The rule of law in the EU is a multi-faceted principle implemented in a multi-layered process. It is embodied in the manifold jurisdictions of its member states, the growing number of EU legislative acts and eventually in the intricate net of cross-references between these bodies of law. Legal training should enable students to understand, navigate and play an active role in this multi-layered and highly interdependent network-structure. Yet this is not happening, as curricula are often exclusively focused on national jurisdictions and legal systems. Even when EU law becomes part of teaching, it often appears as a legal-subfield of its own, with little focus on the interdependencies with and between national jurisdictions. This is exacerbated by the fact that in law the exchange of academic personnel in Europe is still in its infancy. As a result, the “transmitters”, who could contribute different legal perspectives to teaching and research, are missing. Equally detrimental, topics of crucial importance to the understanding of Europe and its legal settings – such as European Governance and Identity – have been absent in legal training so far. In the light of these challenges, five leading universities in Amsterdam, Berlin, London, Paris and Rome have decided to use their experience in conducting a joint-European study program in law, known as the European Law School (ELS), to develop a role model of how to comprehensively Europeanize legal teaching. In this respect, their Strategic Partnership EULysses - new frontiers for legal teaching and training has 3 major objectives: 1. Improve “Europeanization at home” – in terms of topics of particular importance to Europe2. Improve “Europeanization at home” – in terms of academic personnel and 3. Realize the potential of digital means for cooperation and outreachTo reach these objectives the SP will 1. Implement joint teaching activities, particularly on topics of overarching importance for Europe and embedded in joint research on law and social sciences2. Establish a scheme for mobility and embeddedness of academic personnel, and 3. Set-up a Joint Digital Platform (JDP).These actions address students and academic personnel (professors + young researchers) alike. Students benefit from new course offers, held jointly by home and visiting academics. This is especially the case with – but not restricted to – the joint-seminars on topics of particular relevance for Europe. They also involve academics from other disciplines to ensure the contribution of as well as the engagement with other disciplines’ insights, concepts and methodological approaches. As these seminars are taught every year at all locations, each student at all of the 5 universities has the possibility to attend several of these courses during her or his studies – without having to go abroad. Academic personnel benefits from an innovative exchange scheme, which sees them fully embedded in research and teaching activities of their hosting faculties. Each institution sends and receives a maximum of 3 exchange academics per year. Academics not taking part in the exchange scheme equally profit from the SP through the exchange with incoming colleagues from the other ELS institutions and through the planned JDP, which creates an up-to-date “map” of the academic profiles and activities of researchers in the ELS member institutions – to be opened to all EU academia in a second step. Furthermore, academics inside and outside SP’s partner institutions gain from the concepts and training-materials developed for the joint-seminars on topics of overarching importance for Europe, such as the governance and identity of Europe, which are available on the JDP free of charge. All actions are based on a distributed and equally connected approach of responsibilities. For each objective (and derived activities) one institution bears main responsibility, with Berlin in all cases assuming the role of being co-responsible. This ensures strong coherence and equal engagement as well as different perspectives and methodological approaches to be incorporated in the conceptualization and implementation of each action. The SP’s impact and longer terms benefits cover areas within the SP’s partner institutions as well as beyond. Within the SP, it will lead to a significant broadening as well as deepening in the level of cooperation, with tangible results and new opportunities for students and academia alike. It will be a major boast for the Europeanization of these institutions’ legal training in terms of subjects (courses with new topics), people (exchange scheme) and information infrastructure (Joint Digital Platform). At the same time, the SP will serve as a role model of how to “Europeanise” legal study programs in general and in particular of how to a) introduce new topics in legal teaching and b) use digital means for these ends in the most effective manner.

