Search

In 1973 Sweden entered into a free-trade agreement with the EEC. This meant that the EEC principle of prohibition of cartels met with the Swedish principle of abuse. Paper production was heavily ca...

This article discusses the reasons for cartel stability by using the Swedish Steel Casting Cartel as an example. Previous research points out organisational structure and the ability to deal with exit entry and cheating as crucial for stability. In this article, the development of social norms, morally legitimised within the cartel, is discussed as a possible explanation for cartel stability. The organisational structure developed was flexible enough to deal with problems of exit entry and cheating. The discussions on quotas and prices led to a common view on fair prices. The conclusion is that the organisational structure can partly explain why the Steel Casting Group was relatively stable but that there are indications that the development of common social norms related to the value of fairness was also an important explanatory factor.

Le liberalisme en tant que non-interference de l’etat. Le developpement de la legislation suedoise des cartels (1911-1953)En Suede, la libre concurrence a ete consideree comme tres (et de plus en plus) irrealiste durant la premiere moitie du xxe siecle. Une legislation plus stricte en vue de combattre les cartels fut mise en place durant la seconde moitie de ce meme siecle. Cette evolution avait ete interpretee comme une composante de l’americanisation de meme que la libre concurrence peut etre consideree comme l’une des valeurs americaines de base. Durant la periode 1911-1936, les debats au sein du Parlement suedois se concentraient sur le theme de la production : l’organisation privee de la concurrence, sous la forme de cartels, etait consideree comme une voie permettant de diminuer les couts et, par la, de reduire les prix. Au cours des annees 1937-1953, la resistance face a l’intervention etatique s’effaca. Le processus d’urbanisation avait fait entrer la Suede dans la societe de consommation de masse et le theme du marche devenait desormais plus au centre des preoccupations de chacun. Les pratiques des cartels relatives a la consommation, de meme que le systeme des prix de gros, etaient desormais plus difficiles a defendre que les cartels de production.JEL Codes: N4, P1, K2, L4

This article discusses Sweden’s participation in the OEEC between 1947 and 1950 and the extent to which such economic cooperation affected the interpretation of Swedish political neutrality. Even at this early stage there were signs of forces within the OEEC that were striving for a degree of cooperation not merely economic in nature but also political. The Swedish government made great efforts to maintain the distinction between economics and politics, but as this became increasingly difficult it devised another line of action — to distinguish form from content. By arguing vis-a-vis the United States that the content of Swedish policy was more important than the form, and vis-a-vis the Soviet Union that no formal deviation from neutrality had occurred, ’Sweden was able to retain the Great Powers’ trust in its policy of neutrality. In reality this policy signified an adaptation to the demands of the Western powers, as shown, inter alia, by the fact that Sweden, in content though not in form, part...

The article deals with the defining of Swedish neutrality in the initial years of the Cold War. The established truth that the Swedish interpretation of neutrality was adapted to US wishes is not challenged but the reasons for this development are discussed. The main reason for adaptation is identified as the Swedish government's ambitious economic policy which led to economic dependency upon the USA, acceptance of Marshall Aid and economic incorporation into the West. Sweden managed to show the US government that formal neutrality could be combined with practical measures that in fact meant adaptation to US wishes. The argument is also that the USA used economic pressure to achieve its purposes, as when Sweden submitted to US demands regarding strategic exports to Eastern Europe. Concern for the development of Swedish trade and economic growth was important when the Swedish government yielded to the US demands. By formulating the agreement with the USA as an expression of Sweden's autonomously decided policy, Sweden could still claim that formal neutrality had been maintained.