共识的驱动因素:德国、法国、爱尔兰和波兰对英国脱欧的回应

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE German Politics Pub Date : 2023-01-10 DOI:10.1080/09644008.2022.2159943
P. Taggart, K. Oppermann, Neil Dooley, A. Szczerbiak, Susan P. Collard
{"title":"共识的驱动因素:德国、法国、爱尔兰和波兰对英国脱欧的回应","authors":"P. Taggart, K. Oppermann, Neil Dooley, A. Szczerbiak, Susan P. Collard","doi":"10.1080/09644008.2022.2159943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Brexit was potentially a highly divisive issue for the EU27 with states having di ff erent relationships with the UK. And yet in the period from the UK ’ s referendum in 2016 until the exit of the UK in 2020, the EU27 maintained a remarkable degree of unity. This article examines relative EU27 unity in the face of the Brexit process. The article is based on interviews and other research on four selected EU member states: Germany, France, Poland and Ireland. The article considers four di ff erent factors drawn from the theoretical literature that might account for EU27 unity and then examines how they played out in each of the four states. We then compare across the cases and conclude that they all shaped national responses to Brexit, but that how they mattered and the patterns of e ff ects were di ff erentiated among the cases. This points towards the importance of seeing Brexit as a multifaceted phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":46640,"journal":{"name":"German Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drivers of Consensus: Responses to Brexit in Germany, France, Ireland and Poland\",\"authors\":\"P. Taggart, K. Oppermann, Neil Dooley, A. Szczerbiak, Susan P. Collard\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09644008.2022.2159943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Brexit was potentially a highly divisive issue for the EU27 with states having di ff erent relationships with the UK. And yet in the period from the UK ’ s referendum in 2016 until the exit of the UK in 2020, the EU27 maintained a remarkable degree of unity. This article examines relative EU27 unity in the face of the Brexit process. The article is based on interviews and other research on four selected EU member states: Germany, France, Poland and Ireland. The article considers four di ff erent factors drawn from the theoretical literature that might account for EU27 unity and then examines how they played out in each of the four states. We then compare across the cases and conclude that they all shaped national responses to Brexit, but that how they mattered and the patterns of e ff ects were di ff erentiated among the cases. This points towards the importance of seeing Brexit as a multifaceted phenomenon.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German Politics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2022.2159943\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2022.2159943","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

英国脱欧对欧盟27国来说可能是一个高度分裂的问题,因为各国与英国的关系不同。然而,从2016年英国公投到2020年英国脱欧,欧盟27国保持了显著的团结。本文考察了面对英国脱欧进程,欧盟27国的相对统一。这篇文章基于对四个选定的欧盟成员国的采访和其他研究:德国、法国、波兰和爱尔兰。本文考虑了理论文献中可能解释欧盟27国统一的四个不同因素,然后考察了它们在四个州中的表现。然后,我们对这些案例进行了比较,得出的结论是,它们都影响了国家对英国脱欧的反应,但它们的重要性和影响模式在不同的案例中有所不同。这表明了将英国脱欧视为一个多方面现象的重要性。
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
Drivers of Consensus: Responses to Brexit in Germany, France, Ireland and Poland
Brexit was potentially a highly divisive issue for the EU27 with states having di ff erent relationships with the UK. And yet in the period from the UK ’ s referendum in 2016 until the exit of the UK in 2020, the EU27 maintained a remarkable degree of unity. This article examines relative EU27 unity in the face of the Brexit process. The article is based on interviews and other research on four selected EU member states: Germany, France, Poland and Ireland. The article considers four di ff erent factors drawn from the theoretical literature that might account for EU27 unity and then examines how they played out in each of the four states. We then compare across the cases and conclude that they all shaped national responses to Brexit, but that how they mattered and the patterns of e ff ects were di ff erentiated among the cases. This points towards the importance of seeing Brexit as a multifaceted phenomenon.
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
German Politics
German Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
Against All Odds? A Discourse Network Analysis of the Political Debate About the German Passenger Car Toll Act German Legislators’ Conceptions of Democracy and Process Preferences: Results from a New Survey Germany’s Triangular Relations with the United States and China in the Era of the Zeitenwende The Effects of Federalism, Corporatism and Legislative Power on Health System Transformation in Germany Erythrocyte fatty acid aberrations in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Correlation with disease duration.
×
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