Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What has Scottish devolution changed? Sectors, territory and polity-building

  • Original Article
  • Published:
British Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

Generating systematic knowledge on devolution's impact upon polity-building in Scotland remains a considerable challenge. Convinced that a theory-driven method is essential, this article advocates analysis of change in the Scottish polity through a new approach rooted in institutionalist theory to studying the regulation of sectors of public and collective action. Labelled ‘territorial-institutionalism’, this approach studies actor usages of representations of territory as key political resources for legitimising the institutionalisation of sectors and, thence, of polity-building. In applying territorial institutionalism to two sectors – whisky and fisheries – we identify a plurality of actor evocations of territory which fall into three categories: polity-building, sector-building and identity-building. Moreover, we distinguish three political usages of these evocations in the (re-)institutionalisation of each sector post-devolution: (re-)setting the boundaries of their regulatory instruments; modifying the access of stakeholders to decisional arenas; and legitimising/de-legitimising policy instruments and actor influence during conflict. We conclude first that devolution has facilitated change in both sectors. However, inter-sectoral differences highlight the importance of how actors link different representations of territory. Second, we argue that analysis cannot be limited to Scottish arenas, but must include the engagement of Scottish actors in extra-national arenas in general, and those of the European Union in particular.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Conducted by A. Smith, the research on whisky entailed a series of semi-structured interviews conducted with staff of the Scotch Whisky Association and the Confédération européenne des producteurs de spiritueux (CEPS), officials from the Scottish Government and the European Commission and managers of whisky producing companies. This study was financed by the Aquitaine Regional Council through Sciences Po Bordeaux’s ‘Délibération et gouvernance’ programme. Research on fisheries was carried out by C. Carter within her British Academy-funded project: ‘Better Regulation’ and the Transformation of UK–AEU Fisheries: A Re-defining of Regional Governance. Research included observation of an actor/practitioner seminar on sustainable fisheries and the conduct of both semi-structured interviews and discussions with actors from the following groups: catchers, processors, environmental NGOs, single-issue networks, government officials from the UK and Scottish Government, European Commission officials (DG Fish), Scottish, UK and EU parliamentary officials, MEPs and scientists. Finally, we would also like to thank the editors of British Politics and their anonymous referees for both pushing and encouraging us to rework, and hopefully clarify, the arguments developed within this piece.

  2. This is particularly evident in edited books on devolution where insufficient attention has been paid to applying analytical grids across a representative range of sectors to generate findings in a systematic and genuinely comparable way.

  3. For an exception to this trend, see MacPhail (2008).

References

  • Abélès, M. (1996) En attente d’Europe. Paris: l’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. and Schmueker, K. (2006) Introduction and Overview. In: J. Adams, and K. Schmueker, (eds.) Devolution in Practice 2006: Public Policy Differences Within the UK, London: Institute for Public Policy Research, pp. 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, R. (2004) Théorie de la Regulation. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulmer, S., Burch, B., Carter, C., Hogwood, P. and Scott, A. (2002) European Policy-Making Under Devolution: Transforming Britian into Multi-Level Governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P. (2006) Venue shift following devolution: When reserved meets devolved in Scotland. Regional and Federal Studies 16 (4): 429–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P. (2007a) Using devolution to set the agenda? Venue shift and the smoking ban in Scotland. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9: 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, P. (2007b) A ‘multiple lenses’ approach to policy change: The case of tobacco policy in the UK. British Politics 2: 45–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. (2008a) Identifying causality in public institutional change. The adaptation of the National Assembly for Wales to the European Union. Public Administration 86 (2): 345–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. (2008b) Globalization, Scottish fisheries and ‘political work’: Global–EU–local dialectics. In: B. Jullien and A. Smith (eds.) Industries and Globalization: The Political Causality of Divergent Responses. London: Palgrave, pp. 149–181.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. and Smith, A. (2008) Revitalizing public policy approaches to the EU: ‘Territorial institutionalism’, fisheries and wine. Journal of European Public Policy 15 (2): 263–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, R. and Collier, D. (2002) Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labour Movement and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crean, K. and Wisher, S. (2000) Is there the will to manage fisheries at local level in the European Union? A case study from Scotland. Marine Policy 24: 471–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deeg, R. (2005) Change from within: German and Italian finance in the 1990s. In: W. Streeck and K. Thelen (eds.) Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 169–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnan, H. and Wilson, T. (1999) Borders: Frontiers and Identity, Nation and State. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, E. (2005) Introduction. In: E. Eriksen (ed.) Making the European Polity: Reflexive Integration in the European Union. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genieys, W. and Smyrl, M. (2008) Elites, Ideas, and the Evolution of Public Policy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S. (2006) The politics of health policy divergence. In: J. Adams and K. Schmueker (eds.) Devolution in Practice 2006. Public Policy Differences Within the UK. London: Institute for Public Policy Research, pp. 98–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guigner, S. (2008) L’institutionnalisation d’un espace européen de la santé. Phd Dissertation, University of Rennes I.

