Post-Brexit trade policy in the UK: placebo policy-making?

References

• AHDB. (2020). UK and EU Import Tariffs, https://ahdb.org.uk/uk-and-eu-import-tariffs-under-no-deal-brexit
   Google Scholar
• Baetens, F. (2018). #147;No deal is better than a bad deal#148;? The fallacy of the WTO fall-back option as a post-Brexit safety net. Common Market Law Review, 55(Special Issue), 133–174. http://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2018062
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, D., De Propris, L., De Ruyter, A., Hearne, D., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2023). Brexit, trade and UK advanced manufacturing sectors: A midlands’ perspective. Contemporary Social Science, 18(2), 250–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2023.2192700
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnard, C. (2021). Protection of the UK Internal Market: Article 6 of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol. Brexit Institute Working Paper Series No 1/2022, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3986200
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, D., & Tsui, A. O. (1999). Policy as symbolic statement: International response to national population policies. Social Forces, 78(1), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/78.1.213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BBC. (2022). Australia free trade deal a failure for UK, says George Eustice, 15 November 2022, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63627801
   Google Scholar
• BBC. (2023). Brexit: Ministers to ditch deadline to scrap retained EU laws. 11 May 2023. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65546319
   Google Scholar
• Böhringer, C., & Vogt, C. (2004). The dismantling of a breakthrough: The Kyoto protocol as symbolic policy. European Journal of Political Economy, 20(3), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2004.02.004
   Google Scholar
• Cass, L. R. (2008). A climate of obstinacy: Symbolic politics in Australian and Canadian policy. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21(4), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557570802452763
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, J. (2020). Re-imagining space, scale and sovereignty: The United Kingdom and “Brexit”. In D. M. Nonini, & I. Susser (Eds.), The tumultuous politics of scale: Unsettled states, migrants, movements in flux (pp. 138–150). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Committee on Leaving the European Union House of Commons. (2017). First Report, Inquiry into UK’s negotiating objectives for withdrawal from the European Union, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmexeu/815/81502.htm
   Google Scholar
• CPTPP. (2019). Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/tpp-11-treaty-text.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Crowley, M., Exton, O., & Han, L. (2018). Renegotiation of trade agreements and firm exporting decisions: evidence from the impact of Brexit on UK exports. In Society of International Economic Law (SIEL), Sixth Biennial Global Conference. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/280300/cwpe1839.pdf?sequence = 1
   Google Scholar
• De Bièvre, D., Garcia-Duran, P., Eliasson, L. J., & Costa, O. (2020). Politicization of EU trade policy across time and space. Politics and Governance, 8(1), 239–242. https://doi.org/10.17645/PAG.V8I1.3055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deepak, G. (2021). Brexit-The legal intricacies in rolling over EU PTAs. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 52(3), 679–691. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/geojintl52&div=25&id=&page=
   Google Scholar
• Dent, C. M. (2023). The UK’s new free trade agreements in the Asia-pacific: How closely is it adopting US trade regulation? The Pacific Review, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2023.2181862
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond, P. (2023). Post-Brexit challenges to the UK machinery of government in an ‘Age of Fiasco’: The dangers of muddling through? Journal of European Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2023.2225562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DIT. (2020). UK-US Trade Agreement. UK Approach to Negotiations. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uks-approach-to-trade-negotiations-with-the-us
   Google Scholar
• DIT. (2021). Impact assessment of the Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Australia, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1073969/impact-assessment-of-the-free-trade-agreement-between-the-united-kingdom-of-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-and-australia.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DIT. (2022a). Submission to ITC Inquiry: Trade and Foreign Policy, https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106925/html/
   Google Scholar
• DIT. (2022b). Impact assessment of the Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and New Zealand https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1057311/uk-new-zealand-free-trade-agreement-impact-assessment.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Doherty, B., Temple Lang, J., McCrudden, C., McGowan, L., Phinnemore, D., & Schiek, D. (2017). Northern Ireland and ‘Brexit’: The European Economic Area Option. U of Michigan Law & Economic Research Paper, (16-038), 2018-01.
