Why Did Cornwall Vote for Brexit? Assessing the Implications for EU Structural Funding Programmes

Abstract

In the 2016 referendum on UK EU membership, regions which benefitted from high levels of structural funds voted to leave the EU. This was unexpected given the Europeanisation processes expected of the funds in terms of identity and loyalty. Within this case study of Cornwall, we use qualitative methods to assess why this happened and the implications for future structural funding programmes. We find that the rationale behind the Brexit vote was less about the EU as an institution, but was a reflection of the deep levels of uncertainty, insecurity, and frustration that people felt about governance decisions, scarce resources, and the future for themselves and their children. This created a situation where people looked to the nation state for support and security, and were fearful of post-national forms of identification and governance. Consequently, EU support is imagined as being organised by ‘elites’, for elites, rather than benefitting local communities. We suggest breaking down some of the barriers that have arisen through a participatory approach to development decision-making, greater flexibility to regional priorities, and forms of funding that individuals might apply to – such as a skills pot to facilitate easier access to further education and training.