Losing someone you love is devastating, but alongside the grief, bereaved families face a daunting list of practical tasks - from paying funeral bills and dealing with banks to completing paperwork, contacting organisations and navigating unfamiliar systems.

With the average funeral costing around £4,000, the financial pressure can add to an already difficult time. And money is only part of the burden: dealing with a death can also demand huge amounts of time, energy and emotional strength.

Now, researchers at Ģ����Ƶ are inviting people to shine a light on these often-overlooked challenges at a free event exploring what happens after someone dies.

The Hidden Costs of Dying��takes place at HOME on��Tuesday 3 November, as part of the ESRC Festival of Social Science. Led by sociologists Sophie Atherton and Kate Reed, the free event will explore the hidden work of bereavement and why some people face greater challenges than others.

The researchers describe this work as “death administration” - the many practical and administrative tasks that follow a death, often falling to family members and loved ones at a time when they are grieving.

While the cost of a funeral is relatively easy to see, the wider impact can be harder to measure. The time spent sorting out paperwork, the stress of managing financial affairs and the effort required to navigate unfamiliar processes can all take their toll.

At the Manchester event, participants will take part in a creative activity designed to explore these different costs and open up conversations about experiences that are rarely discussed. There is no expectation for anyone to share personal experiences of bereavement.

A representative from the National Bereavement Service will also be available to provide information and signpost people towards further support.

The researchers hope the event will help make the realities of dealing with a death more visible, highlight inequalities in the experiences of bereaved people, and contribute to thinking about how support could be made fairer and more accessible.

��

��

Funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), the Hub will support postgraduate researchers (PGRs) who have received AHRC Doctoral Landscape Awards (DLAs) as part of a new approach to doctoral funding and training across the UK.��

Launched with the 2026/7 academic year, the Hub will support 46 postgraduate researchers across 10 Higher Education institutions, connecting researchers at Manchester with peers and expertise from across the region.��

Alongside Ģ����Ƶ, the Hub brings together Manchester Metropolitan University, the University of Liverpool, Lancaster University, the University of Sheffield, Sheffield Hallam University, Durham University, Newcastle University, the University of Leeds and the University of York.��

The Northern Hub is one of seven regional hubs being supported by AHRC. The hubs are designed to provide cohort-based training and development, enable collaboration and networking between institutions, and connect doctoral researchers with non-academic partners.����

The Hub's work got underway with its official launch on Thursday 15 October, bringing postgraduate researchers together at the University of Manchester for a day of learning, creativity and connection. The programme combined cohort training with a PhDoodle arts and crafts workshop and an EDI Fellows Showcase.��

The Hub will complement the support already available within individual universities by giving researchers access to a wider programme of activities spanning institutions and disciplines.��

Opportunities will include specialist skills workshops, conferences, writing residencies, knowledge exchange retreats and student network events. Training will also explore key themes and AHRC priorities, including equality, diversity and inclusion, artificial intelligence and climate change, alongside career development covering academic and non-academic pathways and publishing.��

While its core programme is centred on PGRs funded through the Doctoral Landscape Awards, many opportunities will also be opened to legacy AHRC DTPs, including the North West Consortium Doctoral Training Partnership (NWCDTP), Northern Bridge Consortium Doctoral Training Partnership (NBCDTP), and White Rose College of the Arts and Humanities (WRoCAH), as well asself-funded postgraduate researchers in the Arts and Humanities across the ten partner institutions.��

The Hub forms part of AHRC’s evolving approach to doctoral training. From 2026, AHRC will use a funding formula for its Doctoral Landscape Awards, covering 50 UK Higher Education institutions and 15 studentships at each institution, three per year over five years. ��

To find out more, please visit the or contact the team.��

The featured projects address issues that affect us all:

Dr Nimesh Dhungana: Putting communities at the heart of disaster recovery

Working alongside communities affected by earthquakes, floods and COVID-19 in Nepal, Dr Nimesh Dhungana co-developed a just recovery framework for more inclusive disaster recovery. The research has helped amplify community voices in policy discussions and informed advocacy and accountability initiatives across multiple countries.

Dr Wren Radford: Bringing creative reflection to everyday inequalities

Working with Poverty Truth, Dr Wren Radford used creative methods including poetry, reflection and workshops to explore lived experiences of everyday inequality. The project placed community voices at the centre of the research. Creating new insights into social change through the co-produced journal Filled to the Brim.

Dr Sophie Everest and Dr Andy Hardman: Understanding participation through filmmaking

Researchers worked with volunteers involved in a community gardening project at Platt Hall in Fallowfield to explore how people experience and participate in cultural spaces. Through co-produced films, the project used filmmaking as both a research method and evaluation tool, capturing how cultural participation shapes people's relationships with place and belonging.

While each project focuses on different challenges, disciplines and locations, they share a common principle that knowledge cannot be created in isolation. Humanities researchers work with communities as co-partners in the research process, creating opportunities for people to shape the questions being explored and contribute to the knowledge being produced.

This collaborative approach requires researchers to adapt and respond to the experiences, priorities and perspectives of the communities they work with. By doing so, research becomes more grounded in lived experience and better placed to drive meaningful change.

At its heart, the campaign explores how research creates impact in society. Through a focus on people and lived experience, humanities research helps ensure that knowledge serves a public purpose. Informing policy, shaping practice and strengthening communities.

Over the coming weeks, Ideas at Work will showcase stories from across the faculty that demonstrate the difference humanities research is making locally, nationally and internationally. Follow the campaign to discover how researchers and communities are working together to address some of the most pressing challenges facing society today.

, one of Europe’s most influential scholars of comparative politics and political theory, visited the University of Manchester to deliver his British Academy Lecture, titled ‘The Institutional Patrimony of the West.’

In his thought-provoking talk, Professor Bartolini drew on more than 1,500 years of history to ask the question: why have democratic institutions and systems of power-sharing emerged and endured in some societies, while proving more difficult to establish in others?

The lecture explored the long historical development of the institutions that underpin democracy in Western Europe where, rather than viewing democracy as a deliberate invention or the inevitable result of economic development, he argued that it emerged gradually through centuries of political competition, negotiation and compromise between different centres of power.

The British Academy

The event was part of the prestigious lecture programme, first established in 1908 and delivered by the most outstanding academics in the UK and beyond. The lectures showcase leading scholarship in the humanities and social sciences, creating opportunities for public engagement with some of the most important questions facing society. Ģ����Ƶ is proud to be a partner in this shared mission, helping to bring research in conversation with wider audiences.

