Voting for Your Pocketbook, but against Your Pocketbook? A Study of Brexit at the Local Level
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2317495 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kira Gartzou-Katsouyanni (0000-0003-4162-3995, London School of Economics and Political Science, corresponding author), Max Kiefel (0000-0002-6039-1395, London School of Economics and Political Science), Javier José Olivas Osuna (0000-0002-9877-8480, London School of Economics and Political Science) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 3-43 |
| Publication date | 2022-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Politics & Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0032-3292 • E-ISSN: 1552-7514 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032329221992198 |
| OpenAlex | W3133772371 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
| References cited | 24 |
In explaining the outcome of the 2016 EU referendum in the United Kingdom, can theories emphasizing the importance of economic factors be reconciled with the fact that many people appeared to vote against their economic self-interest? This article approaches this puzzle through case study research that draws on fieldwork and a process of reciprocal knowledge exchange with local communities in five local authorities in England and Wales. It argues that the Leave vote can be attributed partly to political discontent associated with trajectories of relative economic decline and deindustrialization. Building on the growing literature about the role of narratives and discourses in navigating uncertainty, it contends that these localized economic experiences, interpreted through local-level narratives, paved the way for local-level discourses of resilience and nationwide optimistic messaging about the economic impacts of Brexit to resonate. Local and national-level discourses discounting the potential economic costs of leaving the European Union played a crucial role in giving precise, somewhat paradoxical, political content to the sense of discontent. The article contributes to the growing focus on place and community in understanding political behavior and invites further research on local discourses linking macro-level trajectories and micro-level voting decisions
Brexit · Deindustrialization · Referendum · Political and Economic history of UK and US
The Paradox of Brexit and the Consequences of Taking Back Control
Bridging the Divide Between Structural and Actor-Oriented Explanations of Populism
Varieties of Populist Attitudes in Brexit Britain
Free Movement versus European Welfare States? Variations of the Fiscal Effects of EU Migrants across Welfare State Regimes
Geographical Dimensions of Populist Euroscepticism
Populism Analytical Tools to Unearth the Roots of Euroscepticism
Euroscepticism as a syndrome of stagnation? Regional inequality and trust in the EU
Political legitimacy after the pits
Disagreeing to Agree
Economic nostalgia
Disrupting Political Polarization
Uncertain Futures
Populism and the Economics of Globalization
Who voted for Brexit? Individual and regional data combined
The malaise of the squeezed middle
Focus Groups as Qualitative Research
Brexit, the left behind and the let down
The Epistemics of Populism and the Politics of Uncertainty
Taking back control? Investigating the role of immigration in the 2016 vote for Brexit
The continental divide? Economic exposure to Brexit in regions and countries on both sides of The Channel
Spatially Rebalancing the UK Economy
The mismatch between local voting and the local economic consequences of Brexit
The Divergent Dynamics of Cities and Towns
The 2016 Referendum, Brexit and the Left Behind
Ecologies of Unease
The Brexit vote
Populism as a Problem of Social Integration
Understanding the social and cultural bases of Brexit
The Social Foundations of Latin America's Recurrent Populism
Economic globalization, job insecurity and the populist reaction
Global Competition and Brexit
Where to begin? Grappling with how to use participant interaction in focus group design
Secular Partisan Realignment in the United States
The methodology of Focus Groups
Re-Doubling the Crises of the Welfare State
| Unique citing works | 11 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,75 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2025 (4) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 11 |