This paper focuses on the discursive connection between the notion of autonomy and the ageing-in-place policy approach, in a context of population aging and budgetary restraint. We argue that these central elements of the policy discourse on ageing represent a governance strategy that defines ageing in place as the prevailing standard for ageing well. Through an analysis of ageing policy documents released by the Québécois government between 2012 and 2023, this paper shows a disconnect between national policy frameworks and the reality of ageing in place. The issue of ageing in place is strongly bound up with the idea of autonomy, which is mainly expressed in terms of responsibility and freedom of choice, while its implementation overlooks the social structural determinants of individual autonomy and their impact on older people’s opportunities and processes of ageing in place.

The developmental states of Asia—South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore—have been widely recognized for their successful COVID-19 governance. However, despite these successes, a closer examination reveals significant differences in their strategic responses and the medical resources mobilized. This article explains the different governance approaches taken by the three developmental states. We argue that the pre-crisis industrial coordination capacity of each developmental state plays a crucial role in determining both whether and which medical resources can be mobilized during emergencies. Through comparative case studies and within-case process tracing, we demonstrate how pre-established industry-level coordination capacities enabled Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore to strategically prioritize the production and mobilization of test kits, masks, and vaccines, respectively, especially in the initial phase of the pandemic. This article emphasizes that a country’s domestic production capacity, an often-overlooked institutional factor, can facilitate a more efficient response in a short period of time and significantly strengthen crisis management efforts.

In the decade since the first edition of Global Health Law was published, the world has moved incrementally towards global health with justice, at least by one basic metric: life expectancy has edged up globally, with more rapid gains in low- than high-income countries. But to look around the world, global health with justice still seems a distant dream. Health gaps between people in rich and poor countries remain shocking and unconscionable—as do health inequities within countries. The pandemic also gave salience to profound health injustices—from injustices in access to lifesaving vaccines to gaping disparities in morbidity and mortality based on income, race, and national origin. So did the Trump administration’s decision to pause, and then slash, foreign assistance, bringing an end to lifesaving programs around the world. Guided by the overarching theme of justice, these reflections canvass the history of global health law as a field and discuss developments and challenges in the field across four core themes: multilateralism; equitable distribution of the benefits of scientific advancement; global health law for the poly-crises; and human rights and equity.

This article examines the impact of informal intergovernmental relations on the Kenyan government's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. It argues that although informality in governance has been perceived negatively by many governance scholars, it nevertheless has the capacity to enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of government. By virtue of informality's adaptability and recognition of the centrality of context, it can enhance efficacy particularly in unpredictable circumstances as occurred in the pandemic. Notwithstanding this reality, until recently, literature on informality, mainly informed by Eurocentric colonial perspectives on governance, has focussed on its negative elements, criticizing it for diverse governance ailments. Through the prism of the negotiated order theory, this article challenges this dominant narrative using an analysis of informal intergovernmental relations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kenya. It argues that though informality was at times applied negatively, overall, it ensured vibrant intergovernmental relations, thus positively impacting health service delivery and enhancing the government's legitimacy in the management of the pandemic.

Ever since the thwarted bid by T. Boone Pickens to obtain seats on the board of Koito Manufacturing, the activities of foreign investors in Japan, and of foreign CEOs of Japanese companies, have generated controversy. Foreign assertions of noble intentions are often distrusted by Japanese, while frustrations voiced by Pickens in 1989 are still keenly felt today.

This article examines disaster risk governance for island case studies, focusing on Pacific Small Island Developing States (SIDS). SIDS examples are used to examine two main areas in line with this special issue's themes: power and knowledge in disaster risk governance. The interactions between those themes are explored for three SIDS governance scales: regional, national, and sub-national. Linking the theoretical discussion with empirical examples demonstrates how bypassing government can be suitable for disaster risk governance.

This paper examines the concept of decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs), blockchain-based entities intended to operate without central authority or management hierarchy, through the lens of organisational economics. It compares DAOs with conventional organisational forms and explores whether DAOs represent a novel organisational form. The paper investigates DAOs in the context of the electronic markets hypothesis and applies theories from Demsetz, Jensen and Meckling, and Williamson to understand their potential long-term viability. A key finding is that for DAOs to function as claimed, they must effectively suppress agency costs through smart contracts and internal contestable markets. The paper also highlights the challenges DAOs face in maintaining adaptive integrity and fostering cooperative adaptation. While DAOs show promise in reducing certain transaction and information costs, their long-term viability depends on overcoming significant governance and participation hurdles.

Artificial intelligence (AI) requires new ways of evaluating national technology use and strategy for African nations. We conduct a survey of existing “readiness” assessments both for general digital adoption and AI policy in particular. We conclude that existing global readiness assessments do not fully capture African states’ progress in AI readiness and lay the groundwork for how assessments can be better used for the African context. We consider the extent to which these indicators map to the African context and what these indicators miss in capturing African states’ on-the-ground work in meeting AI capability. Through case studies of four African nations of diverse geographic and economic dimensions, we identify nuances missed by global assessments and offer high-level policy considerations for how states can best improve their AI readiness standards and prepare their societies to capture the benefits of AI.

As part of the “Solar Geoengineering: Ethics, Governance, and International Politics” roundtable, this essay examines dilemmas arising in exploring nonideal scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment. Model-based knowledge about solar geoengineering tells us little about possible climatic responses to malicious, self-interested, or competing deployments, and even less about political or cultural responses outside of the climate system. The essay argues that policy for governing solar geoengineering in a world of multiple states and uneven power relations requires a broader base for solar geoengineering knowledge, beyond that offered by modeling, and a better understanding of nonideal scenarios, especially those motivated by logics beyond reducing climate impacts. It highlights the interests of military and security actors in such knowledge, and the potential for it to facilitate securitization and further reduce the prospect of multilateral collaborative governance of geoengineering in the public interest. The essay concludes that further research can be ethically justified but must be comprehensively governed.