Methodology
The World’s 50 Best Restaurants list is compiled from the votes of the "World’s 50 Best Restaurants Academy", a group of 27 panels established to make the ranking. The world is divided into regions, with a chairperson in each region appointed for their knowledge of their part of the restaurant world. These chairs each selected a voting panel of 30 members, who cast a total of 5,859 votes.
There is no list of nominees; each member of the international voting panel votes for their own personal choice of 5 restaurants. To ensure that there are winners from many regions, they may vote for up to two restaurants in their own region, the remaining votes must be cast outside their home region. Nobody is allowed to vote for their own restaurant, and voters must have eaten in the restaurants they nominate within the past 18 months – although it is not possible to ensure that they have.
The criteria are different from those of the Michelin Guide or other guides, which has allowed restaurants like Momofuku Ssam Bar, Asador Etxebarri and St. John to hold their own among the molecular or traditional cuisine of restaurants like The Fat Duck to Les Ambassadeurs to The French Laundry.
The list has been criticised; writing in The Guardian in 2003 Matthew Fort described the list as "humbug". The French food writer and critic François-Régis Gaudry mentions the lack of reliability of this ranking, while the Spanish chef Martín Berasategui spoke of "rigged" ranking, manipulated by an "important international food company" in order to "cause damage" to the Michelin guide.
Read more about this topic: The World's 50 Best Restaurants
Famous quotes containing the word methodology:
“One might get the impression that I recommend a new methodology which replaces induction by counterinduction and uses a multiplicity of theories, metaphysical views, fairy tales, instead of the customary pair theory/observation. This impression would certainly be mistaken. My intention is not to replace one set of general rules by another such set: my intention is rather to convince the reader that all methodologies, even the most obvious ones, have their limits.”
—Paul Feyerabend (1924–1994)