His death was ruled a suicide, but it brought an abrupt end to criminal proceedings that many hoped would expose the full extent of his network.

His death ended the criminal case against him, but it did not end the questions. One of the most important areas of continued scrutiny has been his travel history.

Understanding where Epstein travelled, and who travelled with him, could be central to understanding how he operated for so long within elite circles.

The World in Maps has created a map that highlights countries visited by Epstein, including nations across North America, South America , Europe, Africa and parts of Asia.

The map is based largely on released flight logs from Epstein’s private aircraft and journalistic investigations.

The flight logs and the ‘Lolita Express’

Epstein owned and used several aircraft over the years, including a Boeing 727 that became widely known in media reports as the “Lolita Express” .

Flight manifests from that aircraft, along with other planes he controlled, have been entered into court records and reported on extensively by outlets including the Associated Press and The Guardian.

The logs show frequent travel between the United States, Mexico, Brazil, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Norway, Russia, Morocco and Senegal.

Influential figures named in released files

Over the years, court documents, depositions and flight logs have referenced several high-profile figures who had contact with Epstein. These include:

Although the logs provide valuable insight, they do not represent a complete record of his lifetime travel.

For more than a century, economic power meant industrial power. The battle was over manufacturing. But that battle is largely settled. Supply chains have been redrawn, factories relocated, and the geography of production transformed. A new contest is under way.

It is the battle for power. Not political power, but electrical power.

Electricity is the enabling force behind everything else. It runs factories, data centres, transport systems and defence networks. It is what allows countries to manufacture, to digitise, to modernise and to fight. Energy is not just another sector of the economy. It is the fuel of the economy.

And at this moment in history, one country has placed itself at the centre of that system. First through trade. Then through renewables. Now, potentially, through the most transformative technology of all: nuclear fusion.

1. Trade wars

The China US trade conflict of 2025 will likely be remembered as a decisive moment in the global balance of power.

Donald Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on allies and adversaries alike, threatening to restrict access to the world’s largest consumer market. The UK, Europe, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and others made concessions in return for slightly lower duties. They did not reverse the policy. They negotiated for marginally better terms.

One country did not give way. China.

Tariffs escalated in stages. Ten percent. Twenty percent. Fifty four percent. One hundred and four percent. Eventually more than one hundred and twenty five percent on some goods. The pressure was intense.

Beijing responded in kind, but more importantly it deployed a weapon decades in the making: control of critical minerals.

In April, China signalled it could restrict exports of rare earth elements such as samarium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, lutetium, scandium and yttrium. These are not household names. Yet they are essential to the production of high performance magnets used in electric motors, wind turbines, defence systems and advanced electronics.

China produces up to 90 percent of global supply in several of these materials. Cutting off access would not simply raise prices. It would stall entire industries.

That leverage mattered. Tariffs were eventually wound back after high level talks, without Beijing making equivalent structural concessions. Whatever one thinks of the politics, the economic lesson was stark. Through long term planning, subsidies, environmental trade offs and export controls, China had embedded itself so deeply in strategic supply chains that it could exert systemic pressure.

This was not an isolated case. During the pandemic, China demonstrated overwhelming dominance in the production of personal protective equipment. In consumer electronics, seven of the top nine phone manufacturers are Chinese. Even devices branded in the United States or South Korea are largely assembled in Chinese factories.

Over three decades, China moved from low cost goods to advanced manufacturing and then to strategic inputs. It did not simply compete in markets. It positioned itself at choke points.

The trade war did not create that reality. It revealed it.

2. The green transition

The next stage of the power shift is already visible in the energy transition.

The world is undergoing the most significant transformation in electricity generation since the first mass power plants came online in the nineteenth century. Wind and solar capacity have surged globally. But one country stands apart.

China has multiplied its wind capacity several times over since the early 2010s and expanded its solar capacity at extraordinary speed. It accounts for close to half of global installed solar capacity and is still growing faster than any other major economy.

At the same time, China continues to build coal plants. Critics point to this as evidence of contradiction. In reality, it reflects scale. China is not simply replacing old capacity. It is expanding total energy production on a vast scale, ensuring reliability while renewables ramp up.

Crucially, China does not only install renewables. It manufactures them.

