Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Political Geography Norway

1. The Norwegian Approach to Afghanistan: Civilian-Military Segregation

Author:
Karsten Friis
Publication Date:
12-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
In a way, one could consider Norway a typical example of a small International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) partner in Afghanistan, with 400 troops at its disposal and responsible for one of the 26 provincial reconstruction teams (PRT). Norway is a signatory to the Atlantic Pact and a staunch North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member. At the same time, the people and the government of Norway — like those in many European countries — share reservations about the extraterritorial use of military force. They consider Norway to be a "peace-nation," a small state without strategic global interests. Norwegian foreign policy favors the multilateral institutional approach, providing stability and predictability through the United Nations (UN). The government of Norway has to balance military needs with civilian demands for humanitarian aid and the support of human rights — in particular women's rights. In Afghanistan, Norwegian civilian aid priorities included the strengthening of Afghan governance capacities, rule of law, education, and rural development.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Development, Humanitarian Aid, and Foreign Aid
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Norway

2. Arctic Bungle

Author:
Mike Wenstrup
Publication Date:
12-2013
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Foreign Affairs
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
Scott Borgerson (“The Coming Arctic Boom,” July/August 2013) is right to argue that “Alaska should invest its considerable wealth in its underdeveloped university system, finance ambitious infrastructure projects, and create policies that attract talented immigrants and encourage them to start new businesses, such as renewable energy ventures.” Unfortunately, the recently passed Alaskan Senate Bill 21 reduces the income Alaskans receive from oil produced on public lands. Alaska has already begun to run deficits, is unable to finance university investments, and, for the fourth straight year, has frozen funding for basic classroom instruction. Oil companies have high profit margins yet pay less for extracting oil in Alaska than in Norway or countless other countries. Alaskan Governor Sean Parnell is squandering an opportunity to convert oil wealth into human and physical capital. Alaska's oil resources are finite, and the state should invest the profits now in capital development and economic diversification.
Topic:
Development, Economics, and Oil
Political Geography:
Norway and Alaska

3. The structure and dynamics of cut flower export markets from Kenya and Ethiopia

Author:
Brian D. Perry
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
This report is part of a broad study of trade preferences and market conditions between various developing countries and Norway, conducted under the auspices of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs and funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Norway's Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) was established in 1971. From 2002 Norway has provided duty and quota free market access (DQF-MA) for all goods from all the 50 least developed countries (LDCs3). In 2005 the results of a review of Norway's GSP were published (Melchior, 20054), which showed that agricultural products from developing countries other than LDCs were still subject to substantial tariffs, and this contrasted dramatically with advantages given to European trading partners. As a result, from 1 January 2008 changes were made to Norway's GSP5. An important adjustment was that 14 low income countries that were not part of the LDC group were included in the provision for duty and quota-free market access (DQFMA). Consequently, 64 low income countries now benefit from DQFMA to Norway for all their goods.
Topic:
Agriculture, Development, Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Markets
Political Geography:
Kenya, Africa, Norway, and Ethiopia

4. A case study of Norway's beef trade from developing countries

Author:
Arne Melchior, Karl M. Rich, and Brian D. Perry
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Norway has traditionally operated a rather closed, managed market for beef importsnder WTO-auspices, Norway operates a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for beef that allows the entry of a small amount of product at a relatively low tariff rate, with higher rates of duty imposed on imports over the quota. There are several different TRQs of relevance to boneless beef. The main quota is the WTO quota, which allows for the annual import of 1,084 tons of frozen beef at an in-quota duty rate of NOK 33,60/kg for boneless cuts. Countries with ordinary GSP access receive a 30 percent discount on this duty, so that the in-quota GSP tariff is NOK 23,52/kg. The WTO quota is administered once per year by an auction system – table 6 provides a list of the prices and volumes for the 2011 WTO quota. For imports outside the WTO quota, the duty is 119,01 NOK/kg, with GSP countries paying 10 percent less at NOK 107,11/kg.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, and Markets
Political Geography:
Norway

5. The Negotiated Nordic Labor Markets: From Bust to Boom

Author:
Jon Erik Dølvik
Publication Date:
01-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University
Abstract:
This paper provides an overview of the negotiated Nordic labor market regimes and their various paths of adjustment from bust to boom in recent decades. Developed in small, open economies, the Nordic labor regimes are often associated with strong centralized agreements and associations, high union density, and extensive worker representation, which have been embedded in social models based on close interaction between working life policies, the welfare state and macroeconomic policies. In leaner forms these features have undoubtedly contributed to the high Nordic levels of mobility, equality and employment in recent years (“flexicurity”), but an often overlooked part of the story is the increased scope for product market competition and the supply-side reforms undertaken in the Nordic countries since the crises in the 1980-90s. Another distinction of the revitalized Nordic models is the growing importance of management-union negotiations and dialogue at the company level. A key argument in this paper is thus that the capacity for negotiated flexibility and adjustment in Nordic labor markets has been critically reliant on the multilevel, single-channel pattern of articulation between centralized coordination and decentralized negotiations linking restructuring, training, productivity and pay issues.
Topic:
Development, Government, and Markets
Political Geography:
Europe, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Iceland

