Suchergebnisse

This book explores how stateless nationalist and regionalist parties across Western Europe have responded to the twin challenges of multi-level politics, and a multi-dimensional policy space, whereby they must articulate policy proposals alongside their territorial demands.It was published as a special issue of Regional and Federal Studies.

This research provides an overview of the potential social impacts of Brexit on individuals and communities in Scotland. It complements economic analyses of Brexit, which tend to focus on impacts on businesses, the economy and GDP. The paper begins by discussing the impacts of the Brexit referendum on people in Scotland since June 2016 to the present day, which include slower economic growth and immigration uncertainty. The research then explores the potential impacts of Brexit going forward under three scenarios: a hard Brexit, a softer Brexit and a no-trade deal Brexit. People's legal rights, access to funding and public services, and employment, housing and consumer spending prospects are then analysed from the perspective of different equalities groups. An in-depth analysis of potential impacts is also provided through a case study on women. The key findings are that the potential socioeconomic effects of any type of Brexit will likely to be widespread across equalities groups; and equalities groups are also likely to feel the shared loss of EU funding, European citizenship and other EU social rights and protections that are not transposed into domestic law or which will likely come to an end (i.e. European Health Insurance Card). However, the likelihood of these impacts happening depends on several variables, as yet unknown, including the closeness of the future UK-EU relationship, trade agreements with other countries, and the UK Government's post-Brexit policy agenda.

Had Scotland voted for independence in September 2014, it would have gained all the paraphernalia of statehood, including full rights over citizenship. But despite the "no", can we still detect a Scottish citizenship without the machinery of statehood? This article examines Scotland's ability to influence citizenship and migration policy from two perspectives. First, from a legal perspective, it examines the Scottish government's limited control over citizenship, nationality and migration legislation, although it has a broader scope to develop its own approach to migrant integration. Next, the article considers citizenship from a broader political and sociological perspective, focusing on the extent to which the three facets of citizenship identified by Marshall in 1950—civil, social and political rights—have been decentralized with the creation of the Scottish Parliament. Finally, the article examines the ways in which the Scottish approach to citizenship has diverged from the uk (English) approach.

This article explores how the issue of immigration was debated by Scottish and UK political actors during the Scottish independence referendum. It considers the longer-term positions of Scottish elites on immigration, before focussing on the ways in which the Yes camp's liberal, multiculturalist approach contrasted sharply with the more restrictive, assimilationist position of the UK Government. The article concludes by considering Scottish voter attitudes towards immigration, before reflecting on the reasons why Scottish parties have adopted a welcoming approach to New Scots.

Citizenship is usually regarded as the exclusive domain of the state. However, changes to the structure of states resulting from decentralisation and globalisation have required a re-conceptualisation of citizenship, as authority is dispersed, identities multiply and political entitlements vary across territorial levels. Decentralisation has endowed regions with control over a wide range of areas relating to welfare entitlements, education and cultural integration that were once controlled by the state. This has created a new form of 'regional citizenship' based on rights, participation and membership at the regional level. The question of who does or does not belong to a region has become a highly politicised question. In particular, this article examines stateless nationalist and regionalist parties' (SNRPs) conceptions of citizenship and immigration. Given that citizenship marks a distinction between members and outsiders of a political community, immigration is a key tool for deciding who is allowed to become a citizen. Case study findings on Scotland, Quebec and Catalonia reveal that although SNRPs have advocated civic definitions of the region and welcome immigration as a tool to increase the regional population, some parties have also levied certain conditions on immigrants' full participation in the regional society and political life as a means to protect the minority culture of the region. Adapted from the source document.