The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, triggering the process referred to as Brexit. University of Michigan experts can discuss the political and economic implications of the vote.

Linda Lim is a professor of strategy at the Ross School of Business whose expertise includes political economy and business-government relations. She can discuss the economic ramifications of the referendum.

“If things go really badly in the next few weeks/months there will be little inclination among others to attempt a leave,” she said. “Even before then this may provide impetus for the rest of the EU to work together more determinedly to ‘show the Brits’ they can do well without them, i.e., could be a spur to unity rather than to disintegration.”

Contact: 734-763-0290, [email protected]

Erik Gordon is a clinical assistant professor at the Ross School of Business who focuses on entrepreneurship and technology commercialization.

“Markets and politicians are overreacting,” he said. “Germany will not leave. It benefits greatly from freely exporting to member countries. If there is a global recession, it will not be because of the Brexit.”

Contact: 734-764-5274, [email protected]

Shobita Parthasarathy, associate professor at the Ford School of Public Policy, can talk about the policy implications of Brexit.

“Today’s Brexit, which has led to David Cameron’s resignation and Scottish threats to revive an independence referendum, is an indicator of growing anger and distrust in elite experts. Average U.K. citizens are suffering economically, and they do not feel heard or understood in the aggregate economic models and the policies these models inform. And of course, we see a quite similar phenomenon emerging in the U.S.”

Contact: [email protected]

Andrei Markovits, professor of comparative politics and German studies, can discuss the impact of Brexit on other member countries of the European Union.

“This Brexit is a big nuisance on many counts but not a real tragedy and most certainly not because of Germany’s or France’s potential leaving the EU,” he said. “That is all panic talk now after this unexpected outcome but not based on any reality.

“One of the EU’s big problems has been that these two continental countries have been its core and its often arrogant masters, which is one of the many reasons that the English and the Welsh—though not the Scots and the Northern Irish—opted to leave it.
Very different issue for the Hungarians and Italians and others. Each one of these cases has to be analyzed in its very own context. Please, no collective panic now.”

Contact: 734-213-2226 or 734-905-0156, [email protected]

Kyle Handley, assistant professor of business economics and public policy at the Ross School of Business, is an expert on how trade policy, geography and uncertainty affect firms. He can discuss comments by GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump regarding Brexit.

“Brexit has provided a salient and powerful demonstration that decades worth of multilateral cooperation can unravel. The U.S. and other countries have reached multilateral agreements and created institutions to reduce import tariffs and stabilize rules governing immigration, investment and international business. These institutions have increased trade and economic growth in part by reducing uncertainty and in part by reducing frictions and making markets more competitive. Even if Trump loses the election, the uncertainty generated by suggesting that the U.S. might renege on decades of commitments to the WTO, trade agreements like NAFTA, or other international treaties could have a detrimental effect on trade and investment.

“This event generates a substantial amount of policy uncertainty for U.K., European and U.S. businesses. There is a strong precautionary motive to ‘wait and see’ how uncertainty is resolved before moving forward with new investments, new business projects and international expansion. That reluctance to make decisions can have adverse effects on economic activity that are related to financial market reaction throughout the world. If the uncertainty persists or negotiations with the EU over the exit transition stall, the reduction and trade and investment could lead to a recession in the U.K. and some major trading partners in the EU.”

Contact: 734-764-1581, [email protected]

Scott Greer is an associate professor of health management and policy at the School of Public Health and senior expert adviser on health governance for the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. He researches the politics of health policies, with a special focus on the politics and policies of the European Union and the impact of federalism on health care. Before coming to Michigan he taught at University College London.

Political perspective:

“This is a momentous and deeply problematic decision,” he said. “It reaps the bitter fruit of decades of problematic media and political elite conversations in the UK. It threatens the whole European project, exposing all Europeans, but especially Britons, to geopolitical realities they have been able to escape. It also profoundly endangers the basic unity of the U.K. since it is hard to imagine Scotland will stay in or the Northern Irish settlement will remain settled.

“The sorrow is that the U.K. started to have its adult conversation about the European Union the morning after the referendum, when it should have started it decades ago in a much less poisonous and challenging world.”

Health perspective:

“One of the most persistent and effective lies was that leaving the EU would help preserve the NHS,” he said. “Rather, it will cut off crucial workforce and make it harder to sustain the NHS systems in a weakening economy.”

Contact: 734-615-3711, [email protected]