In Chapter 7, we conclude our reconceptualization of organizational control by discussing new forms of control, novel combinations of existing controls, new challenges to fundamental assumptions, and new forms of organizing – all of which represent promising directions for future organizational control research and practice.

Life history theory has revolutionized the study of the evolved life course both across and within species. Humans are no exception. Life history theory provides nuance to claims of human uniqueness in the tree of life, including among mammals, and among primates in particular. This chapter first explains how life history theory delivers optimal trait characteristics given trade-offs that are defined by costs and benefits of different “solutions” to fitness-relevant problems. It reviews the current understanding of the evolution of the human life course, and the chapter evaluates explanations of long postreproductive life spans in human populations. It then provides a framework for modeling how selection pressures in different socioecological settings could shape the flexible expression of demographic, physiological, and even psychological traits in our species. Special emphasis is placed on the role that exogenous mortality and environmental unpredictability (and their cues) play on shaping a number of behavioral and physiological traits related to survival. Claims certainly outpace definitive tests, but after a half century, since life history theory was first introduced to the human life sciences, promising new directions are expanding the breadth of topics covered beyond demography, using multiple methods and spanning diverse disciplines.

Malala Yousafzai won the Nobel Peace Prize when she was seventeen. In part, the world knows about her because when the Taliban prohibited girls from attending school in Afghanistan, she spoke up about it, writing articles and giving talks. As is clear by her writing, Malala has strong values that include justice and equality for women as well as a love of learning and education. She also values safety. In making her choice to speak up and criticize her government’s decision, Malala was aware that she was increasing risks to herself and her family. In response, the Taliban shot (then fifteen-year-old) Malala in the head while she was on a school bus. Thankfully, she survived and continues to advocate for a future where girls are free to learn and lead.

Malala made decisions based on trade-offs among her values, even when the priority she placed on equality and justice made her vulnerable to Taliban hostility and increased her own risk of death.

Under what conditions can we expect international courts to be progressive? The introduction begins with a discussion of why it is compelling to answer this question by looking at the case of the European Court of Human Rights – a court that is not unambiguously progressive. It then lays out the theoretical and empirical foundations of the book, presenting the key concepts of forbearance and audacity – strategies that courts employ to adjust their sovereignty costs while maintaining a good institutional reputation. The theoretical framework explains why the Court needs to oscillate between forbearance and audacity, and how this oscillation has shaped the norm against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. The empirical analysis, in its turn, combines social science methods and legal analysis to reveal the extent to which the Court has resorted to forbearance and audacity when interpreting the norm against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, and how such episodes influenced the norm’s developmental trajectory. The introduction concludes by explaining the determinants of forbearance and audacity and putting forth the book’s key contributions to the existing debates.

This chapter examines trimming as a face of moderation. It starts from the definition of trimming given by the Marquess of Halifax in a famous essay, “The Character of a Trimmer” (1684), and compares trimmers to tightrope walkers. It argues that trimmers tend to support the parties they dislike least and search for a “wise mean between barbarous extremes.”

This chapter revisits each of the design principles, summarizing and drawing connections between them. Many of the principles are based on empirical evidence from traditional learning environments; a discussion on the boundary conditions of the design principles explores the extrapolations of this evidence to training recognition skills in dynamic, high stakes environments. The chapter closes with a discussion of the contributions and challenges of augmented reality to training.

Measures taken as part of marine governance can have significant implications for the social, economic and cultural interests and identities of individuals and groups of people. This makes it important to inquire about the legitimacy of key laws and policies in this field. The EU has developed a comprehensive set of rules for protection of the marine environment, promotion of sustainable ’blue growth’ and efficient use of marine space. The Chapter assesses and compares the extent to which and how legitimacy is considered in the three main legal instruments making up this regulatory framework, i.e., the Water Framework Directive, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive. Although considerable differences exist between the directives, social and legitimacy aspects generally receive quite limited attention and tend to be addressed mostly by means of public participation, a practice that in itself is associated with considerable legitimacy challenges.

Biological considerations are often a major focus in conservation translocations: they include the physiological, behavioural, demographic, and ecological considerations relevant to management decisions about translocation planning, implementation, and evaluation. The vast array of biological, and other, considerations that managers must wrestle with render conservation translocations exceedingly complex, and a framework that supports thinking through this complexity to inform decisions in a transparent and deliberative fashion is indispensable. Structured decision-making (SDM) is a framework that is well suited to help managers deal with the complexity of their decisions, and SDM facilitates the integration of science (biological knowledge) to inform decisions. Scientists supporting conservation translocations have many tools at their disposal to help them provide predictions of management outcomes that are as accurate as possible, recognising that various sources of data are valid, and there is substantial guidance available on the appropriate methods to obtain, analyse, and interpret available data. Decisions will represent a mix of objective scientific prediction and subjective attitudes regarding trade-offs between objectives and regarding the uncertainty surrounding predictions. All conservation translocation decisions can be informed using SDM irrespective of their focus being biological, non-biological, and perhaps most realistically a mix across these concerns.

