Scientific expertise and risk aggregation

Thomas Boyer-Kassem (1, 2, 3)

1 MAPP [Poitiers] - Métaphysique allemande et philosophie pratique
2 Axe 2 (2017-2021) : "Vulnérabilités et risques" (MSHS Poitiers)
3 UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers

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.

Domaines: Sciences de l'Homme et Société

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