It produces more than 80 percent of the world’s solar panels and around 60 percent of wind turbines. Six of the top ten global manufacturers in these sectors are Chinese. The same pattern is visible in lithium batteries and electric vehicles. In 2010, battery technology was led by firms in Japan and South Korea. Within a decade, China controlled roughly three quarters of global production, supported by a vertically integrated domestic supply chain and strong state backing.

Rare earths tell a similar story. The United States once dominated production. By 2020, China controlled the overwhelming majority of global processing capacity.

For developing countries, cheap Chinese solar panels and batteries have been transformative. They have enabled electrification at lower cost and accelerated economic development. For advanced economies, affordable electric vehicles have made net zero targets more attainable.

Yet from a strategic perspective, the pattern is clear. The first phase of the clean energy transition has been shaped and largely controlled by China. The technologies that will replace fossil fuels are, to a significant extent, designed, manufactured and refined within its borders.

Energy is becoming the central arena of geopolitical competition. And China has already secured commanding positions.

3. Energy upscaling

The next challenge is more speculative, but potentially far more consequential. Nuclear fusion.

Unlike nuclear fission, which splits heavy atoms to release energy, fusion forces light atoms together. It is the process that powers the sun. Fusion promises enormous advantages. It carries no risk of meltdown in the conventional sense. It produces far less long lived radioactive waste. It requires small quantities of fuel, much of it derived from hydrogen that is widely available.

There are currently no commercial fusion reactors. Most experimental designs rely on containing plasma heated to around 100 million degrees Celsius using extremely powerful magnets. Other approaches use high energy lasers to compress fuel to fusion conditions.

Both pathways depend on advanced materials and components.

High performance magnets require rare earth elements. High temperature superconducting tape is essential for efficient magnetic confinement. China controls the majority of global production in several of these inputs and is expanding capacity rapidly. Laser systems depend on laser diodes, of which around 70 percent are manufactured in China. Tungsten, vanadium, barium titanate and graphene, all relevant to advanced energy systems, are also heavily concentrated in Chinese supply chains.

Private investment in fusion is growing worldwide. In recent years, funding from China has surged from negligible levels to several billion dollars annually, outpacing much of the rest of the world combined.

None of this guarantees technological supremacy. Fusion remains uncertain. Breakthroughs could emerge from the United States, Europe or collaborative international projects. But the early signs echo previous patterns. Identify a strategic technology. Secure the materials. Scale manufacturing. Invest heavily. Build domestic demand. Then dominate global supply.

The stakes are enormous. Electricity demand in developed economies was broadly flat for much of the early twenty first century. That era is ending. Artificial intelligence, electrified transport, heat pumps and industrial decarbonisation are driving a structural increase in demand. Energy systems are not merely being cleaned. They are being expanded.

With sufficient energy, societies can desalinate seawater, irrigate deserts, power vertical farms, heat cold climates and cool hot ones. Energy abundance changes what is economically possible.

Whoever controls the infrastructure of that abundance will shape the terms on which the future is built.

Conclusion

Over the past two decades, China has executed a coherent long term strategy. It entrenched itself in manufacturing. It secured control over critical minerals. It scaled renewable energy production to unprecedented levels. In key areas of the green transition, it has already won the first round.

Now the focus shifts to the next frontier: energy upscaling through technologies such as nuclear fusion. This is not simply about climate policy or industrial policy. It is about the foundations of economic and geopolitical power in the twenty first century.

Trade shaped the past. Renewables define the present. But the ultimate contest is over who will generate, store and control the energy that powers everything else.

In that contest, the outcome may determine not just which country is great, but which country sets the rules for the century ahead.

Most of the data in this article is sourced from a report circulated in the US government. Its authors operate within the industry but wish to remain anonymous. 

Click here to watch our previous episodes

World Reframed is produced in London by Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

The above map shows a striking cultural divide. The United States , Canada and parts of Brazil lean towards Taylor Swift, while Mexico, Central America and most of Spanish-speaking South America favour Bad Bunny.

The split reflects more than fan preference. It mirrors language, streaming behaviour, touring revenue and the globalisation of pop music.

Taylor Swift dominates much of the English-speaking Americas.