  • Hall, P. (1986) Governing the Economy. The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassenteufel, P. (2005) De la comparaison internationale à la comparaison transnationale. Les déplacements de la construction d’objets comparatives en matière de politiques publiques. Revue française de science politique 55 (1): 113–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth, J., Schmitter, P. and Streek, W. (eds.) (1994) Governing Capitalist Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jobert, B. and Muller, P. (1987) L’Etat en Action. Politiques Publiques et Corporatismes. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jullien, B. and Smith, A. (eds.) (2008) Industries and Globalization: The Political Causality of Difference. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2005) The Government of Scotland: Public Policy Making After Devolution. Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (ed.) (2007) Scottish Social Democracy: Progressive Ideas for Public Policy. Brussels, Belgium: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. and McEwen, N. (2005) Introduction: Devolution and public policy in comparative perspective. Regional and Federal Studies 15 (4): 413–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagroye, J. (1997) Sociologie Politique. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacPhail, E. (2008) Changing EU governance: A new opportunity for the Scottish Executive? Regional and Federal Studies 18 (1): 19–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. and Olsen, J. (1989) Rediscovering Institutions. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. (2004) Scotland: Expectation, policy types and devolution. In: A. Trench (ed.) Has Devolution Made A Difference? The State of the Nations 2004. Exeter, UK: Imprint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter, M. (2003) Intergovernmental relations and public administration: Introduction. In: B. Peters and J. Pierre (eds.) Handbook of Public Administration. London: Sage, pp. 59–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (1996) The path to European integration. Comparative Political Studies 29 (2): 123–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. (1987) The Comparative Method. Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert, C. (2004) Doing politics and pretending not to. The commission's role in distributing aid to Eastern Europe. In: A. Smith (ed.) Politics and the European Commission. Actors, Interdependence, Legitimacy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumford, C. (2008) Introduction: Citizens and borderwork in Europe. Space and Polity 12 (1): 1–12.

  • Schlesinger, P.H., Miller, D. and Dinan, W. (2001) Open Scotland? Journalists, Spin Doctors and Lobbyists. Edinburgh, UK: Polygon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2004) Le gouvernement de l’Union européenne. Une sociologie politique. Paris: LGDJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2008) Territory and the regulation of industry: Examples from Scotland and Aquitaine. Regional and Federal Studies 18 (1): 37–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2009a) How the WTO matters to industry: The case of Scotch Whisky. unpublished paper.

  • Smith, A. (2009b) Industries as spaces for the politics of territory: The case of Scotch whisky. unpublished paper.

  • Symes, D. and Crean, K. (1995) Historic prejudice and invisible boundaries: Dilemmas for the development of the common fisheries policy. In: G. Blake, W. Hildesley, R. Pratt, R. Ridley, and C. Schofield (eds.) The Peaceful Management of Transboundary Resources. London: Graham and Trotman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, K. and Steinmo, S. (1992) Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. In: S. Steinmo, K. Thelen and K. Longstreth (eds.) Structuring Politics, Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trench, A. (ed.) (2004) Has Devolution Made A Difference? The State of the Nations 2004. Exeter, UK: Imprint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. (2004) Scotland and the EU: All bark and no bite? In: A. Wright (ed.) Who Governs Scotland? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Europa Institute, University of Edinburgh, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK

    Caitríona A Carter

  2. SPIRIT, Sciences Po Bordeaux, 11 allée Ausone, Pessac, 33607, France

    Andy Smith

Authors
  1. Caitríona A Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andy Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Caitríona A Carter or Andy Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carter, C., Smith, A. What has Scottish devolution changed? Sectors, territory and polity-building. Br Polit 4, 315–340 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2009.9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2009.9

Keywords

Search

Navigation