Bralind Kiri

Bralind Kiri
University of Granada | UGR · Departamento de Economía Aplicada

Doctor of Philosophy


How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more


Publications (2)
Full-text available
The interaction between a university and potential students is examined under the assumptions of financial constraints and of students' abilities following the pattern of a triangular distribution. Subsequently, a comparative statics analysis in terms of welfare and vectors composed of three components – namely quality, tuition fee and ability thre...
We elaborate a model of the incentives of scientists to perform activities of control and criticism when these activities, just like the production of novel findings, are costly, and we study the strategic interaction between these incentives. We then use the model to assess policies meant to enhance the reliability of scientific knowledge. We show...


Cited By


Project (1)
With this project, our goal is to suggest a more complete account of what it means to be an expert. Our theory will provide a better understanding that will help solve many of the problems that arise in scientific and technological controversies. Expertise has been a topic of analysis in Philosophy of Science and Science and Technology Studies (STS). We will start from these studies to build our proposal. We want to demonstrate that a better theoretical characterization of expertise can also have practical implications. We will argue that it is not enough to stipulate a mere description of what it means to be an expert in something, but that we must also develop a set of recommendations to set up broad and representative committees of experts. These committees could more adequately resolve scientific and technological disputes. The committees will gather different ways of "being an expert". Our conception of expertise is a "distributed" expertise, where different ways of "being an expert" are necessary in deliberative processes. Therefore, scientific experts will participate with their significant contributions, together with those citizens who may be affected by a specific problem and can contribute with their "situated knowledge". We will defend that many scientific and technological controversies are resolved erroneously due to two deficits: a communicative and a democratic deficit. In order to study the communicative deficit, we will analyze the argumentative practices that underlie the controversies. And about the democratic deficit, we think that it has its origin in the low participation of the agents that should be involved in the deliberative processes. One of the aspects on which the literature on expertise has focused is the political dimension. The main problem that must be solved is the problem of legitimization versus extension. Access to information and knowledge are cornerstones to reach rational solutions in the public sphere. However, it is necessary to reconcile that a small number of people have the specialized knowledge to solve these problems with the democratic rights of citizens in general. Our project will begin with the study of some scientific and technological controversies, which will be used as a starting point to analyze previous strategies, as well as their weakness. We will also analyze these controversies to understand the role that experts have generally played in closing disputes. We want to develop the notion of "dialogic expertise". In a historical context like the one we face today, citizens have an access to an unapproachable amount of information. For that reason, it is essential to insist on educating in appropriate ways to inquiry and develop capacities and attitudes that enable us in civic forms of participation