A fresh perspective

Offering a fresh perspective on the historical foundations of democracy, the talk raised topical and important questions about the future of political institutions in an increasingly complex and contested world.

Following the talk, Professor Bartolini was joined in conversation by Manchester colleagues: , Professor of Political Science and a Vice-Dean in the Faculty of Humanities, and , Professor of Comparative and Ukrainian Politics.

Their expertise in European politics, democratic engagement, political behaviour and identity provided a fascinating discussion, covering pressing topics such as the role in trust in sustaining institutional legitimacy, contemporary political challenges, and questions of pluralism and citizenship.

Watch the full recording .

The first cohort was recognised at a special celebration event on 24 September 2026, where participants received certificates marking the completion of the year-long programme. The event will also welcome the programme's second cohort as Teach Economics enters an ambitious new phase of growth.

Created in response to a shortage of specialist economics teachers and uneven access to economics education across the country, the programme supports qualified teachers to develop the knowledge, skills and confidence needed to teach A Level economics alongside their existing subject specialism. The training is provided at no cost to participating teachers or their schools.

Following a successful first year in North-West England, the programme is expanding significantly during the 2026/27 academic year. Teachers from selected regions across England and Wales will be able to take part, extending the programme's reach to more schools and colleges. A UK-wide expansion is planned for the 2027/28 academic year, creating even further opportunities for teachers and students to benefit from the initiative.

The programme was launched following research commissioned by the Bank of England and undertaken by FFT Education Datalab, which highlighted significant disparities in who studies economics. The research found striking differences in participation by region, socio-economic background, school type and gender, despite economics becoming increasingly popular in recent years.

Research findings showed that students in some regions are substantially less likely to study economics than those in London, while disadvantaged pupils continue to be underrepresented in the subject. Around 70% of economics students are male, highlighting ongoing challenges in widening participation.

The celebration event brought together teachers, University colleagues, Bank of England representatives and education partners to recognise the achievements of the inaugural cohort and explore the opportunities ahead as the programme continues to expand. The programme's second cohort will begin their studies during the 2026/27 academic year.��

A team of experts at the University of Manchester will combine expertise to transform how we understand British democracy.

The team will be involved in the British Election Survey (BES) - the longest-running and most authoritative survey of electoral behaviour in the UK, tracking the attitudes and behaviour of British voters at every general election since 1964.

A new study, themed ‘Representing Voters’, places the representation of different groups of voters at the heart of its design, analysis and dissemination. It will introduce new methods, new data and new ways of making the British Election Survey accessible to researchers, policymakers, journalists and the public.

The Manchester experts, , , and are based in the departments of and , and they form part of a research team bringing together investigators from University of Manchester, Royal Holloway and King’s College London. The full team combines expertise in electoral behaviour, survey methodology, AI, social media, candidate politics and public engagement.

For further information visit:

Running from 17 October to 7 November, the Festival features a programme of free public events addressing some of the most pressing questions facing society today. Led by researchers from a range of disciplines and perspectives, the events take ideas and expertise beyond the University and into communities, exploring the impact of the cost of living crisis through activities designed for audiences of all ages and backgrounds.

This year’s focus on money, finance and the cost of living examines how financial pressures affect individuals, families and communities, while highlighting how social science can help us understand these challenges and their wider effects.

The Festival’s impact is clear. Last year, 93% of participants said they learned something new, while 58% said the events changed their opinion about something.

Putting money and the cost of living under the spotlight

Through discussions and workshops, participants will learn how financial decisions affect our everyday lives and challenge common assumptions about money.

This year’s theme was praised for its poignancy by :

The activities will explore topics such as how children understand money and fairness, whether generosity can survive rising costs of living, the hidden costs of bereavement, the impact of the cost of living crisis on reading and education, and learning how research is helping communities navigate economic uncertainty.

These events offer a chance to engage with big issues in accessible, thought-provoking ways, showing exactly how the social sciences can help us make sense of the world around us.

This year's programme

This year's events are inclusive for everyone. Whether you’re a family looking for child-friendly activities over half-term, a professional looking for development opportunities, or simply interested in learning more about the topics, there’s something for you!

Below is an overview of some of the events taking place so far:

• , 17 October 2026, 10.00 to 15.00

Discover the hidden mathematics behind every day cultural practices, interests, and communities, and learn how numbers influence our daily lives in ways we often don't notice.

• 28 October 2026, 10.00 to 15.30

Can people still afford to be generous when money is tight? This interactive event explores giving, fairness and community in an age of economic uncertainty.

• , 28 October 2026, 10.00 to 15.30

Through poetry and creative expression, explore how financial pressures are shaping educational experiences and share your perspective in an evolving exhibition.

• , 28 October 2026, 10.00 to 15.00

A series of activities demonstrating how different generations think about money, where financial confidence comes from, and why attitudes towards spending and saving can vary so widely.

• , 29 October 2026, 18.30 to 19.30

Challenge common assumptions about money and gain practical insights into the financial decisions we make every day.

• , 3 November to 5 November 2026, 10.00 to 17.00

Discover how art can communicate experiences of imprisonment, provide powerful personal testimony and encourage new conversations about justice and rehabilitation.

• , 3 November 2026, 14.00 to 17.00

A thought-provoking discussion examining the relationship between money, social connection and community experiences within contemporary gay male cultures.

• , 3 November 2026, 10.00 to 12.00

Bereavement can bring significant emotional and financial challenges. This event explores the often-overlooked costs associated with death and the impact they have on families.

• , 4 November 2026, 10.00 to 13.30

When access to reading is already unequal, ensuring the books available are representative is more important than ever. Join this workshop and learn how to create inclusive reading environments.

• , 6 November 2026, 13.00 to 16.00

Discover how data can reveal hidden patterns in everyday life and how researchers use information to better understand communities and social change.

Browse the full Festival programme and book your place at events:

The Fellowship recognises Professor Agénor's outstanding contributions to the fields of international macroeconomics and development economics, as well as the impact of his work with international organisations including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

Reflecting on the award

A prestigious recognition

Professor Agénor is internationally recognised for his research on macroeconomic policy, economic development, financial systems and growth, and has advised governments and international institutions throughout his distinguished career.

Earlier this year, Professor Agénor delivered 's annual Arthur Lewis Lecture, where he explored the relationship between gender equality, economic growth and public policy. The lecture highlighted how investments in education, infrastructure and social policy can help address gender disparities while supporting sustainable economic development.

Read about Professor Agénor’s recent lecture: Pierre-Richard Agénor delivers joint Arthur Lewis and Vital Topics lecture on gender equality and economic growth.