   Google Scholar
• Dooley, N. (2023). Frustrating Brexit? Ireland and the UK’s conflicting approaches to Brexit negotiations. Journal of European Public Policy, 30(5), 807–827. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2050780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duina, F. (2019). Why the excitement? Values, identities, and the politicization of EU trade policy with North America. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(12), 1866–1882. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1678056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. J. (1971). Politics as symbolic action: Mass arousal and quiescence. Academie Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eiser, D., McEwen, N., & Roy, G. (2021). The trade policies of Brexit Britain: The influence of and impacts on the devolved nations. European Review of International Studies, 8(1), 22–48. https://doi.org/10.1163/21967415-bja10034
   Google Scholar
• Euractiv. (2019). Vietnam and EU sign ‘milestone’ free trade agreement. 01.07.2019 https://www.euractiv.com/section/asean/news/vietnam-and-eu-sign-milestone-free-trade-agreement/
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2022a). Q&A. Commission launches four new infringement procedures against the UK, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_22_4664
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2022b). EU-New Zealand Trade Agreement. Agriculture. https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/09242a36-a438-40fd-a7af-fe32e36cbd0e/library/5eaa0c52-b4ea-4da8-ae62-800492babd4b/details
   Google Scholar
• European Council. (2016). European Council Meeting (18 and 19 February 2016) – Conclusions, The United Kingdom and the European Union, EUCO 1/16, http://docs.dpaq.de/10395-0216-euco-conclusions.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fahey, E. (2021). The European Union as a digital trade actor: The challenge of being a global leader in standard-setting. International Trade Law and Regulation. International Trade Law and Regulation, 27(2), 155–166. https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/26428/8/
   Google Scholar
• FCO. (2018). Global Britain Memorandum from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmfaff/780/78008.htm#_idTextAnchor035
   Google Scholar
• Figueira, F., & Martill, B. (2021). Bounded rationality and the Brexit negotiations: Why Britain failed to understand the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 28(12), 1871–1889. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2020.1810103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossum, J. E., & Graver, H. P. (2018). Squaring the circle on Brexit: Could the Norway model work? Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fotaki, M. (2010). Why do public policies fail so often? Exploring health policy-making as an imaginary and symbolic construction. Organization, 17(6), 703–720. DOI: 10.1177/1350508410366321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, L. (2016). Launch of the World Trade Report 2016- Speech to WTO, 27 September 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/launch-of-the-world-trade-report-2016-inclusive-trade-and-smes
   Google Scholar
• Fox, L. (2017). Free Trade is in our national DNA-Speech at Launch of Institute for Free Trade, 27 September 2017, https://ifreetrade.org/article/liam_fox_free_trade_is_in_our_national_dna
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, R., Manova, K., Prayer, T., & Sampson, T. (2022). UK trade in the wake of Brexit. Centre for Economic Performance Paper No. 1847. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/117855/1/dp1847.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fusacchia, I., Salvatici, L., & Winters, A. (2022). The consequences of the trade and cooperation agreement for the UK’s international trade. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 38(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grab052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gammage, C., & Syrpis, P. (2022). Sovereignty fictions in the United Kingdom's trade agenda. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 71(3), 563–588. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589322000173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García, M. (2020). Slow rise of trade politicisation in the UK and Brexit. Politics and Governance, 8(1), 348–359. http://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i1.2737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasiorek, M., & Jerzewska, A. (2020). The unresolved difficulties of the Northern Ireland protocol. UK Trade Policy Observatory, Briefing Paper. https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/files/2020/06/BP-41-final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gasiorek, M., Larbarestier, G., & Tamberi, N. (2021). The value of the CPTPP for the UK. UKTPO Blog, 3 February 2021, https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2021/02/03/the-value-of-the-cptpp-for-the-uk/
   Google Scholar
