This chapter analyzes the Prague Rules’ claim to maximizing process efficiency by limiting party-autonomy and emphasizing arbitrator discretion. In this context, it is asserted that the re-shifting of focus from the parties to the arbitral tribunal does not and cannot lead to optimal efficiency. Hence, notwithstanding the Prague Rules’ settlement provision, these rules fail to create an environment providing for the (i) identification, (ii) quantification, and (iii) communication of risk that would drive the parties to a voluntary settlement of the dispute, foreclosing a zero-sum result. The delay, lack of efficiency, and indeterminacy plaguing ICA simply are not cured by the Prague Rules’ shift of emphasis. Comprehensive evidential analysis and objective standards remain necessary predicates to settlement, irrespective of any enhancement of arbitrator discretion and corresponding diminution of party-autonomy.

This chapter sets forth a framework based on a historical analysis of the role of efficiency in ICA. This chapter asserts that more so than party-autonomy, arbitrator discretion, the right to second instance review, or emphasis on privacy (and even confidentiality), the main historical principle upon which the legitimacy of ICA was premised, concerns a very narrow concept of efficiency. This legacy construct of efficiency is one that prioritizes the rendering of a binding and enforceable award over all other considerations. The primacy of “process efficiency” is such that even due process has been sacrificed at the altar of expediency. The text explores the interplay between efficiency and due process. It is suggested that only a voluntary settlement can yield “optimal efficiency,” and thereby redeem ICA’s promise to be efficient

What marks out Athens in the Early Iron Age (EIA) is not only clear continuity from the Bronze Age but a steady rise of population through the EIA into the Archaic period. Following a brief topographical overview and a summary of Athens before 1200 BCE, this chapter focuses on the evidence of tombs, including an account of five and a half Athenians: a putative warrior aged 35–45 years at death, an old man aged 70, a young woman in her early 20s accompanied by terracotta model boots, a slightly older woman with her unborn child, and a social outcast. This is followed by what evidence there exists for the settlement of Athens. A major theme is the resilience of the population from the Bronze Age into the EIA and Archaic period. Whether it is cast as a village or town, the urban nucleus of the settlement was the Athenian Acropolis. What played out in the EIA in Athens was the formation of what was to become one of the largest and most successful city-states of the ancient Greek world.

This chapter examines Canadian English from a nationwide point of view, complementing the regional views of the following chapters in this part. It begins with a brief statement of the current demolinguistic status of Canadian English, then reviews the history of English-speaking settlement that led to its establishment, growth and geographic diffusion. This review supports a discussion of the relation between settlement history and the most important linguistic features of modern Canadian English, especially its phonetic and phonological characteristics. A particular focus is on the relative contributions of eighteenth-century American Loyalist settlement and early nineteenth-century British immigration, as well as the later diffusion of those features to Western Canada. Examples of regional variation in vocabulary and pronunciation are then briefly presented, before the chapter concludes with a selective review of previous research on Canadian English.

Chapter 2 tells the story of how ethnicity came to be known in Kenya through territory, providing an overview of the history of ethnic territorial boundary drawing from its inception with the first colonial administration, to today. The principal motivation for the earliest hard boundaries between purportedly homogenous ethnic groups was to free up land for white settlement and capital accumulation. After independence, the administrative boundaries of provinces and districts were deliberately retained, and ethnic patterns of land settlement were engineered. With multi-party elections in the 1990s, these established ‘ethnic territories’ motivated electoral gerrymandering, the most significant postcolonial driver of ethnic territorialisation. All these practices cemented a profound connection between land, boundaries, identity, rights, power, and security. I show how the 2010 constitution worked within this paradigm, too, but in novel ways that moved toward vagueness to manage the inflammatory, grievance-based politics tethered to boundary drawing in Kenya. In doing so, I show how ethnic territorial population concentration today is less certain than commonly imagined.

Chapter 2 provides a series of methods for understanding the overall facts regarding homesteading and how they related to land sales over the period of western settlement. This chapter defines the various features of homesteading, explains its critical logistics, examines the broad distribution of homesteads across space and through time, and shows their general relationship to land characteristics.

As unprecedented as the Declaration was, it was not without intellectual antecedents. The Declaration interacted with and built upon recent expressions of European Enlightenment political philosophy in its focus on “Nature and Nature’s God,” and in its reliance upon the normative principles of “laws of Nature” as well as natural or “unalienable” rights. European Enlightenment political philosophers themselves stood in complex and varied relationships with their ancient and medieval predecessors; sometimes adding to, sometimes transforming, and sometimes rejecting these preceding ideas. The Declaration brilliantly navigates this complex web of intellectual antecedents by treating the ideas of laws of nature, natural rights, the social contract, and republicanism in such a way that the points of tension between their different interpretations are minimized and subsumed within a shared understanding of the importance of nature for political life. In so doing, the Declaration provides an intriguing hint of how the deep fault lines between these political philosophical traditions might ultimately be bridged. The Declaration’s succinct statement of political principles may be viewed as a transformative distillation of a few of its most important European antecedents.

