Political Science and International Studies

There is a growing acceptance in the literature of a potentially significant causal role for ideas about globalization in shaping the trajectory of policy and institutional reform in contemporary Europe. Yet we still know remarkably little about policy-makers' understandings of globalization, save those they choose to declare publicly. This paper contributes to the important task of operationalizing empirically this key set of ideational variables. Using factor analysis of new survey data collected by the authors it maps and compares UK and Irish policy-maker's understandings of, and orientations towards, globalization. The analysis reveals considerable similarities in the ordering of assumptions and attitudes towards globalization between the two country cases and between civil servants and parliamentarians. Yet it also shows some subtle and intriguing differences between policy-makers' responses in the UK and Ireland and between elected and unelected officials. Intriguingly, it also suggests a significant disparity between politicians' private understandings and public discourses of globalization, with the former less necessitarian in tone than the latter. Above all, it suggests that Anglophone globalization discourse in Europe is principally structured in terms of a number of dimensions which relate to the acceptance or rejection of a series of core neoliberal premises. In effect, the terms and internal architecture of globalization discourse in the UK and Ireland are defined by neoliberal assumptions, to the extent that they provide the core point of reference and orientation for even the most sceptical and critical of views.

In recent times, issues surrounding change have become increasingly important in the study of political analysis. This is especially true within strains of new institutionalism such as historical institutionalism and the ‘Varieties of Capitalism’ approach. However, although this has led to a sensitising towards the temporal dimension, the spatial dimension has been relatively ignored. This is arguably problematic, as a fuller understanding of space and the spatiality of social and political relations would lead to more coherent and accurate analyses of political phenomena that currently characterise historical institutionalism. Indeed at an ontological level, drawing on work within the natural sciences and geography, it is impossible to talk of time without reference to spatiality and of space without reference to temporality. This short article reviews some of the more prominent historical institutionalist literature that deals with change and renders explicit the problematic conceptualisation of space, and consequently time, which underpins their analyses. Drawing on Massey and Sayer, it proceeds to outline briefly a relational conception of space and the difference that space makes to political analyses.

Abstract.  Recent years have seen growing interest in the political power of ideas, especially in debates about globalisation and European integration. As is now widely noted, constructions of globalisation and European integration may play a powerful causal role in shaping policy prescriptions across Europe. Yet, while a substantial body of theoretical literature has pointed to the need for sustained empirical analysis of such discourses, little systematic and comparative analysis has been undertaken into policy makers' attitudes towards globalisation, European integration and the relationship between the two. This article presents the initial findings of a survey of elite political attitudes to globalisation and European integration in the United Kingdom and Ireland. The authors develop and apply a theoretical schema for the classification and mapping of such discourses. Their analysis reveals, on the one hand, the range and diversity of discourses of globalisation and European integration among elite political actors and, on the other, the continued prevalence of specific conceptions (and indeed misperceptions) of globalisation in particular that have now been challenged empirically. They identify a series of core tensions and contradictions within elite political discourse in both the United Kingdom and Ireland. This suggests a certain frailty in the prevalent understanding of globalisation to which elite political actors would otherwise seem committed when confronted with its distributive consequences.

This article engages with debates about the trajectory of contemporary European political economies, emphasising in particular the need to map processes of policy change over time (by placing contemporary developments in historical perspective) and space (by considering a variety of policy areas). The article then explores these issues with respect to the Irish case. Placing more recent developments within historical perspective, it argues that the trajectory of the Irish state is not best characterised in terms of a shift from one state form (the ‘activist state’) to another (‘the competition state’). Rather, the path of Irish economic and social policy has been both highly complex and (at times) contradictory, so that change is best characterised in terms of the ebb and flow of tendencies and counter-tendencies rather than in terms of a shift between state forms.

The fact that Britain will, at most, be a late signatory to the single European currency means that the strategic deliberations it faces in deciding whether to enter EMU are rather different to those of earlier entrants. However, this crucial point is lost in almost all discussion of the subject. To date, the academic debate has been dominated by what we term ‘prospective accountancy’, in which a series of abstract counterfactuals ostensibly inform a stylised cost–benefit analysis. This article moves beyond such an approach by combining conjectures about the specificities of the British case with a concrete analysis of the experiences of the Eurozone member whose economy appears most closely to resemble Britain’s: namely, Ireland. The comparative dimension of our work facilitates more empirically-based analysis of the merits and demerits of British entry into EMU. Yet, it is important not to lose sight of the limits of an exclusively comparative approach, for the British growth model is qualitatively different to that of other European Union economies. British growth since the early 1990s has been consumption led, and this in turn has been fuelled to a considerable degree by the release of equity from the housing market. The likely impact of EMU on the British economy will be determined to a significant extent, then, by its effect upon this key catalyst of British growth. Sadly, no retrospective comparison can inform such an assessment.

The Irish Republic has been widely hailed as a 'showpiece of globalisation'. This article argues that although Ireland has experienced considerable change in recent years, there is little evidence to suggest that it has indeed been 'globalised'. Yet the discursive construction of globalisation may in itself play an independent causal role in shaping political outcomes. The article thus also explores the role of ideas about globalisation in shaping Irish policy change.

Once the 'sick man of Europe', the Irish Republic is now hailed as the 'Celtic Tiger'. Commentators and politicians, both within and outside Ireland, point to the Republic's supposedly dazzling economic success as evidence of how nations can flourish in a globalised world. I question this notion, suggesting that Ireland's improved economic performance is best explained by a combination of factors, which cannot simply be lumped under the term 'globalisation'. Indeed, they seem directly to contradict many of the arguments made in the name of globalisation. However, I also contend that ideas about globalisation may play an increasingly important role in Irish economic developments.