Search

• Examines the possibilities and challenges of nurturing UK agri-food justice. • Land justice is crucial to engender food system transformation. • 'Public goods' approach to agri-food policy acts as a depoliticising consensus frame. • The land-food nexus must be placed more prominently on the research agenda. • Argues for participative, inclusive agri-food praxis based on socioecological justice. This paper examines the possibilities and challenges of nurturing agri-food justice by using land as a foundational node in the context of the UK leaving the European Union – what has been termed 'Brexit'. Drawing upon the interconnected literatures of land justice and food justice, which have received sparse coverage in the UK, we develop an agri-food (in)justice lens to reveal the diverse contestations and struggles to transform the physical and political agri-food Brexit landscape in more socioecological just ways. Our research highlights the tensions and difficulties in addressing the complex social and environmental injustices bound up with UK agri-food relations, given the unequal power dynamics that permeate food and farming politics and policy. In particular, the research reveals the continued 'hidden' politics of historically-embedded land (in)justice. We therefore argue for greater focus on the multiscalar relationships between land and the intersecting contestations of agri-food labour, capital and knowledge. We end the paper by discussing the limitations of the nascent 'public goods' approach to agricultural policy under a purported 'Green Brexit' and arguing for participative and inclusive agri-food praxis based on land and food justice to cultivate more socioecologically just futures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the relationship between rural space and Brexit. It uses the 2016 UK Referendum outcome and the ongoing processes of Brexit as an optic though which to explore the changing configurations of rural communities and the ways in which they both reinforce and problematise the politics and geographies of Brexit. Taking as its starting point the 'take our country back' nationalism of the 2016 Referendum the paper considers how the anti-migrant, defensive Brexit positions folded into dominant rural imaginaries. Arguing that these imaginaries have always been fractured, the paper shows how this has intensified through the ruralisation of migration in the 2000s. In this context Brexit can be understood as rupture more than a confirmation of nationalist or exclusionary rural imaginaries and the complex intra-rural Leave/Remain geography is indicative of this. Drawing on a small set of in-depth interviews with expert 'policy actors' from rural community and migrant organisations in rural regions in of Wales, England, and Scotland the paper reflects on the rural-Brexit relationship by exploring rural diversity, perceptions of the impacts of Brexit on rural places and rural-migrant dependencies that are social as well as economic. It identifies the interconnected precarity of rural communities' well-being as the decisions of (and constraints on) rural migrants in the post Brexit, re-bordered UK disrupt and affect rural livability. In doing so, it emphasises the ambivalence in the everyday 'rural Brexit' and calls for closer attention to the ways in which rural communities are constitutive of and respond to political turbulence. • Develops the nascent debates around the relationship between Brexit and the rural. • Examines the complexity of that relationship across three national contexts. • Brings together the sociological literature around Brexit with insights from rural sociology. • Explores the lacunae between the rural as an expression of nationalism and the rural as a lived and fluid space. • Draws on and presents situated policy responses from an exploratory empirical study. • Reflects on emergent senses of rural precarity and the importance of rural interdependencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

External economic exchanges are the most important component of economic relations. No country, regardless of the level of development, can cover all its needs only from its own production. Consequently, all countries are required to participate in foreign trade. The aim of the present paper was to provide visibility on Romania's trade relationship with Great Britain. The data used in the analysis of the evolution of the indicators are represented by the series of import values and by the series of export values. Also, another topic that was given importance in this paper is the impact of Brexit on Romania's foreign trade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 31 January 2020 the UK formally withdrew from the EU, with disengagement to become effective after a period of transition and uncertainty, aggravated by a global health crisis. By analysing the shifting profile of British aid since the Brexit vote and also the terms of the withdrawal, this article intends to shed light on its future course. Building on previous research, three scenarios on post-Brexit aid are considered in section 1: the nationalist; the realist; and the cosmopolitan. Considering the most recent changes in the UK's aid budgets and policy papers, it can be concluded that the country has a realist approach to development cooperation (see section 2). Finally, the paper assesses the impact these changes will be likely to have on European and global aid, ceteris paribus (section 3). Our data show that the UK's volume of aid has remained stable since the Brexit vote in 2016. This has come hand in hand with a shifting pattern of aid allocation: aid provided for health research programmes in the UK, companies and universities has increased, while aid directed at LDCs and DFID programmes has decreased. Our main argument is that the changes match a realist scenario, rather than a cosmopolitan or even a