The School of Social Sciences congratulates Professor Agénor on this prestigious recognition and celebrates his continued contributions to economic research and policy.

A national survey of Ukrainian residents has provided one of the clearest estimates to date of the psychological impact of the ongoing war.

Published today in the , the peer-reviewed study analysed data from a nationally representative survey of civilians living in government-controlled regions of Ukraine.

It provides new estimates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD), finding that 31.2% of respondents met the criteria for one of these mental health conditions.

People living in conflict zones face a heightened risk of traumatic experiences such as physical violence, forced displacement and the loss of loved ones. PTSD can develop after experiencing or witnessing trauma, causing persistent symptoms including intrusive memories, anxiety, irritability and sleep problems. CPTSD is a related but more severe condition that typically follows prolonged or repeated trauma, such as chronic abuse or captivity.

The findings indicate that PTSD and CPTSD are common among Ukrainian civilians living through an active and ongoing war.

'This study is the result of two teams bridging disciplinary boundaries and adapting their research approaches in a wartime context,' said Professor Olga Onuch from Ģ����Ƶ. 'With two of us being Ukrainian, it was not only urgent but personal. Studying trauma experiences and PTSD and CPTSD in a nationally representative sample allows us to give back to our professional and personal communities and facilitate better policy and response mechanisms. We do this work out of a shared sense of the social responsibility of science to society.

“Understanding PTSD and CPTSD - and war exposures more broadly - in a nationally representative sample during an ongoing war is vital for political, economic and societal life in Ukraine. Knowing these patterns can help communities, governments and international actors prepare immediate support and plan for longer-term needs.

Co-author Professor Volodymyr Kulyk, from the Department of Social Sciences at Kyiv School of Economics, adds: “It is important to keep in mind that PTSD and CPTSD are not limited to veterans or people close to combat zone but also are widespread among other categories of people heavily affected by the war, such as Internally Displaced Persons, people who suffered from missiles and drones attacking their cities and towns far from frontline, and those taking care of wounded or traumatized people.”

Involved in the study was – what the authors themselves describe as – “an unusual collaboration” of mental health researchers and social scientists. All had a specific interest in the impact of psychological trauma in Ukraine, on both mental health and sociopolitical outcomes.

The study grew out of research at Ģ����Ƶ examining identity, democracy and social resilience in wartime Ukraine. This work, led by Professor Onuch as part of the Identity and Borders in Flux (IBIF) project, highlighted the need for a stronger understanding of trauma and war experiences. It led to a wider international, interdisciplinary collaboration involving researchers from Manchester, King’s College London, Kyiv School of Economics, The George Washington University, the Centre for East European and International Studies (ZOiS) and Combat Stress. The research was then developed through the Conflict and Cooperation in Eastern Europe (KonKoop) network.��

Assembling a truly interdisciplinary team enabled rare access – in the current circumstances – to a robust, national representative sample, which (via a telephone survey) assessed lifetime exposure to traumatic events, war-related traumas, and symptoms of trauma-related mental health conditions.

From the total sample of 2,504 adults, the results showed:

• Most participants reported high levels of exposure to lifetime and war-related traumatic events, including fires or explosions, shelling, destruction caused by the war, and the injury, displacement, disappearance or death of family members or other loved ones.
• 31.2% of respondents met the criteria for PTSD (25.2%) or CPTSD (6%)

Factors associated with a greater likelihood of PTSD or CPTSD included being female, older age, lower educational attainment, previous military service, displacement due to the war, and a greater number of lifetime traumatic events and war-related stressors.

Being single was the only factor specifically associated with CPTSD rather than PTSD.

Because data were collected at a single point in time during an active conflict, the findings represent a snapshot of the population’s mental health rather than how symptoms change over time.

“One finding we found particularly interesting was that PTSD was much more common than Complex PTSD in this representative national sample,” says lead author, child and adult clinical psychologist, Dr Emma Facer-Irwin, who is a clinical lecturer at KCL. “This may suggest that psychological responses to ongoing war do not always fit neatly into models developed in post-conflict settings. When the threat remains active and unpredictable, the ways people experience and adapt to traumatic stress may be different, and this is an important area for future research.'

Professor Kulyk adds: “As pressure on Ukraine’s health system grows and uncertainty around future humanitarian support increases, understanding the prevalence of PTSD and complex PTSD is essential for planning both immediate and long-term mental health services. Further research will be essential to understand how the psychological impact of the war develops among the general population evolve as the conflict continues.”

As a limitation of their research, the authors note that the study relied on self-reported symptoms – which may be influenced by how participants interpreted the survey questions.

The next area of research they are looking to tackle is to improve understanding of the potential effects of trauma on political attitudes.

Publication details

This research was published in:
European Journal of Psychotraumatology

Title:
Prevalence of exposure to lifetime and war-related traumas, PTSD and complex PTSD in a sample from the Ukrainian general population

URL:��


DOI:
��

Dr David Buil-Gil, Senior Lecturer in Quantitative Criminology in the Department of Criminology, was recognised for his article, The Structure of Unstructured Time and Crime: A Spare Time Model, published in The British Journal of Criminology in 2025.

The award will be presented at the ESC Conference in Warsaw, Poland, in September 2026.

Research on spare time and crime

The award-winning article examines the relationship between unstructured spare time and crime and considers the implications for crime prevention.

In its citation, the judging panel highlighted the article's combination of theoretical development and statistical analysis, noting that the research offers a new perspective on how spare time may influence criminal behaviour and crime trends.

The panel also pointed to the study's relevance for policies and interventions that encourage structured activities and positive social engagement among groups at higher risk of offending.

Award for innovative criminology research

The judging committee said: "Dr Buil-Gil's article offers an original contribution to criminological research and demonstrates a high standard of scholarship.

"The committee was impressed by both the conceptual development of the work and its careful empirical analysis. It makes an important contribution to current debates about crime prevention and criminological theory."

Ģ����Ƶ the award

The ESC Young Criminologist Award recognises an outstanding article by a European criminologist who was 35 years old or younger when the article was published. The nominee must be the sole author of an article on a criminological topic published in a peer-reviewed journal in a European language within the three calendar years preceding the year of the proposed award.

The jury consists of two current or past at-large members of the Executive Board of the ESC and the Past-President. Each year, one member of the jury will be replaced by a new member. The ESC Executive Board is responsible for constituting the jury.

The article was nominated by Thiago R. Oliveira (Ģ����Ƶ), Iain Brennan (University of Hull) and Fernando Miró-Llinares (Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche).

