Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Ethnographies of Movement, Sociality and Space -- Contents -- List of Figures -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Chapter 1. Growing Up with the Troubles -- Chapter 2. Crafting Identities -- Chapter 3. 'Recalling or Suggesting Phantoms' -- Chapter 4. 'Women on the Peace Line' -- Chapter 5. 'You Have No Legitimate Reason to Access' -- Chapter 6. 'Lifting the Cross' in West Belfast -- Chapter 7. Engaging amid Divisions -- Chapter 8. Belfast's Festival of Fools -- Chapter 9. Criss-crossing Pathways -- Chapter 10. Sushi or Spuds? -- Chapter 11. Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Belfast -- Afterword -- Index

AbstractThis 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.

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.

This article focuses on our observations of two contentious Orange Order parades and nationalist protests that took place in an interface area in Belfast, Northern Ireland, in June 2011 and 2012. We apply a perspective of visual ethnography as place-making ( Pink 2009 ) to our research experience in order to add to understandings of how a place of conflict is experienced, (re)produced or challenged through the use of photography and video by marchers, protesters and researchers alike. In doing so, we discuss not only the strengths of visual methods, (how they enable a greater understanding of adversarial perspectives, allow researchers to experience contestation emotionally and compel reflexivity), but also more controversial aspects of their use (the extent to which they limit what researchers notice or omit and legitimate particular versions of conflict). Last, but not least, we suggest that the ubiquitous use of 'the digital eye' in the contentious events we observed has a democratising influence over elements in the performance of conflict: challenging the presumed roles of performers and audiences; of researchers and researched; opening contentious events to a wider audience and facilitating the communication of competing narratives.

AbstractBrexit has both increased the momentum towards Scottish independence and complicated what it could mean in practice, especially if Scotland rejoins the European Union (EU). EU accession would re-open the flow of goods, people, services and capital between Scotland and other EU member-states; a corollary of this, however, would be new restrictions on movement between Scotland and its non-EU neighbours. Effective border management entails a variety of 'at the border' and 'behind the border' processes. As much as these would require dedicated infrastructure and trained personnel, they would ultimately depend upon reliable data/information and good communication among myriad agencies, including on the other side of the border. Fundamentally, the nature and form of the border controls would be determined largely by the relationship that an independent Scotland had with the remainder of the UK—and, principally, on the relationship that the UK develops with the EU.

Next is the collective chapter by Hayward, Leary and Komarova on the the Irish border, an empirical topic that is of great importance and likely to reveal much for the future. It shows the challenges of managing the Irish border after Brexit, the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union centred on a campaign to 'take back control' of its borders. This objective was largely assumed to mean controls on the movement of people through British sea and airports. The movement of goods and services across the UK's 500km land border with the EU was given scant consideration. Two and a half years on, it has proven to be the most complicated challenge for the Brexit process - and one that creates an incredibly complex case for future border management. The border that partitions Northern Ireland from the rest of the island of Ireland has been contested since it was drawn (as a 'temporary measure') almost a century ago. Whilst unionists have seen it as a vital means of preserving British culture and rule in Northern Ireland, Irish nationalists detest it as a lingering manifestation of British colonialism. This is a result of two key processes that fundamentally changed the relationship between the UK and Ireland. First, the peace process built on the 1998 Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement and, secondly, their common membership of the EU. In fact, the benefits of free movement of goods and services through the UK and Ireland's common membership of the EU's customs union and single market really couldn't be properly felt in the Irish border region until the peace process bore fruit. Apart from showing the big macro picture and the historical context in depth they also incorporate the micro community level with the Pettigo case study.