Not ‘my economy’: A political ethnographic study of interest in the economy

Published date01 February 2022
Date01 February 2022
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/13691481211007064
Subject MatterOriginal Articles
https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481211007064
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2022, Vol. 24(1) 171 –186
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13691481211007064
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
Not ‘my economy’: A political
ethnographic study of interest
in the economy
Anna Killick
Abstract
Some political economists explain the apparent downplaying of the importance of economic
issues in political events such as Brexit with reference to the growing anger or despair people
on low incomes feel about the economy. This ‘everyday political economy’ article draws on an
ethnographic study conducted between 2016 and 2018 with residents of an English city to explore
what people think about the phenomenon of the economy. It reveals significant differences in how
interested high- and low-income participants are in the economy and its role as a bedrock for
welfare. Low-income participants are more negative about the economy, particularly contesting
politicians’ claims that it is distinct from the human sphere, when they view it as controlled by
the rich. However, reasoning is based on post-2008 crisis economic conditions, and any lack of
interest in the economy may be more calculative and temporary than is often assumed.
Keywords
Brexit, depoliticisation, economic perceptions, economic self-interest, elite economic narratives,
ethnography, everyday political economy, political behaviour, political disengagement, precariat,
studying across, understanding of the economy
Introduction
How politicians talk about ‘the economy’ in broad terms is important. Many political
economists have studied politicians’ speeches closely, concluding that while they con-
tinue to frame the economy as having the potential to benefit all, in recent years, they
have added the element of the economy as governed by global and impersonal forces
beyond their control (Burnham, 2001; Fawcett et al., 2017; Hay and Rosamond, 2002;
Watson, 2018). Economic inequality and insecurity have risen, but mainstream politi-
cians claim they cannot rectify those problems, leading low-income voters to become
alienated from discourse about the economy (Blyth, 2013; Hay, 2013). Guy Standing
(2011, 2014) argues many people on low incomes are in a state of either anger or despair
about economic issues. As a result, some withdraw from politics altogether while others
Department of Political Science, University College London (UCL), The School of Public Policy, The Rubin
Building, 29/31 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9QU, UK.
Corresponding author:
Anna Killick, University College London (UCL), London, UK.
Email: a.killick@ucl.ac.uk
1007064BPI0010.1177/13691481211007064The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsKillick
research-article2021
Original Article
172 The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 24(1)
turn to politicians who do not offer detailed economic programmes, but focus on cultural
policies or simplistic economic fixes.
However, in the absence of easily accessible and naturally occurring speeches by eve-
ryday actors about the economy, we have not so far done enough work to reveal how they
do in fact react to politicians’ narratives about the economy. This article draws on empiri-
cal research in the everyday political economy (EPE) tradition to explore how ordinary
people are conscious of, acquiesce to or contest politicians’ narratives (Elias and Rethel,
2016; Stanley, 2014; Stanley and Jackson, 2016). I used ethnographic methods in order to
listen to how people speak about the economy at length and in their own homes. By
studying 60 residents of two contrasting districts in the same city, I reveal how beliefs
vary. Are the low-income participants in a state of anger or despair about the phenomenon
of ‘the economy’?
In what follows, I set out the substance of how participants react to three main themes
in elite constructions of the economy. The first theme relates to interest in the economy,
with low-income participants showing less. The second theme relates to whether partici-
pants see the economy as the bedrock of welfare, which low-income participants do less.
The third theme relates to acceptance of the elite construction of the economy as gov-
erned by impersonal forces beyond the reach of human agency. Here the views are most
strongly divergent; while higher income participants tend to accept this construction,
lower income participants see the economy as ‘rigged by the rich’.
Regarding how they express these views, participants from both groups often give rea-
sons and show they calculate. The accounts of low-income participants are less coloured
by emotion than Standing and others suggest. In the absence of similar studies from 10 or
20 years ago, it is difficult to judge how everyday actors’ perceptions of the economy might
have changed over time. However, I evaluate what participants say about the key events
that have affected their perceptions, the 2008 crisis and the distinctive decade following,
of high employment combined with stagnant or declining incomes and greater insecurity.
I argue that the economic conditions and elite narratives in the decade leading up to this
fieldwork may have suppressed low income participants’ interest in the economy. Different
economic conditions, whether positive or negative, might encourage low-income voters to
re-engage with economic issues, even if they continue to resist economistic and depoliti-
cised framing of them.
In the next section, I set out the EPE approach and existing empirical research on
constructions of the economy. Then I explain my methods. In the section on ‘Everyday
constructions of ‘the economy’ I set out how interested research participants are in ‘the
economy’, followed by a section on how long-standing their (dis)interest is. In the con-
clusion I suggest future research agendas and what this research implies for perceptions
of the economy in the COVID-19 era.
The literature
Political economists chart the historical evolution of ‘the economy’ from being a verb
denoting management of resources to an object (Tomlinson, 2017; Tooze, 1998).
Governments from the Second World War onwards harnessed new methods of accounting
and planning to pursue their burgeoning ambitions to control the economy. They learned
to present it not just as an object, but as an object synonymous with nationhood, to
increase voter attachment to it (Mitchell, 1998). The construction of the economy changed
as governments shifted from Keynesian demand management to a neoliberal paradigm

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT