Introduction
Developmental research is a broad field of science that specializes in understanding progressive changes that affect a scientific phenomenon over time. From a trade relations standpoint, the concept is primarily concerned with how countries leverage their economic potential to impose tariffs and restrict trade when interacting with partner states (Elisabete et al., 2021). The exit of the UK from the European Union regional bloc brought new opportunities for the nation to negotiate its trade deals without the involvement of other parties. Of importance to this study is how the UK intends to renegotiate its trade deals with China, noting that it comes from a defunct tax regime used in the now disbanded relationship with European Union partner states.
Developmental research has a strong potential in assessing the impact of tariff changes after “Brexit” on the trade relationship between the UK and China. To understand the complexity of the relationship between both nations, developmental research will be used to understand how tariffs are formulated, understood, and imposed in the wake of changing bilateral relationships between the UK and China (Nash, 2008). Overall, the proposed research is designed to find out ways that developmental research can be used to assess the impact of tariff changes after “Brexit” on the trade relationship between the UK and China.
Research Context
The proposed research investigation will be contextualized in the framework of bilateral relations between the UK and China. Key areas of research that are relevant to this investigation include an investigation of tools and techniques associated with developmental research that applies to the research problem, defining the role of developmental research in understanding tariff changes and their goals, and identifying the theoretical foundation underpinning the inquiry. These areas of research form the basis for the proposed research investigation as demonstrated below.
Developmental Research Techniques and Tools
The application of developmental research techniques in the context of trade relations between the UK and China depends on the appropriate application of its tools and techniques. The selection process depends on various factors, such as types of assessments desired and preferred styles of investigation (Gerring, 2006; Fairbrother (2014). The decision to select the most appropriate tool for analysis is informed by the nature of the research process and the parties involved. For example, classical experimental designs are often associated with summative evaluations, while qualitative approaches are linked with needs assessment activities (Baru, 1998; Sen, 1999). Additionally, process studies are associated with descriptive survey methods, while historical survey methods are commonly applicable in developmental projects (Blaikie and Priest, 2018). Therefore, study design and the nature of the desired outcome play important roles in selecting the most appropriate tool to use in developmental research processes.
Developmental research often undergoes different phases of evolution, each of which is primarily involved with the collection and dissemination of data. Therefore, conducting developmental research by itself is not a conclusive process because there must be demonstrable evidence covering data analysis and reporting (Borgatti et al., 2009). However, before reaching this stage of inquiry, developmental research covers several other interrelated parts to create a “big picture” understanding of a research issue. For example, a separate inquiry process could be introduced to identify the nature and trajectory of a problem, while another one may be developed to specify the context of analysis and define the instructional material that would be used together with it (Queupil and Muñoz-García, 2018). Cross, Borgatti, and Parker (2002) add that some sub-studies may also be introduced to cover different types of evaluations, including summative, follow-ups, or post-instructional performances.
Role of Developmental Research in Promoting Productivity
The internal consistency and effectiveness of trade relations between nations is often a function of the performance of their interrelated parts. For example, an industry’s internal consistency and effectiveness are core parts of its key practices. This is why companies that have a consistent organizational culture often register improved performance because it standardizes behavior and expectations among all parties involved (Locke, Spiduso and Silverman, 2007). At the same time, scholars have pointed out that internal consistency is associated with several measures of organizational performance, including predicting future sales numbers and market-to-book ratios (Skovdal and Cornish, 2015; Alkire and Kanagaratnam, 2020). Developmental research has been linked with these different measures of organizational consistency with a bearing on how different tests and activities in an industry are related to one another. The same approach will be useful in understanding the consistency of tariffs imposed by two or more nations.
Theoretical Foundation
The field of developmental research traces its roots to several theories underpinning performance and evaluation in organizations or industries. Particularly, the field of instructional research has benefitted from developments made in the space to improve knowledge creation processes and instructional designs (Lazer et al., 2009; Russell, 2014). The process has taken two forms, with the first one being defined by context-specific factors of inquiry and the latter characterized by generalized approaches of investigation (Schutt and O’Neil, 2013). Unlike simple instructional programs, developmental research is primarily concerned with the internal consistency and effectiveness of policy practices (Smith et al., 2014; Joshi and O’Dell, 2013). In this context of this review, an effort is made to focus not only on processes that lead to changes in tariff barriers between nations.
