Let me give you an example of where this has worked. In the U.S. They have a portal, I forget the exact name, but it's something like peer to patent database, where they have opened up the patent process to input from experts, recognizing that the expert on a particular patent topic is often not in the government itself. They invite scientists and inventors to comment on patents that are under review. They have found that they get much higher quality information from that process than they could just adjudicating the patents themselves using their own experts. They didn't abdicate the responsibility for making the final decision, for having somebody making sure there wasn't somebody with a bias inputting data, but they were able to get much richer information on which to make their decisions.
I think you can walk that line. I think you do have to be careful with it, and still have somebody adjudicating the information itself.