Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-65tv2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-08T09:15:18.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français
Accepted manuscript

On Elephants and Octopuses: Two Models of Pluralistic Policy Advice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2025

Karim Bschir Open the ORCID record for Karim Bschir [Opens in a new window]  and
Simon Lohse Open the ORCID record for Simon Lohse [Opens in a new window]
Karim Bschir
Affiliation:
University of St.Gallen, karim.bschir@unisg.ch
Simon Lohse
Affiliation:
Radboud University Nijmegen, Research Associate at the Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, South Africa, and at the Centre for Ethics and Law in the Life Science, Leibniz University Hannover, Germany simon.lohse@ru.nl
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this discussion note, we contrast two models of pluralistic policy advice that have recently been proposed: Stephen John’s (2025) representative model and our integrative model (Bschir & Lohse 2022, 2024). We believe that the contrast between representative and integrative pluralism is of high relevance for the broader philosophical discussion on scientific policy advice.

Information

Type
Discussion Note
Information
Philosophy of Science , Accepted manuscript , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Philosophy of Science Association

Footnotes

*

Both authors have contributed equally.