Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
On 23 June the United Kingdom held a referendum to gauge public support for continued British membership of the European Union with a majority voting in favour of 'Leave'. The causes of 'Brexit' have garnered significant attention from academics and commentators, with many explanations focusing on issues of sovereignty, immigration, fiscal austerity, xenophobia and imperial nostalgia, while others have looked to socio-demographic divides based on age, class and the 'winners and losers of globalisation'. We argue that these explanations fail to answer the key aggregate-level questions of why Britain voted to leave now, rather than at any other time, and why Britain, rather than any other member state, voted to leave. We account for Brexit by showing that Britain was always more Eurosceptic than other member states due, ultimately, to historical reasons that today manifest themselves in uniquely weak micro-level integration and that this tension became increasingly apparent as European integration deepened. We then show how post-2004 immigration mobilised the British working and lower middle class, whose consistent Euroscepticism had, until the referendum, been silenced by the UK's pre-2010 party system's consensus on membership. We end by considering the potential ramifications of the referendum for the future of the UK and the EU.
This publication brings together the papers presented at the workshop " Scenarios of a new UK-EU relationship " , held at CIDOB on May 20th 2016 and co-organised with the London School of Economics' European Politics and Policy blog (LSE EUROPP). The workshop analysed the scenarios of the British referendum on European Union (EU) membership that will take place on June 23rd 2016 and discussed, among other issues, the negotiations between the British government and the EU, the referendum campaign, the internal developments in the United Kingdom (UK) and the EU and the scenarios that might prevail after the referendum. This publication presents three scenarios based on whether the UK will stay in the EU (" Bremain "), whether it will leave the EU following some form of agreement (" soft Brexit ") or whether it leaves it abruptly (" harsh Brexit "). The authors cover the economic, political, social and geopolitical effects of each scenario, attempting to devise the new UK-EU relationship in case these scenarios materialise. They pay particular attention to the political dynamics in the EU following the Brexit referendum and the effects on the European project, as well as on the future of the UK.
2019
Brexit has become one of the most contentious issues in the political history of the United Kingdom. As the Brexit deadline of March 29th 2019 approaches quickly, uncertainties surrounding the UK’s ‘divorce’ from the EU still exist. The government of Theresa May finds itself in a predicament, seeking to arrive at a deal that will see an orderly exit from the European Union. This report covers all phases of Brexit, from the historical background to the factors that led to Brexit referendum itself, and the reasons for the success of the ‘Leave’ campaign. The report also examines the political and economic implications of Brexit for both the UK and the EU.
The Brexit is unprecedented in the history of European Union (EU) and unparalleled in the annals of European integration. The seemingly unexpected outcome of the Brexit referendum has instant, far-reaching and remote consequences for Britain, EU, European integration, and neo-functionalism. The implications for African countries, African Union (AU), and African integration cannot be over-emphasised. The main objective of this paper is to examine the implications of the June 23, 2016 Brexit Referendum for African integration. The paper therefore concluded that the June 23, 2016 Brexit Referendum has enormous implications for African integration. The domino effect of Brexit may not trigger exit referendum among AU member states, but it has triggered agitations for referendum on self-determination and restructuring among ethnic nationalities in member states particularly Nigeria. This intensifies centrifugal forces of sub-nationalism and disintegrative nationalism among the AU member countries. The paper suggested post-neo-functionalism as the only way out.
Global Affairs, 2017
Brexit shocked liberal elites across Europe, instigating a burgeoning new field of research. Brexit scholarship tends to puzzle over two questions: what happened? What will happen now? This article addresses the latter and builds upon scholarship that suggests that “identity” mattered as much as economics. Digging deeper into British identity, this essay borrows from social-psychology to analyse how temporal status comparisons contributed to Brexit. It argues how the peculiar qualities of British identity narrative make Eurosceptic complaints about sovereignty, Brussels and “control”, particularly salient to nationalists. In short, negative temporal status comparisons with Britain’s former self underpins its longterm Euroscepticism: When Brits learn they once “ruled the world”, the European Union’s practices of compromise compare poorly: Cooperation is easily presented as subordination. Brexit can thus be understood as a radical attempt to arrest Britain’s decline by setting sail for a future based on a nostalgic vision of the past.
The vote by the British people to withdrawal from the EU – also known as a " Brexit " – means both the UK and the EU now face an unprecedented challenge. Brexit could have significant implications for the EU, the ideas and structures of European integration, and European geopolitics. The UK itself faces an uncertain future. This article examines why Brexit has come to pass and explores what it could mean for the EU, European integration, and Europe's economics and security. It argues that as with many of the other problems the EU has faced, the EU and UK will muddle through a Brexit, coping but not solving the challenges it presents.
Since the United Kingdom’s referendum on European Union membership, a number of explanations have been put forward for the vote to leave. In this article, we argue that none of them provides a satisfactory account. We then outline an alternative explanation. The UK has long been one of the most Eurosceptic countries in the EU, and the reason why is that Britons have a weaker sense of European identity––an identity which is rooted in specific aspects of the country’s history. Since the early 1990s, Britons’ Euroscepticism has been amplified by four key developments: the ERM crisis; the increasing pace of European integration; the Eurozone debt crisis; and immigration from Eastern Europe. Our explanation answers two critical questions: ‘Why did the UK that voted to leave, rather than any other member state?’; and, ‘Why did the UK vote to Leave in 2016, rather than at any point in the past?’
The Journal of Gemmology, 2019
Choice Reviews Online, 2010
Carthaginensia 39 (2023): 511-536
Frontiers in Plant Science
Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 2020
Revista Aurora, 2011
Advances in Integrated Soil Fertility Management in sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities
International Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2011
Mil neuf cent. Revue d'histoire intellectuelle, 2011
Applied Sciences, 2022
Schools as Community Hubs, 2023