Ģ����Ƶ Dr David Buil-Gil

Dr David Buil-Gil is Senior Lecturer in Quantitative Criminology and Research Director in the Department of Criminology at Ģ����Ƶ. His research focuses on crime measurement, quantitative methods, cybercrime, crime prevention and comparative criminology. He works with policymakers, statistical agencies and criminal justice organisations in the UK and internationally to improve understanding of crime and its causes.

Further information about David's research is available on his University research profile:

Publication details:

DOI:

Professor Konstantinos Stathopoulos is a leading corporate governance scholar whose research examines how companies are governed and how corporate decision-making affects different stakeholders. His work has a particular focus on executive compensation and the ways in which poor governance practices can affect stakeholder wealth. More recently, his research has examined the interests and influence of stakeholders, including employees, in corporate decision-making and governance.��

He is Vice President of the International Corporate Governance Society, Chair of the Corporate Governance Special Interest Group of the British Accounting and Finance Association and an Otto Mønsted Visiting Professor at Copenhagen Business School. He was Editor-in-Chief of Corporate Governance: An International Review from 2019 to 2024.

Professor Andreja Zevnik is an interdisciplinary scholar whose research explores political resistance, protest, race, identity and marginalisation.

Her work draws on psychoanalysis, continental philosophy, and postcolonial theory to examine how political identities and forms of resistance are produced. Her recent research has focused particularly on the racialisation and political mobilisation of Roma communities in Europe, Black Lives Matter and other forms of anti-racist political mobilisation. Her research with colleagues has also helped to raise awareness of antigypsyism and strengthen political representation and advocacy among Roma communities in Slovenia.

“Our newest Fellows represent some of the most influential voices in social science today,” said Will Hutton, President of the Academy of Social Sciences. “Their work is expanding knowledge, challenging assumptions and generating insights that are informing and even redefining decision making across government, business, education and civil society.”

“I am delighted to welcome these leading experts to the Academy, and look forward to working with them to raise the profile and impact of the social sciences across the UK and beyond.”

Key findings and recommendations

• China’s state support for green industries is effectively subsidising the global transition to a low-carbon economy.

• China has become dominant in the so-called ‘new three’ green technologies - batteries, electric vehicles and solar power.

• Attempts by countries such as the US and EU states to compete with China could slow the adoption of green technologies and increase the cost of decarbonisation.

• Governments increasingly face four broad choices - compete with China, cooperate with it, accept Chinese dominance, or abandon parts of the green transition.

• The UK should strengthen cooperation with China on green technologies rather than trying to compete directly.

• The UK should continue to avoid tariffs on Chinese green technologies and seek Chinese investment in UK manufacturing.

A global climate dilemma

The report says China now occupies a leading position across many of the technologies needed for the green transition including solar, wind, batteries, hydrogen and electric vehicles. Its dominance has helped drive down the cost of these technologies, but this has also created growing geopolitical and economic tensions.

“China’s dominance of green technology presents a fundamental dilemma for governments,” lead author Dr James Jackson of Ģ����Ƶ’s Sustainable Consumption Institute. “The world needs these technologies to decarbonise, but efforts to compete with China risk making the transition more expensive and more difficult.”

The authors argue that countries should focus more heavily on cooperation - particularly where access to affordable green technologies is essential to meeting climate targets.

Opportunities for the UK

The report identifies green technology as an opportunity to improve UK-China relations following a period of strained diplomatic ties. It recommends that the UK should seek closer trading relationships with China, while maintaining the ability to challenge Beijing on other issues such as human rights.

Among its recommendations, the report says the UK should encourage Chinese EV manufacturers to establish production facilities in Britain, while using the country’s expertise in financial services to support investment in green technologies. It also recommends that the Bank of England consider measures used by China’s central bank to support the development of green industries.

Publication details

is published by Ģ����Ƶ. Dr Jackson is the lead author, alongside Mathias Larsen of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics.

Publication details

The study was published in the Journal of Sex Research.

DOI: .

• Multiple agencies share responsibility for tackling economic crime, in some cases creating uncertainty over leadership and accountability

• Competing priorities and budget pressures can limit organisations' ability to devote resources to economic crime investigations

• The broad and evolving nature of "economic crime" makes it difficult to define priorities and measure success

• Outdated technology and poor data-sharing arrangements continue to hamper investigations and intelligence gathering

• The UK's response relies heavily on cooperation between organisations with different responsibilities, cultures and objectives

Economic crime has become one of the UK's biggest crime threats

The researchers say economic crime encompasses a vast range of offences, from online fraud and investment scams to money laundering, bribery and sanctions evasion.

However, a key issue identified by the study was ambiguity surrounding the term ‘economic crime’ - which lacks clear boundaries and scope - and how different threats should be prioritised.

The research found that political priorities and major world events can rapidly reshape which forms of economic crime receive attention and resources. As a result, agencies can find themselves responding to an ever-expanding range of threats, stretching already limited resources.

The authors argue that while the broad label of economic crime helps attract political attention and funding, it can also obscure important differences between offences that require very different responses.

Outdated systems slowing investigations

Participants in the study also highlighted concerns about the technological tools available to investigators. Some reported that basic collaboration and data-analysis capabilities lag behind those available in the private sector, with information-gathering processes that should take days sometimes taking months.

The researchers found that these limitations can make it more difficult to identify emerging threats, share intelligence and coordinate action across agencies.

What is needed

The researchers say the enabling conditions needed to tackle the problem are:

• A shared definition of economic crime, clear enough to guide prioritisation yet flexible enough to serve both political and operational purposes

• Data-sharing arrangements and intelligence infrastructure that allow partners to act and build understanding simultaneously

• Clear incentives and dedicated resourcing that allow partners to commit meaningfully beyond their core organisational mandates

• Clear delineation of roles and responsibilities across agencies, with recognised leadership

• Formalised but flexible accountability arrangements that create soft mechanisms for ensuring participation without undermining partner autonomy

Why this matters

Fraud is now one of the most common crimes affecting people in the UK, while money laundering enables a wide range of serious criminal activity, from organised crime to corruption.

The findings also have wider relevance for governments around the world that are increasingly relying on multi-agency partnerships to tackle complex forms of crime that cross organisational and national boundaries.

What the researchers say

"The National Economic Crime Centre was created to bring together the many organisations involved in tackling economic crime, recognising the need for a collective response” said Professor Nicholas Lord. “However, coordinating agencies with different responsibilities, priorities and resources is not straightforward, and certainly needs more than goodwill.”

"What emerges from this study is a picture of a system that depends heavily on cooperation between organisations,” added Professor Elisa Bellotti. “The challenge is not simply understanding economic crime itself, but creating the conditions that allow different institutions to work together effectively in responding to it.”

