nach oben

Erschienen in:

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

The Scope and Specificity of Economic Relations Between the EU and the United Kingdom in Brexit Case

verfasst von : Rasa Daugėlienė, Paulius Puskunigis

Erschienen in: Brexit

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The scientific research problem was formulated: how to explain controversial UK position regarding the membership in the EU? The aim of the study is to prognosticate the future of economic international relations between the EU and the UK in Brexit case. The tasks of the study are to systemise the dynamics of the EU and the United Kingdom economic relations in the perspective of history; to predict possible EU-UK relations scenarios after the Brexit; as well as to investigate the opinion of experts regarding the research object. The research methods used: literature analysis, focusing on primary sources but also including secondary sources; survey of experts using structured questionnaires with closed questions. The design of the study is formed in chronological order. It includes a historical analysis of the UK’s road to the European Communities, as well as the dynamics of the UK’s membership in the EU. The study also includes analysis of secondary sources to identify the most conceivable Brexit strategy, and then analysing the possible impacts of the most probable scenarios, which are based on that strategy. The key results address a few propositions. To begin with, although British were among the conceptualists of European integration, it took almost 20 years when the UK finally became a member of the developing EU. Those two decades had negative economic implications for British economy as it missed out opportunities provided by the common market. The eventual UK membership boosted most of the numbers concerning the British economy, however, disagreements with the EU still existed, particularly through issues of EU Budget contributions and immigration. Moreover, the “hard” Brexit is understood as the most probable Brexit strategy. In this case, the future EU-UK relation scenarios range is very limited. It includes a presumable Free Trade Agreement or bilateral trade based on World Trade Organization rules. We conclude that neither of those two solutions would ensure the UK trade with EU without tariffs or quantitative restrictions.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Impact of the Article 50 of TEU on Migration of the EU Workers in Case of Brexit

See Crafts (2016), p. 1.

Read Vitkus (2013), pp. 84–85 and Ehring (2002), p. 921.

Dedman (2006).

For details read Johnson (2015).

See Dedman (2006), p. 16.

See Dedman (2006), pp. 20–21.

For a more detailed analysis read Johnson (2015), Chapter 17 “The Wooing of America”.

See Dedman (2006), p. 25.

For details read Vitkus et al. (2008).

See Dedman (2006), p. 22.

To find more numbers about the Marshall Plan read Daugėlienė (2011), pp. 18–19.

To find more details about ECA and OEEC, read Vitkus et al. (2008), Daugėlienė (2011), Gifford (2016), Young (2015).

See Dedman (2006), p. 28.

Vitkus et al. (2008), p. 202.

Read Johnson (2015), Chapter 20 “Churchill the European”.

See Dedman (2006), p. 57.

For more details read Pukelienė (2008).

See Dockrill and Young (1989), p. 2.

Dedman (2006) and Gifford (2016).

Dockrill and Young (1989), p. 6.

See Dedman (2006), p. 106.

See Dedman (2006). pp. 107–110.

Dedman (2006), p. 110.

Vitkus et al. (2008).

See Dedman (2006), p. 111.

To read more see Dedman (2006).

For more analysis read Young (2015), pp. 1253–1275.

Vitkus (2013), p. 84.

See Dedman (2006), p. 106.

Crafts (2016), p. 1.

For a more detailed information read Dedman (2006).

See McDonald and Deardem (2005), p. 329.

McDonald and Deardem (2005), p. 334.

Crafts (2016), p. 15.

Research made by Badinger (2005), p. 53.

For a more detailed information read Crafts (2016).

Webb et al. (2016), p. 3.

Vitkus (2013), p. 85.

For a detailed analysis read Vitkus et al. (2008).

Dedman (2006).

Webb et al. (2016), p. 9.

Read Begg (2016), pp. 39–47.

See Webb et al. (2016), p. 10.

Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 14.

Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 25.

To get more information read Vitkus et al. (2008).

See Crafts (2016), p. 8.

For more analysis of European social policy read Vitkus et al. (2008).

See Vitkus et al. (2013), p. 274.

Dustmann and Frattini (2014).

Webb et al. (2016), p. 7.

Made my Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 26.

Read the article by Piris (2016) to get a more detailed information about each relation model.

