Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Neoliberalization, uneven development, and Brexit

Electronic data


Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Neoliberalization, uneven development, and Brexit: Further reflections on the organic crisis of the British state and society

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

<mark>Journal publication date</mark>2018
<mark>Journal</mark>European Planning Studies
Issue number9
Number of pages19
Pages (from-to)1728-1746
Publication StatusPublished
Early online date19/07/18
<mark>Original language</mark>English


Neoliberalization is a variegated series of processes with a core policy set that comprises: liberalization, deregulation, privatization, recommodification, internationalization, reductions in direct taxation, and decriminalization of predatory economic activities. Compared to the era of Atlantic Fordism and Spatial Keynesianism, neoliberalization promotes uneven development in the name of competitiveness and pursues policies that largely neglect its adverse economic, social, and political repercussions. Growing inequalities of income, wealth and life-chances have been ascending the political risk agenda and, through works such as Piketty's Capital in the twenty-first Century, have been conversationalized'. Yet little concrete action occurs to remedy the results of uneven development in societies undergoing neoliberal regime shifts. This contribution relates these issues to Brexit as a symptom of the organic crisis of British society, marked by manifold economic, political and social crises, and the continuing failure to address uneven development. The referendum question falsely posited that Brexiting would resolve many of these problems. However, the real issue should have been in' or out' of neoliberalism. Failure to deliver the anticipated benefits of Brexit will interact with the continuing crisis of British society to reinforce environmental, economic, social, and political crises and provide further grounds for right-wing populist mobilization.

Bibliographic note

Written for special 25th anniversary issue of European Planning Studies