Brexit and the decentred state
| Published date | 01 January 2022 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0952076720905008 |
| Date | 01 January 2022 |
| Author | Matt Beech |
| Subject Matter | Special Issue Articles |
2022, Vol. 37(1) 67 –83
Special Issue: Decentred State
Brexit and the
decentred state
Matt Beech
University of Hull, UK
Abstract
The aim of this article is to examine Brexit through the lens of decentred theory.
Decentred theory regards the British state as neither a monolith (as per modernist
social science) nor a myth (as per post-modern theory) but rather as a repository of
norms, customs, practices and thought acquired by elite actors, professionals and policy
networks. The central thesis of the article is that the idea of the decentred state, as an
explanation of state governance, can be seen in the phenomenon of Brexit. The article
uses literatures on governance and contemporary history to examine the relevance of the
concept of the decentred state. Then it considers the case study of British politics in the
1970s as a precursor to the decentring effects of Brexit on state governance. The article
then moves to consider three dimensions of the phenomenon of Brexit which can be
understood as decentring practices in and of themselves: the referendum vote, the nego-
tiations and competing ‘imaginings’ of the United Kingdom in a post-European Union
membership environment. The article’s findings represent a fresh and novel means by
which scholars can utilise the idea of the decentred state as an intellectual tool to explain
the phenomenon of Brexit.
Keywords
Brexit, decentred state, governance, United Kingdom
Introduction
The decision for the United Kingdom to withdraw from the European Union (EU)
is the most important political and constitutional decision taken in living memory.
The decision was taken in a nation-wide referendum held on 23 June 2016.
Corresponding author:
Matt Beech, Department of Politics, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull HU6 7RX, UK.
Email: m.beech@hull.ac.uk
Public Policy and Administration
!The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0952076720905008
journals.sagepub.com/home/ppa
68 Public Policy and Administration 37(1)
The result was a victory for the two ‘Leave’ campaigns and was predicated on a
turnout of 72% of registered electors, with 52% voting to ‘Leave’ and 48% voting
to ‘Remain’. The campaign was long. It ran from 15 April to 23 June. It was often
bitter and ill-tempered. The airwaves, the press, the internet in general, and social
media in particular, were replete with arguments, data, counterpoints, misinfor-
mation and criticism. With the triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on 29
March 2017, the minority Conservative government led by Theresa May activated
the legal mechanism for the United Kingdom’s exit from the EU. In the days that
followed, the arguments continued often generating more heat than light.
Arguments abound pertaining to the shape and form of Brexit; the implementation
or ‘transition’ period; the post-membership relationships; and, most controversial-
ly, whether the British electorate wish to revisit their decision.
This article’s central thesis is that the idea of the decentred state,
1
as an expla-
nation of state governance, can be used to interpret the phenomenon of Brexit.
For Bevir (2013), the merit of decentred theory is that it: ‘...emphasizes the diver-
sity of governing practices and the importance of historical explanations of these
practices. Governance is seen as a set of diverse practices that people are constantly
creating and recreating through their concrete activity’ (1).
Bevir’s use of decentred theory interprets how state actors respond to significant
change. It gives credence to agency, ideas and beliefs and emphasises the evolution
and adaptation of traditions, practices and behaviours. This theory of a ‘diversity
of governing practices’ is a feature of the British state. There was a ‘diversity of
governing practices’ and contested narratives prior to the United Kingdom joining
the European Community on 1 January 1973 through to ratifying the Maastricht
Treaty in July 1993 and on to the June 2016 referendum, to today and beyond,
when the United Kingdom eventually exits the EU.
It is because Brexit is fundamentally a struggle about wresting sovereignty
from the EU back to the Houses of Parliament and, by so doing, altering the
governing practices of the last four decades that makes it necessarily a decentring
event. What is argued below is that regardless of whether one thinks, or desires
from a normative perspective, that Brexit will lead to the United Kingdom being
meaningfully independent of a supra-national federal politics, the sheer act of
‘Brexiting’ is a decentring event in and of itself. Evans and Menon (2017) are
correct when they suggest that: ‘Brexit will also provide the British state with
arguably its most severe peace-time challenge. The Cabinet Secretary reckons it
has few, if any, parallels in its complexity’ (Evans and Menon, 2017: 108).
The article will begin by discussing the relevance of the concept of the decentred
state as an explanatory theory of state governance in the United Kingdom. Then it
will consider the case study of British politics in the 1970s as a precursor to the
decentring effects of Brexit on state governance which was an example of an
extended period marked by shock, schism, rupture and characterised by disputes.
Next the article analyses three aspects of Brexit and how each one contributes to
the decentring of state governance: the referendum vote, the negotiation and the
competing ideational visions of the United Kingdom after EU membership.
2Public Policy and Administration 0(0)
To continue reading
Request your trial