Replication Data for: Shaping Post-Withdrawal Relations With a Leaving State: Brexit Dilemmas and Public Opinion

How do voters want their governments to respond when another country unilaterally withdraws from an international institution? We distinguish between negotiation approaches that vary in the degree to which they accommodate the withdrawing state’s demands and argue that citizens’ negotiation preferences are shaped by two issues: First, their exposure to the costs and benefits of accommodation. This exposure varies across issues, and we argue that citizens will generally prefer non-accommodation on zero-sum issues, but support more accommodation on cooperation issues, where non-accommodation puts existing cooperation gains are at risk. Second, citizens consider that withdrawal negotiations create precedents and should be less willing to accommodate the more they are concerned about the ripple effects of accommodation on the institution’s stability. Moreover, the choice between accommodation and non-accommodation confronts different groups of citizens with two types of dilemmas. To examine our argument, we use survey evidence and a conjoint experiment conducted in Germany and Spain during the Brexit negotiations. We find that respondents overall are more willing to accommodate the UK on cooperation issues than on zero-sum issues, but also find evidence that Euroskeptics and Europhiles confront different issue-specific dilemmas. Our paper contributes to a better understanding of the dynamics surrounding the challenges to multilateralism that have proliferated in recent years.