See Piris (2016), p. 10.

Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016).

Holmes et al. (2016).

See Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 17.

See UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), p. 24.

Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 17.

See Kierzenkowski et al. (2016), p. 19.

Piris (2016).

UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), p. 33.

“The EU’s financial services ‘passport’ means that financial services firms authorised in the UK can provide their services across the EU, without the need for further authorisations.” (Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union. 2016).

See Kierzenkowski et al. (2016).

Piris (2016), p. 10.

For a more detailed analysis read Van Marrewijk et al. (2012).

See Van Marrewijk et al. (2012), p. 243.

Lea (2017), p. 3.

Piris (2016), p. 11.

See Piris (2016), p. 10.

UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), p. 16.

See UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), pp. 35–38.

UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), p. 38.

UK Policy Paper: Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016), p. 35.

See Trade and Investment Balance of Competence Review (2013), p. 55.

Alternatives to membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union (2016) 9781474129442. HM Government, London

Badinger H (2005) Growth effects of economic integration: evidence from the EU member states. Rev World Econ 141(1):50–78CrossRef

Begg I (2016) The EU budget and UK contribution. Natl Inst Econ Rev 236(1):39–47CrossRef

Crafts N (2016) The growth effects of EU membership for the UK: a review of the evidence

Daugėlienė R (2011) ES ekonominė integracija: priežastys, raida, perspektyvos. Technologija, Kaunas

Dedman M (2006) The origins and development of the European Union 1945–1995: a history of European integration. Routledge, Abingdon

Dockrill ML, Young JW (1989) British Foreign Policy, 1945–1956. Springer, BerlinCrossRef

Dumčiuvienė D (2010) Europos ekonominė integracija. Technologija, Kaunas

Dustmann C, Frattini T (2014) The fiscal effects of immigration to the UK. Econ J 124(580):F593–F643CrossRef

Ehring L (2002) De Facto discrimination in world trade law. J World Trade 36:921CrossRef

Gifford C (2016) The United Kingdom’s Eurosceptic political economy. Br J Polit Int Relat 18(4):779–794CrossRef

Holmes P, Rollo J, Winters LA (2016) Negotiating the UK’s post-Brexit trade arrangements. Natl Inst Econ Rev 238(1):R22–R30CrossRef

Johnson B (2015) Churchilio veiksnys. Kaip vienas žmogus lėmė istoriją. Tyto alba, Vilnius

Kierzenkowski R, Pain N, Rusticelli E, Zwart S (2016) The economic consequences of Brexit: a taxing decision. OECD Economic Policy Papers, (16)

Lea R (2017) Brexit update: and trade can thrive under WTO rules

Mcdonald F, Dearden S (2005) European economic integration, 4th edn. Pearson Education, Harlow

Piris J (2016) If the UK votes to leave. The seven alternatives to EU membership. Centre for European Reform, London

Pukelienė V (2008) Ekonominė integracija: teorija, ES politika ir procesai. Kaunas, VDU

Trade and Investment Balance of Competence Review (2013) London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Europos Sąjungos teisė (2007), 5th edn. Eugrimas, Vilnius

Van Marrewijk C, Ottens D, Schueller S (2012) International economics, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Vitkus G (2013) Jungtinė Karalystė ir Europos integracija. Europos mozaika. 28 Europos Sąjungos valstybės. Eugrimas, Vilnius, pp 84–85

Vitkus G, Grikienis R, Maniokas K, Martikonis R, Sinkevičius E, Vilpišauskas R (2008) Europos Sąjunga. Enciklopedinis žinynas, 3rd edn. Eugrimas, Vilnius

Webb D, Keep M, Wilton M (2016) In brief: UK-EU economic relations. House of Commons Library Briefing Paper, 6091

Young AR (2015) Liberalizing trade, not exporting rules: the limits to regulatory co-ordination in the EU’s ‘new generation’preferential trade agreements. J Eur Public Policy 22(9):1253–1275CrossRef

Titel: The Scope and Specificity of Economic Relations Between the EU and the United Kingdom in Brexit Case
verfasst von: Rasa Daugėlienė
Paulius Puskunigis
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Brexit
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73413-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-73414-9

Copyright-Jahr: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73414-9_16