant and understood by the concept of community is critical. The chapter therefore begins by recognising the contested nature of the concept of ‘community’, noting critique of assumptions regarding shared interests and priorities, and reflects on different forms of community, how communities may emerge over time and recognition of ‘delocalisation’ of communities in relation to natural resource governance. Different bases of social cohesion are then considered and forms of the related concept of social capital reviewed. Insights from research into how cohesion and social capital influence co-management emphasise the centrality of relationships. Given that co-management may involve multiple and diverse communities, representation of actors is generally necessary. The section on representation considers what representation implies and what bases of representation have been found within the experience of co-management.

In a general sense, it is up to the parties to make their agreement; a court will not create an agreement for them if they have failed to agree in clear terms. This principle is embodied in Section 29 of the Contract Act which provides that ‘[a]greements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void’. Section 29 goes on to provide six illustrations of certain and uncertain agreements.

The application of Section 29 raises three issues: (a) what methods do courts use in their attempt to resolve apparent uncertainty in a contract, (b) what is the test applied to determine whether a contract will be too uncertain to enforce and (c) to what extent does the doctrine of severability apply in connection with Section 29. We deal with each of these matters below.

METHODS OF RESOLVING APPARENT UNCERTAINTY

The starting point is that the courts will strive to remove uncertainty. This predisposition is reflected in Lord Wright's statement in the English case of Hillas & Co. v. Arcos:

This statement (of English law) has been cited in approval by the Supreme Court and by various High Courts. Similar views have also been independently expressed by High Courts.

Chapter 11 concludes the book by synthesizing its central arguments and highlighting broader implications for business, policy, and scholarship. It reiterates four key themes: first, climate change management and economic growth are not inherently at odds, second, climate change creates both risks and opportunities for multinational corporations (MNCs), third, climate pressures are reshaping firms’ resource dependencies, and fourth, MNCs can play pivotal roles in advancing climate solutions. The chapter reflects on the book’s contributions to international business, development studies, and global political economy. It also outlines the study’s limitations and identifies promising avenues for future research. The book concludes with a call for action, urging public and private actors to embrace innovation, cooperation, and long-term planning to achieve sustainable prosperity and advance climate solutions.