Organisational Adaptation and Turbulence: Shaping (Post-)Brexit Environmental Policy Developments

The negative vote on the continuation of the UK's EU membership in June 2016 opened up a period of turbulence and change for the UK's institutions and policies far beyond the official departure from the EU in January 2021 (Berny, Gravey and Thomas 2021; Baldini, Massetti, Bressanelli 2023). This paper analyses how environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have responded to this unprecedented turn of events, as they tried to prevent any regression of environmental legislation and secure ambitious policies following exit from the EU. It considers how turbulence has impacted both organisations and their advocacy strategies. Turbulence characterises institutional politics when “events and demands interact in a highly variable, inconsistent, unexpected and/or unpredictable manner” (Ansell et al. 2017, 7). What Brexit meant for policies and the UK's relationship with the EU remained unclear until the the departure of the UK in January 2021. The Brexit vote resulted in political turmoil and heated debates as political actors grappled with the complexity of exiting the EU (McConnell and Tormey 2019). Internal divisions soared across the public and within political parties regarding the desirable and expected outcomes of Brexit. Additionally, Brexit raised issues of continuity and stability across policy and legal landscapes. The challenge was especially significant for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), as 80% of its portfolio was shaped by EU legislation (Burns, Gravey, Jordan and Zito 2019). The complexity of getting Brexit done, the different tempos of parallel policy developments under a succession of five premierships within seven years, and the Covid-19 pandemic collectively strained organisations, administrations and interest groups alike. While early mobilisation during the referendum phase and the joint efforts of NGOs in coalitions have been documented (Lee and Abbott 2021; Berny and Gravey 2024), little is known about how this unprecedented effort was tackled inside individual organisations. By focusing on the question of adaptation, the purpose of the paper is to examine whether environmental groups have changed their modes of engagement with the general public, their membership bases and public officials as they navigated the Brexit process and unfolding policy developments. This justifies studying advocacy choices in different situations and over time, while concomitantly considering potential organisational change in competence and structure. Drawing on Selznick's (1957) distinction between static and dynamic adaptation, the longitudinal perspective applied here shows a more complicated picture than mere legislative and inside-oriented lobbying. The empirical research consists of tracking the advocacy strategies and internal adjustments of four NGOs (nature protection organisations and cross-issue organisations) displaying different resources and skills from 2016 until the Brexiteers' last attempts to undermine environmental legislation in 2022–23.