This chapter aims to redescribe the IPCC through the analytical framework of the book by identifying the actors, activities and forms of authority that shape the organisation and its assessment practice. Reviewing existing studies of the IPCC, the chapter begins by identifying two central concerns within this scholarship: first, the relationship between science and politics and second, the asymmetries between developed and developing country participation. The chapter contributes to this literature by using the framework of the book to identify the IPCC as five distinct units: the panel, the bureau, the technical support units (TSUs), the secretariat and the authors. This identifies other forms of authority that matter alongside scientific and political forms, most importantly the administrative, as found within the TSUs. Describing the historical emergence of the social order over thirty years and six assessment cycles reveals the relationship between economic capital and meaningful participation. It requires economic and human resources to undertake IPCC activities, and it through this investment individual actors and member government becomes meaningful and authoritative participants, with knowledge of and the symbolic power to write the meaning of climate change.

The most widely read and influential component of the IPCC’s practice of writing is the summary for policymakers (SPM), where the key messages of the underlying report are presented in short sentences and figures to facilitate travel into the media, ministers’ speeches and UNFCCC negotiations. The aim of this chapter is to describe the politics of approval. The chapter begins the historical emergence of this practice and documents the tactics and strategies available to co-chairs, authors and delegates to influence the final outcome. Documenting participation in the authorship and approval of the SPM again illuminates the asymmetries revealed in previous chapters, but also highlights the growing presence of some developing countries in the process. This is evident in the content that has initiated some of the greatest struggle – the categorisation of developing versus developed countries. This account reveals that the forces structuring the final stage of the IPCC’s practice of writing originate in the broader global struggle to determine the meaning of climate change and continue after the approval, only now with a new SPM to substantiate national positions in the negotiation of the collective response.

The introduction begins by addressing the uses of studying cultural institutions. It provides a working definition of ‘institution’ and a historical overview of the emergence of the infrastructure of institutions in the period 1700 to 1900. The logic of choosing the period is addressed in relation to the uneven translation from cultural institutions based on the court and church to voluntary institutions that had an arms-length relationship to the state. It also discusses the historical irony that just as a ‘romantic’ definition of the literary individualism emerged that might seem to pit literature against Institutions, there was a proliferation of institutions of literature. The purview of the collection in relation to British national and imperial culture and identities is explained and the opportunities for further work in related areas discussed in the framework of the collection’s own historical moment at a time when the university-based discipline of Literature seems to be undergoing a fundamental change in its structure and purposes.

Chapter 9 focuses on the analysis of etymological spelling, and especially the insertion of <b>, <c>, <d>, <l> and <p> in Early Modern English word forms, the development of alternant <aun> and <ph>, and the rationalisation of <er>/<ar>. My results indicate that etymologised spellings appeared increasingly more markedly between the early and the mid-sixteenth century, while only a percentage of the forms which developed during these decades continued until the seventeenth century. My investigation shows that the etymologising developments in epenthetic graphemes, <aun>, <ph> and <er>/<ar> spread out not gradually, from high-frequency words to lower-frequency ones, but rather at largely comparable frequencies across most of the English vocabulary, albeit somewhat erratically and haphazardly across legitimate and illegitimate etymologies. The discussion reflects upon the development of the etymological spellings, focusing especially on the potential interaction between authors and printers as agents responsible for the modern standardisation during the process of in-house proofreading. Overall, I suggest, changes occurring in the English printing industry were primarily responsible for the different etymologising trends between the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries.

In her 1949 article ‘We Want Books – But Do We Encourage Our Writers?’, Jamaican writer Una Marson alludes to the lack of exposure of Caribbean writers to potential readers and bemoans the lack of interest in reading. She also implies that Caribbean writers might be scarce or unproductive because they lack financial support. As the second decade of the twenty-first century closes, it is clear that the cultivation of a Caribbean reading audience as well as a market for Caribbean literature has gathered momentum since 1949. This essay considers the role of literary prizes and festivals in stimulating new writing, in growing a global audience for Caribbean literature and in supporting the careers of Caribbean writers in the region and in the Caribbean diaspora.

This chapter documents how British writer, Sir Thomas Henry Hall Caine used the Berne Convention to popularise authors’ rights on a speaking tour of Canada in 1895 (where on behalf of the Society of Authors, British Parliament and American publishers he was tasked with preventing Canada’s effective withdrawal from the Berne Convention). Caine’s efforts demonstrate how the tension between the utopian idea of copyright as a natural right and the political pragmatism that Ricketson identified as underpinning the Berne Convention 1886 played out in practice. This history helps us understand how the idea of a universal right of authors continues to influence the public imagination as the main rationale for copyright.

In the realm of copyright law, Singapore has chosen to look to Australia as its model: anyone familiar with the Australian copyright. This chapter explains the background to this choice, and elaborates on how Australian scholarship has influenced the development of Singaporean copyright law in one particular aspect – namely, the concept of authorship.

Copyright embraces a vast range of authors and is intended to be neutral about the nature of authorship save for the requirement of originality. Nevertheless, the description author can be illusory and even unhelpful. Great visual arts masters have for centuries practised their art through the directed hand of others. Are they authors? Should conductors of music, stage directors or curators of art exhibitions be deemed authors? What would ‘the show’ be without them? And what of authorship in the modern computer age of the creation of works where the human hand is significantly or even completely removed? On the other hand, indigenous cultures typically eschew notions of private ownership and the individual as author. The age-old concept of authorship in copyright is open to serious reflection and review.

This chapter recapitulates Professor Ricketson’s analysis in his 1992 Manges Lecture at Columbia Law School, presciently titled 'People or Machines: The Berne Convention and the Changing Concept of Authorship'. As Ricketson systematically developed the inquiry, it became clear that ‘People or Machines’ in fact meant ‘People Not Machines’. This chapter considers whether, more than twenty-five years later, subsequent technological developments warrant reconsideration of the human authorship premise underlying the Berne Convention. If that premise holds firm, the next question is whether non-human-generated outputs require some form of intellectual property protection. Any such regime, it should be noted, would fall outside the Berne Convention.