• Gasiorek, M., & Magntorn Garrett, J. (2020). Reflections on the UK Global Tariff: good in principle, but perhaps not for relations with the EU, UKTPO Blog, 21 May 2020, https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2020/05/21/reflections-on-the-uk-global-tariff-good-in-principle-but-perhaps-not-for-relations-with-the-eu/
   Google Scholar
• Graziano, A., Handley, K., & Limao, N. (2018). Brexit uncertainty and trade disintegration (No. w25334). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w25334/w25334.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Greer, A., & Grant, W. (2023). Divergence and continuity after Brexit in agriculture. Journal of European Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2023.2204118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Guardian. (2023). Changing attitudes to Brexit three years on. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2023/jan/30/changing-attitudes-to-brexit-three-years-on
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, G. (1983). Symbolic and pseudo policies as responses to diffusion of power. Policy Sciences, 15(3), 269-287. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007BF00136828
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, G., & Richardson, J. J. (1979). Concepts of rationality and the policy process. European Journal of Political Research, 7(4), 415–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1979.tb00916.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hestermeyer, H., & Ortino, F. (2016). Towards a UK trade policy post-Brexit: The beginning of a complex journey. Kings Law Journal, 27(3), 452–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2016.1254416
   Google Scholar
• Hix, S. (2018). Brexit: Where is the EU-UK relationship heading? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(S1), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12766
   Google Scholar
• Hix, S., Hagemann, S., & Frantescu, D. (2016). Would Brexit matter? The UK’s voting record in the Council and the European Parliament. VoteWatch Europe, Brussels. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/66261/1/Hix_Brexit%20matter_2016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hobolt, S. B., Tilley, J., & Leeper, T. J. (2022). Policy preferences and policy legitimacy after referendums: Evidence from the Brexit negotiations. Political Behavior, 44, 839–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09639-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• House of Lords International Agreements Committee. (2021). 10th Report 2021-22, UK Accession to CPTPP: Scrutinising Government’s Negotiation Objectives, https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/7859/documents/81612/default/
   Google Scholar
• Hy, R. (1978). Some aspects of symbolic education policy: A research note. The Educational Forum, 42(2), 203–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131727809336302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ITC International Trade Committee House of Commons. (2022a). UK trade negotiations: Parliamentary scrutiny of free trade agreements, https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/30492/documents/175947/default/
   Google Scholar
• Katsaroumpas, I. (2023). Different shades of minimalism: The multilateral construction of labour clauses in UK-Australia and UK-New Zealand FTAs. King’s Law Journal, 34(1), 71–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2023.2199467
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, C. J., & Tannam, E. (2023). The UK Government’s Northern Ireland policy after Brexit: A retreat to unilateralism and muscular unionism. Journal of European Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2023.2210186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latorre, M. C., Olekseyuk, Z., Yonezawa, H., & Robinson, S. (2019). Brexit: Everyone loses, but Britain loses the most. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper, (19-5). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id = 3345244
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, S. (2022). Most-favoured nation: Trade policy in the metaverse. Most Favoured Nation, 25 March 2022, https://mostfavourednation.substack.com/p/most-favoured-nation-trade-policy
   Google Scholar
• Marion, N. E. (1997). Symbolic policies in Clinton's crime control agenda. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 1(1), 67–108. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.1997.1.1.67
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J., & Sargeant, J. (2022). Northern Ireland Protocol: Ongoing UK-EU Disagreements. Institute for Government, 26 January 2022, https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/northern-ireland-protocol-disagreements
   Google Scholar
