In France, certificats d’utilité were introduced by the Law n°68-1 of January 2, 1968. According to article L. 611-2 of the French Intellectual Property Code, French certificats d’utilité are regulated by the same rules as French patents, with the main exceptions being a shorter duration, the absence of requirement of a research report for the delivery of the title (certificate), and of the lack of opposition proceedings.

This chapter discusses literary representations of plants in the French and francophone tradition, referencing texts and writers from Europe, the Caribbean, North America, Western Africa, the Indian Ocean, and Southeast Asia. Without pretending to offer an impossibly exhaustive history or a complete list of references, this essay considers a diverse set of examples to signal the broad range of these imaginary encounters with the vegetal, as well as shifting (though sometimes overlapping) approaches to botanical knowledge from the Middle Ages to the present. It also examines how and why plants have served as potent allegorical figures, and then focuses on select images of the plants themselves, noting some of their most popular species as well as the ways in which literary authors have tried to understand the otherness of the vegetal.

This chapter opens a series of chapters with case studies on France, the Netherlands, Hungary, and Poland. The institution of French laïcité is commonly understood as referring to a strict separation of church and state. This chapter explains how laïcité has become entangled in the pseudo-constitutional notion of vivre ensemble and the rising significance of social norms for the substantiation of the legal concept of l’ordre public. This is inferred from two particular expressions of constitutional intolerance: first, the overly general and restrictive prohibition of the full-face veil in public spaces, which culminated in the S.A.S. v. France case. Second, it details the expansion of the legal concept of laïcité as expressed in the 2021 Law Concerning the Respect for the Principles of the Republic, which exercises extensive control over the organisation of religious institutions, sources of funding, and their political loyalty to the Republic.

A popular refrain in many countries is that people with mental illnesses have “nowhere to go” for care. But that is not universally true. Previously unexplored international data shows that some countries provide much higher levels of public mental health care than others. This puzzling variation does not align with existing scholarly typologies of social or health policy systems. Furthermore, these cross-national differences are present despite all countries’ shared history of psychiatric deinstitutionalization, a process that I conceptualize and document using an original historical data set. I propose an explanation for countries’ varying policy outcomes and discuss an empirical strategy to assess it. The research design focuses on the cases of the United States and France, along with Norway and Sweden, in order to control for a range of case-specific alternative hypotheses. The chapter ends with brief descriptions of contemporary mental health care policy in each of the four countries examined in this book.

This chapter begins the second part of the book, which tests the main empirical implications of localized peace enforcement theory using data from Mali, a land-locked country in West Africa. Though Mali experienced three coups, a separatist civil war, and an Islamist extremist insurgency from 2012 to 2024, no source of conflict has been more fatal or detrimental to Malian society than communal violence. The chapter starts by providing a very brief history of identity-based conflict in the country. It also places Mali within a broader historical context and demonstrates that its experience of interethnic tensions is representative of countries with colonial legacies. The chapter then draws on detailed interviews with forty-eight local leaders to describe what communal violence and peacekeeping look like in Mali from the residents’ perspective. Given the theoretical importance domestic perceptions of peacekeepers, these interviews offer crucial insights into the plausibility of localized peace enforcement theory. There are distinct advantages of studying the Malian case, which the chapter describes in a brief overview of international interventions by the UN and France from 2012 to 2024.

To set the stage for the US–French case comparison, this chapter shows how the political economy of mental health care was similar in the two countries prior to the Second World War (the critical juncture that initiated deinstitutionalization). One difference, though, stands out: the possibility of coalition formation between workers and managers in public mental health services. On the labor side, French public sector trade unions acquired full legal rights after the war, but the maturation of their US counterparts was late, limited, and staggered across the states. On the management side, the organization of French public psychiatric managers was better equipped to enter into this coalition than its American counterpart. I discuss how these differences came to be. Special attention is paid to the economic interests that drove psychiatrists’ intra-professional conflicts and how their gradual settlement produced diverging organizational outcomes. A discussion of potential confounding factors closes.

Midcentury French policy-makers seemed less committed to expanding public mental health care than their US counterparts, but the psychiatric “sectorization” policy nonetheless took off and ultimately increased the supply of services by the end of the 20th century. This chapter identifies the political factors that produced such results. The presence of a public labor–management coalition in mental health care facilitated three positive supply-side policy feedback cycles, producing the distinctive “French way” of deinstitutionalizing the mentally ill.

This chapter considers the strategic dimension of conflict in North America between the outbreak of fighting between the French and colonial Americans in the Ohio valley in 1754 and the formal end of the War of American Independence in 1783. While this thirty-year period saw several local struggles between colonists and Native peoples, the focus here is on the two major conflicts – the Seven Years War (1754–1760 in North America, 1756–1763 in Europe) and the War of Independence (1775–1783). Both wars were global struggles, extending well beyond North America – the Seven Years War from its outset, and the War of Independence from 1778, when the French became belligerents. Even so, the chapter will concentrate on the American aspects of these struggles, and only indirectly address the Caribbean, west African, European and Asian dimensions. It will aspire to cover all the participants in the North American parts of the two wars – settlers, Native peoples and Europeans, particularly the British and the French.

