The article explores the theoretical capabilities of the fusion approach as a conceptual 'kit' to explain the 'bigger picture' of European integration from a local government perspective. Fusion addresses the rationales and methods facilitating the transfer of policy-making competences to the European level. It understands European integration as a merging of public resources and policy instruments from multiple levels of government, whereby accountability and responsibilities for policy outcomes become blurred. The article argues that the fusion approach is useful to explain the systemic linkages between macro-trajectories and the corresponding change at the local level; the fusion dynamics of the local and European levels in a common policy-2 cycle; the attitudes of local actors towards the EU. Although the article concludes that local government is rather modestly 'fused' into the EU, fusion approaches allow examining the extent to which the local level has become integrated into the European governance system.

The article explores a new, dynamic conceptual framework to understand the relations between local government and the European Union (EU). It argues that, first, the fusion approach explains the systemic linkages between European integration and corresponding change within cities, counties and municipalities. Secondly, fusion dynamics are slowly emerging across European and local levels, whereby competencies and resources are merging and policies become synchronised under Europe 2020 and the European Cohesion Policy. Thirdly, the fusion approach provides an understanding of the attitudes of local actors towards European integration. In order to show the relevance of fusion, the article presents the findings of five empirical indicators: the absorption of EU policies and legislation; attention towards EU policies; institutional adaptation; EUrelated action of local government and attitudes towards European integration. It also compares local government in two contrasting regions with regard to their political autonomy -North Rhine-Westphalia in Germany and the North West of England.

On 24 June 2016, a narrow majority of citizens of the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, a decision which has exposed deep divisions in British society. This article analyses the extent to which the campaign to leave the EU and its aftermath can be explained in terms of existing definitions of ‘populism’. It distinguishes between a ‘thin’ and ‘thick’ ideology of populism. Whereas the ‘thin’ ideology refers to a specific political method or style, one which claims to represent the ‘true people’ against a ruling elite, the ‘thick’ ideology focuses on substantial ideological elements, e.g. authoritarian and nationalist worldviews. The paper demonstrates that the Brexit campaign has been dominated by exclusive, right-wing populist ideas. In order to understand the appeal of populist parties and movements in the UK, the paper explores the multi-layered factors that have led to widespread support for the anti-European and anti-immigration politics. It argues that a mix of economic, political and cultural disenfranchisement is a root cause of the vote for Brexit. In this light, the Brexit rhetoric of ‘taking back control’ can be interpreted as a (problematic) attempt to overcome disenfranchisement.

No abstract

The political earthquake represented by Brexit encapsulates wider trends currently shaping European societies: a populist turn against migration and free movement, the revival of protectionist and anti‐free trade economic policies, the growth of nationalism and xenophobia, and scepticism towards the benefits of globalisation. This chapter explores the reasons behind the populist turn in UK society, arguing that these are rooted in an economic, cultural, and political disenfranchisement of citizens that dates back decades but which has been exacerbated by the austerity policies of recent times. The chapter analyses ‘Brexit populism’ in terms of its particular political tactics, style and ideology: while sharing certain typical populist traits, populism in Britain is inflected in interesting ways. It shows the significance of one of the many lines of division in the Brexit vote by comparing and contrasting attitudes in Scotland and England, pointing to some of the mediating national and cultural factors and highlighting where and why populists fail to gain ground.