Publication details

The study was published in the Journal of Economic Criminology.

DOI:

She added: "While I welcome the child-focused courts that the government has introduced, the family justice system has an opportunity to move from seeing children as passive recipients of adult decisions to recognising them as active participants. If children's voices are consistently heard, respected and acted upon, family courts will be better protect their safety, wellbeing and long-term health."

Recommendations

The researchers are calling for major reforms to private family law proceedings, including:

• Ensuring children's voices are routinely and meaningfully heard throughout family court proceedings.

• Embedding the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child more fully into domestic law.

• Reforming family court practice so children's views genuinely influence decisions affecting them.

• Providing specialist training for judges, legal professionals and safeguarding practitioners on children's rights, trauma, coercive control and child sexual abuse.

• Introducing stronger safeguards against technology-facilitated abuse, including the misuse of children's medical information.

• Expanding access to child-centred, trauma-informed interventions such as play therapy and specialist counselling.

The authors conclude that meaningful reform will require not only legislative change but also a cultural shift across the family justice system towards recognising children as equal rights holders whose lived experiences should guide judicial decision-making.

Publication details

The paper was published in the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law.

This study was supported by a grant from the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Participatory Research Fund to Dr Elizabeth Dalgarno, Principal Investigator. The findings remain the responsibility of the research team.

DOI:

• Weekly sales increased by more than 76,000 copies following the release of the first Netflix season.

• Strong sales growth occurred across both English-speaking and non-English-speaking countries.

• In Brazil and Mexico, around 99% of sales came from translated local-language editions.

• UK buyers most commonly discovered Heartstopper through its television adaptation.

• Nearly two-thirds of UK buyers were aged between 13 and 24.

• Around a quarter of purchases were gifts or purchases made for other people.

"The Netflix series did not simply amplify an existing audience,” said Dr Francesco Rampazzo, Lecturer in Social Statistics and Demography at Ģ����Ƶ. “It brought in new readers and changed how the books travelled, from a specialist graphic-novel readership into mainstream young-adult, retail and family purchase contexts.”

A global success built through local book markets

The study found that the Heartstopper effect extended well beyond English-speaking audiences. Countries including Poland, Spain, Brazil and Mexico all experienced substantial increases in book sales following the Netflix release.

Researchers say this demonstrates the importance of local publishing, translation and retail networks in turning global streaming successes into sustained book-market demand.

"What is striking is that the same story travels across very different countries, but it does so through local infrastructures,” said Kristopher Velasco, Assistant Professor of Sociology at Princeton University. “Translation, retail channels and media visibility all matter for whether a screen adaptation turns into sustained book demand.”

More than a bestseller

The researchers also examined thousands of reader and viewer reviews to understand how audiences engaged with Heartstopper across different media.

They found that viewers discussing the Netflix series were far more likely to emphasise themes of LGBTQ+ visibility and personal recognition, while book readers more often discussed recommending, gifting and sharing the series with others.

According to the researchers, this suggests that adaptations can change not only who consumes a story, but how it is understood and discussed.

"The same story means different things in different media settings,” said Dr Rampazzo. “On screen, Heartstopper was often discussed as a moment of visibility and recognition. In book reviews and buyer data, it also appears as something to buy, recommend, gift and pass on.”

Shared across generations

The study found evidence that Heartstopper's success extended beyond its core young-adult readership.

Reader reviews frequently described parents, grandparents and other relatives buying the books for younger family members. UK consumer data also showed that gifting accounted for a significant share of purchases.

The researchers argue that this wider circulation helped establish Heartstopper as a mainstream cultural phenomenon rather than a niche publishing success.

Final chapter approaches

The findings are published shortly before two major milestones for the franchise: the release of the final Heartstopper book on 2 July, and the Netflix film adaptation on 17 July.

Researchers say the ending of the series offers a rare opportunity to examine whether audiences built through streaming platforms continue to drive demand for books.

Publication details

Turning Pages into Screens: Media Adaptation and the Reclassification of Cultural Objects can be viewed .

The survey will explore issues including:

• Experiences of travelling as a driver, passenger, pedestrian, cyclist or public transport user

• Feelings of safety and confidence while travelling

• Worries about road safety and personal security

• Barriers that influence travel choices

• Ideas for improving safety and accessibility

• Evidence to support future changes

The survey is the first part of a wider research project being delivered by Ģ����Ƶ on behalf of the Safer Roads Greater Manchester Partnership Board.

Alongside the survey, participants will have the opportunity to take part in follow-up focus groups to provide more detailed insights into their experiences.

The findings will be presented to the Greater Manchester Safer Roads Partnership Board later this year.

The researchers hope the project will help ensure women's perspectives are better reflected in future road safety policies, interventions and transport planning.

By capturing the insights of women from a wide range of backgrounds, ages and travel habits, the study aims to create a stronger evidence base to support safer, more inclusive streets across Greater Manchester.

“It is vital that everyone feels safe travelling on foot, by bike or in a vehicle, and we need to understand specifically how women experience Greater Manchester's roads so we can continue to address barriers they may face,” said Dame Sarah Storey, Active Travel Commissioner for Greater Manchester. 

"Women use roads and transport networks every day, but their experiences are not always fully reflected in the evidence that informs road safety policy and planning,” said Dr Miles. “We know that concerns about safety can influence how, when and whether people travel, yet there has been relatively little research exploring these issues from women's perspectives.

“By listening to their experiences, we can build a clearer understanding of the challenges women face and identify where improvements could make the greatest difference.

"Road safety is about more than preventing collisions - it's also about ensuring people feel confident and secure when moving around their communities,” said Professor Broad. “The insights gathered through this research will help us understand what helps women feel safe, what creates barriers or concerns, and what practical changes could improve their experiences. 

“We want the findings to support evidence-based action that makes Greater Manchester's roads and transport systems safer and more inclusive for everyone.”

Women interested in taking part can complete the survey by .

• Just 4% of patients in the dataset were offered social prescribing between 2019 and 2024

• Patients living in the least deprived areas were significantly more likely to be offered social prescribing than those in the most deprived communities

• Women were substantially more likely than men to be offered social prescribing

• Older patients and people with multiple long-term conditions were more likely to receive offers

• More than three quarters (77.7%) of those offered social prescribing received a referral

• Ethnic minority patients were generally as likely - or more likely - to accept referrals

What else did the study find?

The researchers analysed anonymised NHS primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), one of the largest healthcare datasets in England.

The study explored which groups of patients were offered social prescribing and which went on to receive referrals after offers were made.

