I would avoid 'coupled with' completely here.
- '[A and B], coupled with [C], are two ...' is notionally infelicitous.
Assuming notional agreement (trying to use broad-brush rules is, I consider, inadequate here) either [up-to-date knowledge and experience] (a) is seen as sufficiently unary to be treated as such (ie given singular agreement) or (b) we need to use a non-subsetted list 'A, plus B, plus C'. Thus
- (a) Health and safety, coupled with economic growth, is our primary focus.
I've chosen a different example of the same structure because I can't bring myself to see 'up-to-date knowledge' and 'experience' as being sufficiently cohesive to warrant being treated as unary. Beans and luncheon meat, not bacon and eggs.
(There are, though, not a few examples on the internet which treat 'A coupled with B' as a compound subject; this is not the received viewpoint. The following from an [otherwise?] well-written article from ACS: Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering:
- (anti-a) Efficient antibacterial activity coupled with the ability to visualize bacterial processes allow Au–Ag NPs to be a potential solution in medicine and biosensing.)
- (b) Up-to-date knowledge, experience, and the motivation of young people, are assets that make their advice more pivotal.
You can show that the A and B are more cohesive than A and C, say, without being unary, by rephrasing
- (b') Up-to-date knowledge and experience – when put together with the motivation of young people – are assets that make their advice more pivotal.