The notion of efficient trade-offs is popular in studies of language from an efficiency perspective. These studies represent a valuable contribution to functional approaches to language. They provide interesting hypotheses for large-scale empirical investigations. At the same time, trade-offs can turn out to be oversimplifications when we focus only on correlations between two variables. The next step is to investigate causal (directional) networks with multiple factors that can influence language use and structure. A first attempt is shown in the case study of Subject and Object cues. We find that the correlation between word order freedom and case marking is robust and cannot be reduced to the effect of other linguistic cues. Also, the causal analyses suggest that the causal direction is more likely to be from word order to case marking than the other way round. At the same time, the evidence makes us conclude that the way efficiency is reflected in aggregate linguistic variables is anything but straightforward.

To counter the dominant anthropocentric and synergistic framing of the relationship between environmental protection and human rights, this chapter focuses on the conflicting dimension of this relation. It maps the main types of conflicts induced from a case-law analysis of regional human rights courts. Conflicts between nature conservation policies (through the creation of protected areas) and the rights of indigenous peoples or cultural minorities living on such lands have been deplored for long, as also instantiated through the numerous cases decided by the Inter-American and African human rights Courts and Commissions. Less has been said, however, about conflicts between animal welfare concerns and cultural or religious freedoms of certain communities; conflicts between landscape preservation policies and land ownership, including by vulnerable groups such as Roma people; and conflicts between energy policies and the rights to adequate living conditions and to property. Strasbourg and Luxembourg judges are increasingly occupied with such issues. This innovative typology of normative conflicts between environmental protection laws and human rights offers new empirical, theoretical and doctrinal insights to understand the nature and the extent of the conflicting dimension of the relationship between environmental protection and human rights.

Chapter 9 introduces the general desiderata of a good theory and tradeoffs that flow from this set of oft-conflicting criteria. Next, we discuss various complexities of theorizing – the number of causes and effects embraced by a theory, the specification of mechanisms, and the problem of defining units and levels of analysis.

This chapter focuses on the national level and studies interlinkages, institutional integration and policy coherence in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. After defining key terms, the chapter reviews how perspectives on interlinkages have shaped a new discourse, followed by an analysis of the steering effects of the global goals on institutional integration and policy coherence. The chapter finds that some measures have been taken by national governments to advance institutional integration through coordination by central agencies and inter-ministerial exchanges. Growing policy coherence, however, is not clearly observable. Existing barriers in political-administrative systems preventing institutional integration and policy coherence have not vanished with the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals. Although recent studies have considerably enhanced knowledge on the conceptual understanding of interlinkages, integration and coherence, empirical data about how these concepts play out in practice at national level is still very limited.

Dedicated public policy professionals are focused on improving their programs. Understandably, they neglect other worthy goals. Economists insist on focusing on the big picture: the opportunity costs for other departments and for taxpayers of spending more and more to address a single problem.

Economists find themselves at odds with experts, who singlemindedly pursue worthy ends without regard to costs. Consider megaprojects such as supersonic transport airplanes and high-speed trains. The engineers who design them want to show what they can do with “adequate” funding. Politicians want to be credited with spearheading such megaprojects. Economists, by contrast, want to be sure that consideration is given to less glamorous projects that may bring greater benefits at far less expense.

Opportunity costs are especially neglected when it comes to saving lives. It’s an easy applause line: “We should pay any price to save a life.” But some projects will reduce very small risks at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Economists remind us that we all take very small risks in our daily living, and there are many programs that will reduce risk. We can’t “fully fund” them all without neglecting, for example, our education and environmental goals.

The equity issue economists spend most of their time on is the current distribution of income and whether that distribution is becoming more unequal through time. Mainstream economists strongly disagree about these matters. Some want substantial increases in income tax for the highest earners; others think substantial increases would hurt economic growth in the medium to long term as lower after-tax income makes potential innovators more risk-averse while other high-paid workers decide to retire earlier. It is striking that almost no economists bring up a right to the fruits of one’s labor and fair compensation for one’s innovative ideas. Jefferson, on the left, Hamilton, on the right, and all the principal founders in between were strong believers in property rights. All the arguments about fairness, economic growth, and deserts are considered at length.

Economists agree about some equity matters. For example, they think the general public does not understand the actual incidence of taxes. Taxing unemployment insurance sounds regressive, but with our progressive income tax it actually hurts most those with above-average income. Raising business taxes sounds progressive, but labor and consumers pay a substantial part of this tax.