英国脱欧后的贸易政策:安慰剂政策?

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
M. J. García
{"title":"英国脱欧后的贸易政策:安慰剂政策?","authors":"M. J. García","doi":"10.1080/13501763.2023.2235380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Trade policy and negotiations have lain at the heart of the Brexit process. Initial UK trade policy has been characterised by: (1) the need to limit the impact of changes in trading relations (mainly with the EU) to minimise challenges for businesses and the possibility of economic losses; (2) a strong ideological commitment to free trade, and related to that; (3) symbolic and ‘placebo’ actions designed to show that the UK can enact an independent trade policy. Negotiation of free trade agreements (FTAs), thus, became a priority of trade policy. This article explores how approaches to FTAs have evolved, focusing specifically on post-Brexit FTAs with Australasia. Overall, the desire to complete speedy agreements has at times trumped business and societal interests, and precluded the development of a coherent long-term UK FTA vision, revealing the symbolic motivation of being seen as ‘delivering Brexit’ behind the initial years of post-Brexit trade policy.","PeriodicalId":51362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Public Policy","volume":"30 1","pages":"2492 - 2518"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Post-Brexit trade policy in the UK: placebo policy-making?\",\"authors\":\"M. J. García\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13501763.2023.2235380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Trade policy and negotiations have lain at the heart of the Brexit process. Initial UK trade policy has been characterised by: (1) the need to limit the impact of changes in trading relations (mainly with the EU) to minimise challenges for businesses and the possibility of economic losses; (2) a strong ideological commitment to free trade, and related to that; (3) symbolic and ‘placebo’ actions designed to show that the UK can enact an independent trade policy. Negotiation of free trade agreements (FTAs), thus, became a priority of trade policy. This article explores how approaches to FTAs have evolved, focusing specifically on post-Brexit FTAs with Australasia. Overall, the desire to complete speedy agreements has at times trumped business and societal interests, and precluded the development of a coherent long-term UK FTA vision, revealing the symbolic motivation of being seen as ‘delivering Brexit’ behind the initial years of post-Brexit trade policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"2492 - 2518\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2235380\",\"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":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2235380","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: 2

摘要

贸易政策和谈判一直是英国脱欧进程的核心。最初的英国贸易政策的特点是:(1)需要限制贸易关系(主要是与欧盟)变化的影响,以尽量减少对企业的挑战和经济损失的可能性;(2)对自由贸易有强烈的意识形态承诺,并与之相关;(3)象征性和“安慰剂”行动,旨在表明英国可以制定独立的贸易政策。因此,自由贸易协定(fta)的谈判成为贸易政策的优先事项。本文探讨了自由贸易协定的方法是如何演变的,特别关注英国脱欧后与澳大拉西亚的自由贸易协定。总体而言,快速完成协议的愿望有时压倒了商业和社会利益,并阻碍了英国自由贸易协定长期愿景的发展,揭示了在英国脱欧后最初几年的贸易政策背后被视为“实现英国脱欧”的象征性动机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Post-Brexit trade policy in the UK: placebo policy-making?
ABSTRACT Trade policy and negotiations have lain at the heart of the Brexit process. Initial UK trade policy has been characterised by: (1) the need to limit the impact of changes in trading relations (mainly with the EU) to minimise challenges for businesses and the possibility of economic losses; (2) a strong ideological commitment to free trade, and related to that; (3) symbolic and ‘placebo’ actions designed to show that the UK can enact an independent trade policy. Negotiation of free trade agreements (FTAs), thus, became a priority of trade policy. This article explores how approaches to FTAs have evolved, focusing specifically on post-Brexit FTAs with Australasia. Overall, the desire to complete speedy agreements has at times trumped business and societal interests, and precluded the development of a coherent long-term UK FTA vision, revealing the symbolic motivation of being seen as ‘delivering Brexit’ behind the initial years of post-Brexit trade policy.
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