The United States and Canada remain core markets for Swift, who has consistently ranked among the world’s most streamed artists. According to IFPI’s Global Music Report , Swift was the world’s best-selling recording artist in 2023, driven by the massive success of her Eras Tour and re-recorded albums.

Her commercial power is equally visible on streaming platforms. Spotify has repeatedly listed her among its most-streamed artists globally, while Billboard reported that the Eras Tour became the highest-grossing concert tour in history, surpassing $1 billion in revenue.

In Brazil, one of the largest music markets in Latin America, Swift’s strong touring presence and streaming numbers have helped cement her popularity beyond English-speaking borders.

On the other hand, Bad Bunny dominates Mexico, Central America and most of South America.

The Puerto Rican superstar has become one of the most influential Latin artists in modern history. Spotify confirmed that Bad Bunny was the platform’s most-streamed artist globally for three consecutive years from 2020 to 2022, a historic achievement for a Spanish-language performer.

His album Un Verano Sin Ti became one of the most-streamed albums of all time and earned a Grammy nomination and award for Album of the Year, a rare milestone for a primarily Spanish-language release.

According to the map, Spanish-speaking countries across Latin America overwhelmingly favour Bad Bunny, whose reggaeton and Latin trap catalogue resonates culturally and linguistically across the region.

Meanwhile, English-speaking markets lean towards Swift’s pop and country-pop catalogue.

Brazil : The notable exception

Brazil stands out.

Despite being a Portuguese-speaking nation with its own vibrant domestic music industry, the map places Brazil in Swift’s column. Brazil is one of the world’s top ten music markets, according to IFPI, and international pop artists regularly perform strongly there.

Swift’s sold-out stadium shows in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro underline her commercial strength in the country.

Based on YouTube’s all-time public view counts, the current top 10 stands as follows:

At the top of the list is still the record-breaking Latin hit Despacito by Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee, which continues to dominate as YouTube’s most-viewed video of all time with 8.9 billion views.

This figure is more significant as it is even bigger than the world's total population. According to Worldometer, the global population stood at roughly 8.2 billion in early 2026.

TIME previously described the song’s rise as a defining moment for the global mainstreaming of Spanish-language pop, marking a turning point in how music crosses borders in the streaming era.

These numbers underline the truly global nature of YouTube’s audience, spanning Latin pop, K-pop, devotional music, novelty animation, and international football anthems.

YouTube has become far more than a video platform. It is now one of the world’s most influential music distribution systems.

The streaming platform plays a central role in shaping modern hits, particularly outside the traditional Western music industry pipeline. Artists can break through globally without radio dominance, driven instead by algorithms, fan communities, and shareable visuals.

From ice hockey in North America to figure skating in East Asia, the breakdown highlights how geography, infrastructure and history shape winter sport identity across the world.

Here’s how it looks country by country.

Ice hockey dominates the northern powerhouses

Ice hockey stands as the most prominent winter sport across much of North America and northern Eurasia.

Countries marked for hockey include:

This comes as little surprise. Canada considers ice hockey central to its national identity , while the United States and Russia consistently field strong Olympic and professional teams. According to the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF), these nations remain among the highest-ranked globally, with deeply embedded youth systems and professional leagues driving sustained popularity.

Across Scandinavia and the Baltic region, hockey’s presence is reinforced by climate, infrastructure and strong international results.

Skiing

Skiing, including alpine and cross-country disciplines, leads across much of western and central Europe.

Countries shown with skiing as their top winter sport include:

Austria and Switzerland, in particular, are synonymous with alpine skiing, producing generations of Olympic champions. The International Olympic Committee notes that skiing disciplines account for one of the largest shares of medal events at the Winter Games, reflecting their scale and global participation.

Mountain geography and winter tourism industries further reinforce skiing’s dominance in these regions.

Figure skating

Figure skating emerges as the most popular winter sport in:

Both nations have produced Olympic champions and global stars under the International Skating Union (ISU), and the sport consistently draws strong television audiences during the Winter Games. Japan ’s figure skating culture, in particular, has seen sustained growth over the past two decades.

Speed skating

Speed skating appears prominently in:

China has invested heavily in speed skating infrastructure and Olympic preparation, particularly in the lead-up to Beijing 2022. The Netherlands traditionally dominates global speed skating, and while not highlighted separately on this map, the sport remains deeply embedded in northern Europe as well.

