The UK’s referendum on remaining in the European Union or leaving it generated an avalanche of campaign information, including hundreds of interventions by social scientists. David Walker casts a sceptical eye over the experience, asking whether the wafer-thin majority for Leave signals a failure of social scientists input.
The result of the second UK referendum on membership of the European Union appeared immediately as a tragedy, says Robert Dingwall. It has rapidly degenerated into a farce, which may yet have tragic consequences.
Public conversations about Britain’s EU membership could have involved wide-ranging discussions of British and European politics, economics and society, argues our Daniel Nehring. They did not. Instead, they were dominated by oversimplifications, stereotypes and lies.
in the wake of the leavers winning the Brexit vote, the British Academy of Social Sciences predicts uncertainty for the social science community, ‘with implications for research funding, international collaboration, freedom of movement, and capacity building.’
Imagine a crystal ball that could provide us with graphs of levels of house prices, migration, the value of the pound, or the number of EU laws, from now into the far future, suggests Nick Chater about the results of the Brexit vote. He suspects this crystal ball would not help many voters come to any firm conclusions.
A collection of academic articles from three journals published by SAGE examine the questions whirling around the Brexit vote. As Angus Armstrong and Jonathan Portes say, ‘The phony war is over!’
A briefing from the Academy of Social Sciences concludes that ‘given the available evidence, compared to other sciences in the UK and to social scientists in other EU member states, over the past two decades UK social scientists may have benefitted to a greater extent from the EU funding and capacity building opportunities provided by EU programmes.’
German-born Daniel Nehring insists that the upcoming Brexit vote is founded less on reason and more on xenophobia, and argues that the toxic atmosphere surrounding the vote is already doing harm to Britain’s fabled academic enterprise.
Drawing on discussions with academics who have oriented their work around public engagement and social impact, Daniel Pearson suggests these academics present an opportunity to rethink the existing structures of reward and recognition in higher education. “We are, as a species, addicted to story,” says English professor Jonathan Gottschall in his book, The Storytelling Animal. “Even when the […] Tom Burns, whose combination of play — and plays – with teaching in higher education added a light, collaborative and engaging model […] A 2024 report by the National Academies explores the latest advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology and their potential effects on economic productivity, job stability, and income inequality. It also highlights key research opportunities and data needs to help workers and policymakers adapt to the evolving AI landscape. In this post, co-authors Frank T. Piller, Tucker J. Marion, and Mahdi Srour reflect on the inspiration behind their research article, “Generative […] During the final stages of editing the proofs for Artificial Intelligence and Work: Transforming Work, Organizations, and Society in an Age of Insecurity, […]
EXPLORE
Impact
Young Scholars Can’t Take the Field in Game of Academic Metrics
READ MORE
Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research
READ MORE
Tom Burns, 1959-2024: A Pioneer in Learning Development
READ MORE
Innovation
NAS Report Examines Nexus of AI and Workplace
READ MORE
When Do You Need to Trust a GenAI’s Input to Your Innovation Process?
READ MORE
The Authors of ‘Artificial Intelligence and Work’ on Future Risk
READ MORE
