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.

From its very origins as a semi-nomadic community seeking to establish itself as an early modern state, large flows of migrants, exiles, and refugees found an accommodating Ottoman Empire. Indeed, the conditions under which migrants settled allowed for many to thrive as the empire encouraged migration as a manner to expand its territorial reach beyond the core Anatolian and Balkan regions. The ethnic and religious diversity of these migrants helped regularly energize Ottoman political, economic, and cultural life. At other moments, in different settings, other migrants destabilized the empire as peasants were uprooted by administrative attempts at settling the new arrivals. Arriving as the empire replaced previous ruling structures to adjust to political, cultural, and economic changes in the larger world, refugees from neighboring empires were thus seen as threats by many while they were welcomed by other constituencies within the Ottoman state, a pattern of settlement that shaped the 600-year history of the empire.

Chapter 12 discusses the EU’s new pilot regime for DLT market infrastructures, as laid out in the Pilot Regulation (PilotR). Section 12.2 covers its scope, including activities and entities in scope, size limits, the interface towards the Settlement Finality Directive (SFD), geographic scope, and the EU passporting rules. Section 12.3 explains the procedure under PilotR, beginning with the fundamental requirement to appoint an operator that applies for specific permission to run the DLT market infrastructure – in contrast to the decentralised nature of DLT. Then, we outline how PilotR provides exemptions from MiFID/MiFIR and CSDR along with the associated conditions and compensatory measures – and the supervisory framework under PilotR. Section 12.4 discusses the governance of DLT market infrastructures based on the Business Plan Approach, by which the operator proposes the rules for its own operations – to be approved by the competent authority. Section 12.5 concludes.

This chapter briefly surveys the history of research into human settlement in the Caucasus region and outlines the book’s theses. In doing so, it acknowledges the long-standing interest in the unique languages and topography of the Caucasus region. It also surveys Caucasus research before and after the fall of the Soviet Union. It further charts the impact of anthropological genetics on our understanding of human evolutionary history; and introduces the unanswered questions about Caucasus population history.

To litigate or not to litigate, that is the question any Chinese companies operating in the United States long enough must contemplate. For American companies, litigation is nothing but an unavoidable business risk and often a vital competition strategy, routinely dealt with by legal and managerial professionals applying monetarized cost–benefit analysis. Such analysis typically incorporates attorney fees and other litigation expenses, potential reputational damage, time and human resource consumption, and the present value of expected litigation gains or losses. By contrast, litigation in China carries complex social meanings and is often avoided to preserve long-term cooperative relationships or to signal desirable attributes to uninformed third parties. When lawsuits do occur, they are often handled by stakeholders without professional legal assistance. Disputants consider a wide range of material and nonmaterial interests that are shaped by both formal institutions undergoing significant transformation and complex, entrenched social norms governing dispute resolution. Chinese companies immersed in these two disparate institutional environments approach legal disputes in the United States.

This overview of Iceland’s medieval history is divided into three phases: firstly, from settlement in the ninth century to 1096−7, which marks the emergence of the Icelandic Church; secondly, from the appearance of Iceland’s earliest written historical sources to the ceding of independence to Norway in 1262/4; and finally, to the end of the fourteenth century. It shows how Iceland’s marginality to the rest of Europe, its lack of a centralized authority and the blurring of historicity and fiction in its most prominent texts have affected understanding of Icelandic history and problematized its historiography. The chapter begins with discussion of the two primary native sources, Ari Þorgilsson’s Islendingabók (The Book of Icelanders) and Landnámabók (The Book of Settlements), their accounts of settlement and conversion, and the value of archaeology as a source. The second phase details the growth of the church and monasteries as places of learning, and how the church’s increasing power led to clashes with the secular elite, resulting in the chaos and violence of the Sturlungaöld. The final phase concerns Iceland’s loss of independence, economic condition and relations with Norway.

The evolution of population and settlement in the Iberian Peninsula during the Middle Ages has similarities and differences with the rest of Western Europe. The differences arise from the process of territorial expansion and feudal colonization developed by the Christian kingdoms against Al-Andalus. That also determined diverse situations among the Christian kingdoms and regional contrasts within them. This chapter explores the evolution of population between approximately 1000 and 1500. The introduction offers a preliminary reflection on the sources and their possibilities and limits. In the second section, the patterns of population change and migration are discussed. Despite some methodological issues, some population figures and their evolution are offered for each area. This shows an evolution in which the late medieval crisis and, above all, the Black Death had a great impact, although uneven in the different kingdoms and territories. The study of rural and urban settlements is addressed in the third section, relating its characteristics and evolution to the social and economic structure in the different areas. Finally, the fourth section studies the population weight and the characteristics of the following urban socio-professional sectors: workers, artisans and merchants.

The history of Egypt during the first centuries of Islam comes with a striking paradox. While Upper Egypt, from Fusṭāṭ to Aswan, has received much attention due to the numerous papyri from the region, the Delta is rarely attested in these documents. This is most probably linked to the region’s humid soil, which contributed to the progressive degradation of papyri. Indeed, other than a few private letters written in Alexandria, no papyri from this period have been found in the Delta. Despite this, the Delta occupied a central place in the imperial construction of Islam, especially during the Umayyad period (40/661–132/750): it linked the new capital, Fusṭāṭ, to the Mediterranean and its main cities, was the prime locus of Arab settlement from the second/eighth centuries and was a choice transit space to Syria-Palestine and Cyrenaica. Based on narratives by Egyptian Muslim writers and papyrological documents mentioning the Delta, we can sketch the history of the administrative and fiscal management of this space, to follow the process of tribal settlement in relationship with imperial policies and to analyse the latter’s consequences on the social situation in the Delta at the end of the Umayyad period and in the early Abbasid period.

Kom Abou Bellou is located halfway between Cairo and Alexandria, two kilometres west of the current Rosetta branch of the Nile. Despite early interest in the site and its good general state of conservation, it has remained largely ignored. Work undertaken in 2013 at Kom Abou Bellou reassesses our knowledge of the territory. The space, which includes the city, is considered over the long-term chronology to facilitate an analysis of the city and its space from the point of view of its internal organisation, its functions and its relation with its natural, political and socio-economic environment. The site has been occupied from the Old Kingdom until at least the tenth century CE. Diachronic study makes it possible to highlight the phenomena of creation, modification and appropriation of this space, notably the displacement of the settlement according to the periods and the reuse of previously occupied spaces. These transitions provide many examples that allow us to observe changes in the urban system and, more broadly, data on the land use patterns and the perception of space. This chapter aims to present the first reflections on this matter, which will be expanded as the archaeological site and its documentation are studied.

This chapter covers the long story of migration and settlement in the borderlands of Germany and Poland. It explores the difference between migration and settlement, along with modern German history and Polish space, 1772–1871, and Flottwell. The argument for Poland as German colonial space is explored, alongside Max Sering’s early life. It also explores Alsace as borderland, Gustav Schmoller, and the Historical School. It covers Sering’s six month journey throughout North America and his subsequent analysis of homesteading and the settlement of the frontier. Sering’s discovery of the concept of inner colonization, Indigenous, Métis, and Removal vs Assimilation are all discussed.