The Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) (1964 – 1990) was abolished by the Education Reform Act, 1988. This ended an unitary system of education that had existed in inner London for over a hundred years. This thesis examines the question of the political reasons and motivations for the ILEA’s abolition, considering both the move to the right by the Conservative party which abolished it, and the move to the left by the Labour party. In effect the polarisation of politics left little room for the form of pragmatic politics and policies which had enabled the ILEA to develop under previous Conservative and Labour administrations. Under these conditions the radical step to abolish the ILEA became possible. Given this political climate the question is asked as to whether there were good grounds for the abolition of the ILEA, over and above ideological considerations. Two strategies are adopted to answer this question. The first examines the history and processes of policy making with reference to the support for Special Educational Needs and Adult, Further and Higher Education. These may be considered ‘success stories’ while a third case, that of William Tyndale, considers whether there were also weaknesses in the ILEA’s policy processes. The second examines the claims that the ILEA tolerated low standards in education and failed to give value for money. It is concluded that the evidence does not sustain the claims made against the ILEA and that therefore, its demise can better be explained by the polarisation of politics at the time.

The economic crisis in the European Union has raised numerous policy questions. It has also raised many important questions for scholars. One of these is the question of why we have witnessed such radically divergent reform speeds in different countries under Economic Adjustment Programmes. Closer examination of these Programmes clearly shows their high degree of uniformity, so that the answer cannot be found in the nature of policy input. This thesis instead takes a Varieties of Capitalism approach. Looking in depth at the cases of Greece and Ireland, which represent polar opposites of the spectrum of economic models within the EU, this thesis argues that success of Economic Adjustment Programmes crucially depends on a country’s pre-existing economic model. This insight challenges the current approach to crisis resolution, which endorses a ‘one size fits all’ approach to structural reforms. An adapted version of Bruno Amable’s Varieties of Capitalism (VOC) approach is conducive to detailed analysis, as it permits disaggregating the structural reform agenda according to five institutional areas. Thus, reform patterns can be compared between countries as well as between institutional areas. The hypothesis put forward in this dissertation is that the reforms promoted in Greece and Ireland can be accurately described as a reform trajectory intended to take both countries closer to a market based variety of capitalism. The analysis, based on textual analysis of the Economic Adjustment Programmes, as well as interviews with Greek, Irish and European policy-makers, suggests that VOC predicts reform trajectories largely accurately. The application of Amable’s approach also revealed its weaknesses, particularly in underestimating the role of political decision making in times of crisis through a rather mechanistic conceptualisation of the EAP implementation process. This is addressed through the inclusion of Streeck and Thelen’s mapping of political responses to external change, adding an important component to the VOC literature and making it suitable to the analysis of reform in crisis conditions.

The two decades preceding the global financial crisis of 2008 saw an increase in international migration flows. This development was accompanied by the relaxation of immigration entry controls for select categories of foreign workers across the developed world. The scale of labour immigration, and the categories of foreign workers granted entry, varied considerably across states. To some extent, these developments transcended the traditional classifications of comparative immigration politics. This thesis examines the reform process in two states with contrasting policy legacies that adopted liberal labour immigration selection and control policies during the abovementioned period. The instrumental role that immigration has played in the process of nation-building in Australia has led it to be classified as a 'traditional destination state' with a positive immigration policy legacy. By contrast, immigration has not been significant in the formation of national identity in the United Kingdom. It has a more negative immigration policy legacy and is generally regarded as a 'reluctant state'. Examining the reasons for liberal shifts in labour immigration policy in two states with different immigration politics allows insights to be gained into the processes of policy-making and the dynamics that underpin it. In Australia, labour immigration controls were relaxed incrementally and through a deliberative process. Reform was justified on the grounds that it fulfilled economic needs and objectives, and was consistent with an accepted definition of the national interest. In the UK, liberal shifts in labour immigration policy were the incidental consequence of the pursuit of objectives in other policy areas. Reform was implemented unilaterally, and in an uncoordinated manner characterised by an absence of consultation. The contrast in the manner in which reform was managed by the various actors, institutions and stakeholders involved in the process both reflected, and served to reinforce, the immigration policy legacies of the two states. Moreover, the Howard government used Australia's positive legacy to construct a coherent narrative to justify the implementation of liberal reform. This generated greater immediate and lasting support for its reforms among stakeholders and the broader community. By contrast, lacking a similarly positive legacy, the Blair government in the UK found it difficult to create such a narrative, which contributed to the unpopularity of its reforms. This thesis therefore argues that policy legacies had a significant impact on the processes and dynamics that shaped labour immigration selection and control decisions during the recent wave of international migration. The cases demonstrate that a nation's past immigration policy experiences shape its policy-making structures, as well as institutional and stakeholder policy preferences, which are core constituent components of a nation's immigration politics. The UK case shows that even when reluctant states implement liberal labour immigration policies, these characteristics tend to create feedback effects that make it difficult for reform to be durable. The relationship between immigration policy and politics thus becomes self-reinforcing. But this does not necessarily mean that states' immigration politics are rigid, since the institutions that help to make a nation's immigration policy and shape its politics will inevitably undergo a process of adaptation in response to changing contexts.

