Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Scientific expertise and risk aggregation

Abstract : When scientists are asked to give expert advice on risk-related questions, such as the authorization of medical drugs, deliberation often does not eliminate all disagreements. I propose to model these remaining discrepancies as differences in risk assessments and/or in risk acceptability thresholds. The normative question I consider, then, is how the individual expert views should best be aggregated. I discuss what "best" could mean, with an eye to some robustness considerations. I argue that the majority rule, which is currently often used in expert panels, has significant drawbacks.
Document type :
Journal articles
Complete list of metadata

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02558151
Contributor : Msh Poitiers Maison Des Sciences Humaines <>
Submitted on : Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 12:10:16 PM
Last modification on : Tuesday, February 16, 2021 - 9:28:02 AM

Identifiers

Citation

Thomas Boyer-Kassem. Scientific expertise and risk aggregation. Philosophy of Science, University of Chicago Press, 2019, 86 (1), pp.124-144. ⟨10.1086/701071⟩. ⟨halshs-02558151⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

59