Foreign Investment and Multinational Corporations in the Nordic Countries
| Author | Olav Knudsen |
| Published date | 01 November 1980 |
| Date | 01 November 1980 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/001083678001500402 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Foreign
Investment
and
Multinational
Corporations
in
the
Nordic
Countries
OLAV
KNUDSEN
Institute
of Political
Science,
University
of Oslo
Knudsen,
O.
Foreign
Investment
and
Multinational
Corporations
in
the
Nordic
Countries.
Cooperation
and
Conflict,
XV,
1980,
209-215.
The
main
question
here
is:
How
exposed
are
the
Nordic
countries
to
the
political
influence
of
multinational
corporations?
The
article
briefly
surveys
and
compares
the
Nordic
regulatory
systems
for
foreign
business.
Concerning
the
nature
of
the
political
influence
of
MNCs,
it
is
argued
that
geographical
dispersion
is
a
key
variable,
assuming
centralized
corporations:
The
more
geographically
extended
a
company’s
commitments,
the
greater
its
bargaining
power
vis-à-vis
host
countries.
To
answer
the
initial
question
therefore
requires
a
differentiation
of
data
pertaining
to
geographically
dispersed,
from
those
pertaining
to
geographically
concentrated,
corporations.
The
article
presents
such
data
for
the
Nordic
countries,
and
shows
significant
differences
between
them.
I.
THE
QUESTION
So
far
none
of
the
Nordic
countries
has
had
a
really
serious
clash
with
international
business
interest.
In
the
tougher
current
climate
of
business-government
relations
this
could
easily
change.
The
present
article
raises
the
question:
How
exposed
are
the
Nordic
countries
to
the
political
influence
of
multinational
corporations
(MNCs)?2
II.
NORDIC
REGULATION
OF
FOREIGN
BUSINESS:
A
BRIEF
DIGRESSION
The
most
obvious
response
to
this
question
would
refer
to
the
legal
and
administrative
arrangements
available
in
each
country
for
the
regulation
of
foreign
business.
As
will
be
seen
shortly,
however,
national
regula-
tion
has
severe
limitations
in
dealing
with
international
corporations,
because
only
a
small
part
of
the
activity
to
be
regulated
takes
place,
or
is
directed
from,
inside the
regulating
(host)
country.
This
point
will
be
set
forth
more
completely
below.
Nevertheless,
it
would
be
erroneous
to
conclude
that
national
regulation
is
totally
without
importance
in
this
regard.
An
explicit
set
of
rules
and
procedures
might
clarify
the
rights
and
duties
of
the
parties
and
help
resolve
conflicts
when
they
arise.
Furthermore,
this
may
in
itself
serve
to
make
conflicts
less
likely.
Hence,
a
certain
minimum
of
rules
appears
necessary
to
make
the
relationship
function
smoothly.
However,
the
existence
of
rules
also
signals
the
government’s
ambition
to
have
a
say
in
shaping
and
channeling
business
de-
cisions.
Up
to
a
point
this
ambition
will
be
expected
and
regarded
as
legitimate
by
any
international
corporation.
Beyond
that
point,
governmental
ambition
is
likely
to
meet
resistance,
and
the
rules
may
then
serve
as
much
to
fuel
disputes
as
to
resolve
or
prevent
them.
Ultimately,
of
course,
much
will
depend
on
the
attitudes,
demands
and
expectations
of
individual
corporations
and
on
the
political
acumen
of
the
govern-
ment
officials
who
administer
the
rules.
It
is
impossible
within
the
limits
of
this
article
to
give
a
fair
account
of
Nordic
legislation
and
associated
administrative
practice
in
this
area.
Suffice
it
to
say,
therefore,
that
when
we
compare
the
legal
and
administrative
systems
which
the
Nor-
dic
countries
have
worked
out
to
regulate
foreign-owned
business
activities,3
Norway
seems
to
have
the
most
far-reaching
system
and
Denmark
the
least,
with
Finland
and
Sweden
falling
somewhere
in
between.4
In
To continue reading
Request your trial