G2TT
来源类型Report
规范类型报告
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.7249/RR2126
来源IDRR-2126-RE
What sort of Brexit do the British people want? A proof-of-concept study using stated preference discrete choice experiments: Technical addendum
Charlene Rohr; Alexandra Pollitt; David Howarth; Hui Lu; Jonathan Grant
发表日期2017-07-13
出版年2017
页码71
语种英语
结论
  • The British public want a deal on Brexit and are willing to compromise to get one. Netting out the positives and negatives, the current situation of EU membership is worth about £14 per household per week more than leaving the EU with no deal.
  • The British public place the greatest value on the ability to make trade deals and having access to the Single Market for trade of Goods and Services after Brexit, more so than restricting freedom of movement, increased sovereignty and reduced EU contribution.
  • The British public seem to be more concerned with restricting demand for public services than simply restricting freedom of movement, particularly those who voted to leave the EU.
  • Education level was the most important explanatory variable in quantifying people's preferences. Overall, those with university degrees preferred closer ties to the EU, while those with no qualifications preferred greater institutional distance from the EU.
  • Given the importance of making trade deals and access to the Single Market, the public place a positive value on a relationship like Norway's current relationship with the EU, allowing for free trade with other countries while remaining within the single market, and accepting freedom of movement and some loss of sovereignty.
摘要

This proof-of-concept study uses stated preference discrete choice experiments to explore and quantify how the British public value key dimensions of a future relationship with Europe, including freedom of movement for holidays, freedom of movement for working and living, contributions to the EU, free trade with other countries, access to the EU single market for goods and services and sovereignty. The study report provides details of the technical aspects of the work, including the survey methodology, the design of the experiments and the model analysis. A companion report summarises the key policy findings. In terms of methodology, we conclude that people were able to undertake the choice experiments, even though they were complex — both because of the abstract nature of the choices and the number of attributes and levels. The resulting model indicates that those dimensions directly influencing the economy — such as free trade deals with countries outside the EU and access to the EU single-market — are valued most highly, and that preferences vary significantly by education level. Using the model results we find that Britons place a negative value on a 'no deal' option of about £14 per household per week of EU expenditure relative to the status quo (noting that the absolute values derived from the study should be used to provide order-of-magnitude estimates). Having a relationship like Norway is valued positively at about £14 per household per week of EU expenditure relative to the status quo.

目录
  • Chapter One

    Background

  • Chapter Two

    Designing the stated preference discrete choice experiments

  • Chapter Three

    Findings from the stated preference discrete choice experiments

  • Chapter Four

    How can we use the choice modelling results to inform Brexit negotiations?

  • Chapter Five

    Methodological findings and recommendations

  • Appendix A

    Fieldwork and characteristics of the survey sample

  • Appendix B

    Detailed choice model results

主题Discrete Choice Modeling ; European Union ; International Economic Relations ; International Trade Law ; Politics and Government ; United Kingdom
URLhttps://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2126.html
来源智库RAND Corporation (United States)
引用统计
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/523335
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Charlene Rohr,Alexandra Pollitt,David Howarth,et al. What sort of Brexit do the British people want? A proof-of-concept study using stated preference discrete choice experiments: Technical addendum. 2017.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 资源类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
RAND_RR2126.pdf(2337KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
1600113092738.jpg(8KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA缩略图
浏览
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Charlene Rohr]的文章
[Alexandra Pollitt]的文章
[David Howarth]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Charlene Rohr]的文章
[Alexandra Pollitt]的文章
[David Howarth]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Charlene Rohr]的文章
[Alexandra Pollitt]的文章
[David Howarth]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: RAND_RR2126.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
文件名: 1600113092738.jpg
格式: JPEG

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。