This chapter begins by outlining the past trends and the present trajectory of employment-related dispute resolution at international organizations. Second, the historic evolution of the statutory basis of administrative tribunals at the United Nations is analysed, suggesting that Member State governance organs are prepared to revise procedures, but are reluctant to address the transparency of employment law at international organizations. Third, and in conclusion – extending this book’s emphasis on concisely and clearly introducing the law – the incorporation of general legal principles of international administrative law into the Statutes of international administrative tribunals is proposed.

This chapter addresses evidence-related recommendations for the consideration of the UN treaty bodies. Written by three practitioners from the civil society sector, with direct experience of the individual communication procedure before the UNTBs, it also benefited from input from all the contributors to the volume, which it concludes. Part I offers normative reflections. It deals with legal questions, including: What should the applicable standard be when determining human rights claims? How should this standard vary according to the type of claim and the stage of the proceedings? In what circumstances and under which conditions should the burden of proof be shifted from the complainant to the respondent state? Part II deals with organisational, and thus more mundane issues, but it highlights how proper identification and communication of the applicable evidentiary concepts and norms are essential to a transparent, accessible and fair system, therefore necessitating proper resourcing.

Chapter 2 develops the book’s theoretical contribution: a model explaining how partisan inclusion fosters de facto autonomy in electoral management bodies. The chapter distinguishes between de jure independence, which is often established through constitutional or legal reforms, and de facto autonomy, which emerges only when political actors perceive electoral management bodies as legitimate, transparent, and predictable. It outlines how partisan engagement can build trust, reduce informational asymmetries, and create mutual constraints that deter manipulation. The chapter presents an “institutional pathways” approach, detailing how some electoral commissions have followed a process of legal reform, stakeholder embedding, and administrative routinization that lead to autonomous practice. It further examines how consultation mechanisms, conflict-resolution procedures, and internal accountability practices reinforce autonomy over time. The chapter concludes with a set of comparative expectations linking variation in inclusion to observable differences in election quality and crisis resilience across “cases”.

This chapter analyses the EU framework governing takeovers, focusing on the Takeover Directive designed to ensure fair treatment of shareholders and transparency during public acquisition bids. It examines key principles such as mandatory bid rules, disclosure obligations and protection of minority shareholders. The chapter explores the challenges of harmonizing takeover regulations across diverse Member States and balancing market efficiency with investor protection. By reviewing case law and national implementations, it highlights recent reforms and their impact on corporate control dynamics within the EU. The discussion underscores the role of takeover regulation in fostering competitive, transparent and integrated European capital markets.

Trust is presented as a cornerstone of human–AI interaction. The chapter reviews psychological, sociological, and computational models of trust, including interpersonal and contractual trust, Luhmann’s theory of trust-as-prediction, and the Computers Are Social Actors theory that explains why people anthropomorphize machines. It examines risks of overtrust (automation bias, misplaced confidence) and undertrust (algorithm aversion, underuse of reliable systems). Strategies such as transparency, explainability, fairness, and accountability are discussed as ways to calibrate trust appropriately. The chapter concludes that trust in AI is dynamic, context-dependent, and must be designed into systems deliberately.

This chapter explores how psychology and human–AI interaction (HAI) principles shape successful AI products. Using failures like McDonald’s ill-fated AI drive-thru as cautionary tales, it shows how neglecting user needs such as control, trust, and comprehension can cause reputational and product damage. Drawing on human-centered design, cognitive psychology, and UX research, the authors argue that great AI experiences depend on anticipating how humans think, feel, and decide. They outline strategies for embedding empathy, transparency, and explainability into AI, highlighting that these lessons extend beyond engineering teams to anyone influencing AI adoption.

The chapter examines the adjudication of AI-related disputes as well as the application of AI-driven technologies in international commercial courts (ICommCs), a relatively new adjudication forum. It argues that ICommCs are well-suited for resolving digital technology disputes due to their publicness, transparency, and capacity to develop jurisprudence for the digital economy – advantages that set them apart from ADR and ODR mechanisms. Their international nature also aligns with the transnational character of digital disputes. Additionally, ICommCs are ideal for integrating AI-driven innovations in dispute resolution, as they are more agile and adaptable than other forums, particularly ordinary domestic courts. Their specialised judges, manageable caseloads, and ability to swiftly address emerging technological challenges further enhance their suitability.

Chapter 3.4 explores how pharmaceutical care is financed. Paying for medicines includes how the end-purchase of existing medicines is managed but also the way investment in research and development (R&D) is handled. Key learning includes that

• Pharmaceutical innovation draws on substantial public and private resources.

• – The public sector primarily supports early-stage research, regulates the industry and incentivizes development.

• – The private sector is typically central to development, commercialization, manufacture and marketing. It seeks high profit margins and is not always transparent or responsive to policy priorities.

• Novel and specialized therapeutics as well as population ageing are likely to accelerate medicines expenditures. This requires careful management of pricing and reimbursement.

• Policy-makers can leverage a mix of push and pull strategies to align industry efforts with societal need including through

• – Clear communication of health system priorities

• – Transparent incentive and pricing systems and measures to enhance R&D efficiency

• – Payment mechanisms that foster equity and sustainability

• – Cross-country collaboration including on preparedness, procurement and pricing transparency.

This chapter offers an overview of contemporary pro-oil mobilization in Canada and the United States. Through analysis of ninety-five organizations, the chapter looks at patterns in the scale, issues, and levels of transparency common among pro-oil advocacy groups. These data show that contestation today often happens at the state or provincial level and typically emphasizes multi-issue, long-term campaigns. Furthermore, many of these organizations demonstrate at least nominal financial transparency, with more than half naming sponsors on their websites. This level of revelation is largely absent on social media, however, with very few campaigns mentioning their sponsors on X or Facebook. Groups that are nominally finically transparent also employ misrepresentative coalitions, buried attribution, passive voice, and reputational laundering to make their funding sources harder to track in practice.

This chapter focuses on AI and its impact on transparency in judicial decision-making. Transparency is one of the core values of the rule of law, and essential for maintaining the trust and accountability of the judiciary and justice system as a whole. Drawing upon semi-structured expert interviews with members of judiciary and legal profession, case law and real-life examples of AI tools, the chapter considers four questions: why transparency matters in the context of judicial decision-making; the information that judges must have and communicate to satisfy the demands of transparency; whether they have access to this information; and, if not, what we might do about this deficit. We argue that two complementary solutions can strengthen judicial transparency in the age of AI: (1) a regulatory framework that mandates disclosure of specific information pertaining to the code and variables used in AI tools; and (2) robust use of the due process duty to provide adequate reasons for a judicial decision that depends upon the output of a predictive tool. These steps are essential to reconcile judicial use of AI with the need for transparency, as a foundational aspect of justice and rule of law.

The book’s final chapter returns to issues of transparency, arguing that so- called front groups tend to be open secrets of sorts, with their funders or founders rarely fully hidden from view. The chapter demonstrates that oil companies today are apt to use financial transparency as a strategic asset, framing themselves as amplifiers of citizen speech. As oil companies embrace a more open model of citizen organizing, critiques or policy interventions that call for exposing the sponsors of pro-oil campaigns see their relevancy wane. The chapter closes by exploring how scholars and environmental activists might use the empirical insights of previous chapters, particularly the top-down control, internal political fissures, and affective experience of risk by joiners in pro-oil campaigns, to create more just and effective grassroots interventions in climate politics.