The role of France in David Hume’s intellectual biography is difficult to overestimate. He visited that country three times, wrote the Treatise in La Flèche, and reached the peak of his success during the years he spent in Paris (1763–66), where he was welcomed as a highly valuable member of the Republic of Letters. He cared greatly about the circulation of his writings in France, and actually succeeded in establishing his reputation across the Channel. The History of England made him an outstanding historian, the Natural History of Religion an authoritative esprit fort, but it was the Essays that confirmed him as a subtle political thinker and, what he cared about most, as a profound philosopher in the eyes of his French readers. Before and besides being translated in the form of collections, many of Hume’s essays were translated, summarised, commented on, reviewed, and discussed individually, giving rise to a complex and divergent reception. The present chapter provides an overview of this reception, based on first-hand research on eighteenth-century French translations, reviews, commentaries and criticisms of the Essays.

Obtaining French citizenship is not enough to secure social acceptance, and terror attacks committed in the name of Islam have critically impaired Muslims’ claims to national membership. Beginning with a discussion of how the construction of Muslims as a “suspect community” has impacted their daily lives, the chapter explores Muslim leaders’ efforts to display exemplary conduct to reassure majority members and circumvent the terrorist stigma. Their actions, such as organizing guided tours and open days in mosques, are emblematic of this endeavor, as well as of the asymmetrical burden of mutual understanding that characterizes postcolonial European societies. Moreover, embodying exemplariness involves cultivating Islamically justified dispositions for approachability and gentleness in daily interactions. Efforts to allay suspicions can also lead Muslim leaders of the UOIF to establish taboo forms of cooperation with intelligence officers, which highlights the ways in which the securitization of Islam relies partly on the involvement of certain community members. Overall, through their practice of disidentification from “Salafi,” “literalist,” and other “extremist” worshippers, French Muslim leaders tend to reinforce the distinction made by state authorities between “good Muslims” and “bad Muslims,” thereby deflecting the fundamentalist stigma onto some coreligionists.

This chapter addresses the three earliest constitutional lineages, in the USA, France and Poland. It shows how these constitutional forms were shaped by imperialism and how the intensification of military policies in the eighteenth century defined the patterns of citizenship that they developed. It also shows how, diversely, each constitutions established a polity with militarized features, so that the different between national and imperial rule was often slight. To explain this, it addresses Napoleonic constitutionalism in Fance and the tiered citizenship regimes that characterized the American Republic in the nineteenth century.

This chapter examines whether the legal and regulatory framework in France for the transport of energy is fit for hydrogen purposes and designed to accommodate that new energy carrier. Specifically, the aim of the analysis is to determine whether the French regulator chose the rules- or goal-setting approach when setting the framework for the transport of hydrogen. From early on, France attributed a prominent role to hydrogen for achieving its energy and climate goals and the decarbonization of its energy system, particularly transport and industry. This is demonstrated by the plethora of pilot power-to-gas projects across continental France, pushing the limits and exploring different synergies between hydrogen, gas and renewable energy sources. French gas infrastructure operators have already carried out extensive work to explore possibilities for integrating a significant amount of hydrogen into the gas mix by 2050, with limited infrastructure adaptation costs, deploying coordinated use of solutions including blending, methanation and even the option of 100 per cent hydrogen. Until recently, the legal and regulatory framework was lagging behind, as essential provisions that could facilitate hydrogen in the French gas transport infrastructure were missing. This, however, changed recently with the adoption of a specific chapter in the French energy code that also includes provisions on the transport of renewable hydrogen in natural gas pipelines and autonomous transport networks. This chapter, based on the analysis of these recent developments, assesses the type of regulatory approach followed by France regarding transport of hydrogen regulation and why this approach changes based on the regulatory subject. The flexibility and adaptability that characterise France’s decision on the regulatory approach to be used each time could prove valuable in other jurisdictions and could, despite some shortcomings, serve as a key tool for the design of reasonable legal frameworks for hydrogen transportation.

This chapter focuses on ways to understand the Vietnam War through the operation of race in US interventions during the 1960s. As part of the inquiry, it examines friction between the United States and Panama in 1964 and the invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965. France’s legacy in Vietnam and the US adaptation of French racialized colonial policies provide a backdrop for the war. The Cold War, rather than territorial annexation or economic exploitation, provided the chief rationale for the US presence in Vietnam and provided a path for particularly American forms of racism to emerge there and in areas of US domestic life that were affected by the conflict. In the interim, Vietnam served as a laboratory in which various theories about modernization and development were evaluated and carried out. The experiences of American minorities in the military are documented, including officials’ efforts to control dissidence in the ranks. African Americans, Native Americans, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Asian Americans experienced the war in somewhat different ways, but all found themselves confronted by leading assumptions and practices about their minoritarian status. The war led many to see themselves as racially defined in a struggle whose costs were disproportionately borne by people of color amidst discrimination at home and by Vietnamese combatants abroad. As a result new sensibilities led to transformation in American civil society.