[HDR defence] 18/06/2025 - Christèle Lagier: "De la trajectoire à la carrière. The processual professionalisation of a political scientist" (UPR JPEG)

Christèle Lagier will submit her habilitation to direct research (HDR) on 18 June 2025.

Date and place

The Wednesday 18 June at 2pm
Salle des thèses, Bâtiment Nord, Campus Hannah Arendt, Avignon Université.
To follow the viva remotely : https://bbb.univ-avignon.fr/rooms/9sw-eco-ddv-ojw/join

Manuscript titles

Manuscript 1 : From trajectory to career. The processual professionalisation of a political scientist (67 pages)

Manuscript 2 : Traces of a professional career. How to write to exist (472 pages)

Manuscript 3 - original : To lose oneself or to find oneself? What interdisciplinarity does to scientific practice (320 pages)

Laboratory

UPR 3788 -JPEG - Legal, Political, Economic and Management Sciences Laboratory

Discipline

Political science

Composition of the jury

• Philippe Aldrin, University Professor of Political Science, Sciences Po Aix (guarantor)
• Isabelle Bruno, HDR Lecturer in Political Science, University of Lille (rapporteur)
• Didier Demazière, CNRS Research Director, Centre for Organisational Sociology
• Delphine Dulong, Professor of Political Science, University of Paris 1 (rapporteur)
• Patrick Lehingue, Emeritus Professor of Political Science, Université Picardie Jules Verne
• Cécile Robert, University Professor of Political Science, IEP Lyon (rapporteur)
• Antoine Vauchez, Professor of Political Science, University of Paris 1

Summary of manuscript 1 - original : 

From a professional trajectory to a case study, the original manuscript invites us to take a reflective look at a teaching and research career that has been shaped by changes in the contemporary governance of science. Over and above the individuality to which this research project is linked, the aim is to deconstruct the processes by which the profession of teacher-researcher is gradually being brought into line with the standards of public research policies that are in the process of being privatised. We see the injunctions to interdisciplinarity as one of the instruments of this conformation under the guise of aligning research with the imperative of innovation. We enter this subject through the discipline of 'political science', a rare and objectively dominated science, by confronting it with the injunctions of an interdisciplinarity presented as necessary for survival. Based on a survey of interviews with over thirty male and female teacher-researchers from a variety of disciplines, we are giving voice to an often invisible voice in order to gain a better understanding of the depoliticising effects of such orientations in public action. The approach consists of dissecting scientific practices in order to reconstruct their 'epistemic virtues', define the possibilities for interdisciplinary dialogue or non-dialogue, and identify the real scientific added value of such projects. As a 'practising non-believer', we start from our experience as a researcher involved in interdisciplinary projects, placing the following question at the heart of our research: How does involvement in interdisciplinary projects lead to the transformation of scientific practices, which can be seen as ways of shaping a 'scientific self' (Daston and Galison 2012)? The aim is to examine more broadly the compromises, and even the very epistemological compromises, that the interdisciplinary earmarking of public research funding can bring about.