Editing Epistemic community (section)

== Limitations ==
Some refutations have been formulated about epistemic communities, in the study of the circulation of international expertise. Firstly, one should be cautious about the '''risk of [[retrospective]] thinking''' when conceptualizing epistemic communities. Indeed, the solutions proposed by expert groups which are eventually adopted by policy makers are one but many that have been formulated by the scientific community. The epistemic community proposition is confirmed by the fact that the solution adopted are necessarily "tolerable" by policy makers, who choose between all those which have been proposed by the scientific community.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Jacobson |first1=Harold Karan |title=Diplomats, Scientists, and Politicians: The United States and the Nuclear Test Ban Negotiations |last2=Stein |first2=Eric |publisher=University of Michigan Law School |year=1966 |location=Ann Harbour}}</ref> Secondly, it is '''difficult to assess the limits of the term "experts".''' For instance, the [[G7]] "experts" would in fact be civil servants from the member-states of the organization, who therefore cannot claim the scientific legitimacy of researchers.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Economy |first=Elizabeth Charissa |title=Negotiating the terrain of global climate change policy in the Soviet Union and China: Linking international and domestic decision-making pathways |publisher=University of Michigan |year=1994 |location=Michigan |language=English}}</ref> Finally, this hypothesis '''does not take into consideration the influence of national contexts''' in the [[Agenda-setting theory|agenda-setting]] of epistemic communities. The experts are restricted to the limit of the tolerable in their own national context, which is also crucial in the adoption of the solutions they propose at the local level.<ref name=":0" />