Social prescribing schemes aim to support people whose health may be affected by wider social issues such as loneliness, poor housing, financial stress or isolation by linking them with non-medical community services through dedicated NHS link workers.

Clear inequalities

Patients in more affluent areas consistently had higher odds of being offered social prescribing than those in deprived areas, despite evidence that poorer communities often experience worse health outcomes and greater levels of long-term illness.

Women were also more likely to be offered referrals than men across almost every age group examined.

The study found strong links between long-term illness and social prescribing access, with patients suffering multiple health conditions far more likely to receive offers and referrals.

Why it matters

Researchers say the findings are significant because social prescribing has become a major part of NHS plans to reduce pressure on healthcare services and improve public health.

Since 2019, thousands of social prescribing link workers have been recruited across England through the NHS Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme.

The researchers warn that unequal access to these services could risk widening existing health inequalities if patients in deprived communities are less likely to benefit. However, the study also found encouraging signs once offers had been made.

Patients from ethnic minority backgrounds were often more likely than white patients to accept referrals, while deprivation itself did not appear to reduce uptake after an offer was made.

Researchers say this suggests the key inequality may lie in access to offers rather than willingness to engage.

Men and older patients less likely to engage

The study also found important differences between being offered social prescribing and accepting referrals.

While older patients were more likely to be offered support, they were less likely to go on to receive referrals once offered. Male patients were consistently less likely than women to both receive offers and proceed to referral.

Researchers say more work is needed to understand why some groups may be underrepresented or less likely to engage with social prescribing services.

What the researchers say

“It is concerning that the patients most likely to benefit from social prescribing support appear to be among the least likely to be offered it,” said Research Fellow Anna Wilding. “People living in deprived communities are more likely to experience long-term illness, financial hardship, isolation and poor mental health - the very issues social prescribing is designed to help address.”

“Our findings suggest the biggest challenge is not whether people will engage with social prescribing once offered support, but ensuring disadvantaged communities are not left behind in the first place.”

Publication details

The study was published in journal PLOS One.

DOI:

• Elite football increasingly relies on investment from fossil fuel-rich states and companies, including sponsorships and ownership models linked to Gulf nations and energy firms.
• FIFA’s partnership with Saudi oil giant Aramco is singled out by the authors, who claim football has become central to a wider strategy of sportswashing by fossil fuel interests.
• The expanded 48-team format for the 2026 Men’s World Cup will significantly increase emissions due to the greater number of matches and the vast travel distances across North America.
• The tournament will feature 104 matches across 16 host cities spanning the entire continent. The last Men’s World Cup in 2022, Qatar, saw 64 matches played across the 32-team tournament.
• FIFA’s environmental policies are scrutinised, with the research team accusing the organisation of promoting sustainability rhetoric while simultaneously expanding competitions and strengthening ties with fossil fuel sponsors.

The study highlights concerns over future tournaments, noting that Saudi Arabia is set to host the 2034 World Cup while the United States withdrew from the Paris climate agreement under President Donald Trump.

Why this matters

The researchers say the expanded 48-team format for the 2026 Men’s World Cup will significantly increase emissions due to the greater number of matches and the vast travel distances across North America.

The tournament will feature 104 matches across 16 host cities spanning the entire continent. The last Men’s World Cup in 2022, Qatar, saw 64 matches played across the 32-team tournament.

FIFA’s environmental policies are also scrutinised, with the research team accusing the organisation of promoting sustainability rhetoric while simultaneously expanding competitions and strengthening ties with fossil fuel sponsors.

The study also highlights concerns over future tournaments, noting that Saudi Arabia is set to host the 2034 World Cup while the United States withdrew from the Paris climate agreement under President Donald Trump.

What the researchers say

Lead researcher, Dr Mark Doidge, Reader in Sociology of Sport at Loughborough University, said: “Football is the world’s most popular sport, and probably the most popular activity. It is for this reason that football authorities, like FIFA, continue to exploit it for commercial profit."

“Football is also a cultural powerhouse with millions of fans, volunteers, and players trying to make the sport better. Football can, and should, use its influence to mitigate against climate change.”

Dr James Jackson, Lecturer at Ģ����Ƶ, said: “Despite the last World Cup offering a preview of what football would be like in a significantly warmer world, FIFA has remained indifferent to better regulation. Rather than being proactive and ensuring football helps mitigate against the worst impacts of climate change, they are - at best - pursuing meagre adaptation measures for things which affect fans and players."

Dr Oscar Berglund, Senior Lecturer in International Public and Social Policy at the University of Bristol, said: “FIFA has made elite men’s football the primary target of Petrostate sportswashing. This World Cup, with the ridiculous Trump Peace Prize and having Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest polluter, as its main sponsor, reaches new levels.

“It has been a key strategy of Petrostates to use football’s unrivalled cultural influence globally. They don’t need to convince us that fossil fuels are good, just that they are inevitable. So, as we watch and love our beautiful game, we come to accept the necessary evil of fossil capital.”

Club sustainability and commercial pressure

As part of the study, researchers interviewed sustainability managers working in football clubs across Europe, many of whom described tensions between environmental targets and the commercial demands of the modern game.

According to the report, sustainability initiatives are often only approved if they do not disrupt football’s core product, including the scheduling and broadcasting of matches.

Some interviewees said clubs remained more focused on increasing revenues than reducing environmental costs, despite the growing financial risks posed by flooding, heatwaves and fixture disruption.

Recommendations

The investigation proposes a series of recommendations aimed at reducing football’s environmental impact.

• FIFA should stop awarding tournaments to Petrostates.
• Restrictions should be placed on fossil fuel ownership of clubs.
• Fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship should be banned in football.
• Football authorities should halt the expansion of competitions.
• Sustainability managers should be embedded into all levels of club decision-making rather than operating in isolated compliance roles.

FIFA response

FIFA has previously defended its sustainability strategies and said major tournaments can drive investment, infrastructure and development in host nations. The organisation has also said that expanding competitions increases global participation and opportunities for smaller footballing nations.

Publication details

To read the full report, . The findings will form part of Football and Climate Change: The Unsustainability of the Beautiful Game, due to be published in 2027.

• Psychological therapy is often assessed using research models originally developed for medicines

• Unlike drugs, therapy is typically personalised, open-ended and shaped by the therapist–client relationship

• Heavy reliance on RCT evidence may narrow treatment options in public healthcare and insurance systems

• Short-term symptom measures may miss broader outcomes such as improved relationships, stability and self-understanding

• A broader evidence base is needed, including real-world outcomes and patient experience

Why this matters

RCTs are commonly used to decide which treatments receive funding, policy backing and public provision.