• Martill, B. (2023). Withdrawal symptoms: Party factions, political change and British foreign policy post-brexit. Journal of European Public Policy, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2198578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McConnell, A. (2020). The use of placebo policies to escape from policy traps. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(7), 957–976. http://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1662827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McEwen, N. (2021). Negotiating brexit: Power dynamics in British intergovernmental relations. Regional Studies, 55(9), 1538–1549. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1735000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGowan, L. (2017). Preparing for Brexit: Actors, negotiations and consequences. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• McKee, I., & Gougeon, M. (2022). New Zealand Trade Agreement. A letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands and the Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise to the UK Minister for Trade Policy. 21 August 2022. https://www.gov.scot/publications/new-zealand-trade-agreement-letter-to-the-uk-government/
   Google Scholar
• Morita-Jaeger, M. (2020). Japan-UK Free Trade Agreement –What is missing?, UKTPO Blog, https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2020/10/22/japan-uk-fta-what-is-missing/
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, M. (2021). Northern Ireland and Brexit: Where sovereignty and stability collide? Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 29(3), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2021.1891027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, M., & Evershed, J. (2022). Contesting sovereignty and borders: Northern Ireland, devolution and the union. Territory, Politics, Governance, 10(5), 661–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2021.1892518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, C. R. G., & Robb, N. (2023). From the protocol to the Windsor framework. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4382498
   Google Scholar
• Neville, A., Hallak, I., & Mazzur, S. (2022). Implementation of the UK Withdrawal Agreement: Financial provisions, citizens’ rights and the Northern Ireland Protocol. | European Parliamentary Research Service, PE 698.884, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2022/698884/EPRS_IDA(2022)698884_EN.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Office for Budget Responsibility. (2022). Economic and Fiscal Outlook-March 2022. https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-march-2022/
   Google Scholar
• Office for National Statistics (ONS). (2023). https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/jim7/mret https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/jim8/mret
   Google Scholar
• O’Toole, F. (2022). Britain’s attack on its own protocol is one more exercise in Brexit gaslighting. The Guardian, 15 June 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/15/britain-ni-protocol-brexit-ministers-deal
   Google Scholar
• Paquin, S., Rioux, X. H., Eiser, D., Roy, G., & Wooton, I. (2021). Quebec, Scotland, and substate governments’ roles in Canadian and British trade policy: Lessons to be learned. International Journal, 76(1), 85–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020702021992856
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polak, P. R. (2021). Who had their cake and ate it? Lessons from the UK’s withdrawal process and Its impact on the post-Brexit trade talks. German Law Journal, 22(6), 983–998. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.54
   Google Scholar
• Politico. (2017). Boris Johnson: Countries ‘queuing up’ for post-Brexit trade deals, 18 January 2017, https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-countries-queuing-up-for-post-brexit-trade-deals/
   Google Scholar
• Politico. (2022). Joe Biden could ghost Boris Johnson over Northern Ireland Brexit row, 19 May 2022. https://www.politico.eu/article/us-president-joe-biden-could-ghost-boris-johnson-in-brexit-row/
   Google Scholar
• Portes, J. (2022). The Economics of Brexit: What Have We Learned?, CEPR Press, https://cepr.org/publications/books-and-reports/economics-brexit-what-have-we-learned
   Google Scholar
• Reilly, M. (2020). The great free trade myth. British foreign policy and east Asia since 1980. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rollo, J., & Holmes, P. (2020). EU-UK post-Brexit trade relations: Prosperity versus sovereignty? European Foreign Affairs Review, 25(4), 523–550. https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2020037
   Google Scholar
• Rosamond, B. (2019). Brexit and the politics of UK growth models. New Political Economy, 24(3), 408–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2018.1484721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutter, J. (2020). ‘Singapore on Thames is dead. Long live Singapore on Thames’ UKICE Commentary, https://ukandeu.ac.uk/singapore-on-thames-is-dead-long-live-singapore-on-thames/
   Google Scholar
• Schnapper, P. (2021). Theresa May, the Brexit negotiations and the two-level game, 2017–2019. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 29(3), 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2020.1753665
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scottish Government. (2022). Agriculture and the Environment. Government Website, https://www.gov.scot/policies/agriculture-and-the-environment/gm-crops/
   Google Scholar