According to ISU participation data, speed skating continues to be one of the most structured and competitive ice disciplines worldwide.

Curling

One of the more striking features of the map is curling’s prominence across parts of Africa, the Middle East and South Asia.

Countries marked for curling include:

While curling does not command the same commercial spotlight in these regions as it does in Scotland or Canada, its presence reflects expanding federation membership and Olympic engagement. The World Curling Federation has actively developed the sport beyond traditional strongholds in recent years.

Bobsleigh

Bobsleigh is shown as the most prominent winter sport in several Latin American, African and Southeast Asian countries, including:

Sled sports often gain attention through Olympic participation and high-profile qualification stories. The International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) has documented growing interest outside Europe and North America over the past decade.

Luge

Luge appears as the leading winter sport in:

Though highly specialised, luge remains a core Olympic discipline governed by the International Luge Federation (FIL), with concentrated development programmes in Europe and emerging initiatives elsewhere.

Ski jumping

Ski jumping features prominently in:

Poland, in particular, has a deep ski jumping tradition, producing multiple Olympic medallists and World Cup champions. The sport enjoys significant broadcast attention across parts of Central Europe during the Winter Games.

The International Olympic Committee recognises 16 core winter sports in the Olympic programme, and this country-by-country breakdown shows how those disciplines are distributed culturally around the globe.

In everyday language, “America” and “the United States ” are often used interchangeably, even by people living inside the U.S. itself.

But geographically, America or more precisely the Americas , refers to two continents, North and South America, containing around 35 sovereign nations, including Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and many others. The United States of America is just one of those nations.

The Puerto Rican superstar reiterated this as he used his 13-minute set to champion unity across the Americas by closing his set by naming countries beyond the United States, including Canada, Brazil, Bolivia, Panama and nations in Central and South America.

For many, especially Latino and Caribbean communities in the U.S., the message was one of belonging as much as geography.

By naming those countries during the performance, Bad Bunny placed Puerto Rico and other parts of the hemisphere squarely within the story of America, challenging narrow definitions of national identity.

Here are some reactions to Bad Bunny's performance:

Bad Bunny, born Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio, became the first Latino solo artist and the first headliner to perform almost entirely in Spanish for the Super Bowl halftime show.

The 13-minute set was described as a “fusion of Latinx culture, social commentary, and musical celebration” with guest appearances from stars including Lady Gaga, Ricky Martin and Cardi B.

Bad Bunny’s halftime show was widely viewed as a celebration of Latin American identity on one of the world’s largest stages.

According to BuzzFeed’s detailed breakdown, the performance blended high-energy hits with strong visual storytelling, weaving Puerto Rican heritage and broader Latin culture into every part of the performance.

Celebrities asserted the claim of a good show when Grammy-award-winning artist Kacey Musgraves wrote on X, “That made me feel more proudly American than anything Kid Rock has ever done.”

Not all responses were positive. Right-wing critics, including President Donald Trump , labelled the show “terrible,” in part due to its cultural focus and political undertones.

This is not surprising as Bad Bunny’s selection as headliner stirred debate long before the performance. Critics argued that a predominantly Spanish-language show on America ’s most-watched TV stage represented a departure from tradition, a divide that reflected broader national conversations around identity and inclusion.

However, Bad Bunny tried to prove that this stance was wrong when he chose to read out countries in North and South America, including Venezuela, Guyana, Chile, Paraguay and Panama to prove that America was bigger than the United States .

With an overall score of 4.64 out of 5, Italy tops a list compiled from hundreds of thousands of verified user ratings across traditional dishes, regional specialities and local ingredients. The rankings, visualised by World Visualised and sourced from TasteAtlas, reflect real consumer sentiment rather than critic-led opinion.

Italy’s number-one ranking is driven by its deep culinary heritage and global appeal. From Neapolitan pizza and handmade pasta to regional icons like risotto, pesto, Parmigiano Reggiano and olive oil, Italian food consistently scores highly for flavour, balance and authenticity.