The paradox of contemporary migration in the EU is that new actors, rules, and institutions have emerged and created internal spaces where there is a gradual reorientation of the character of EU border regime. These spaces have become arenas where EU member states are re-categorizing, re-scaling, expanding, and diversifying their modes of internal migration control and enforcement. To overcome this paradox, this research seeks to explore migration policies in Sweden, Germany, and France to demonstrate that the narratives about EU common border policy is complex, uncertain, polarising, and conflicting. This paper argues that the emergence of the EU common border regime with a multiplicity of actors have created everyday bordering as a rebordering mechanism of control that threatens the idea of a common EU border, especially at the level of nation states. My theoretical approach is based on ‘everyday bordering and the politics of beloninging’. And I applied an interpretative approach in the analysis of official policy documents, academic articles, media reports, advocacy papers, NGO documents, and political speeches.

Entre 1780 et 1860 en Europe, la géographie se structure peu à peu en champ scientifique et académique indépendant, et particulièrement en France, Prusse et Grande-Bretagne. Au même moment dans ces trois pays européens, des géographes travaillent à ce que leur champ soit enfin considéré comme une science à part entière, au même titre par exemple que l'histoire ou les mathématiques. Ils construisent leur champ à la faveur d'un renouvellement profond de ses principes institutionnels et épistémologiques, selon un processus similaire dans ces trois sphères. Ils organisent progressivement les connaissances géographiques selon une exigence de scientificité, dont ils discutent les modalités. Ce processus de construction à la fois scientifique et disciplinaire est profondément marqué par l'héritage des Lumières et l'esprit universaliste, mais, parallèlement, il se trouve également influencé et informé par le contexte politique. Entre 1785 et 1860, les savoirs géographiques sont en effet investis d'une valeur stratégique grandissante : ils jouent un rôle majeur dans les idéologies politiques des États et également dans les actions politiques menées. En interrogeant conjointement les champs du politique et des savoirs géographiques, cette thèse ainsi à mettre en évidence en quoi le processus de montée en discipline des savoirs géographiques engagé simultanément en France, en Prusse et en Grande-Bretagne se trouve fondamentalement en tension entre, d'une part, une exigence universaliste portée à l'échelle européenne par le champ scientifique et, d'autre part, la nationalisation progressive des savoirs géographiques. / Between 1780 et 1860, geography tends to become a full scientific field in Europe, built thanks to renewed institutional and academic principles, especially in France, Prussia and Great Britain. t the same time in these three European countries, geographers expect that their field will be finally considered as a proper science, compared for instance to history or mathematics. In order to complete this aim, they gradually organise geographical knowledge according to scientific patterns. The French, Prussian and British spheres are affected by a similar process. This scientific and academic construction of a proper geographical field is influenced by a universalistic spirit, inherited from the European Enlightenment, but also deeply affected by the political context. Between 1785 and 1860, geographical knowledge is recognised as strategic : it plays a major role in the politics of the states and, therefore, in the organisation of the different policies developed in this period. By questionning at the same time the field of geography and the field of politics and policy, this thesis intends to highlight how the process of academic and scientific construction of geography engaged at the same time in France, Prussia and Great-Britain is essentially in a position of tension between a demand of universalism and the progressiv nationalisation of geographical knowledge.