The rights of peoples in Spain and its empire formed part of wider pan-European discussions, which were informed by both secular and religious normativities. According to those, the universe was the aggregate of constant and multiple exchanges. Though these exchanges were not necessarily equal nor simultaneous, they nonetheless formed the basic skeleton of all social, political, and legal interactions. Jurists and theologians who set out to explain how this system operated suggested that a pre-set order that was stable, prescriptive, and indisputable oversaw these exchanges. This order indicated the appropriate place for all peoples and things and gave each a particular function. It resulted in a constellation, which was not arbitrary, but instead corresponded to an objective situation, a ‘state of stability’ or an ‘unaltered condition.’

Rather than view nineteenth-century Australian poetry as simply imitative of British models, this chapter examines how such poetry explored aspects of time and space in distinctive ways as well as from alternative perspectives. It considers how Charles Harpur conceptualised shifts in temporal scale, how Caroline Leakey questioned positioning and precedence, and how Eliza Dunlop engaged with the idea of distance that extended to aspects of the human condition more generally. It also analyses how writers such as Mary Bailey, Adam Lindsay Gordon, Henry Kendall and R. H. Horne (who lived in Australia for a substantial period) reconfigured classical and English literary traditions through antipodal positions that raised questions around heritage and history. The chapter then discusses women’s navigation of delimiting conventions of authorship. Lastly, the chapter considers how nineteenth-century Australian poetry started to voice nation in an embryonic form.

Gender stereotyping has captured public attention, from the courtroom to the everyday workplace – but the term encompasses a variety of beliefs, motivations, and contexts. This chapter first discusses prominent theories of gender stereotyping that have been primarily used in employment discrimination contexts (e.g., social role theory, the stereotype content model). I then identify how adjudicators across a variety of legal contexts (e.g., judges, juries, employers, social services officers) behave in a stereotyped fashion, according to those theories. An understanding of where stereotyping occurs across underexplored contexts is ultimately valuable for our understanding of how and where researchers might intervene in disparities research.

Settlement, not trial, is the predominant way in which most legal disputes are resolved. Despite this, very little research has examined how the public thinks about settlement. This chapter discusses the need for such research and describes the first few projects trying to fill that need. People hold complex and fairly accurate beliefs about the nature and prevalence of settlement. They also show remarkable willingness to draw inferences when parties settle, including inferences about a defendant’s responsibility. Some avenues for the future of this burgeoning field are also discussed.

Judicial actions in the courtroom remain for the most part off the record and hard to discern. Moreover, judicial settlement practices in the United States, for example, can take place in judicial chambers, far from the public eye. Thus there is a need for physical presence of researchers in public hearings to understand what judges do today in the age of vanishing trials. Researchers of this study entered courts in London, Florence, and Tel-Aviv. The various judicial conflict resolution practices that emerged in Israel’s most active first-instance court, in Tel-Aviv, provide a new perspective on power in the courtroom, identifying new forms of legitimation and justice developed by judges as they perform their settlement-promoting roles. In addition, we discuss an alternative model, found in the Florence Court, where judges were only recently permitted to use settlement practices. There the judges are supported by interns who screen cases before trial to examine whether they may be appropriate for mediation. In court, judges may offer mediation to the parties and explain their reasoning for doing so but will usually not try to settle the cases themselves. Lastly, we showcase intervention styles that offer new visions for the judicial role.

The narratives of judges and lawyers in interviews give a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the beliefs and dilemmas underlying judicial settlement-promoting decisions in court. In this chapter we describe findings from our interviews with judges and lawyers. What is their view of the judicial role in the pursuit of settlement? What is their view of ADR? What is their perspective on the interplay between justice and efficiency? Which theories of legal justice do they develop? Findings are described on the background of the comparison between legal cultures.

This chapter introduces the vanishing trial phenomenon – the emphasis on settlement and plea bargains and the decline of the judicial verdict. This phenomenon began in common law systems and coincided with the rise of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). ADR has been promulgated through a variety of legal constructs, including national laws and transnational directives. However, to date, it is often the case that neither the normative values of adjudication nor the fundamental values of ADR (such as dialogue and relation building) prevail. In their stead, especially in common law countries, there is a drive for efficiency in both courts and mediation sessions. Efficiency has, to a large extent, become synonymous with settlement and the means by which settlement is reached receive little to no notice. Judges, in this setting, are expected to manage cases until they settle – though, as our research shows, some judges have more ambitious horizons for their role, lending new insights to the possible new trajectories. As methods to replace the judicial role are under experimentation, the value and place of the judicial role have reached a critical crossroads.