TasteAtlas notes that Italian cuisine stands out for its simplicity and ingredient-first philosophy, where quality produce takes precedence over complex techniques. This approach continues to resonate worldwide, from street food counters to Michelin-starred kitchens.

Second place goes to Greece, which earned a strong 4.60 rating. Greek cuisine is praised for its freshness and Mediterranean roots, with dishes such as souvlaki, grilled seafood, feta-based salads and yoghurt sauces ranking among the platform’s most loved foods.

Just behind is Peru, scoring 4.54, reflecting the country’s growing reputation as a global culinary innovator. Peruvian cuisine blends Indigenous, Spanish, African and Asian influences, with standout dishes including ceviche, lomo saltado and causa. Peru’s rise highlights how regional diversity and bold flavours are reshaping global food trends.

Both Spain and Portugal recorded scores of 4.53, underscoring the Iberian Peninsula’s strength in global cuisine.

Spanish cuisine is celebrated for its regional depth, from Valencian paella and Andalusian gazpacho to tapas culture and premium cured meats. Portugal, meanwhile, continues to gain international recognition for dishes such as bacalhau, caldo verde and seafood rice, supported by a strong tradition of home-style cooking.

France scored 4.48, maintaining its reputation for culinary technique, pastry mastery and fine dining tradition. While often associated with haute cuisine, TasteAtlas notes that everyday French dishes and regional specialities play a significant role in its ranking.

Türkiye and Japan, both rated 4.49, reflect how deeply food is tied to national identity. Turkish cuisine blends Middle Eastern, Central Asian and Mediterranean influences, while Japanese food culture continues to impress with its focus on seasonality, precision and presentation.

China and Indonesia, each scoring 4.48, highlight Asia’s growing visibility in global food rankings. China’s vast regional diversity, from Sichuan spice to Cantonese delicacy, remains a major draw, while Indonesian cuisine gains traction through dishes like nasi goreng, rendang and satay.

How TasteAtlas builds its rankings

TasteAtlas compiles its annual rankings using real user ratings, filtering out mass-produced and inauthentic entries to focus on traditional food culture . According to the platform, the goal is to document and preserve culinary heritage while offering travellers a reliable guide to local food experiences.

What this really means is that these rankings reflect how people actually eat and travel, and not just what appears on fine-dining menus.

The run-off held on February 8 saw Seguro secure roughly 67% of the vote, far ahead of his rival André Ventura of the far-right Chega party, who took around 33%. This result marks a strong mandate and returns the head of state role to a Socialist after years dominated by centre-right leadership.

The map of “most voted candidate per municipality” shows a sea of red, representing municipalities where Seguro led on the first or second round, with only a handful of areas where Ventura came out on top. This geographic distribution underlines the breadth of support for Seguro’s campaign across urban and rural Portugal.

In the first round on January 18, Seguro led with just over 31% of votes, while Ventura came second with about 23.5%, forcing the run-off as no candidate achieved the 50 per cent threshold required for first-round victory.

Turnout was notable, with just over 50% of registered voters participating in the decisive second round, the highest presidential turnout in years.

Though the presidency in Portugal is largely ceremonial, the role carries important powers, such as naming the prime minister, chairing the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, and, in some cases, dissolving parliament. These powers mean the election outcome can have a real impact on governance and policy direction.

For Seguro, the mandate is both political and symbolic. He ran as a moderate socialist, attracting support from across the centre and left, and successfully formed a broad anti-populist coalition.

Ventura, while defeated, celebrated his result as a major milestone for Chega. His 33% share is the highest ever for his party in a national election and reflects its growing influence in Portuguese politics .

President-elect Seguro is expected to take office in March, succeeding Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, who has served two terms.

The (mal)governance of raw materials such as these even led to the resources being seen as a ‘curse’. In the present day, the scramble for critical minerals has many of the same features – imperial powers seeking to take control of the resources for their own benefit. History seems to be repeating itself.

The US’s new proposed trading club for critical minerals, in conjunction with its more domestically-oriented Project Vault, albeit designed to protect technologies for AI, manufacturing and defence rather than green industries, is but the latest example of an imperial-centred approach.  Such an approach could reinstate previous and reinforce existing power structures instead of recalibrating or even dismantling these structures for a socially-just global transformation that does not mainly serve the interests of the US.

