Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identity Mobilization, Path Dependence, and the Future of the European Union After Brexit

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Implications of Brexit for East Asia

  • 702 Accesses

Abstract

What will be the impact of Brexit on the future of European Union (EU)? We argue that Brexit will not trigger a domino effect leading to a collapse of the EU. Whether European integration continues depends on the balance of forces between “identity mobilization” originated in member states and the tenacity of EU institutions to resist such pressure. Given that Brexit is a manifestation of identity mobilization, we argue that the likely impact of Brexit is a proliferation of various forms of “differentiated integration.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks. 2008. “A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus.” British Journal of Political Science 39(1): 1–23.

  2. 2.

    Hooghe and Marks, p. 13.

  3. 3.

    Ernst Haas. 1968. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces, 1950-1957. 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

  4. 4.

    Hooghe and Marks, pp. 1–2.

  5. 5.

    Hooghe and Marks, p. 22.

  6. 6.

    Paul Pierson. 1996. “The Path to European Integration: A Historical-Institutionalist Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 29(2): 123–63; Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” The American Political Science Review 94(2): 251–67.

  7. 7.

    Pierson (1996, p. 126).

  8. 8.

    Mark D Aspinwall and Gerald Schneider. 2000. “Same Menu, Separate Tables: The Institutionalist Turn in Political Science and the Study of European Integration.” European Journal of Political Research 38: 1–36, p. 16.

  9. 9.

    Simon J. Bulmer. 1994. “The New Governance of the European Union: A New Institutionalist Approach.” Journal of Public Policy 13: 351–80.

  10. 10.

    Fritz W. Scharpf. 1988. “The Joint-decision Trap: Lessons from German Federalism and European Integration.” Public Administration 66(3): 239–78.

  11. 11.

    Pierson (2000).

  12. 12.

    Pierson (1996, p. 137).

  13. 13.

    Brigid Laffan. 1996. “The Politics of Identity and Political Order in Europe.” Journal of Common Market Studies 34(1): 82–102.

  14. 14.

    Neil Fligstein, 2008. Euroclash: The EU, European Identity and the Future of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  15. 15.

    Vivien A. Schmidt. 2011. “The Problems of Identity and Legitimacy in the European Union: Is More Politics the Answer?” In Debating Political Identity and Legitimacy in the Europe Union, edited by Sonia Lucarelli, Furio Cerutti, and Vivien A. Schmidt, 16–37. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge, p. 16.

  16. 16.

    Sean Carey. 2002. “Undivided Loyalties: Is National Identity an Obstacle to European Integration?” European Union Politics 3(4): 387–413.

  17. 17.

    Cas Mudde. 2007. Populist Radical Right Parties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  18. 18.

    Hans-Georg Betz. 1994. Radical Right-Wing Populism in Western Europe. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan; Kitschelt, Herbert. 1995. The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analyst. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

  19. 19.

    Pippa Norris. 2005. Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Hainsworth, Paul. 2008. The Extreme Right in Western Europe. New York: Routledge.

  20. 20.

    Mudde, Populist Radical Right Parties, 2007.

  21. 21.

    Ibid., p. 162.

  22. 22.

    Neil Fligstein, Alina Polyakova, and Wayne Sandholtz. 2012. “European Integration, Nationalism and European Identity.” Journal of Common Market Studies 50(S1): 106–22, p. 115.

  23. 23.

    Norris (2005).

  24. 24.

    Fligstein, Polyakova, and Sandholtz (2012, p. 116).

  25. 25.

    Pieter de Wilde and Michael Zurn. 2012. “Can the Politicization of European Integration be Reversed?” Journal of Common Market Studies 50(S1): 137–53.

  26. 26.

    Sara Binzer Hobolt. 2009. Europe in Question- Referendums on European Integration. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, p. 3; Qvortrup, Matt. 2013. Direct Democracy- A Comparative Study of the Theory and Practice of Government by the People. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, p. 3; International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA). 2008. Direct Democracy- The International IDEA Handbook. Stockholm, Sweden: International IDEA, 47–49.

  27. 27.

    Laura Tilindyte. 2016. “Referendums on EU Issues.” European Parliamentary Research Service. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/582041/EPRS_BRI(2016)582041_EN.pdf

  28. 28.

    Ibid.

  29. 29.

    Hobolt (2009).

  30. 30.

    Kateryna Zarembo. 2016. “Yes for Ukraine, Win for Europe.” Politico, March 15. http://iwp.org.ua/eng/public/1972.html

  31. 31.

    Cynthia Kroet. 2016. “Viktor Orbán to call for EU Treaty Changes.” Politico, September 21. http://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-to-call-for-eu-treaty-changes/

  32. 32.

    Ibid.

  33. 33.

    Ibid.

  34. 34.

    David Stern. 2016. “Dutch Referendum Shakes Ukraine.” Politico, April 7. http://www.politico.eu/article/dutch-referendum-shakes-eu-ukraine-association-agreement-petro-poroshenko/

  35. 35.

    Andrew Macdowall. 2016. “Voters Back Viktor Orbán’s Rejection of EU Migrant Quotas.” Politico, October 2. http://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-referendum-eu-migration-viktor-orban/

  36. 36.

