Log in
European Union (EU)-Middle East relations are of critical importance to policy-makers, and this case study shows how Professor Richard Youngs' research has changed perspectives and practices among EU elites, informed debates among practitioner groups and shaped public debate about democracy promotion and human rights. As both Professor of Politics at Warwick and Director General of the Madrid-based think-tank FRIDE, Youngs' research findings have challenged conventional wisdom on: the prospects for democratisation in the Arab world; the identities of Islamist interlocutors; and the efficacy of civil society support. The influence of Youngs' research can be observed directly through the numerous commissions he has received from the European Parliament and the uptake of his subsequent reports among key stakeholders.
A key priority of the EU since the 1990s has been the promotion of liberal democracy in undemocratic and illiberal societies such as those of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Pace's work has furnished important insights to policy practitioners working on the EU's role in democracy promotion. She has provided advice and recommendations to the EU External Action Service, the European Commission and the European Parliament (EP) as well as the Swedish government (via the International Institute on Democracy and Electoral assistance [IDEA]). This work has directly informed the following decisions: an EP Resolution on Democracy Building in the EU's External Relations (dated 22 October 2009); and the European Council's Conclusions on Democracy Support in the EU's External Relations (dated 17 November 2009).
Research by Professor Anoush Ehteshami has been drawn upon by senior Foreign and Commonwealth Office Research Analysts in developing UK foreign policy. In particular, it has informed their thinking on UK policy responses to the changing dynamic between the Middle East and East Asia; and on UK policy responses to Iran's nuclear programme. This has fed directly and indirectly into UK Government foreign policy.
The Middle East Centre (MEC) has achieved a unique standing in providing informed analysis of the region, based on its cumulative academic expertise. It has made significant contributions to the media's and the public's understanding of political and societal developments in the Middle East. The MEC has given advice both to emerging Arab democracies on their own political systems, and to other governments on their relations with the countries of the region. The centre itself has also become a place of neutral ground, where individuals from opposite sides in conflicts in the region can meet, away from local tensions.
This case study focuses on the development of the European Union (EU) as a global political/security actor, particularly regarding the dynamic relationship between institution-building, strategic thinking, and policy performance. The impact involves the influence of Professor Michael E. Smith's research on EU foreign/security policy on current policy debates about the EU's future as a global actor, and on the broader issue of the EU's purpose in world politics. The EU is currently considering ideas about how to reform its ambitions in this area in light of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, providing a major opportunity for Smith's work to have an impact.
Renton used his research on the origins of the Israel-Palestine conflict to enhance public understanding by extending the quality and range of evidence and argumentation in public discourse on a major issue of historical importance with present day consequences. This was achieved through a range of collaborations, media, engagement with public campaigns, and synergies with the international news cycle.
This research, on (i) Britain's refusal to intervene militarily in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995 and (ii) the history of humanitarian interventions in general, has received considerable attention from policy makers and attentive publics. It has contributed to the questioning in British political circles of the `conservative pessimism' which in the past often led to an unwillingness to act over humanitarian disasters. It has also contributed to the wider emergence of the norm of a `responsibility to protect', whereby governments qualify the classical presumption of non-intervention with a degree of commitment to protect a people when it is under attack from its own government.
Research on the management and implementation of EU Cohesion policy has informed the legislative proposals made in 2011 by the European Commission for the reform of Cohesion policy. It has also influenced some organisational changes within the Commission introduced in early 2013. EU Cohesion policy is the second largest area of expenditure in the EU budget, currently worth c. €347bn for the 2007-13 period, and provides funding for regional socio-economic development programmes in all EU Member States. The legislative proposals influenced by the Strathclyde research affect every national, regional and local authority in the EU benefiting from EU Structural and Cohesion Funds.
Research conducted by John Turnpenny shaped the recommendations of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC). In 2010, the EAC addressed the need to embed sustainable development across government policy-making. This followed the closure of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) and the end of funding for the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC). The EAC determined to change how it engaged with experts, while reaffirming and expanding its role in the overall scrutiny of government sustainability policy. Turnpenny's findings formed the basis of two of the thirteen headline recommendations in the EAC's 2011 report Embedding Sustainable Development Across Government. In addition his suggestions helped influence significant changes in the way that the EAC operates, and contributed to its wider impact among other policy actors.
Research on participation in governance and related policy instruments, with a particular focus on interest organisations and groups, with strategic orientation of research publications towards impact, and evidence of use at the highest level in public policy reviews and public discourse/debate, as well as deliberations of advocacy groups.