Theorising the tale of two norms
in France, humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact for pricing options.


If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

The chapter provides an overview of the innovative framework promoted by the book to analyse the historical interplay between France’s domestic norm of human and the international norm of human protection at the time. The framework builds on the respective work of Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) and Acharya (2004, 2011, 2013, 2015) and is defined by four key stages: entrepreneurship, localisation, subsidiarity and internalisation. Because norms are not static, these stages are likely to recur as the international context evolves and/or new forms of contestation emerge, but the framework put forward can be used to analyse these developments. Before exploring it in more depth, the chapter first investigates some of the key factors that have influenced France’s conception of, and contribution to, human protection over the years. It concludes by emphasising the theoretical contributions made by the book.


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 54 54 2
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0