IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cnpexx/v24y2019i3p408-421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Brexit and the Politics of UK Growth Models

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Rosamond

Abstract

Brexit has reopened and repoliticised the debate about future growth models for the UK economy. This contribution argues that this debate is built around historically specific path dependencies that reflect the particular character of public debate about British political economy, while also suggesting that the debate around Brexit takes place at a very distinctive moment in the history of democratic capitalism in Europe. This combination gives the renewed politicisation a specific and perhaps perverse character. The paper considers how we should approach debates about growth models, paying particular attention to the importance of the politics of support. It suggests that recent debate about growth models has been largely subsumed within the politics of Brexit, which has politicised that debate, albeit through the emergent political economy frames that Brexit has provoked. The paper explores the ways in which the demise of three key props of European democratic capitalism – a sustained period of economic growth, a governing philosophy that subordinated the market to wider social purposes and strong political parties – play out in the context of Brexit and the search for a new politics of support.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Rosamond, 2019. "Brexit and the Politics of UK Growth Models," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 408-421, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cnpexx:v:24:y:2019:i:3:p:408-421
    DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2018.1484721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13563467.2018.1484721
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13563467.2018.1484721?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gabriel Siles-Brügge & Michael Strange, 2020. "National Autonomy or Transnational Solidarity? Using Multiple Geographic Frames to Politicize EU Trade Policy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 277-289.
    2. Begg Iain, 2019. "No Longer “The Economy Stupid”: How Muddled Economics Contributed to a Chaotic Brexit," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Moshfique Uddin & Anup Chowdhury & Geoffrey Wood, 2022. "The resilience of the British and European goods industry: Challenge of Brexit," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 934-954.
    4. Polyzos, Stathis & Samitas, Aristeidis & Katsaiti, Marina-Selini, 2020. "Who is unhappy for Brexit? A machine-learning, agent-based study on financial instability," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    5. Ben Rosamond, 2020. "European Integration and the Politics of Economic Ideas: Economics, Economists and Market Contestation in the Brexit Debate," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1085-1106, September.
    6. Kalaitzake, Manolis, 2020. "Resilience or relocation? Expectations and reality in the city of London since the Brexit referendum," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/14, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cnpexx:v:24:y:2019:i:3:p:408-421. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cnpe20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.