Academic literature on the topic 'France. Conseil national de la main d'oeuvre'

Résumé Le relatif retard pris par la productivité de l'agriculture française à partir du milieu du XIXe siècle pose le problème de ses causes. L'auteur pense que l'une d'elles est la difficulté qu'éprouvent les agriculteurs français à prendre le virage technologique nécessaire. Ils se montrent hésitants devant l'adoption d'un machinisme agricole, varié dans ses aspects et sans cesse perfectionné. Dans une première partie sont présentées l'évolution de ce machinisme, ses étapes avec leurs caractères propres, sa répartition dans l'espace national. Partant de ce tableau évolutif, l'auteur s'interroge sur ses raisons, sur ses rythmes variables dans le temps. Il pense que le conservatisme, la routine des paysans, l'insuffisante qualification de la main-d'oeuvre agricole, constituent des facteurs non déterminants. Il privilégierait plutôt, en faisant des éléments importants d'explication, le faible dynamisme des constructeurs français, les structures socio-économiques de monde paysan, notamment l'abondance des petites et très petites exploitations, la conjoncture des prix et, peut-être, l'insuffisant exode rural qui permet aux exploitants de disposer d'une main-d'oeuvre salariée relativement peu coûteuse. Le contexte démo-socio-économique rend compte à la fois de la grande lenteur de la mécanisation et des disparités zonales très marquées, bien qu elles s'estompent à partie de l'extrême fin du XIXe siècle. Finalement la mécanisation de i agriculture française s'est bien réalisée, mais lente- ment, tardivement et modérément. Le mérite en revient aux "notables' ruraux qui ont donné ïexemple et stimulé la masse paysanne en organisant des concours et des expositions. Ceux-ci sont devenus efficaces à partir du moment où la paysannerie a pris conscience de /' utilité des machines et a disposé des moyens financiers nécessaires à leur acquisition.

The paper looks into historic processes of developing and establishing the state policy of France in the sphere of language, education and culture, reflected in such genres of regulatory documents as capitulary, ordinance, and letters patent. The focus is made on three royal documents, namely the capitulary of Charlemagne “Letter on Promotion of Literary Culture” (“Epistola de litteris colendis”, 787), the ordinance of Villers-Cotterêts (“Ordonnance de Villers-Cotterêts”, 1539), issued by Francis I, king of France, and letters patent of Louis XIV, regulating the activities of publishing houses (“Lettres patentes et arrêt du conseil d’État du Roi portant règlement pour la librairie”, 1702). The study aims to reveal formal and content-related features of regulatory documents of the historic period under consideration. Another purpose is to identify the degree of their variability and similarity. The main methods employed in the research were textual and interpretative types of analysis. The fact that the documents compiled on behalf of French monarchs made the focus of our research defines its novelty. The findings showed that this documentation evidences the dawn and further shaping of the French national language, cultural and educational policy. The authors show that these institutional genres were designed to strengthen the royal power in France during the period between the 8th and 18th centuries. From linguistic perspective these documents are a formidable example of how the “discourse of power” emerged and got streamlined.

There are more than seven thousand of unique languages nowadays, that reflect the uniqueness of the living conditions, the worldview and cultural traditions of different peoples. According to UNESCO, 75 languages in Europe and Asia Minor and about 115 languages in the United States over the past five centuries have been lost. The regional or minority languages are part of the national heritage and play leading role in the process of national identity as bearers and guarantors of national culture and national identity, that is why the value of regional languages is constantly increasing. However, the danger of the growth of nationalism and separatism makes politicians wary of measures to protect the national languages. The article deals with the political debate in France around the ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, adopted by the Council of Europe on 25 June 1992, which purpose was to protect the historical regional languages of the EU, some of which are in danger of eventual extinction.. The author provides analysis of the historical preconditions of the current debate as well as of the stance taken by the French leadership on this issue. The study is based on a set of scientific methods and approaches - the principle of scientific objectivity and system of historical research. The main methods are problematic and historical-comparative analysis, classification and comparison of the political and historical concepts. Modern France de jure firmly follows linguistic traditions laid down by previous regimes, as defined in its constitution as the principles of the indivisibility of the Republic and the unity of the French people. According to Article 2 of the Constitution of the Fifth Republic, French language is the only official. However, in addition to the French 75 languages are being spoken all over the Overseas Departments and Territories of France, including 24 languages of the indigenous population of the European part of France, and the languages of immigrants. Despite the fact that the ratification of the Charter serve certain political figures, the Conseil d'Etat, the highest judicial authority in administrative cases, and later the Constitutional Council refused to ratify the Charter, due to the fact that the provisions of the Charter are contrary to the Constitution. The question of amending the Constitution of France is facing fierce debate and remains unresolved for nearly a decade. The political problem is the impact of the application of the Charter, by the fact that at all times promoting one language at the expense of others become a catalyst for powerful and very dangerous social and political processes.

