Abstract
AbstractThis paper promotes the idea of a culturally‐sensitive Tiebout–Hirschman–Rothschild mechanism underpinning the UK's 2016 Brexit result. Our culture‐based development (CBD) model asserts a trade‐off between two rival types of voting: voting with one's feet or voting in a radical way due to being unable to vote with one's feet, akin to a protest vote. We explore the effects on the Brexit vote of shares of public spending on culture and a particular type of migration dynamic that triggers social closure. Our findings reveal that strong support for the Leave campaign was encountered in areas with lower local government expenditure on culture and in areas with higher outflows of UK residents. Previous literature had found that left‐behind places and places with concentrations of highly educated commuters are the pro‐Brexit nests. Our CBD mechanism of perceived relative deprivation offers a reconciling explanation of these seemingly controversial findings.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
