Federica Giovanella examines the on-going conflict between copyright and informational privacy rights within the judicial system in this timely and intriguing book.

Providing an accessible introduction to the application of multi-criteria analysis in law, this book illustrates how simple additive weighing, a well known method in decision theory, can be used in problem structuring, analysis and decision support for overall assessments and balancing of interests in the context of law.

A comparative and historical account of the origins and meanings of the discourse of judicial 'balancing' in constitutional rights law.

"Now that economic development is starting to pick up in many countries in Africa, the question arises how such development can be balanced with the need for adequate environmental protection. This crucial issue, inherent in the notion of sustainable development, is addressed in this innovative and path-breaking volume. For the first time, academics from seventeen African countries have joined forces to analyse the way in which economic and environmental interests are balanced in their legal systems. The authors all use a common framework to improve the comparability of the country studies. The different country-related chapters do not only provide insights into the formally applicable legal rules (law in the books), but given that the book brings together academics aware of the practice in Africa, they also describe the way in which environmental policy functions in practice (law in action). Many case studies, with conceptual analyses are provided of pollution incidents and the way in which administrative agencies or courts have on those occasions balanced the interests between the economy, society and the environment. A critical comparative analysis by the editors points at tendencies towards convergence and points of divergence between the African countries. Suggestions for policy reform are also formulated, showing African countries how they can benefit from experiences in the US and Europe. This thought provoking volume is a must for anyone (academic, policymaker or practitioner) interested in sustainable development generally and in Africa in particular."--P. [4] of cover.

At the end of the Cold War, the United States emerged as the world's most powerful state, and then used that power to initiate wars against smaller countries in the Middle East and South Asia. According to balance-of-power theory--the bedrock of realism in international relations--other states should have joined together militarily to counterbalance the United States' rising power. Yet they did not. Nor have they united to oppose Chinese aggression in the South China Sea or Russian offensives along its western border. This does not mean balance-of-power politics is dead, argues renowned international relations scholar T. V. Paul; instead it has taken a different form. Rather than employ familiar strategies such as active military alliances and arms buildups, leading powers have engaged in "soft balancing," which seeks to restrain threatening powers through the use of international institutions, informal alignments, and economic sanctions. Paul places the evolution of balancing behavior in historical perspective, from the post-Napoleonic era to today's globalized world. This book offers an illuminating examination of how subtler forms of balance-of-power politics can help states achieve their goals against aggressive powers without wars or arms races.

Available Open Access under CC-BY-NC licence. Examining how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) has responded to external threats over the past 50 years, this book provides a compelling account of regional state actions and foreign policy in the face of potential sovereignty violation. The author draws on a large amount of previously unanalysed material, including declassified government documents and WikiLeaks cables, to examine four key cases since 1975. Taking into account state interests and the role of external powers, the author develops the ‘vanguard state theory’ to explain ASEAN state responses to sovereignty violation, which, it is argued, has universal applicability and explanatory power.