nationalist approach, which would result in decreasing aid and weaker links with partner countries. As a result, and despite the UK's new allocation pattern to countries, sectors and channels, there should be no major impact on aid at the European and global levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pressure from global retailers to reduce food costs has altered downstream agri-food work regimes, with many food producers having adopted more flexible modes of working and employed migrant labour from lower income countries. Since the expansion of the European Union (EU) in 2004, the farming and food sector in the UK has recruited large numbers of migrant workers from central and eastern EU countries. The decision by the UK electorate in 2016 to leave the EU - what has been termed Brexit - has created a 'crisis' in relation to the continued supply of migrant labour. In this paper we explore the role of migrant labour within the UK's agri-food system and the ways that migrant workers have been positioned by different actors within recent discussions of farming, food and Brexit. We do this through an analysis of national survey data on migrant agricultural workers and materials from interviews with more than 70 agri-food organisations in the UK. What emerges from this research is that rather than viewing Brexit as a key moment to critique the state of the UK's agri-food system, including the structural conditions of work, dominant actors have used it more narrowly to construct a 'crisis' of migrant labour supply, arguing for new policy mechanisms to guarantee the future provision of low-cost imported labour. Within these narratives of post-Brexit agri-food futures, the presence of migrant labour has been both normalised and institutionalised by conventional food organisations but the realities of migrant work and the voices of migrants themselves have been conspicuous largely by their absence. • The UK agri-food sector's dependency on migrant workers from central and eastern EU countries has been threatened by Brexit. • Brexit has been used by dominant agri-food actors to construct a 'crisis' of migrant labour supply. • The centrality of migrant labour to food production in the UK has been both normalised and institutionalised by dominant agri-food actors. • The realities of migrant work and migrants' voices have largely been ignored within post-Brexit agri-food discussions. • There is a need to revalue the role of labour (ers) within the UK's agri-food system as well as in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Relations / Uluslararasi Iliskiler is the property of International Relations Council and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

On 24June 2016, a narrow majority of citizens of the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, a decision which has exposed deep divisions in British society. This article analyses the extent to which the campaign to leave the EU and its aftermath can be explained in terms of existing definitions of'populism'. It distinguishes between a 'thin' and 'thick' ideology of populism. Whereas the 'thin' ideology refers to a specific political method or style, one which claims to represent the 'true people' against a ruling elite, the 'thick' ideology focuses on substantial ideological elements, e.g. authoritarian and nationalist worldviews. The paper demonstrates that the Brexit campaign has been dominated by exclusive, right-wing populist ideas. In order to understand the appeal of populist parties and movements in the UK, the paper explores the multi-layered factors that have led to widespread support for the anti-European and anti-immigration politics. It argues that a mix of economic, political and cultural disenfranchisement is a root cause of the vote for Brexit. In this light, the Brexit rhetoric of'taking back control' can be interpreted as a (problematic) attempt to overcome disenfranchisement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I analyze the effect of Brexit on United Kingdom labor productivity and its components using a synthetic control methodology. My results show that the Brexit vote had a negative impact on labor productivity, causing GDP per hour worked to decrease by an average of 2.24% per year in comparison to the absence of Brexit. The two components of labor productivity are GDP and hours worked. I find that the decrease in the GDP is more than the increase in hours worked per person, causing the labor productivity to decline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Medunarodni Problemi is the property of Institute of International Politics & Economics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since 2015, when the UK legislated a target for aid spending, the nature of its spending on official development assistance has changed significantly. Government departments not traditionally associated with spending aid have found themselves in charge of disbursing aid funds as a result of that year's spending review. The vote to exit the European Union has subsequently introduced a number of uncertainties. What considerations will be at play in UK aid spending after Brexit? What will become of official development assistance currently spent through European mechanisms? In what sort of configuration might the Department for International Development and other government departments find themselves? The focus of this paper is on how the vote to leave the European Union might affect the way the UK spends aid. It asks whether the legal framework for this spending is robust enough to withstand the demands that a new post-Brexit political and economic context will make. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on a case-study of Cornwall in the South-West of England, this paper has three main aims. First, it seeks to listen to the voices of migrant workers and, in doing so, learn more about their experiences of moving to, and working in, the British countryside. Second, it evaluates the impact of Brexit on their lives and, in particular, how it influences their decision to work in the UK or elsewhere. Finally, consideration is given to the significance of citizenship to their lives, both as a formal contract with the EU and as a lived experience. • Listens to the voices and perspectives of migrant workers. • Uses citizenship as a conceptual 'middle ground' to understand the lives of migrant workers. • Draws on interviews with thirty migrant workers. • Considers the impact of Brexit on agricultural labour in the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role played by concepts and ideas in driving policy transformations has been much discussed in the political science literature. This paper presents a case study of ideas and the extent to which they drive policy change, drawing on the example of the Public Money for Public Goods (PMPG) principle in relation to the reform of EU and UK agriculture policy. We assess the factors which have promoted the adoption of the PMPG principle and the extent to which it is currently being realised under the EU's Common Agricultural Policy and the UK's post-Brexit agriculture policies. Drawing on a range of expert interviews, we find that policy concepts such as this have the capacity to be utilised by policymakers when looking to solve 'wicked' policy problems, and once mobilised, can gradually gain acceptance amongst stakeholders, lobbyists and policymakers over time. However, we also report evidence of dilution and mission creep, with a gap emerging between the original idea, its interpretation, and how it is realised in the messy world of policy advocacy and resistance. We conclude that advocates of the PMPG principle need to seize some recent windows of opportunities under an emerging set of post-Brexit set of land management schemes to further develop and implement this important policy idea. • How ideas shape public policy is studied using the 3I's - Ideas, Institutions, Interests. • Development and promotion of Public Money for Public Goods principle is examined. • Ideas have the capacity to be used to solve "wicked" policy problems. • Powerful ideas tend to be diluted when implemented in the policy arena. • Advocates must seize windows of opportunity for ideas to be mobilised effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the results of interviews conducted with stakeholders in the North East Scotland commercial fishing industry who operate with Fixed Quota Allocation (FQA) units under the United Kingdom's (UK's) fisheries management system. The results derived from these interviews provide a view of the FQA system from those operating within it and identify strengths and weaknesses of the system. The implications of these results are that the FQA system, and the introduction of FQA units, led to increased investment and efficiency within the North East Scotland 'over 10 m′ sector. This, however, has led to a consolidation of quota and the raising of barriers to entry. These may threaten the future of the industry and its traditional links to its coastal communities but the situation is complicated by concerns that any changes to the system to address these threats risks destabilising the economic structure of the industry which is built on the asset value of FQA units. The UK Government has indicated that the system will endure post-Brexit so it may be that any additional quota realised from exiting the European Union (EU) is applied to a system where those who will benefit most understand that it may risk the industry's future. This paper calls for more research into the FQA system, with those who work with FQA units and those who do not, to ensure that the socioeconomic impacts of this system are better understood in order that future management safeguards the stability of the industry into the future. • FQA units attracted investment to 'over 10m' in North East Scotland, industry now reliant on system existing in perpetuity. • FQA units have driven efficiency in the 'over 10m' sector but have led to consolidation and raised barriers to entry. • Brexit may benefit 'over 10m' sector but will not address the issues within the FQA system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brexit, the UK's planned withdrawal from the EU, has significant implications for UK fisheries, potentially creating both opportunities and challenges regarding future governance of some of the most important fisheries in the EU. This paper presents findings of discussions with key industry representatives from two of Scotland's largest ports – Peterhead and Fraserburgh. The views of these stakeholders give a unique perspective on the opportunities and challenges provided by Brexit. Views are reported on the current management system, the importance of the EU as an export market and how industry stakeholders believe fisheries should be governed if the UK leaves the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Despite the view from stakeholders that the current distribution of fishing rights in UK waters is unbalanced, and the view that the CFP has moved from a positive to a negative for the industry, the implications of these results suggest that this part of the industry is not focussed solely on a quick removal from the CFP that returns 100% of fishing rights and control of UK waters, but instead seeks an improved management system that allows for the long term sustainability of the sector. • EU Common Fisheries Policy viewed as saving the Scottish fishing industry but now seen to constrain its growth. • Scottish fishers want to leave the Common Fisheries Policy but not block access to their fellow fishers from abroad. • Reduction of export trade from the UK to the EU has potential for significant negative impact on the industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]