The editorial argues that this has had significant consequences in mental healthcare, where therapies with strong trial evidence - particularly CBT - have become dominant in many systems.

In England’s NHS Talking Therapies programme, only a small minority of high-intensity practitioners offer non-CBT approaches, according to evidence discussed in the article.

Why therapy is different from drugs

The article highlights key differences between medicines and psychological therapies.

While drugs can typically be standardised and tested under controlled conditions, therapy is more fluid. Sessions evolve in response to the individual, progress can be non-linear, and meaningful change may include outcomes that are harder to quantify.

What current evidence may miss

The editorial argues that many therapy studies are relatively short, often capturing early symptom improvement but missing longer-term change, setbacks or deeper psychological development.

It also suggests that recovery is often more complex than a single score or endpoint, and may involve ongoing change over time.

To illustrate this, the author uses a fictional case study showing how different therapy models can lead to very different long-term outcomes, even where short-term symptom improvement appears similar.

Towards a broader understanding of evidence

Rather than rejecting trials altogether, the editorial calls for a more pluralistic approach to evidence, including:

• Real-world service data from routine NHS and community settings

• Research into how therapy works, including the role of relationships and context

• Greater emphasis on patient perspectives and lived experience

What the researcher said

“We have become so used to treating Randomised Controlled Trials as the gold standard that we rarely stop to ask whether they are the right tool for every intervention,” said Dr Sahanika Ratnayake, philosopher of psychiatry at Ģ����Ƶ.

“This editorial is not based on a new experiment, but on analysing the strengths and limits of the existing evidence base. Therapy is not a pill - it is a human relationship shaped by trust, timing, context and individual need.

Why it matters now

Demand for mental health support is rising, while services face pressure over waiting times, staffing and budgets.

The article argues that policymakers need evidence systems that better reflect how therapy is actually practised, and what patients themselves value from care.

Publication details

The editorial was published in BJPsych.

DOI:

·        Small and statistically insignificant drop in hotel prices on major online platforms and hotel websites
·        Prices fell by around 5% for bookings made directly with hotels offline
·        Customers shifted away from online travel agents towards direct booking
·        Offline bookings – the largest channel at the time – increased their relative sales share
·        Total consumer savings were meaningful, but modest relative to the overall market

Why this matters

Online platforms like Booking.com and Expedia play a major role in how people find and book hotels.

For years, many of these platforms used ‘price parity clauses’ to prevent hotels from offering cheaper deals elsewhere, including on their own websites. 

Policymakers expected that banning these rules would lead to lower prices across the board. However, the study suggests the reality is more complicated, and that headline online prices may not tell the full story.

Hidden cheaper rooms

For most travellers, booking a hotel is simple - search the internet, compare prices and click - but this research suggests that the best deal may not always be the one you see.

Instead, customers willing to call, email or walk into a hotel directly were more likely to find lower prices after the policy change. In other words, the cheapest room may be the one that never appears online.

What actually changed

The study focuses on France, which in 2015 became the first country to fully ban price parity clauses in the hotel sector. Researchers analysed data from 166 hotels across Europe, comparing France with countries where the rules were still in place.

They found:

·        Online prices showed small decreases of around 1–2%, but these are not statistically distinguishable from zero
·        Offline prices dropped significantly, around 5% or €8.50 per booking
·        Bookings shifted away from online platforms towards direct offline channels

Why online prices didn’t fall

One reason may be that online platforms still have powerful ways to influence hotel behaviour. Hotels that offer lower prices elsewhere risk being pushed down search rankings, making them less visible to customers.

As a result, many hotels appear to have avoided cutting prices on visible online channels, even after the rules were removed. Instead, they offered discounts where platforms were less able to monitor - in direct, offline bookings.

What customers may be missing

The findings suggest that:

·        Not all price competition is visible online
·        Some of the best deals require extra effort to find
·        Consumers who rely only on platforms may miss cheaper options

At the same time, many users continue to use online booking tools for the convenience and additional services they offer – such as price comparison, guest reviews, and streamlined booking – even if it means paying slightly more.

A mixed success 

The policy did lead to more competition between booking channels, lower prices for some consumers and a shift away from platforms.

But overall, the impact was smaller than expected, especially on the highly visible online prices policymakers hoped to change.

Why it matters now

The findings are particularly relevant as new regulations, including the EU’s Digital Markets Act, aim to curb the power of large online platforms.

Understanding how businesses respond in practice is crucial to ensuring these policies deliver real benefits for consumers.

Publication details

The paper was carried out by economists from Ģ����Ƶ, the University of Oxford, the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and partner institutions across Europe. It was published in The Economic Journal.

DOI:

• Higher levels of education are consistently linked to longer life expectancy
• In some countries, the gap between education levels exceeds a decade of life
• Women aged 20-49 show particularly large differences in mortality by education
• New statistical methods allow researchers to estimate mortality even where data is missing
• The study provides new evidence from under-researched regions including North Africa and Western Asia

What did the study find?

The study, funded by the Austrian Academy of Sciences analysed mortality patterns across 13 countries in South-East Europe, Western Asia and North Africa between 1980 and 2015. 

Researchers reconstructed mortality rates by age, sex and education level using a new statistical model designed to work even where official data is incomplete or inconsistent.

The findings revealed a clear and consistent pattern: people with more education live significantly longer than those with little or no formal education. 

How was the research done?

The research was carried out by Professor Arkadiusz Wiśniowski from Ģ����Ƶ, alongside Dr Andrea Tamburini and Dr Dilek Yildiz from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria.

The team developed an innovative modelling framework that combines data from multiple international sources, including the United Nations, Eurostat and Demographic and Health Surveys.

This approach made it possible to estimate life expectancy differences even in countries where reliable birth and death records are limited. 

Where are the biggest differences seen?

In some countries included in the study, the difference in life expectancy between people with higher and lower levels of education was equivalent to more than ten years.

The gap was particularly striking among women aged 20 to 49, where those with secondary education or higher experienced much lower mortality rates.

Why does education affect life expectancy?

The findings highlight the wide-ranging impact of education on people’s lives.

“Access to education means better health knowledge, better jobs, and better access to healthcare - but it also changes how people make decisions about their lives,” said Professor Arkadiusz Wiśniowski. “It’s a powerful social equaliser.” 

Why has this been hard to measure before?

Until now, much of the global evidence linking education and life expectancy has come from high-income countries with strong data systems.

In many parts of the world, incomplete or inconsistent records have made it difficult to understand how education shapes health outcomes.

Why does this matter?

By filling these data gaps, the study provides one of the most comprehensive pictures to date of how education influences survival across diverse global populations.