• Siles-Brügge, G. (2019). Bound by gravity or living in a ‘post geography trading world’? Expert knowledge and affective spatial imaginaries in the construction of the UK’s post-Brexit trade policy. New Political Economy, 24(3), 422–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2018.1484722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinberg, J. B. (2019). Brexit and the macroeconomic impact of trade policy uncertainty. Journal of International Economics, 117, 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2019.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sykes, O. (2018). Post-geography worlds, new dominions, left behind regions, and ‘other’ places: Unpacking some spatial imaginaries of the UK’s ‘Brexit’ debate. Space and Polity, 22(2), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2018.1531699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teja, N. (2021). ‘Opinion: Singapore-on- Thames is a post-Brexit fantasy’ International Financial Law Review, 25 March 2021, https://www.iflr.com/article/2a6466axp6qvytzvdg6ww/opinion-singapore-on-thames-model-is-a-post-brexit-fantasy
   Google Scholar
• Time. (2022). ‘Liz Truss has resigned. Here’s how she lost control.’ 20 October 2022, https://time.com/6223365/why-liz-truss-resigned/
   Google Scholar
• Tonge, J. (2022). The 2022 Northern Ireland Assembly elections: Polling, power-sharing, protocol. Political Insight, 13(2), 10–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041905822110877
   Google Scholar
• Trade Justice Movement. (2018). A trade model that works for everyone. Trade Justice Movement. https://www.tjm.org.uk/resources/briefings/a-trade-governance-model-that-works-for-everyone
   Google Scholar
• Trommer, S. (2017). Post-Brexit trade policy autonomy as pyrrhic victory: Being a middle power in a contested trade regime. Globalizations, 14(6), 810–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2017.1330986
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2017). Trade white paper: Our future trade policy. London: UK Government. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/preparing-for-our-future-uk-trade-policy
   Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2019). Public Consultation on the UK potentially seeking accession to the CPTPP. Outcomes, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/817865/Public_consultation_on_the_UK_potentially_seeking_accession_to_CPTPP.pdf
   Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2021). Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Australia, https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/free-trade-agreement-between-the-united-kingdom-of-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-and-australia
   Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2022a). Northern Ireland Protocol Bill (HL Bill 52), https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-03/052/5803052_en_1.html
   Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2022b). Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and New Zealand, https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/free-trade-agreement-between-the-united-kingdom-of-great-britain-and-northern-ireland-and-new-zealand
   Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2023). Windsor Framework. CP806, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1138989/The_Windsor_Framework_a_new_way_forward.pdf
   Google Scholar
• UKICE. (2022). The Northern Ireland Protocol Bill: Context and Consequences. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/UKICE-Northern-Ireland-Protocol-Bill.pdf
   Google Scholar
• UKICE. (2023). UK Trade Tracker. https://ukandeu.ac.uk/uk-trade-tracker-january-2023/
   Google Scholar
• USTR. (2019). US-UK Negotiations. Summary of Specific Negotiation Objectives. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf
   Google Scholar
• van Schalkwyk, M. C., Barlow, P., Siles-Brügge, G., Jarman, H., Hervey, T., & McKee, M. (2021). Brexit and trade policy: An analysis of the governance of UK trade policy and what it means for health and social justice. Globalization and Health, 17(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-021-00697-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weatherill, S. (2020). The protocol on Ireland/northern Ireland: Protecting the EU’s internal market at the expense of the UK’s. European Law Review, 2(2), 222–236. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo = 7490526
   Google Scholar
• Webb, D. (2022). Progress on UK free trade agreement negotiations. House of Commons Library. Research Briefing 9314. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9314/CBP-9314.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Young, A. R., & Peterson, J. (2014). Parochial global Europe: 21st century trade politics. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zappettini, F. (2019). The official vision for ‘global britain’ brexit as rupture and continuity between free trade, liberal internationalism and ‘values’. In V. in Koller, S. Kopf, & M. Milgbauer (Eds.), Discourses of brexit (pp. 140–154). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, H. (2019). Brexit and the external trade policy of the EU. European Review of International Studies, 6(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.3224/eris.v6i1.02
   Google Scholar