6. Economic Survey of Norway, 2007

Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Abstract:
The economy is experiencing a favourable period of robust growth, low unemployment and moderate underlying inflation. This largely reflects the effects of globalisation, of which Norway has been a prime beneficiary, supplying energy and other commodities at high prices and increasingly importing products from low-cost countries. Sizeable labour migration inflows, together with sustained productivity growth, have kept cost inflation at a moderate pace. A tradition of foreign trade openness, domestic competition, a good policy framework and sound macroeconomic management have meant that Norway was well prepared to take advantage of these international trends.
Topic:
Development, Economics, and Markets
Political Geography:
Europe and Norway

7. An Index of Donor Performance

Author:
David Roodman
Publication Date:
11-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The Commitment to Development Index of the Center for Global Development rates 21 rich countries on the “development-friendliness” of their policies. It is revised and updated annually. The component on foreign assistance combines quantitative and qualitative measures of official aid, and of fiscal policies that support private charitable giving. The quantitative measure uses a net transfers concept, as distinct from the net flows concept in the net Official Development Assistance measure of the Development Assistance Committee. The qualitative factors are: a penalty for tying aid; a discounting system that favors aid to poorer, better-governed recipients; and a penalty for “project proliferation.” The charitable giving measure is based on an estimate of the share of observed private giving to developing countries that is attributable to a) lower overall taxes or b) specific tax incentives for giving. De-spite the adjustments, overall results are dominated by differences in quantity of official aid given. This is because while there is a seven-fold range in net concessional transfers/GDP among the scored countries, variation in overall aid quality across donors appears far lower, and private giving is generally small. Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden score highest while the largest donors in absolute terms, the United States and Japan, rank at or near the bottom. Standings by the 2006 methodology have been relatively stable since 1995.
Topic:
International Relations, Development, Economics, and Humanitarian Aid
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, Norway, and Netherlands

8. GSP in the "spaghetti bowl"; of trade preferences

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper examines the relative position of GSP (tariff preferences for developing countries) compared to ordinary tariffs and free trade agreements in Norway, the EU and the USA. On average, ordinary GSP gives a tariff rebate of less than 50% in all countries. “Extended” GSP, given to the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and others, implies zero tariffs in Norway and the EU, but only partial liberalisation in the USA. EU provides extended GSP for 119 countries, while the USA does so for 76 and Norway for 52. Considering the shares of trade rather than the number of countries, extended GSP covers 5% or less of total trade in all cases, and ordinary GSP is much more important. Compared to tariffs in free trade agreements, ordinary GSP is inferior in the USA and the EU, but not too far behind in Norway. This is due to recent cuts in MFN tariffs as well as improvements in the GSP system of Norway. For manufacturing, Norway has low tariffs and a generous GSP system. This is however not the case for agriculture.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, and Third World
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Norway

9. Norway's Trade with Developing Countries

Author:
Per Botolf Maurseth
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
This paper presents some characteristics of Norway's trade with developing countries. Norwegian trade with low and low middle-income countries has increased in recent years. Imports have increased more than exports. This is partly because a large part of Norwegian exports is petroleum sold to other OECD countries. Norwegian trade with the least developed countries, on the other hand, is stagnant and constitutes only a minor share of Norwegian foreign trade. This pattern is similar to other OECD countries: Developing countries increase their share in world trade while least developed countries are marginalized. By adjusting for size and geographical position of Norwegian trade partners it is found that Norwegian trade with developing countries is as expected as compared to other OECD countries.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Development, International Trade and Finance, and Third World
Political Geography:
Norway

10. GSP in the 'spaghetti bowl' of trade preferences

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper examines the relative position of GSP (tariff preferences for developing countries) compared to ordinary tariffs and free trade agreements in Norway, the EU and the USA. On average, ordinary GSP gives a tariff rebate of less than 50% in all countries. “Extended” GSP, given to the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and others, implies zero tariffs in Norway and the EU, but only partial liberalisation in the USA. EU provides extended GSP for 119 countries, while the USA does so for 76 and Norway for 52. Considering the shares of trade rather than the number of countries, extended GSP covers 5% or less of total trade in all cases, and ordinary GSP is much more important. Compared to tariffs in free trade agreements, ordinary GSP is inferior in the USA and the EU, but not too far behind in Norway. This is due to recent cuts in MFN tariffs as well as improvements in the GSP system of Norway. For manufacturing, Norway has low tariffs and a generous GSP system. This is however not the case for agriculture.
Topic:
Development, Economics, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Norway