移民与英国:脱欧后的反思

M. Alfano, C. Dustmann, T. Frattini
{"title":"移民与英国:脱欧后的反思","authors":"M. Alfano, C. Dustmann, T. Frattini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2900373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recent referendum in the UK on membership of the EU has sent shockwaves across the political establishment not just in the UK itself and throughout Europe, but also around the world. In the runup to the referendum, economists were (perhaps for the first time) united in pointing out that the economic case for Brexit is rather slim, that hardly any well-argued reason could be given by the Brexit camp as to why it may be a good idea to leave the EU, and that the economic consequences could be severe. That lack of economic argument in favour of Brexit, which should have been the key battleground in the run up to the referendum, led the debate to focus on one particular issue, Immigration. Like the free movement of goods, capital, and services, a fundamental pillar of the EU, and a non-negotiable requirement for any new member state, is the free movement of people. It is that particular aspect of EU membership that became the strongest single assertion of the Brexit camp. The inability to control immigration f m within the EU was made a symbol for everything else Brexit stood for (such as the idea of “sovereignty†or the pain of being subjugated to “rules made in Brussels and not the UK†), but – again – fact-based arguments against free mobility on economic or welfare grounds were hard to find. Nevertheless, free mobility within the EU became quickly the scapegoat for the economic and social woes that had distressed the country since the great recession, and perhaps even earlier, such as crime, real wage decline, inequality, unemployment, access to social services, health provision, and benefits and transfers. “Immigration†and everything people associated with it and were encouraged to believe by a relentless campaign of the majority of the tabloid press decisively contributed to the decision that the UK took on June 23, 2016. Immigration and free mobility will likely again be central in the negotiations between the UK and its European partners in developing a model for Brexit that minimises the economic costs fo both the UK and the EU.","PeriodicalId":134919,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Politics of Immigration (Topic)","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immigration and the UK: Reflections after Brexit\",\"authors\":\"M. Alfano, C. Dustmann, T. Frattini\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2900373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The recent referendum in the UK on membership of the EU has sent shockwaves across the political establishment not just in the UK itself and throughout Europe, but also around the world. In the runup to the referendum, economists were (perhaps for the first time) united in pointing out that the economic case for Brexit is rather slim, that hardly any well-argued reason could be given by the Brexit camp as to why it may be a good idea to leave the EU, and that the economic consequences could be severe. That lack of economic argument in favour of Brexit, which should have been the key battleground in the run up to the referendum, led the debate to focus on one particular issue, Immigration. Like the free movement of goods, capital, and services, a fundamental pillar of the EU, and a non-negotiable requirement for any new member state, is the free movement of people. It is that particular aspect of EU membership that became the strongest single assertion of the Brexit camp. The inability to control immigration f m within the EU was made a symbol for everything else Brexit stood for (such as the idea of “sovereignty†or the pain of being subjugated to “rules made in Brussels and not the UK†), but – again – fact-based arguments against free mobility on economic or welfare grounds were hard to find. Nevertheless, free mobility within the EU became quickly the scapegoat for the economic and social woes that had distressed the country since the great recession, and perhaps even earlier, such as crime, real wage decline, inequality, unemployment, access to social services, health provision, and benefits and transfers. “Immigration†and everything people associated with it and were encouraged to believe by a relentless campaign of the majority of the tabloid press decisively contributed to the decision that the UK took on June 23, 2016. Immigration and free mobility will likely again be central in the negotiations between the UK and its European partners in developing a model for Brexit that minimises the economic costs fo both the UK and the EU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":134919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Politics of Immigration (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Politics of Immigration (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2900373\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Politics of Immigration (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2900373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

摘要

最近英国就欧盟成员国身份举行的公投不仅在英国本身和整个欧洲,而且在全世界的政治体制中引起了冲击波。在公投前夕,经济学家们(也许是第一次)一致指出,脱欧的经济理由相当薄弱,脱欧阵营几乎找不出任何充分的理由来说明为什么离开欧盟可能是一个好主意,而且经济后果可能很严重。支持英国退欧的经济论据不足,本应成为公投前的关键战场,但却导致辩论集中在一个特定问题上,即移民问题。就像商品、资本和服务的自由流动一样,欧盟的一个基本支柱,也是任何新成员国不可谈判的要求,就是人员的自由流动。正是欧盟成员国身份的这一特殊方面,成为脱欧阵营最有力的主张。欧盟内部无法控制移民,这被当成了英国脱欧所代表的其他一切东西的象征(比如 - œsovereigntyâ -欧元的概念,或者被布鲁塞尔而不是英国制造的 - œrules所征服的痛苦),但很难找到以经济或福利为由反对自由流动的基于事实的论据。尽管如此,欧盟内部的自由流动很快就成了经济和社会问题的替罪羊,这些问题自大衰退以来,甚至更早的时候就困扰着这个国家,比如犯罪、实际工资下降、不平等、失业、获得社会服务、医疗服务、福利和转移支付。 - œImmigrationâ -以及与之相关的一切,以及被大多数小报媒体无情的宣传所鼓励的一切,都对英国在2016年6月23日做出的决定起了决定性的作用。移民和自由流动可能会再次成为英国与其欧洲伙伴之间谈判的核心,以制定一种将英国和欧盟的经济成本降至最低的英国退欧模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Immigration and the UK: Reflections after Brexit
The recent referendum in the UK on membership of the EU has sent shockwaves across the political establishment not just in the UK itself and throughout Europe, but also around the world. In the runup to the referendum, economists were (perhaps for the first time) united in pointing out that the economic case for Brexit is rather slim, that hardly any well-argued reason could be given by the Brexit camp as to why it may be a good idea to leave the EU, and that the economic consequences could be severe. That lack of economic argument in favour of Brexit, which should have been the key battleground in the run up to the referendum, led the debate to focus on one particular issue, Immigration. Like the free movement of goods, capital, and services, a fundamental pillar of the EU, and a non-negotiable requirement for any new member state, is the free movement of people. It is that particular aspect of EU membership that became the strongest single assertion of the Brexit camp. The inability to control immigration f m within the EU was made a symbol for everything else Brexit stood for (such as the idea of “sovereignty†or the pain of being subjugated to “rules made in Brussels and not the UK†), but – again – fact-based arguments against free mobility on economic or welfare grounds were hard to find. Nevertheless, free mobility within the EU became quickly the scapegoat for the economic and social woes that had distressed the country since the great recession, and perhaps even earlier, such as crime, real wage decline, inequality, unemployment, access to social services, health provision, and benefits and transfers. “Immigration†and everything people associated with it and were encouraged to believe by a relentless campaign of the majority of the tabloid press decisively contributed to the decision that the UK took on June 23, 2016. Immigration and free mobility will likely again be central in the negotiations between the UK and its European partners in developing a model for Brexit that minimises the economic costs fo both the UK and the EU.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Postbellum Electoral Politics in California and the Genesis of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 Do Open Borders Lead to Different Types of Migrants? Firm Heterogeneity and the Impact of Immigration: Evidence from German Establishments Mass Involuntary Migration and Educational Outcomes Vietnamese Immigrant Entrepreneurship: A Comparison of Self-Employment in Vietnam and the United States
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1