Les quotidiens du Québec et la Bataille de Seattle : entre l'approche néolibérale et l'analyse radicale

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

L'émergence d'un principe de justice distributive en droit international économique : analyse de l'évolution du traitement spécial et différencié du GATT à l'OMC

La libéralisation des échanges a fait augmenter les richesses, mais en réalité, elles se sont concentrées dans les pays développés. La question de la distribution plus équitable des richesses s'est rapidement posée. Le système GATT/OMC a joué un rôle décisif dans la libéralisation des échanges et dans l'articulation des rapports entre les pays développés et les pays en développement (PED). L'émergence et l'incarnation juridique dans le système GATT/OMC d'un principe de justice distributive passe par l'évolution du traitement spécial et différencié (TSD). Sous le GATT, le TSD s'est d'abord manifesté par l'article XVIII et la Partie IV du GATT de 1947, la Clause d'habilitation et le Système de préférences de 1971. Le TSD ainsi proposé appartenait essentiellement à la sof law et a échoué dans sa tentative d'intégrer les PED au système SCM. Sous l'OMC, le TSD a changé de paradigme et de mandat. Le TSD est passé d'un outil voué à mettre au développement des PED à un mécanisme employé à aider les PED à mettre en œuvre les nouvelles politiques de libéralisation découlant des accords de l'OMC. Les dispositions TSD seront alors dispersées dans l'ensemble des accords de l'OMC, mais sans jamais transcender la forme «soft law» qui les caractérisait sous le GATT. L'échec de la Conférence de Seattle, en 1999, engendrera le «Programme de Doha pour le développement», en 2001. La Déclaration de Doha était alors perçue comme l'incarnation de la transformation de l'OMC en organisation qui se préoccupe désormais de justice distributive. En observant de près le texte de la Déclaration de Doha et en analysant sa valeur juridique, on ne constate pas de progrès significatifs. Encore une fois, les mesures proposées le sont sous forme de déclarations d'intention et de promesses, voire d'engagement à négocier. Actuellement, le Cycle de Doha tarde à aboutir et tout nous porte à croire que l'avènement de l'OMC n'a pas concrétisé la volonté des PED d'une répartition plus équitable des richesses.

Evidence-Based Practice in PubMed: Are Shared Filters Useful to Health Sciences Academic Users?

Objectives In April 2010, the Université de Montréal’s Health Sciences Library has implemented shared filters in its institutional PubMed account. Most of these filters are designed to highlight resources for evidence-based practice, such as Clinical Queries, Systematic Reviews and Evidence-based Synopsis. We now want to measure how those filters are perceived and used by our users. Methods For one month, data was gathered through an online questionnaire proposed to users of Université de Montréal’s PubMed account. A print version was also distributed to participants in information literacy workshops given by the health sciences librarians. Respondents were restricted to users affiliated to Université de Montréal’s faculties of Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Sciences, Nursing and Pharmacy. Basic user information such as year/program of study or department affiliation was also collected. The questionnaire allowed users to identify the filters they use, assess the relevance of filters, and also suggest new ones. Results Survey results showed that the shared filters of Université de Montreal’s PubMed account were found useful by the majority of respondents. Filters allowing rapid access to secondary resources ranked among the most relevant (Reviews, Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Practice Guidelines and Clinical Evidence). For Clinical Study Queries, Randomized Controlled Trial (Therapy/Narrow) was considered the most useful. Some new shared filters have been suggested by respondents. Finally, 18% of the respondents indicated that they did not quite understand the relevance of filters. Conclusion Based on the survey results, shared filters considered most useful will be kept, some will be enhanced and others removed so that suggested ones could be added. The fact that some respondents did not understand well the relevance of filters could potentially be addressed through our PubMed workshops, online library guides or by renaming some filters in a more meaningful way.

Using Google Analytics to evaluate an email information literacy program for medical and dental students

Objectives: An email information literacy program has been effective for over a decade at Université de Montréal’s Health Library. Students periodically receive messages highlighting the content of guides on the library’s website. We wish to evaluate, using Google Analytics, the effects of the program on specific webpage statistics. Using the data collected, we may pinpoint popular guides as well as others that need improvement. Methods: In the program, first and second-year medical (MD) or dental (DMD) students receive eight bi-monthly email messages. The DMD mailing list also includes graduate students and professors. Enrollment to the program is optional for MDs, but mandatory for DMDs. Google Analytics (GA) profiles have been configured for the libraries websites to collect visitor statistics since June 2009. The GA Links Builder was used to design unique links specifically associated with the originating emails. This approach allowed us to gather information on guide usage, such as the visitor’s program of study, duration of page viewing, number of pages viewed per visit, as well as browsing data. We also followed the evolution of clicks on GA unique links over time, as we believed that users may keep the library's emails and refer to them to access specific information. Results: The proportion of students who actually clicked the email links was, on average, less than 5%. MD and DMD students behaved differently regarding guide views, number of pages visited and length of time on the site. The CINAHL guide was the most visited for DMD students whereas MD students consulted the Pharmaceutical information guide most often. We noted that some students visited referred guides several weeks after receiving messages, thus keeping them for future reference; browsing to additional pages on the library website was also frequent. Conclusion: The mitigated success of the program prompted us to directly survey students on the format, frequency and usefulness of messages. The information gathered from GA links as well as from the survey will allow us to redesign our web content and modify our email information literacy program so that messages are more attractive, timely and useful for students.