From a theoretical perspective, few developmental research theories have been formulated. However, given that the concept is linked to policy changes, it shares a link with theories that have predicted the outcome of international partnerships. For example, Lewin’s management model, which presupposes that organizational changes are subject to group influences, has been used in this context. It suggests that successful change management processes have to undergo three phases, which include unfreezing, change, and refreezing (Mauritz, 2017). The unfreezing process of change management is linked to the relaxation of policy positions to allow for changes to happen. Lewin’s model suggests that this action leads to the second phase of change where new elements are introduced into an organization’s processes or activities. The last phase of change occurs when corporate governance structures are fortified to create a new policy regime.
Kotter’s change theory has also been employed in the aforementioned context of corporate governance to explain organizational change processes. Unlike Lewin’s change model described above, it focuses more on the “people,” as opposed to the contents of the change itself (Mauritz, 2017). Particularly, it highlights the need for stakeholders to build a core coalition that will drive common agendas and remove all barriers that cause friction among partner states. In this regard, it forms a common framework for merging the interests of multiple nations in a business arrangement or industry. Consequently, the theory directs attention to areas that need emphasis during change. Other theories that have been used in the same context of analysis include the McKinsey 7s model, Nudge theory, and Bridges transitional model (Mauritz, 2017). These theoretical frameworks provide a framework for integrating development research initiatives in managing data that would then be used to support various models of taxation.
Summary
The findings highlighted in this review show that developmental research has been used in various fields of science because of its ability to convey varied techniques for addressing specific industry-related problems. While its competence is unquestioned, there is minimal evidence demonstrating its use and effectiveness in assessing tariff barriers in international trade. Given the complexity and sheer volume of the trade relationship between the UK and China, there is a need to understand how developmental research can be used to assess the impact of tariff changes after “Brexit” in the UK-China trade relations.
Research Question
For a long time, the UK has mulled over establishing its own trade relationship with China. In 2013, the UK prime Minister, David Cameroon travelled to China and hinted at being a catalyst in the development of a trade relationship between the UK and the European Union, to the dismay of Brussels, which reserves the sole right of negotiation such agreements (Slawson, 2017). However, with the exist of the UK from the European Union economic bloc; there is a renewed sense of vitality in realizing Cameron’s objective of the UK establishing its own trade deal with China. The ramifications of this policy suggestion are still unknown, at least from a tariff-standpoint. Consequently, this study aims to assess the impact of tariff changes after “Brexit” on the trade relationship between the UK and China. The binding research question is as follows:
Research Question: How can developmental research be used to assess the impact of tariff changes after Brexit on the trade relationship between the UK and China
Data Collection Techniques
Secondary data will be used as the main source of information, as opposed to primary research data, because of the broad and interrelated nature of the research variables involved (Skovdal and Cornish, 2015). Indeed, the proposed research is aimed at assessing the impact of tariff changes after Brexit on the trade relationship between the UK and China. The scope of the investigation is at a macroeconomic level, thereby necessitating the adoption of secondary research, which will allow the researcher to investigate relevant data within a short time. Additionally, the justification for using the secondary data collection technique is ingrained in its simplicity and ability to avail a vast array of information within a short time.
The main types of secondary research data to be included in the final paper will be government reports, industry analysis documents, journals, books, and credible websites. Emphasis will be made to analyze documents published within the past five years to uphold their relevance to current market and industry dynamics affecting the post-“Brexit” relationship between the UK and China. These documents will be obtained online and searched from reputable databases, such as Sage Publication, Emerald Insight, and Google Scholar. Keywords and phrases that will be used in the research process include “developmental research,” “Brexit,” “United Kingdom,” and “China.”
Data Analysis Techniques
Content analysis will be used to analyze the pieces of information obtained from the above-mentioned data collection process. The process will be undertaken as per the guidelines of Blaikie and Priest (2018), Maxwell (2006), Boote and Beile (2005), which emphasize the need to organize data obtained according to key thematic areas that are relevant in answering research questions. Therefore, the pieces of information obtained will be distilled into key themes that will be used to explore interlinked areas of study. The information generated will thereafter be used to develop core ideas of the paper.
