Chaire de recherche du Canada en ÉPI
Team
Cynthia Couette réalise un doctorat en cotutelle en science politique à l'Université Laval et en régulation et gouvernance à l'Australian National University sous la supervision du Professeur Jean-Frédéric Morin et de la Professeure associée Ashley Schram, respectivement.
En parallèle, Cynthia travaille depuis 2021 comme auxiliaire de recherche pour le projet The Polycentric Governance of the Earth's Orbital Space de la chaire, pour laquelle elle continue de travailler en tant que doctorante affiliée. Elle a d'abord été en charge de réaliser les entrevues pour le projet avant d'assurer la coordination de l'équipe de visualisation graphique et d'analyse des données. Depuis Mars 2024, elle travaille également comme auxiliaire de recherche pour l'Australian Centre for Space Governance, où elle est en charge du traitement et de l'analyse des données.
Ses travaux portent sur le rôle des acteurs non-étatiques dans la gouvernance mondiale de biens communs. Plus précisément, sa thèse de doctorat analyse l'influence de la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates dans la gouvernance mondiale des brevets pharmaceutiques.
Cynthia collabore également avec l'Australian Centre for Health Equity, la Planetary Health Equity Hothouse et le Working Group on Earth-Space Governance de l'organisation Earth System Governance.
Auparavant, elle a réalisé sa maîtrise de recherche en étude internationales (profil relations internationales) à l'École supérieure d'études internationales de l'Université Laval et détient également un Baccalauréat ès arts en études internationales et langues modernes - profil développement international.
Courriel : cynthia.couette.1@ulaval.ca
Intérêts de recherche
Gouvernance mondiale
Économie politique internationale
Acteurs non-étatiques
Biens communs
Réseaux de gouvernance
Cours enseignés
Auxiliaire d'enseignement pour le cours POL-1005 Relations internationales et défis de la mondialisation
Peer-reviewed articles
-
Beaumier, G., C. Couette & JF Morin (2024) "Hybrid organisations and governance systems: the case of the European Space Agency," Journal of European Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2024.2325647
The constitutive organisations of governance systems tend to multiply and diversify over time. In parallel, a tendency toward homophily favours the creation of clusters of homogeneous organisations. Yet, few systems drift to the point of disconnection or dislocation. Several remain sufficiently cohesive to allow adaptation and other complex properties to emerge. To maintain equilibrium between order and chaos, some organisations must create bridges between otherwise homogeneous groups. This paper argues that hybrid organisations are ideally suited for this role. By their nature, hybrids share characteristics with different types of organisations in global governance, allowing them to overcome strict homophily and create bridges across clusters. Hybrids benefit from acting as brokers and in doing so, they facilitate the exchange of material and ideational resources across the governance system. Even if it is not their intention, they contribute to holding governance systems together and counterbalance the effect of homophily. We illustrate this argument by examining the space governance system and the hybrid nature, bridging activities, and brokerage role of the European Space Agency.
Voir la publication originale Voir la publication originale en format pdf
-
Couette, C. (2024) Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents. Global Policy, 00, 1–12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13342
Expert consensus helps policymakers solve complex problems by identifying and legitimizing policy solutions. Yet, persistent hesitation remains among policymakers regarding the technically adequate policy solution despite the existence and mobilization of epistemic communities. This paper contends that more attention should be given to studying the epistemic competition that may arise when multiple epistemic communities grapple with the same problem but have divergent understandings of its technical nature and its adequate policy solutions. Building on Science and Technology Studies and on the literature on polarization, this paper suggests that two social dynamics, namely the mobilization of resources and increased polarization, may complexify the technical disagreement among experts. In turn, these dynamics may lead to a deadlock in the debates, negatively impacting the institutional context where they take place. To illustrate this, this paper analyzes the case of the pharmaceutical innovation system, which has been prone to tensions between experts arguing for strong patent protection and experts arguing for greater flexibility to meet public health needs. This paper builds on a mixed method combining a social network analysis of experts invited to provide their expertise in the WHO-WTO-WIPO Trilateral Cooperation events and on semi-structured interviews with 24 of these experts.