Qualitative and quantitative research approaches and methods are usually found to be utilized rather frequently in different disciplines of education such as sociology, psychology, history, and so on. But, both the methods and approaches have pros and cons. Knowing the advantages and disadvantages of these two methods will help you make a better decision. Quantitative research is advantageous for studies that involve numbers, such as measuring achievement gaps between different groups of students or assessing the effectiveness of a new blood pressure medication. While quantitative research methods works well in the laboratory under tightly controlled conditions, measuring phenomena like human behavior in natural settings is trickier. Survey instruments are vulnerable to errors such as mistakes in measurement and flawed sampling techniques.
may, thus, act as a catalyst for environmental improvements by encouraging clarification of legislation currently is scattered across various EU Directives and regulations. By As the EU’s reigns on the UK to loosening, the Government may be able to embrace a more forward-thinking approach and adopt more comprehensive domestic policies. This could provide an opportunity to move away from the economic market-based policy which presently acts as a driving force behind EU environmental protection. By potentially rejecting the intrinsic economic agenda of the EU, UK environmental policy could be liberalised to enact a philosophy more respectful of natural resources and habitats.
Why should we doubt this view?
Whilst these arguments stand some ground, there are in fact some indications that the view that improvements will be made easier as a result of Brexit is unrealistic. Whether or not the Government chooses to adopt the ‘Norwegian model’, a more distanced kind of ‘Canadian model’ or a ‘no deal’ approach, Britain will encounter a number of challenges which present as stumbling blocks to the Government’s targets.
Transposition
For one, the European Communities Act 1972 (ECA) has thus far provided a legal basis for the application of EU law. Once this is repealed, EU legislation within the UK becomes invalidated. In order to combat this, the Government have proposed that the Great Repeal Act will be enacted on “exit day” to restore the legality of instruments, previously rooted in the ECA, by converting them into primary law. In order to bring ‘the whole body of existing EU law’ into UK law the day we leave, the Government have indicated that a ‘copy and paste’ approach will be adopted, transposing EU legal instruments via a ‘continuance clause’. This, however, raises a number of issues.
Crucially, this approach will not directly transpose all EU legislation into UK law without further intervention. Therefore, careful scrutiny of regulations to identify those viable outside of the EU context will be required; in particular, those regulations which necessitate some form of EU involvement or authorization. Providing a clear example, the field of EU chemicals law is almost entirely compromised of regulations set out by the REACH programme. In a report carried out by the UK House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC), it was found that creating a domestic system to mirror REACH would be extremely complex and expensive for both the taxpayer and the industry. Yet, without translation of these substantive provisions, the UK risks regulatory uncertainty. Consequently, the EAC suggested that some cooperation should be maintained with the single market, at least if anything, to retain access to registration under the REACH programme. As Haigh further suggests, if the Government were to attempt to create an entirely new chemicals agency to replicate the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in the scenario that cooperation
