From a lower middle-class family in a small mining town in South Africa, a series of opportunities created by mentors in South Africa and abroad, together with the grit and daring to take them up, enabled me to work with some of the most innovative developmental theorists, such as Colwyn Trevarthen, and global policy figures like Jim Yong Kim, former President of the World Bank. I used these opportunities to shape a research and advocacy career that brought together knowledge and evidence relating to young children and families from a wide range of disciplines to contribute to global, regional, and national policy and programs to address the universal and enduring problems of poverty, inequality and social exclusion that limit children’s chances in life. I am extremely gratified that some of my students, assistants, and early career collaborators, driven by their talents and encouraged by my nerve, have similarly carved out global careers starting from provincial beginnings.

This is the third and final of the book’s mini-studies of dignity. Jumping forward in time again to twenty-first-century South Africa, this chapter revolves around an object that bears on an important aspect of what many people today understand by dignity: the toilet. As one campaigning slogan has it, ‘sanitation is dignity’. South Africa is a country in which there exist large disparities in the distribution of sanitation services, with black South Africans considerably less well served than white South Africans. The chapter follows the efforts of poor black communities to secure or defend sanitary dignity through litigation and public protest.

This chapter presents a special instance of education reform in which South African students presented a compelling case for curriculum change under decolonization. At first, it appeared that all conditions for successful change were in place – receptive university leadership; compelling educational rationale; pressing political demand; and widespread support among academic teachers. A massive colonial statue was toppled of the imperialist Cecil John Rhodes on the University of Cape Town campus. For a short but powerful moment (2015–2016) academic faculties refocused their energies on critical concepts such as decoloniality, what it might mean and how it could be implemented. Special seminars, invited speakers, funded projects, senate authorizations, and commissioned task teams sprung into action to “decolonize the curriculum.” Five years later, little had changed both for the disciplinary curriculum (e.g., sociology or chemistry) or the institutional curriculum (i.e., the rules and regulations that govern legitimate knowledge). Why? Based on interviews with more than 200 academic teachers across 10 universities, this case study demonstrates how exactly institutions temper radical ideas. This is a specific case of radical reform in a broader struggle to decolonize knowledge from Cape Town and Bristol to Antwerp and South Carolina.

A core purpose of South Africa’s Constitution was to modify private orderings growing out of Apartheid’s legacy of racism. Hence, the South African framers, and specifically those representing the African National Congress (ANC), had strong reason to adopt some version of horizontal application. While republican elements occur in some of the ANC’s early thought on private actors’ duties, such discourses featured less when the party had to find consensus with representatives of the Nationalist Party while negotiating the Interim Constitution. A strong formalist streak in the legal culture, concerns about preserving property rights, and the incentives of institutions such as the Supreme Court of Appeal all cut against the practice of horizontal application. Ultimately, the constitutional framers provided for both direct and indirect horizontal application in the Final Constitution. The ANC’s vision was thus fixed in this feature, and subsequent cases further cemented a break from prior orderings. Republican discourses ensued in cases involving horizontal application and perhaps most clearly in issues striking at the heart of the old Apartheid regime, such as housing and education.

This chapter reviews the regulation of disinformation from an African human rights’ law perspective, focusing on the right to freedom of expression and the right to vote. It provides an overview of the African regional law framework, specifically the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights of 1981 (the African Charter) and corresponding jurisprudence. The chapter also analyses the way in which freedom of expression and disinformation laws have been applied in African countries, the aim being to contextualize and illustrate how African regional law plays out at the domestic level, but with an emphasis on the position in South Africa.

Chapter 3 revisits the Cold War Scramble for Africa. Throughout the continent, the ‘concession model of extraction’ – the renting out of land to foreign corporations in exchange for royalties – was based on the early emergence of mining giants in South Africa. The concession model was not dismantled following independence. Gatekeeping politics were consolidated through the alternate paths taken by London and Paris. France incorporated its former colonies within a ‘post-colonial block’. Britain reconverted as a dual middle power – with London as jurisdictional apex and the City as financial powerhouse. The Cold War sidelining of The Hague justice institutions enabled the deployment of the US Cultural Cold War, based on the formidable sway of the alliance of Wall Street resources – finance, arbitration and corporate law firms – which contributed to the insulation of foreign corporate rights in property in resource-rich African states from national and international oversight.

This chapter lays the theoretical foundation for the book by disentangling the myriad discourses and interpretations of digital sovereignty from the perspective of the Global South and emerging power alliances. It argues that BRICS countries symbolize the “rise of the rest” in an increasingly multipolar world, their digital policies critical to the future shape of global internet, and digital governance. In this book, the idea of digital sovereignty itself is viewed as a site of power contestation and knowledge production. Specifically, the chapter identify seven major perspectives on digital sovereignty in a complex discursive field: state digital sovereignty, supranational digital sovereignty, network digital sovereignty, corporate digital sovereignty, personal digital sovereignty, postcolonial digital sovereignty, and commons digital sovereignty. The chapter highlights the affinities and overlaps as well as tensions and contradictions between these perspectives on digital sovereignty with brief illustrative examples from BRICS countries and beyond. While a state-centric perspective on digital sovereignty is traditionally more salient especially in BRICS contexts, increasing public concern over user privacy, state surveillance, corporate abuse, and digital colonialism has given ascendance to an array of alternative perspectives on digital sovereignty that emphasize individual autonomy, indigenous rights, community well-being, and sustainability.

As a “Digital Swing State,” South Africa’s approach to digital sovereignty is unique. This chapter analyzes South Africa’s involvement in international processes relevant to digital sovereignty and critically assesses its national policy and regulatory response to the digital economy, focusing on online content regulation, cybercrime, and data policy. Attention is given also to the challenges faced by South Africa, such as cyber vulnerabilities, institutional failures in implementing digital policies, and the struggle to protect citizens’ rights in the digital space. South Africa’s emerging digital sovereignty posture is analyzed through the lens of securitization and development, revealing a complex balance between leveraging digital transformation for socioeconomic development and addressing cybersecurity threats. The chapter reveals while developmental aspirations inform South Africa’s digital policy to reap the benefits of digitalization, they are also increasingly influenced by securitization trends to protect national digital assets and avoid loss of control. The chapter recommends for South Africa to balance its securitization agenda with respect for human rights, calling for proportionate, legitimate, and human-centric policies. The aim is to achieve a positive digital sovereignty agenda that respects human rights and promotes human security, as enshrined in the 1996 Constitution, while effectively implementing digital policies for socioeconomic development.

This chapter provides an overview of selected studies assessing technology-aided programs to promote independent leisure and communication or combinations of independent leisure, communication, and daily activities in people with mild to moderate intellectual disability often associated with sensory and/or motor impairments. The studies included in the overview offer an opportunity to describe the development of those programs, the technology solutions used to support them, and their outcomes in terms of participants’ independent performance. Following the presentation of the programs and their outcomes, the discussion focuses on three main issues: (a) effectiveness of the programs and methodological considerations, (b) accessibility and affordability of the programs, and (c) implications of the programs for professionals working in daily contexts. With regard to the last issue, an effort was made to examine ethical and moral questions that may accompany the possible decisions of professionals to adopt those programs in daily contexts.