Contesting sovereignty and borders: Northern Ireland, devolution and the Union

Murphy, Mary C.; Evershed, Jonathan

doi:10.1080/21622671.2021.1892518

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Membership to the European Union (EU) complemented Northern Ireland’s peace process as it provided Unionists and Nationalists with a context that surpassed their ideological, political, and territorial differences (Hayward, 2018; Hayward & Murphy, 2018; Murphy & Evershed, 2021). Critical to this was access to the EU single market, which facilitated the free movement of goods and people across the previously contested Ireland–Northern Ireland border, and as such reduced its salience in everyday life (Hayward, 2018).…”

Section: Group Identification and Construction Of Political Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brexit: Threat or opportunity? Nationalist identification is related to the perceived likelihood of a United Ireland.

Shelly¹,

Muldoon²,

Roth³

2023

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Northern Ireland has long been a contested territory. The 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement seemed to offer a resolution to the long-standing conflict. However, it has been reawakened by Brexit. Brexit presents a threat in Northern Ireland because it raises the divisive question of the United Kingdom's sovereignty over the region and the issue of the border. However, despite Nationalists'-a political identity group associated with the political ideology of Irish reunification-initial opposition to Brexit, many in this group now view Brexit as a potential opportunity to achieve their political goal of Irish unity. The aim of the present research is to examine the combined influence of the Nationalist's identity and perceived Brexit threat on people's understanding of the proximity of this political goal. We specifically test whether Nationalists' strength of group identification, and the threat of Brexit, is linked to how likely people believe a United Ireland has become. In two studies, we found evidence for the prediction that strong ingroup identification is related to the perception that a United Ireland is more likely. In the second study, path analysis showed that this relationship is conditional on perceived threat. For Nationalists with stronger ingroup identification, the threat of Brexit is greater. Combined, these factors are linked to an increased sense that a United Ireland is likely. In the discussion, we consider the implications of our findings for polarization in this postagreement society. Public Significance StatementThis study suggests that, in contexts of political instability, strong group identification and threat may be associated with people's perceptions of political opportunity. Additionally, it highlights the importance of considering the role of identity and threat to understand people's political preferences in a society with preexisting divisions.

show abstract

Section: Group Identification and Construction Of Political Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brexit: Threat or opportunity? Nationalist identification is related to the perceived likelihood of a United Ireland.

Shelly¹,

Muldoon²,

Roth³

2023

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As sovereignty is highly contested, depending on specific priorities, interpretations, and subjects, it is obvious that many sovereignty studies deal with borderlands and political conflict (Jones, 2012; Kraudzun, 2017; Murphy & Evershed, 2021; Stein, 2016). The securitisation of the border through the construction of roads, fences, and floodlights transgresses and ignores the imposition of sovereign authority at the previously open and lightly guarded border.…”

Section: Geographies Of Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking geographies of sovereignty: Towards a conceptual framework of situated sovereignty

Lange,

Pütz,

Herlo

2023

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We engage with debates on shifting geographies of sovereignty in the digital age by providing a conceptual framework for “situated sovereignty”. Our contribution draws on a review of the scholarly literature and current sovereignty practices. We aim to move beyond state‐centred and territorial understandings of sovereignty. A common discussion is the necessity of reconfiguring notions of sovereignty. However, hardly any studies have discussed the sociospatial configurations of practising sovereignty in the digital present. We conceptualise practices of sovereignty along intersecting strands of scholarly literature that have scarcely been related, drawing from political geography, science and technology studies, and critical digitalisation studies. Reviewing the literature, we identify three fields framing current practices of sovereignty—(i) state and territory, (ii) civic engagement, and (iii) digitalisation—based on which we develop a conceptual framework of situated sovereignty. Our framework addresses the situated role of sovereignty practices from a spatial point of view. We propose pragmatism, legitimacy, and governance as three analytical themes for better understanding current and future shifting geographies of sovereignty and enhancing sovereignty studies.

show abstract

“…The Protocol arises from recognition of the unique historical, geographical and political position of Northern Ireland. This position is one of deep and intrinsic connection to both Britain and Ireland (Murphy & Evershed, 2021; Walsh, 2019). The dependence upon them is not exclusively felt by unionists for Britain and nationalists for Ireland, but it is a dependence of the whole region – in economic, legal, cultural, social and policy terms – upon both of them, and thus of the relationship between them.…”

Section: Northern Ireland's Already‐precarious Positionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…connection to both Britain and Ireland (Murphy & Evershed, 2021;Walsh, 2019). The dependence upon them is not exclusively felt by unionists for Britain and nationalists for Ireland, but it is a dependence of the whole regionin economic, legal, cultural, social and policy termsupon both of them, and thus of the relationship between them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland: Past, Present, and Future Precariousness

Hayward

Komarova

2022

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland in the UK–EU Withdrawal Agreement as a ‘flexible and imaginative’ response to the problems that Brexit has created for the island of Ireland. It looks at the purpose of the Protocol and its origins, noting the reasons why flexibility was required from both sides. It then considers the ways in which precariousness from its conception has been demonstrated in its first year of operation. This focuses upon four main areas: implementation, dynamic alignment, the democratic consent vote, and the UK–EU relationship. Its core argument is the ‘flexibility’ that the Protocol requires also means a certain degree of ambiguity. In the absence of a stable UK–EU relationship, this precariousness could exacerbate the difficulties of meeting the policy challenges that surround the Protocol for Northern Ireland, the UK, Ireland and the EU.

show abstract

Contesting sovereignty and borders: Northern Ireland, devolution and the Union

Cited by 11 publications

References 53 publications

Brexit: Threat or opportunity? Nationalist identification is related to the perceived likelihood of a United Ireland.

Brexit: Threat or opportunity? Nationalist identification is related to the perceived likelihood of a United Ireland.

Rethinking geographies of sovereignty: Towards a conceptual framework of situated sovereignty

The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland: Past, Present, and Future Precariousness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About