The article offers reflections on Rosi Braidotti’s book “Posthuman”, which was published in 2021 by the Gaidar Institute Publishing House (translator Diana Khamis). Rosi Braidotti is a contemporary philosopher and feminist theorist, originally from Italy, currently teaching at the Utrecht University (Netherlands). Despite her connection with significant international organizations and associations (including UNESCO, Conseil National de la Recherche Scientifique, France, European Consortium for Humanities Institutes and Centres, EEC) and the role that her research plays in contemporary social and humanitarian discourse, her name is not widely known to the Russian-speaking reader in comparison to other authors of feminist trend, such as Judith Butler or Donna Haraway. Rosi Braidotti’s interest is directed towards the reflections on the subjectivity of a contemporary person. Based on critical theory, the project of nomadology, feminist studies, and using her own anti-humanistic optics, she affirms the idea of a posthuman who has a developing identity, overcomes anthropocentric limits in its essence, and is open to assemblies with living matter and the world of technology. In this review, I focus on the main structural elements of the book, its key ideas; I offer my interpretation of some plots of the text; I dwell on the discussion points of the work. I come to the conclusion that the concept of the posthuman and the posthumanistic method allow us to open new horizons for the current research practices of man and society.

Les transformations de l’université française à mesure des développements historiques, sociétaux, politiques et économiques l’ont amené à repenser sa mission et devenir entrepreneuriale. Pour l’économie de la connaissance, elle est aujourd’hui un acteur-clé et les docteurs une cheville ouvrière. Ils sont incités, dans la formation doctorale, à s’orienter vers d’autres carrières là où le secteur académique est resserré. Des dispositifs de professionnalisation sont construits, sans réflexion sur leur réactivité vis-à-vis de l’activité et des jeunes docteurs. Cette recherche, en sciences de gestion, dialogue avec ce contexte pour investiguer le processus sociotechnique de la professionnalisation au travail dans et par l’activité, i.e. du transfert des compétences, donc de leur développement. Le cadre conceptuel envisage une analyse multi niveaux d’un processus de professionnalisation au travail, aux niveaux des individus, de l’activité et de l’organisation. Nous faisons dialoguer contexte et concepts avec la Théorie Historico-Culturelle de l’Activité, dans sa troisième génération. Nous nous immergeons en « chercheur de l’intérieur » au sein d’un cabinet de chasse de tête de jeunes docteurs et l’Université de Lyon par investigation de terrains en mixant les méthodes (entretiens, parcours professionnels et expérimentation d’un accompagnement). La recherche contribue à trois volets : une redéfinition de la mission de l’université et de son organisation, par l’activité et les communautés, et de l’expertise des docteurs par rapport à la société ; une autre manière de penser le développement des compétences et leur transfert en GRH ; et une quatrième génération de la T.A
Transformations of French university as historical, societal, political and economic developments have led to reconsider its mission and become entrepreneurial. For the knowledge economy, it is a key actor and PhDs kingpins. They are invited, during doctoral training, to embrace other careers while academic sector is narrowing. Professionalisation programs are built without reflecting on their reactivity towards the activity and young PhDs. This research, in management studies, engages a dialogue with these issues to rethink the sociotechnical process of professionalisation at work in and through activity, i.e. skills transfer, therefore, their development. Our conceptual framework envisions a multi-level analysis of a professionalisation process at work, at the individual, activity and organisational levels. We engage in a dialogue with the third generation of Historical-Cultural Activity Theory (C.H.A.T.). We immerse as an “insider researcher” in a headhunting company specialised in PhDs recruitment, and the University of Lyon as PhD candidate. We conduct empirical study on several fields by mixing methods (interviews, professional life stories, and experimentation). Our research contributes to three areas: a redefinition of university’s mission and organising through activity and communities, and the expertise of PhDs related to society; another way of thinking skills development and transfer in HRM; and a fourth generation of C.H.A.T

Abstract THE Liberation government was expected not only to find solutions to gigantic, material problems, but also to fulfil the far-reaching promises of the Conseil National de la Resistance in its charter of 15 March 1944. De Gaulle disliked redeeming cheques he had not signed. But his government was basically drawn from the two main strands of the Resistance; and he was well aware that he partly owed his triumph over Giraud and other Allied counter scenarios to the endorsement of the CNR. Not only did this make it awkward for him to postpone payment, but the CNR’s pledges were enthusiastically supported by a wide segment of popular feeling and political opinion. Even so, de Gaulle preferred to talk about ‘renovation’ rather than ‘revolution’ (as proclaimed by left-wing elements in the Resistance) —a distinction that perhaps caused the incarcerated Petain to give a wan smile of fellow-feeling as he remembered his own semantic scruples in 1940-1.