What Sort of Brexit Do the British People Want?

A Longitudinal Study Examining the 'Trade-Offs' People Would Be Willing to Make in Reaching a Brexit Deal

Published in: King's College London website (October 2018)

by Jonathan Grant, Charlene Rohr, David Howarth, Hui Lu, Alexandra Pollitt

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.kcl.ac.uk

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

In July 2017 we published a proof-of-concept study using a technique known as 'stated preference discrete choice experiments' to understand what sort of Brexit the British people really wanted and what trade-offs they would be willing to make in negotiations for a deal with the EU. We asked 917 members of the British public, in a survey fielded in February and March 2017, to make choices between different possible options for the relationship between the UK and the EU. As negotiations continue between the UK government and the EU, we decided to revisit this study to see whether people's priorities have changed in terms of what is important in the UK's future relationship with the EU, given the political discourse and events of the last year. To have the best chance of measuring whether people's preferences have changed over this period, we approached the same people that we surveyed in February 2017, managing to repeat the survey with 752 of them. We added a further 164 new respondents to our sample, giving a total of 916 participants for the 2018 round of the study. This second round occurred in April and May 2018, before publication of the government's white paper on the future relationship between the UK and the EU in July of the same year. In this short report we set out what we did, and why we think using discrete choice analysis is a useful and illuminating way to understand the UK public's preferences for a Brexit outcome. We then summarise the key events that have occurred since the June 2016 referendum to provide some context around the snapshots in time that our survey data represent. In addition, we provide a brief review of other salient polls that have come out over the period and are relevant to our findings.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.