Limitations of Study
The generalizability of the study is a key limitation of the proposed research. In other words, data obtained from the secondary research process are only relevant to tariff barriers affecting trade relations between the UK and China and not non-tariff barriers. Furthermore, the insights that will emerge from the study will only be relevant to the two countries, while the adoption of developmental research techniques used to predict the future trajectory of tariff barriers in a post-“Brexit” world (Robson and McCartan, 2016). The second limitation of the study is the indicative nature of its findings. Stated differently, the information obtained from the investigation will only be used to highlight specific areas of development research that are useful in assessing tariff changes in a post-“Brexit” UK world – devoid of specific details regarding the adoption of the technique.
Timetable
The proposed research is expected to have six chapters, which will be completed in nine weeks. In the first week, ethical approval will be sought from relevant authorities, and chapters one and two completed within the same period. Data collection activities will proceed on the third week and its findings used to form the basis for the completion of chapter three of the research – methodology. Chapters five and six will be completed in subsequent weeks based on the outcomes associated with the synthesis of data. These phases of the research process are outlined in the Gantt chart seen in table 1 below.
Table 1. Gantt Chart (Source: Developed by Author)
Reference List
Alkire, A. and Kanagaratnam, U. (2020) Revisions of the global multidimensional poverty index: indicator options and their empirical assessment. Oxford: Oxford Development Studies.
Baru, S. (1998) ‘Mahbub ul Haq: an appreciation’, Economic and Politics Weekly, 33(35), pp. 2275-2279.
Blaikie, N. and Priest, J. (2018) Designing social research: the logic of anticipation. London: Polity.
Boote, C. and Beile, F. (2005) ‘Scholars before researchers: on the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation’, Educational Researcher, 34(6), pp. 3-15.
Borgatti, S. et al. (2009) ‘Network analysis in the social sciences’, Science, 323(5916), pp. 892-895.
Cross, R., Borgatti, S. and Parker, A. (2002) ‘Making invisible work visible: using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration’, California Management Review, 44(2), pp. 25-46.
Elisabete, V. et al. (2021) Comparative research on earnings management, corporate governance, and economic value. London: IGI Global.
Fairbrother, M. (2014) ‘Economists, capitalists, and the making of globalization: North American free trade in comparative-historical perspective’, American Journal of Sociology, 119(5), pp. 1324-1379.
Gerring, J. (2006) Case study research: principles and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Joshi, D. and O’Dell, R. (2013) ‘Global governance and development ideology: the United Nations and the World Bank on the left-right spectrum’, Global Governance, 19(2), pp. 249-275.
Lazer, D. et al. (2009) ‘Computational Social Science’, Science, 323(5915), pp.721-723.
Locke, L. F., Spiduso, W. W. and Silverman, S. J. (2007) Proposals that work: a guide to planning dissertations and grant proposals. 6th edn. Beverley Hills: Sage Publications.
Mauritz, T. (2017) Applied neuroleadership models in project and change management: a toolbox for project managers. London: GRIN Verlag.
Maxwell. G. (2006) ‘Literature reviews of, and for, educational research: a commentary on Boote and Beile’s scholars before researchers’, Educational Researcher, 35(9), pp. 28-31.
Nash, K. (2008) ‘Global citizenship as show business: the cultural politics of make poverty history’, Media, Culture and Society, 30(2), pp. 167-181.
Queupil, J. P. and Muñoz-García, A. (2018) ‘The role of women scholars in the Chilean collaborative educational research: a social network analysis’, Higher Education, 4(1), pp. 1-17.
Robson, C. and McCartan, K. (2016) Real world research. 4th edn. London: Wiley.
Russell, M. A. (2014) Mining the social web: data mining Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, Google+, GitHub, and more. 2nd edn. Sebastapol, California: O’Reilly.
Schutt, R. and O’Neil, C. (2013) Doing data science: straight talk from the frontline. Sebastapol: O’Reilly.
Sen, A. (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skovdal, M. and Cornish, F. (2015) Qualitative research for development. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.
Slawson, N. (2017) David Cameron to lead £750m UK-China investment initiative. Web.
Smith, K. M. et al. (2014) ‘Using developmental research to design innovative knowledge translation technology for spinal cord injury in primary care: actionable nuggets on SkillScribe’, The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine, 37(5), pp. 582-588.