Rule maker or rule taker? Brexit, finance and UK regulatory autonomy

The compatibility in terms of domestic systems that embed specific values of particular legal traditions is a critical determinant of international cooperation. We analyze international cooperation on professional qualifications because a domestic qualification system best showcases its distinct approach to social governance. Civil law states, which value written rules and certainty, use paper examinations as a core component of competency assessment of professionals, and upon international cooperation they opt to harmonize paper examinations. Common law states regard track record as important in assessing competence, and they often mutually allow professionals from partner states who have a good track record to practice in their territory. Cooperation between civil and common law states is possible when both parties make a conscious effort to align their domestic systems. In this case, an international mechanism has features of harmonization and mutual recognition. We also consider how to generalize the findings to explain states’ attitude toward inter-governmental organizations in general.

Section: Future Research Agenda and Replication Possibilitiessupporting

confidence: 87%

Domestic legal traditions and international cooperation: Insights from domestic and international qualification systems

Hamanaka

Jusoh

2021

“…A first issue concerns institutional autonomy, a claim both sides have insisted on, but which are incompatible together (cf. James and Quaglia, 2021). The EU is keen that the Union’s decision-making autonomy – its ability to govern itself – is not undermined by the inclusion of non-members in decision-making processes.…”

Section: The Politics Of Withdrawalmentioning

confidence: 99%

When politics trumps strategy: UK–EU security collaboration after Brexit

Martill

Sus

2021

Both the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) have significant incentives for close collaboration in foreign, security and defence policies, given their shared strategic interests, the clear potential for efficiency savings in working together, and the intensity of prior working relations. That the recently negotiated EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement contains no provisions in this area is thus puzzling for followers of European security, who predicted prompt agreement, and for theories of international cooperation, which emphasise the importance of shared threats, absolute gains and prior interaction. We argue the failure to reach such an agreement stemmed from the politics of the withdrawal process itself, which resulted in acute problems of institutional selectivity, negotiating dynamics that polarised the relationship, institutional change that made an agreement less likely, and distributional scrabbling to supplant the UK. Our findings show that the dynamics of moving away from existing forms of cooperation are highly distinct from those motivating cooperation in normal times.

“…At the same time, the impact of Brexit on EU financial structures was expected to be limited – with Brexit being one factor possibly leading in the future to a significant empowerment of EU authorities in this field. James and Quaglia (2020) illustrate the preferences in finance of UK regulators during Brexit negotiations. They show that the UK government’s decision not to push for a soft Brexit for financial services can be explained by the demands of UK politicians – which ultimately took precedence over those of the financial industry – and the importance for UK regulators of retaining regulatory autonomy.…”

Section: Findings and Overview Of The Articlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Brexit effect: Political implications of the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union

Baldini

Chelotti

2021

Brexit has brought tensions in European and (especially) British politics. This article illustrates the rationale, scope and research questions of the special issue, which investigates the first Brexit effects in the five years following the 2016 referendum. Taking the distribution of political power as our primary focus and analysing mainly – though not exclusively – British politics, we trace the first developments in the three domains of politics, polity and policy since the UK’s decision to leave the EU. In the politics domain, after the political uncertainties surrounding the referendum period, we detect a return to the power-hoarding dynamics typical of the Westminster model. However, the territorial and constitutional architectures of the British polity are under considerable strain, with Brexit strengthening the nationalistic movements in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In the policy domain, despite strong common interests, Brexit has failed to produce cooperative EU–UK arrangements in finance and foreign policy.