The model could now be applied more widely to help governments and international organisations better understand population health and plan future services.

What are the implications?

The researchers say the findings strengthen the case for treating education as a key public health intervention, not just a social or economic priority.

“We hope this work helps policymakers see education not only as a path to better jobs, but as a key public health intervention,” said Professor Wiśniowski. “Investing in education is investing in life itself.” 

Publication details

This research was funded by the Austrian Academy of Sciences and is published in Demographic Research.

DOI:

Keir Starmer’s decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US keeps coming back to haunt him. It has now emerged that Mandelson was granted security clearance by the Foreign Office, despite concerns raised during the . Top Foreign Office civil servant Olly Robbins was sacked over these revelations.

Mandelson was controversial long before Starmer appointed him in 2024. A New Labour figure known as the “prince of darkness” due to his reputation as an adept but often ruthless and underhand political operator, Mandelson had already been embroiled in a number of scandals involving allegations of corruption. He was also known to have had a close relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as well as close business links in China.

Starmer fired him in September 2025 after emails were released showing Mandelson offering supportive messages to Epstein, who faced charges of soliciting a minor at the time. Further emails released by US officials suggested that Mandelson might have passed privileged and market-sensitive information to Epstein during the fallout of the financial crisis. In February 2026, the former ambassador was on suspicion of misconduct in public office. He has denied criminal wrongdoing and has not been charged.

Therefore, it is perhaps unsurprising that Mandelson did not pass the vetting process carried out by the Cabinet Office’s UK Security Vetting team. Almost all civil servants are required to go through some form of vetting. But as a top diplomat, Mandelson was subject to the most intensive form of scrutiny. From what is known about the process, red flags were probably raised about Mandelson’s links with Chinese and Russian business interests, though the exact details have not been made public.

Starmer and his allies have argued that Robbins did not tell the prime minister about concerns raised in the vetting process as he should have. , Robbins said that Number 10 took a “dismissive” approach to the vetting process. He also said that he was under “constant pressure” to approve Mandelson’s clearance due to this being a political priority for Starmer. Mandelson’s appointment was announced publicly before the vetting took place.

The opposition is piling on the pressure for Starmer to resign. But behind speculation about the prime minister’s future stands a deeper set of constitutional questions about accountability and standards in public life.

From Starmer’s perspective, the scandal has revealed a pressing need to improve the independent scrutiny of appointments. He has ordered a review into vetting procedures, and argued that failings lie with civil servants in the FCDO and with the robustness of vetting processes – not with him.

On one level, this defence is an effort to deflect blame. Yet the response also fits with Starmer’s approach to politics as a .

In arguing for a more robust independent process around vetting in their attempts to avoid blame, Starmer and his allies invoke a of Whitehall culture. This view treats independent, depoliticised scrutiny and checks and balances as key missing links in British politics. Building these would be vital for ensuring transparency and accountability around appointments and politics more broadly.

Since coming to office, Starmer has consistently argued for a rewiring of the British state to modernise the government. Like academics, thinktanks, journalists and former Whitehall insiders before him, Starmer’s view suggests that Whitehall and the centre of the British state operate in an antiquated way. When it comes to accountability and standards, the government arguably lacks proper independent scrutiny and constitutional checks and balances to hold decision-makers to account.

Instead, Whitehall is too reliant on a , which suggests politicians typically act with the best of intentions and therefore do not need to be subject to independent scrutiny.

Who is responsible?

Critics, echoing Robbins’ testimony, have argued that Starmer and his allies pressed Mandelson’s ambassadorship as a political priority, announcing it before vetting procedures had been completed in order to push through the appointment.

Many have pointed out that Mandelson’s reputation as a potentially suspect character was well known before the release of the Epstein files. Within this narrative, blame for the appointment of Mandelson lies squarely with Starmer.

In a sense, this approach offers a different view of British politics. In terms of appointments – both to top civil service positions and to more political posts – the UK’s approach has been argued to resemble . Here, the ruler decides their key advisers on the basis of their own preferences and objectives.

This too implies a lack of proper checks and balances around appointments. But one of the proposed advantages of such a system is that it places accountability and responsibility for decisions clearly in the hands of elected politicians. Britain has a longstanding tradition of individual ministerial accountability.

Starmer, however, is now seemingly weakening this tradition by deflecting blame onto the civil service and its processes. It is this notion of direct political accountability that Starmer’s opponents are invoking when they call for his resignation.

Overall, these two images of British politics are contradictory and indicative of the emergence of an . On the one hand, the state has failed to move towards modern and robust independent scrutiny of ministerial decision-making around appointments. On the other hand, politics has shifted away from a culture of clear, individual ministerial accountability.

This leaves Britain in a “worst of both worlds” scenario when it comes to accountability and standards in public life. It has neither robust independent scrutiny, nor clear lines of political accountability. More than anything, the Mandelson vetting scandal reveals the need to fix this broken system.

, Research Associate, Department of Politics, and , Research Associate,
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

The study found SEND complaints make up 27% of the complaints received by the LGSCO and 48% of the cases that it upholds. Common issues include delays in carrying out Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) assessments, and failures to deliver the support children are legally entitled to.

Despite these challenges, the research also points to the impact of the Ombudsman’s work. Its recommendations can help councils identify problems, strengthen accountability, and push for improvements that benefit families.

In some cases, the findings have empowered local officials to argue for more resources or rethink how services are delivered - however, the report also highlights limitations including the time and capacity required to respond to investigations, and repeated recommendations on issues councils recognise but lack the means to resolve.

A key gap identified is that the Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints directly against schools - even though they play a central role in delivering SEND support - which can leave families without clear routes to resolve issues.

The report sets out recommendations to strengthen the system, which include extending the Ombudsman’s powers to cover schools, raising awareness of joint investigations with health bodies, and improving communication between councils and the Ombudsman. Crucially, it emphasises that meaningful reform must address underlying pressures on the SEND system, including funding shortages and workforce gaps.

“This research comes at a key moment for SEND system reform,” said Ash Patel, Programme Head for Justice at the Nuffield Foundation. “The Government’s intention to improve complaints and mediation processes - enabling faster and more collaborative, resolution of disagreements and reducing the need for appeals to the SEND Tribunal - is welcome. However, the proposals are silent on the role of the LGSCO, and it remains frustratingly unclear how disputes will be avoided or how routes for appeals and complaints will operate.”

“The report points to high levels of tension between the education system and families of children with SEND; without greater attention to minimising these conflicts, it is difficult to see how existing pressures on complaints and appeals will ease.” 

DOI: