The knowledge behind Brexit. A bibliographic analysis of ex-ante policy appraisals on Brexit in the United Kingdom and the European Union

This is the final version. Available on open access from Taylor & Francis via the DOI in this recordIn this article we map and explain the sources of knowledge cited on 85 Brexit impact appraisals, 46 of which were formal impact assessments ordered and published by the European Parliament and 39 ‘sectoral reports’ ordered by the UK Government and released by the House of Commons Exiting the EU Committee. All reports were published between the day after the UK referendum and the year after the start of the UK-EU negotiations. We conducted a citation analysis of 3537 references and tested author push and policy sector pull hypotheses with non-parametric tests. Our findings highlight the epistemic function of the professional referent groups to which authors belong. Authors tend to generate information and cite sources that are congruent with their ‘home group’ in the departmental unit where they work, or their larger professional group, even in urgent high-salient risk situations like Brexit. Differences between policy sectors do not strongly matter

Out of the ivory tower: an explanation of the policy advisory roles of political scientists in Europe

The relevance and impact of political scientists’ professional activities outside of universities has become the focus of public attention, partly due to growing expectations that research should help address society’s grand challenges. One type of such activity is policy advising. However, little attention has been devoted to understanding the extent and type of policy advising activities political scientists engage in. This paper addresses this gap by adopting a classification that distinguishes four ideal types of policy advisors representing differing degrees of engagement. We test this classification by calculating a multi-level latent class model to estimate key factors explaining the prevalence of each type based on an original dataset obtained from a survey of political scientists across 39 European countries. Our results challenge the wisdom that political scientists are sitting in an “ivory tower”: the vast majority (80%) of political scientists in Europe are active policy advisers, with most of them providing not only expert guidance but also normative assessments

Antibiotic research and development: business as usual?

The global burden of antibiotic resistance is tremendous and, without new anti-infective strategies, will continue to increase in the coming decades. Despite the growing need for new antibiotics, few pharmaceutical companies today retain active antibacterial drug discovery programmes. One reason is that it is scientifically challenging to discover new antibiotics that are active against the antibiotic-resistant bacteria of current clinical concern. However, the main hurdle is diminishing economic incentives. Increased global calls to minimize the overuse of antibiotics, the cost of meeting regulatory requirements and the low prices of currently marketed antibiotics are strong deterrents to antibacterial drug development programmes. New economic models that create incentives for the discovery of new antibiotics and yet reconcile these incentives with responsible antibiotic use are long overdue. DRIVE-AB is a \u20ac9.4 million public-private consortium, funded by the EU Innovative Medicines Initiative, that aims to define a standard for the responsible use of antibiotics and to develop, test and recommend new economic models to incentivize investment in producing new anti-infective agents