Yes, I do.
I've had experience in the U.S. with their science advisory process on three major panels. I would say another option to look at is that you have specific advisory panels on particularly contentious points. Salmon aquaculture could be an example of this. The big difference in this is that these panels continue through time. They rotate memberships so you never lose the experience of the background, and they are accountable for the reports. The reports are written and public.
There are multiple options for you to develop parallel processes. Andrew has given you one. I could give you others from the U.S. experience.