The rise of Generative AI has accelerated the shift toward Industry 5.0, marking a critical transition from the technology-centric focus of Industry 4.0 to a human-centric, value-driven paradigm. While its predecessor prioritized automation and technology, Industry 5.0 integrates advanced human–machine collaboration with social imperatives to create resilience. This study advances current literature by presenting a novel systems-based framework, grounded in systems theory and legitimacy theory, which conceptualizes Industry 5.0 as an interconnected ecosystem rather than isolated pillars. We identify technological adaptation, specifically AI integration, and human-centricity as critical inputs that drive economic, environmental, and social sustainability as systemic outputs. By mapping these interdependencies, the model demonstrates how cohesive components collectively fuel organizational transformation. These findings offer actionable insights for aligning corporate strategies with Sustainable Development Goals, providing policymakers and practitioners with future-oriented pathways to navigate this complex, emerging industrial environment.

Numerous benefits materialize when people extend legitimacy to institutions; consequently, many investigations of the legitimacy of the police have been reported. However, several critical issues remain unanswered. My paper’s purpose is to revisit the question of willingness to grant police legitimacy, focusing on a nationally representative sample of African Americans. I test hypotheses connecting police legitimacy with experiences with unfair treatment by legal authorities, ingroup attachments, attitudes toward systemic racism, and engagement with Black Lives Matter. My findings reveal significant connections between experience with discrimination, ingroup attachments, and beliefs about systemic racism but little relationship between BLM attitudes and police legitimacy.

Previous research suggests that the mainstream media’s portrayals of the U.S. Supreme Court as an objective and impartial institution contribute to its diffuse support among the public. This study explores what happens if people are not exposed to these messages, relying instead on information sources that portray the Court and its justices as being politically oriented and motivated. We use the 2003 Blacks and the U.S. Supreme Court Survey data and coarsened exact matching to examine the effect of exposure to the Black media, whose reports are less likely to include legitimizing symbols of the Court. We find that exposure to the Black media significantly lowers people’s diffuse support for the Court among both Blacks and Whites. This result indicates that differences between Blacks and Whites with respect to their diffuse support for the Court are likely to be a function of the informational environment to which they are exposed rather than race per se.

Global laws are an important inspiration for commercial law reforms around the world. Much analysis of this phenomenon emphasizes the capacity of regulatory élites, such as lawmakers, courts and lawyers, to adapt global laws to local conditions. What is often absent from this top-down analysis is a wide-ranging consideration of what the regulated think about global laws. This article aims to redress this shortcoming in the comparative literature by drawing fresh perspectives from bottom-up responses to global laws. It takes from socio-legal scholarship a framework for analysing the interface between thought formation and social action and explores the question—how do the regulated conceptualize and localize global laws? If compliance is socially constructed from below, as this literature suggests, then attempts to understand legal globalization by focusing exclusively on regulatory élites misses much of the localization story.