The scale of population displacement as a result of violent conflict and social instability particularly, but not exclusively, in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America at the time of writing in 2016 raises new and urgent questions about language support policy in societies directly involved in receiving displaced persons, whether on a temporary or long-term basis. At the same time, social conflict that emerges as an unintended consequence of the political ambitions of transnational entities like the European Union also raises questions with regard to the way in which individuals with lim ited language proficiency navigate decision-making and handle potential social breakdown after moving to a new geonational context. These situations focus attention on the type of policy approach best suited to addressing such multifarious need, and the extent to which it is reasonable or even desirable to establish transnational principles (as distinct from standards) for the organisation and delivery of professional language support services. Efforts to establish supranational instruments, for example in the context of the European Union (e.g. EU Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings), constitute an attempt to transcend national policymaking; however, substantive dif ferences in political structures, role profiling and resources are a barrier to implementation in some cases (see Salaets & Balogh, this volume). This collection brings together new perspectives on the struggle to establish coherent responses to ethical imperatives that inhere in relations between states and limited language proficiency speakers, regardless of their residency status. The themes of social inclusion, political participation, rec ognition, equality, distributive, restorative and procedural justice, health and well-being may be cited as examples of such imperatives and call into ques tion both the capacity and willingness of public policymakers to include interpreting and translation on the policy agenda (see Sasso & Malli, 2014; Martín Ruano, this volume). A key point of departure for the collection is the acknowledgement of the limited impact to date that profession- and disciplinary-led discourses on professionalisation have had on policymakers. The assumption that such discourses would help to establish and legitimateservice provision has not been realised, at least to the extent anticipated in the past two decades, prompting the need to recalibrate the terms of debate and seek new ways to engage with relevant stakeholders. Efforts to address these issues are already in process, as seen through increasing emphasis on evidence-based policymaking. However, this highly rational, science-based approach needs to be critically appraised in relation to the wider social and political contexts in which it is embedded. Discourses on evidence-based policymaking, for instance, have been increasingly criti cised for their inherent normativity and tendency to sideline values in politi cal debate (e.g. Du Toit, 2012). Other more abstract ideological influences impact on policy and provision and therefore need to be investigated if the social basis for and consequences of policy development are to be fully understood. Even in cases where the evidence base is robust, the state and/or institutional response may still fall short in terms of quality and outcomes for service users. The fact that this is already a reality in some countries highlights the need for scholars to broaden the range of paradigms used to evaluate policy recommendations and decision-making processes. In addition to issues of policy, the collection also provides a timely evalu ation of the nature and degree of convergence between recent theorisations of interpreter and translator ethics in the academe and practice in the field. There is evidence to suggest that, despite greater emphasis on teleological over deontological frameworks in Interpreting Studies (see Baker & Maier, 2011), deontological codes continue to exert strong influence on practition ers’ rationalisation processes during interaction (see Devaux, this volume). This serves as a call to educators to revisit approaches to the teaching and learning of ethics and the theoretical frameworks used to structure such approaches (see Brander de la Iglesia, this volume). Furthermore, new empir ical evidence from the field also makes it possible to shed light on the relative weight given to what Rudvin (2007) describes as rules and notions of suc cess, and relationships and well-being in settings such as detention facilities and asylum hearings (see Valero-Garcés; Tryuk, this volume, respectively). Ideology, which is the third area of focus in this collection, has long been debated in translation studies through an emphasis on language and power relations, and on the agency of the translator in manipulating and mediating these relations (Fawcett & Munday, 2009). In interpreting stud ies more specifically, an emerging area of focus concerns the analysis of the product of simultaneous conference interpreting through the lens of ideol ogy and its various discursive instantiations in studies that draw extensively on critical discourse analysis (e.g. Beaton-Thome, 2007). Research in public service interpreting and translation (PSIT) has also explored the constel lations of power that impact on service provision and decision-making in situ, largely through an appeal to sociological theories that have yielded rich insight into the ethical and the relational in interpreted interaction. Therelative neglect of ideological influences on policy formation specific to indi vidual geonational contexts in PSIT, however, suggests that these influences are somehow less amenable to systematic analysis. By broadening the range of interdisciplinary perspectives, this collection seeks to open up scholarly investigation and challenge such perceptions. At the same time, the collection draws attention to PSIT as sources of deep ideological tension at societal level. Overwhelmingly, the literature in interpreting studies positions both occupational activities as an ideal policy response by socially progressive societies to the complex communi cation needs of minority-speaking populations. However, this perspective may sometimes be perceived as limiting in relation to policy development, and highlights the potential for differentiated approaches. For instance, the interconnections between language proficiency development and interpret ing and translation services are generally absent from discussions. Emerging research on the third sector provides examples of how the overlapping need for language proficiency development and interpreting and translation ser vices plays out at the organisational level and impacts on policy develop ment (see Tipton, this volume).