If the world is to undergo a green transition, how might it do so without repeating the colonial and imperial global structures of the past? In short, what might a Green New International Economic Order (GNIEO) look like and how might it come about?

As a first step, greater agency and voice for the Global South are a prerequisite. Notwithstanding the uneven global distribution of critical minerals, many of them are found in the countries of the Global South (for example, China and Brazil alone have over 70% of known rare earth reserves).

If they are to be extracted and used to meet progressive social, political, economic and ecological goals, then countries of the Global South will need to have control over their resources and have access to the technologies which will allow them to use these resources for their own industrial advancement. Ownership of resources and access to technology and finance were, in fact, key aspects of the Global South’s proposals for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) in the 1970s. 

The NIEO was a brave attempt to see an alternative future for global economic governance but it failed to deliver as countries in the Global North, especially the US under Kissinger, sought to divide the countries of the Global South by exploiting the differences of interests between oil exporting and oil importing countries while maintaining Northern unity as much as possible, and as the Global South’s agenda unravelled as a result of the underlying tensions in its goals.

If a GNIEO were to be forged now, it would face many of the same problems. The unity of the Global North might be strained, however, as the US under Trump alienates friend and foe alike. Notwithstanding this, many of the current global governance institutions designed to regulate extractive processes, such as the World Bank’s Climate Smart Mining Initiative and the OECD’s Responsible Business Conduct, are dominated by Northern countries.

A coherent Global South response would require two major features. Firstly, it would need to manage the inherent tensions between resource nationalism and collective action. Secondly, and relatedly, it would need China to be a powerful leader given its global dominance in the extraction and processing of critical minerals.

Resource nationalism - and its associated policy instruments such as industrial policy, the support of State-Owned Enterprises, local content regulations and export bans - has resurfaced in the Global South over the past decade or so. Many countries feel the pull of resource nationalism as a way to protect and secure their own economic destinies in the face of predatory external threats.

Of course, this has often led local elites to engage in predatory behaviour themselves as part of the global structures of extraction and accumulation. Resource nationalism – in the sense of sovereign control over resources - is a necessary but insufficient condition for progressive change. One of the problems, from a global perspective, is how resource nationalism can be made compatible with collective action by the Global South, that is, which parts of nationalism can be reasonably ceded for the greater power offered by the prospect of cooperation with other Global South countries.

This dilemma is especially acute for China in the case of critical minerals. It is faced with geopolitical and geoeconomic threats from the US, is blocked by many Northern countries from investing in key sectors and from purchasing some key technologies. China’s response, perhaps unsurprisingly, has been overwhelmingly nationalist.

An examination of resource policy documents reveals a strong emphasis on domestic regulation covering issues such as environmental mitigation, work safety, export quotas and industrial restructuring and upgrading. There are specific provisions for international cooperation through the Belt and Road Initiative, for example, and in some bilateral agreements (with Russia, for example).

But there is conspicuously little which speaks to the global level, at how global governance structures could be forged to advance the interests of the Global South despite China’s insistence that it sees itself as a key member and supporter of the Global South. 

At present, we are therefore left with critical minerals, essential to the future well-being of the global population and planetary health, being governed by the anarchic interactions of rival powers. A Green New International Economic Order is needed urgently. 

The opinions and thoughts expressed in this article reflect only the author's views.

About the authors

Paul Bowles is Professor Emeritus at the University of Northern British Columbia, Canada. He has published widely on development, globalisation, and extractivism.

Nathan Andrews is an Associate Professor of International Relations at McMaster University whose research focuses on the global political economy/ecology of natural resource extraction and development.

Jing Vivian Zhan is a Professor in the School of Governance and Policy Science at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her research focuses on comparative political economy, local governance, and natural resource management, especially in the Chinese context.

This opinion piece draws upon the analysis set forth in Nathan Andrews, Paul Bowles and Jing Vivian Zhan, “ Transforming Global Critical Minerals Governance: Is a Green New International Economic Order Possible?”, Third World Quarterly , 18 January 2026 (online first), DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2025.2608840. For extended analysis, see also Paul Bowles and Nathan Andrews (eds.), Extractive Bargains: Natural Resources and the State-Society Nexus , London: Routledge, 2024.