Dr Jonathan Boyd
In recent years, several governments in different parts of Europe - along with the European Commission itself - have made serious and welcome commitments to combating antisemitism and fostering Jewish life. Those commitments matter enormously. They reflect recognition of the persistence of antisemitism, and a growing awareness that Jewish life is an integral part of Europe’s past, present and future.
But if those commitments are to translate into effective policy and sustainable outcomes, they require something that has, until now, been less well developed: a strong and coherent foundation of empirical knowledge.
Across the work I have been involved in - spanning multiple countries, datasets and many years of research - one challenge has consistently emerged. While there is already a considerable body of research on antisemitism and contemporary Jewish life in Europe, the overall evidence base remains far weaker than it needs to be to inform genuinely effective policy.
The quality of existing research ranges dramatically, from excellent to pure speculation. But more generally, it is typically fragmented, uneven across countries, and only loosely connected to the policy processes it is meant to inform. In some places, data are relatively rich; in others, they are sparse or absent. Standards and methodologies vary enormously, and opportunities to compare findings across borders - or to build cumulative insight over time - remain limited.
These are not simply technical weaknesses. They have real consequences. Where evidence is absent or partial, responses tend to be reactive. Where knowledge is uneven, policy tends to follow suit. And where research is not systematically connected to decision-making, even well-intentioned interventions too often miss their mark.
In most other policy fields - health, education, migration - gaps in knowledge infrastructure would be difficult to accept. Robust systems exist to gather data, connect research, and translate findings into policy-relevant insight. They do not eliminate uncertainty, but they help ensure decisions are based on the best available evidence rather than disconnected fragments.
But in the field of contemporary Jewish life and antisemitism, such infrastructure has, until now, been underdeveloped. This is the gap that NERON - the Network for European Research on Jewish Life and Antisemitism - is designed to address.
NERON is not simply another research project. It is a long-term effort to strengthen the system that allows knowledge in this field to be built, shared and applied. It will connect researchers, policymakers and communities across Europe, identify gaps in knowledge and capacity, and strengthen the standards and tools used to study both contemporary antisemitism and Jewish life. In practical terms, it will seek to build a more coordinated and cumulative research environment - one in which insights generated in one country can inform understanding in another, and in which knowledge will develop systematically over time.
Neron's academic team meeting. The founding executive board for the project includes some of Europe’s leading specialists in the social scientific study of contemporary Jewish life and antisemitism.
This matters, first and foremost, for Jewish communities themselves. A clearer, more nuanced understanding of Jewish life is essential to developing policies that effectively support it.
But it also matters more broadly for Europe. Historically, Jewish life has often served as a sensitive indicator of the wider condition of European societies. Where Jewish communities feel secure and able to flourish, this is often associated with openness, confidence and social cohesion. Where they do not, it can signal deeper tensions. Understanding Jewish life, therefore, is not only about understanding a minority. It is also about understanding society itself.
For that reason, strengthening the knowledge infrastructure in this field cannot be seen as a niche concern. It is part of a broader effort to ensure that public policy - particularly in areas touching on minority identity and social cohesion - is grounded in robust, comparable evidence.
Executive Director
Executive Director
Jonathan has been Executive Director of JPR since 2010, having previously held research and policy positions at the JDC International Centre for Community Development in...
Read more