Tools and institutions of international cooperation built up after the 2nd World War seemed to be underperforming when facing global threats on the environment, the importance of which is underlined by many recent scientific reports. International Law must go beyond its traditional purpose of supporting inter-state cooperation since it must now define rules and standards likely to be incorporated into the national legislation to help coordinate, if not harmonise, national environmental legal and policy frameworks. Beyond this remarkable expansion of international Law (some say treaty congestion) these institutions and instruments have been significantly transformed to cope with the above-mentioned threats with some new kinds of expert advice, the development of multilateral treaty making, some new types of norms, the growing role of private actors, and the development of new forms of international control --both public and private. However the global environmental governance remains fragmented. Without a world executive and legislative power, there is a proliferation on the international scene of norm producers and disseminators. The creation of a World Environmental Organisation is still in limbo and it is also disputable whether such an organisation would suffice to integrate the “multiple sites of governance” [Snyder, 2010]. The latter are loosely articulated, among themselves and with the other regulation mechanisms in domains such as trade, investment or human rights and so on, although some research points at the burgeoning architecture mixing or alternating synergy, cooperation and conflict relations between different regimes [Biermann, 2009]. The international governance of the environment was first understood through international regime analysis, where regimes are defined as sets of principles, norms, rules, and procedures, which shape the behaviour of actors in a specific area. In practice this corresponds to international conventions and subordinate treaties. More recently though, it was suggested that these regimes are embedded in some more elaborated settings labelled “regime complexes”. These are made of three or more international regimes addressing some different issues within a common domain, which not only co-exist by also interact on substance or at operational level, without being formally coordinated, and by working alongside with other governance mechanisms involving private corporations and NGOs. On the basis of this conceptualisation that saddles International Law, International Relations, Political Science, Political Economy and Sociology, this research project aims to analyse the enabling conditions, the forms and the impacts of norm circulation within actor networks by focusing on two important regime complexes, biodiversity and climate change. The fragmentation diagnosis being well established, it seems important to analyse these process through actor network analysis and focus on circulation of norms and actors. The core concept here is the “permeability” of the various elements of the regime complex, how circulation takes place and what are the impacts on the complex itself, and beyond on international governance as a whole.

The RefWar project focuses on the protection in France of "war refugees", i.e. those who are forced into exile as a result of armed conflict in their country of nationality or residence. It aims to shed light on a major dimension of contemporary forced migration by assessing the applicable legal instruments (field surveys), by proposing a continuous analysis of the reception and protection of war refugees in France (publication of books, website with a space dedicated to notes or chronicles of current events and case law), by better training the various stakeholders (creation of a DU and a legal "clinic"), and by proposing, if necessary, an evolution of the law (proposal to create a supplementary protection title for humanitarian reasons).

Due to the information asymmetry between patients and physicians, prescribing decisions are made by physicians. To promote their drugs, pharmaceutical companies spend considerable amounts to physicians, either by funding their attendance to conferences, or through donations and gifts. The relationships between healthcare professionals and the pharmaceutical industry, and the influence of promotion on doctors' prescribing behavior, is therefore a major issue for the regulation of healthcare spending and the sustainability of our healthcare system. Indeed, laboratory promotion can be beneficial if it provides information to physicians, which then leads them to prescribe treatments associated with better health outcomes. But it can be costly and inefficient if these prescriptions only result from the moral contract which binds doctors to firms and leads them to prescribe treatments which are less effective and / or more costly. This project aims to analyze the role of the relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and doctors on the prescription behavior of the latter. We mobilize a wide range of microeconomic analysis tools (microeconomic theory, mobilization of large administrative databases, laboratory testing and experimentation) in order to assess the impact of drug promotion on doctors' prescribing behaviors. in France. The project will answer to two important questions. First, we will analyze if physicians prescribe more drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies with which they have financial relations. We will also test whether this leads them to more expensive and/or less effective prescriptions than they would do without any financial relations. To answer these questions, we will use administrative, longitudinal and exhaustive data on physicians in France. More precisely, we will merge data from the “Transparence Santé” database to those of the national health insurance. Then, a testing with doctors will be implemented; this is the only possible way to analyze if these financial relations lead to less efficient prescriptions. In our second research question, we will analyze whether prescriptions result from better drug knowledge due to information provided by the pharmaceutical industry, or if they are motivated by financial incentives instead. We will develop a theoretical model whose predictions will be tested thanks to a lab experiment. This entire project will be carried out with a team with varied and complementary skills in microeconomics, as well as with public health doctors and a psychologist.