You're either being disingenuous or naive.They don't take an editorial position if that's what you're after. It's analysis - which is why it's a good neutral website.
"Authors Swati Dhingra and Thomas Sampson note that it is highly uncertain what the UK’s future would look like outside the EU, which makes ‘Brexit’ a leap into the unknown."
That's not analysis that is an editorial position. They could have equally said "The EU continues to change and the UK alone cannot prevent it from changing, the Eurozone crises is yet to be resolved, and remaining with the EU is a leap into the unknown."
Their "analysis" says that one option is ‘doing a Norway’ and that another option is ‘doing a Switzerland’. I'm sorry, but what about 'doing a UK'? If you add Norway and Switzerland together their economies are still less than half of ours. The EU relies far more on our spending that they do on others.
Their "analysis" says we're a small country, but we have the 5th largest economy in the world. Why didn't their "analysis" say "as a country with the 5th largest economy in the world, the UK would have substantial bargaining power"?
Because it's not just analysis is it.
And here's further proof that you're mistaken:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/02/19/the-uk-needs-the-eu-but-the-eu-needs-the-uk-too/
No one can read that, understand it, and honestly say it's not giving a position.
"LSE’s Visiting Professor in Practice Joaquín Almunia offers his opinion."
So, were you honestly mistaken, or disingenuous?