EXTREMISMResearch on Extremism in the U.K. Hobbled by Skewed Research Environment

The U.K. Commission for Countering Extremism released a report earlier this month which analyzes the research environment in the U.K. within which research on extremism takes place.

The Commission commissioned Daniel Allington of King’s College London to produce this report.

The report says there are problems in studying extremism and communicating the findings of studies of extremism. These problems have caused gaps in the knowledge base around extremism in the U.K. and a lack of research on specific extremist movements, especially Islamist extremism.

Here are excerpts from the report:

Executive Summary
As a result of systemic problems both in studying extremism and in communicating the findings of such study, there are likely to be substantial gaps in the knowledge base around extremism in the UK.

Above all, there appears to be a lack of research on specific extremist movements in the UK today — especially when it comes to Islamist extremism. This suggests that it would be unwise to assume that publicly available research on extremism provides a sound basis for UK government policy.

Findings of the two studies reported here suggest that:

·  The study of extremism is highly politicized, and its politicization presents clear potential for silencing and exclusion of certain perspectives

·  Projects supported by the major public research funders appear to be skewed towards studies of extremism in general, as well as towards studies of the far right, especially with regard to the UK of the present day and the recent past

·  There may also be comparable skews in research carried out without such support (for example, within think tanks)

·  There are many obstacles to collecting relevant data by conventional means, including when trying to access data and research participants via state agencies, such as HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), and when seeking approval from risk-averse research ethics committees

·  The use of ‘naturally occurring’ online data in place of more conventionally collected data raises problems of representativeness, and also does not always avoid difficulties with regard to ethical approval processes

·  Lack of data-sharing makes it difficult for stakeholders to seek second opinions, and leads to duplication of effort

·  Dissemination of research findings on extremist groups and their associates and supporters is hampered by several factors, including online intimidation, credible physical threats, and strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs, also known as ‘lawfare’ or ‘intimidation lawsuits’)