Europe's sovereign debt crisis and the accompanying national bank crises in the European Union brought bank regulation and supervision to the top of the EU policy agenda. In a few short years, we have witnessed a 'great leap forward' for European integration marked by over a dozen pieces of EU legislation shaping the operation of banks, rules on bank capital, reconfigured supervisory agencies, and Banking Union. The significance of these measures lies however, in the fact that they constitute the most dramatic transfer of policy-making powers to the European level since the start of Economic and Monetary Union in 1999. This volume addresses the three main political battles behind the adoption of these new regulatory and supervisory policies. First, it examines divisions among states, both according to their domestic institutional structures, including distinct financial systems, as well as their creditor or debtor status in the crisis. Second, it studies the battle over national versus supranational jurisdiction. Third, it explores the conflictual process of policy learning and the activation of epistemic communities who claim competence to address the crisis. This book was originally published as a special issue of the journal West European Politics.

We know from the cost of the 2007-09 crisis that transnational finance does not operate in a realm removed from our everyday lives. Variegated Neoliberalism explains why its inequalities persist and how they undermine more social-minded policies towards finance in the EU. The book suggests that large financial groups capitalize on broader changes in capitalism and emerging assumptions about what benefits society at large. Those pushing these political-economic projects present policy change to cope with financial globalization as a new common sense. Macartney's argument then contests these assumptions through an analysis of the spatial relations of transnational actors, and the political claims made within finance and research communities. Rather than relying on umbrella concepts like 'transnational capitalist class', Variegated Neoliberalism emphasises the national-domestic foundations for transnationalization and what we commonly understand as neoliberalism. The book provides comparative analyses of global and European banking communities, and economic research centres, in the UK, France, and Germany. It explains the constellations underpinning the current neoliberal order in global finance, and the realms of possibility for challenges to it.

We know from the cost of the 2007-09 crisis that transnational finance does not operate in a realm removed from our everyday lives. Variegated Neoliberalism explains why its inequalities persist and how they undermine more social-minded policies towards finance in the EU. The book suggests that large financial groups capitalize on broader changes in capitalism and emerging assumptions about what benefits society at large. Those pushing these political-economic projects present policy change to cope with financial globalization as a new common sense. Macartney's argument then contests these assumptions through an analysis of the spatial relations of transnational actors, and the political claims made within finance and research communities. Rather than relying on umbrella concepts like 'transnational capitalist class', Variegated Neoliberalism emphasises the national-domestic foundations for transnationalization and what we commonly understand as neoliberalism. The book provides comparative analyses of global and European banking communities, and economic research centres, in the UK, France, and Germany. It explains the constellations underpinning the current neoliberal order in global finance, and the realms of possibility for challenges to it.

This book examines how decisions made by the Conservative government during the COVID19 pandemic have increased economic inequality in the UK. Decades of austerity, asset-based welfare and financialization had already exacerbated social divisions in the UK prior to the pandemic. The political blueprint behind these measures combined Privatized Keynesianism and the Asset Economy. To explain, economists have highlighted that inequality derives from the fact that income from wealth increases at a faster rate than income from wages. The ensuing political assumption is that - in the face of pressures on public finances - promoting asset ownership is the best alternative to government-funded welfare schemes. What this meant, as the pandemic unfolded, was that when tough decisions about resource allocation needed to be made, the UK Treasury and the Bank of England found almost unlimited funds to rescue and protect asset-holders and middle-income homeowners, whilst reverting to a narrative of "misfortune" for the asset-less poor. This book assesses the political decisions taken by UK policymakers during 2020-21 and their consequences. In doing so, it challenges policymakers and the informed public to re-consider the morality of inequality, and to make alternative decisions to promote a more ecologically sustainable, caring, equal and prosperous society.

Europe's sovereign debt crisis and the accompanying national bank crises in the European Union brought bank regulation and supervision to the top of the EU policy agenda. In a few short years, we have witnessed a 'great leap forward' for European integration marked by over a dozen pieces of EU legislation shaping the operation of banks, rules on bank capital, reconfigured supervisory agencies, and Banking Union. The significance of these measures lies however, in the fact that they constitute the most dramatic transfer of policy-making powers to the European level since the start of Economic and Monetary Union in 1999. This volume addresses the three main political battles behind the adoption of these new regulatory and supervisory policies. First, it examines divisions among states, both according to their domestic institutional structures, including distinct financial systems, as well as their creditor or debtor status in the crisis. Second, it studies the battle over national versus supranational jurisdiction. Third, it explores the conflictual process of policy learning and the activation of epistemic communities who claim competence to address the crisis. This book was originally published as a special issue of the journal West European Politics.

Amidst the continued debate surrounding the foundations of IPE, coupled with recent methodological and theoretical divides this book argues that an attempt should be made to re-visit the notion of the 'critical'. The challenge posed by contributors to this volume is to assess the development of so-called critical IPE and interrogate whether the theoretical foundations it was built upon have reached their potential. The essays in this volume take up this challenge in a number of different ways but all share a common concern - to re-assess the purpose of critical approaches, reflect on why certain social theorists have been favoured as a point of departure, yet others have largely been ignored. In light of recent debates on the notion of a 'trans-Atlantic divide' within IPE the collection the contributors aim demonstrates how the distinction between the 'critical' and the 'orthodox' (or 'empirical') is only significant if the 'critical' is geared towards a larger, more substantial body of critical social enquiry and engages with what it means to conduct such enquiry.

Amidst the continued debate surrounding the foundations of IPE, coupled with recent methodological and theoretical divides this book argues that an attempt should be made to re-visit the notion of the 'critical'. The challenge posed by contributors to this volume is to assess the development of so-called critical IPE and interrogate whether the theoretical foundations it was built upon have reached their potential. The essays in this volume take up this challenge in a number of different ways but all share a common concern - to re-assess the purpose of critical approaches, reflect on why certain social theorists have been favoured as a point of departure, yet others have largely been ignored. In light of recent debates on the notion of a 'trans-Atlantic divide' within IPE the collection the contributors aim demonstrates how the distinction between the 'critical' and the 'orthodox' (or 'empirical') is only significant if the 'critical' is geared towards a larger, more substantial body of critical social enquiry and engages with what it means to conduct such enquiry.