    Ibid.

  37. 37.

    Lili Bayer. 2016. “Victor Orban’s Vision of a Bigger, Looser Europe.” Politico, September 6. http://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orbans-vision-of-a-bigger-looser-europe-hungary-european-union-brexit/

  38. 38.

    Ibid.

  39. 39.

    Cynthia Kroet. 2016. “Dutch Reject EU-Ukraine Deal.” Politico, April 6. http://www.politico.eu/article/low-turnout-as-dutch-reject-eu-ukraine-deal/

  40. 40.

    Philippe C Schmitter. 1996. Imaging the Future of the Euro-policy with the Help of New Concepts. In Governance in the European Union, edited by Gary marks, Fritz W Scharpf, Philippe C. Schmitter, and Wolfgang Streeck, 121–50. London, Sage; Wolfgang Wessels. 1997. An Ever Closer Fusion? Journal of Common Market Studies 35(2): 276.

  41. 41.

    Scharpf (1988) and Pierson (1996).

  42. 42.

    Theodore J. Lowi. 1972. Four Systems of Policy, Politics and Choice. Public Administration Review 32(4): 298–310

  43. 43.

    David Phinnemore and Lee McGowan. 2010. A Dictionary of the European Union, 5th ed. London: Routledge, p. 86.

  44. 44.

    Peter Moser, Gerald Schneider, and Gebhard Kirchgässner. 2000. Decision Rules in the European Union: A Rational Choice Perspective. London: Macmillan.

  45. 45.

    Gerda Falkner. 2000. “Policy Networks in a Multi-level System: Convergence towards Moderate Diversity?” West European Politics 23(4): 94–120; Frans van Waarden. 1992. “Dimensions and Types of Policy Networks.” European Journal of Political Research 21: 29–52; Hussein Kassim. 1994. “Policy Networks, Networks and European Union Policy Making: A Sceptical View.” West European Politics 17(4): 15–27.

  46. 46.

    Dermot Hodson and Imelda Maher. 2001. “The Open Method as a New Mode of Governance: The Case of Soft Economic Policy Co-Ordination.” Journal of Common Market Studies 39(4): 719–46.

  47. 47.

    Thomas Gehring. 1997. “Governing in Nested Institutions: Environmental Policy in the European Union and the Case of Packaging Waste.” Journal of European Public Policy, 4(3): 337–54; Elizabeth Bomberg. 1998. “Issue Networks and the Environment: Explaining European Union Environmental Policy.” In Comparing Policy Networks, edited by David Marsh, 167–84. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press; John McCormick. 2001. Environmental Policy in the European Union. New York: Palgrave.

  48. 48.

    Christopher Hill. 1998. Closing the Capability – Expectations Gap. In A Common Foreign Policy for Europe? Competing Visions of the CFSP, edited by John Peterson and Helene Sjursen, 18–38. London: Routledge; Michael E. Smith 2004. “Toward a Theory of EU Foreign Policy-Making: Multi-Level Governance, Domestic Politics, and National Adaptation to Europe’s Common Foreign and Security Policy.” Journal of European Public Policy 11(4): 740–58; Fraser Cameron. 2012. An Introduction to European Foreign Policy. 2nd ed. Oxon, UK: Routledge; Jolyon Howorth. 2007. Security and Defence Policy in the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  49. 49.

    Hodson and Maher (2001).

  50. 50.

    Kenneth Dyson. 2010. “‘Euro’ Europe: ‘Fuzzy’ Boundaries and ‘Constrained’ Differentiation in Macro-Economic Governance.” In Which Europe? The Politics of Differentiated Integration, edited by Kenneth Dyson and Angelos Sepos, 215–32. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 4.

  51. 51.

    Negotiating directives for Article 50 negotiations, Council of the European Union, XT21016/17 ADD 1 REV 2 ANNEX, UKTF, Brussels, 22 May 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/negotiating-directives-article-50-negotiations_en. [Hereafter EU Council].

  52. 52.

    EU Council, p. 7.

  53. 53.

    EU Council, p. 4.

  54. 54.

    Michel Barnier, “Speech by Michel Barnier at the European Economic and Social Committee,” European Commission, 6 July 2017, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1922_en.htm

  55. 55.

    Ibid.

  56. 56.

    Michel Barnier, “Statement by Michel Barnier on the publication of the Guiding Principles for the Dialogue on Ireland and Northern Ireland,” European Commission, 6 September 2017, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-3145_en.htm

  57. 57.

    Michel Barnier, “Speech by Michel Barnier at the press conference following the third round of Article 50 negotiations with the United Kingdom,” European Commission, 31 August 2017, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-3043_en.htm

  58. 58.

    Ibid.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of European and American Studies, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan

    David W. F. Huang

Authors
  1. David W. F. Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David W. F. Huang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of European and American Studies, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan

    David W.F. Huang

  2. Taiwan Studies Program, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

    Michael Reilly

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huang, D.W.F. (2018). Identity Mobilization, Path Dependence, and the Future of the European Union After Brexit. In: Huang, D., Reilly, M. (eds) The Implications of Brexit for East Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0185-8_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0185-8_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-0184-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-0185-8

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation