"The relationship between experts and officials calls to mind the three models described by Jürgen Habermas. The ‘decisionist’ model, which was first analyzed by Max Weber, gives primacy to those who have the legitimacy to make decisions, i.e., to elected and appointed city officials. The ‘technocratic’ model invests legitimacy in the ‘scientific’ character of expertise and therefore in the expert, while relegating city officials to a subordinate role. Finally, the ‘pragmatic’ model argues that the proposals of experts are discussed within the public realm of civic debate. Other understandings of the relationship have been proposed, most notably C. P. Snow’s theory of the weakness of politicians’ science training, and the substantial social studies of science literature. Furthermore, some scholars have pointed out that attention should be paid to the national forms taken by expertise, especially the difference between countries having common law and Roman law. American expertise, for example, usually involves the expression of various actors, and the decision is conceived (at least in theory) as a compromise between different but legitimate opposing interests. The French system, on the other hand, appears to be more technocratic, with a lineage directly embedded in a centralized monarchy, and centered on a cadre of civil servants trained as experts at prestigious state Grandes Écoles."