Modelling negotiations on the Nordic Economic Area: Uncertainty and absolute gains as factors of international solidarity

D. Lanko
{"title":"Modelling negotiations on the Nordic Economic Area: Uncertainty and absolute gains as factors of international solidarity","authors":"D. Lanko","doi":"10.21638/spbu06.2022.302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article revisits the negotiations on NORDEK, a Nordic Economic Area, held by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden in 1968–1970. Finland, which initially took active part in the negotiations, later reversed its position under pressure from the Soviet Union as well as for other reasons. Four remaining Nordic countries refused to pursue a Nordic Economic Area without Finland for multiple reasons, of which one was solidarity with Finland. This article presents multiple game models, of which some reflect the actual outcome of the NORDEK negotiations, i. e., their failure, while others reflect hypothetical outcomes of the negotiations, such as emergence of a NORDEK of four without Finland. Those models allow concluding on the main factors causing Nordic solidarity, for which the NORDEK negotiations were a testing ground, and which had been the defining feature of regional politics in the European North during fifty years following the failure of the negotiations. First, domestic uncertainty about the issue debated by multiple nations contributes to greater solidarity among those nations. Second, majority’s focus on their absolute gains during international negotiations contributes to greater solidarity among negotiating nations. Third, relative equality among negotiating nations does not have any influence on solidarity among them. The latter conclusion supports the theoretical assumption that that organic solidarity (solidarity among different) is as possible as is mechanical solidarity (solidarity of similar).","PeriodicalId":336122,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu06.2022.302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article revisits the negotiations on NORDEK, a Nordic Economic Area, held by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden in 1968–1970. Finland, which initially took active part in the negotiations, later reversed its position under pressure from the Soviet Union as well as for other reasons. Four remaining Nordic countries refused to pursue a Nordic Economic Area without Finland for multiple reasons, of which one was solidarity with Finland. This article presents multiple game models, of which some reflect the actual outcome of the NORDEK negotiations, i. e., their failure, while others reflect hypothetical outcomes of the negotiations, such as emergence of a NORDEK of four without Finland. Those models allow concluding on the main factors causing Nordic solidarity, for which the NORDEK negotiations were a testing ground, and which had been the defining feature of regional politics in the European North during fifty years following the failure of the negotiations. First, domestic uncertainty about the issue debated by multiple nations contributes to greater solidarity among those nations. Second, majority’s focus on their absolute gains during international negotiations contributes to greater solidarity among negotiating nations. Third, relative equality among negotiating nations does not have any influence on solidarity among them. The latter conclusion supports the theoretical assumption that that organic solidarity (solidarity among different) is as possible as is mechanical solidarity (solidarity of similar).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
北欧经济区谈判模拟:作为国际团结因素的不确定性和绝对收益
本文回顾了1968-1970年丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典就北欧经济区(NORDEK)举行的谈判。最初积极参加谈判的芬兰后来在苏联的压力和其他原因下改变了立场。其余四个北欧国家拒绝建立一个没有芬兰的北欧经济区,理由多种多样,其中一个是与芬兰团结一致。本文提出了多个博弈模型,其中一些反映了NORDEK谈判的实际结果,即他们的失败,而另一些则反映了谈判的假设结果,例如出现了一个没有芬兰的NORDEK。这些模式可以总结北欧团结的主要因素,NORDEK谈判是一个试验场,在谈判失败后的五十年里,北欧团结一直是欧洲北部区域政治的决定性特征。首先,多个国家辩论的这个问题的国内不确定性有助于加强这些国家之间的团结。其次,多数国家在国际谈判中注重自己的绝对利益,有助于加强谈判国家之间的团结。第三,谈判国之间的相对平等对它们之间的团结没有任何影响。后一个结论支持了一个理论假设,即有机团结(不同之间的团结)和机械团结(相似的团结)一样可能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Foreign economic cooperation between St. Petersburg and Denmark in the 21st century: Main trends, problems, prospects The pandemic, Russia and the West Russian — US public diplomacy: Comparative aspects and dialogue prospects Conferences on political modeling: Simulating European Union — Eurasian Economic Union negotiations Russian-American relations in a changing world: A new contribution to the discussion on the future of international order
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1