英国脱欧与英国政策制定:概述

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Geoffrey Dudley, Andrew Gamble
{"title":"英国脱欧与英国政策制定:概述","authors":"Geoffrey Dudley, Andrew Gamble","doi":"10.1080/13501763.2023.2258164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Westminster Model (WM) remains dominant in UK post-Brexit policy-making, with few signs that the UK Government is willing to cede power to the devolved administrations and external interests. Despite the plebiscitary vote for Brexit in the 2016 Referendum, the implementation of that change has been dependent on the vagaries of the WM, and a succession of internal crises within the governing Conservative Party. The case studies in the special issue illustrate how the consequent problems of complexity and capacity are compounded by the dilemma of tracking EU legislation while attempting to demonstrate that the UK has ‘taken back control’ and is delivering a ‘Global Britain’ strategy. This results in UK Brexit policy-making progressing in an ad hoc and unpredictable manner. The evidence from the case studies suggests that the UK will not become a rule taker but will increasingly seek to preserve or reclaim as much as possible of the benefits that it enjoyed as a full member state. This will not remove all the costs associated with Brexit, but over time it might significantly reduce them. The resulting compromise will not satisfy either Brexit purists or Remainers, but it is likely to become the agreed framework within which Governments operate.","PeriodicalId":51362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Public Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brexit and UK policy-making: an overview\",\"authors\":\"Geoffrey Dudley, Andrew Gamble\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13501763.2023.2258164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Westminster Model (WM) remains dominant in UK post-Brexit policy-making, with few signs that the UK Government is willing to cede power to the devolved administrations and external interests. Despite the plebiscitary vote for Brexit in the 2016 Referendum, the implementation of that change has been dependent on the vagaries of the WM, and a succession of internal crises within the governing Conservative Party. The case studies in the special issue illustrate how the consequent problems of complexity and capacity are compounded by the dilemma of tracking EU legislation while attempting to demonstrate that the UK has ‘taken back control’ and is delivering a ‘Global Britain’ strategy. This results in UK Brexit policy-making progressing in an ad hoc and unpredictable manner. The evidence from the case studies suggests that the UK will not become a rule taker but will increasingly seek to preserve or reclaim as much as possible of the benefits that it enjoyed as a full member state. This will not remove all the costs associated with Brexit, but over time it might significantly reduce them. The resulting compromise will not satisfy either Brexit purists or Remainers, but it is likely to become the agreed framework within which Governments operate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2258164\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2258164","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

威斯敏斯特模式(WM)在英国脱欧后的政策制定中仍占主导地位,几乎没有迹象表明英国政府愿意将权力移交给下放的政府和外部利益集团。尽管在2016年的全民公投中投票支持英国脱欧,但这一变化的实施一直依赖于WM的变幻莫测,以及执政的保守党内部的一系列危机。特刊中的案例研究说明了随之而来的复杂性和能力问题是如何因追踪欧盟立法的困境而复杂化的,同时试图证明英国已经“收回控制权”并正在实施“全球英国”战略。这导致英国脱欧政策的制定以一种临时和不可预测的方式进行。案例研究的证据表明,英国不会成为规则接受者,而是将越来越多地寻求保留或收回其作为正式成员国所享有的尽可能多的好处。这不会消除与英国脱欧相关的所有成本,但随着时间的推移,可能会显著降低成本。由此产生的妥协既不会让脱欧纯粹主义者满意,也不会让留欧派满意,但它很可能成为各国政府运作的商定框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brexit and UK policy-making: an overview
The Westminster Model (WM) remains dominant in UK post-Brexit policy-making, with few signs that the UK Government is willing to cede power to the devolved administrations and external interests. Despite the plebiscitary vote for Brexit in the 2016 Referendum, the implementation of that change has been dependent on the vagaries of the WM, and a succession of internal crises within the governing Conservative Party. The case studies in the special issue illustrate how the consequent problems of complexity and capacity are compounded by the dilemma of tracking EU legislation while attempting to demonstrate that the UK has ‘taken back control’ and is delivering a ‘Global Britain’ strategy. This results in UK Brexit policy-making progressing in an ad hoc and unpredictable manner. The evidence from the case studies suggests that the UK will not become a rule taker but will increasingly seek to preserve or reclaim as much as possible of the benefits that it enjoyed as a full member state. This will not remove all the costs associated with Brexit, but over time it might significantly reduce them. The resulting compromise will not satisfy either Brexit purists or Remainers, but it is likely to become the agreed framework within which Governments operate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: The primary aim of the Journal of European Public Policy is to provide a comprehensive and definitive source of analytical, theoretical and methodological articles in the field of European public policy. Focusing on the dynamics of public policy in Europe, the journal encourages a wide range of social science approaches, both qualitative and quantitative. JEPP defines European public policy widely and welcomes innovative ideas and approaches. The main areas covered by the Journal are as follows: •Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of public policy in Europe and elsewhere •National public policy developments and processes in Europe •Comparative studies of public policy within Europe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信