Swedish Concerns Within the Context of the European Union

           In 1995, Sweden became a member of the European Union. The decision to accede to the Union was a difficult one for Sweden to make, and it came against a backdrop of pessimistic public opinion. European integration has long been seen by many as a path towards ensuring political, economic, and social advancement within the continent. By integrating various areas of society, the European Union attempts to achieve political harmony, maximum progress, and economic stability for all of its member states. As a consequence, member states accept a loss of a portion of their autonomy, and are forced to compromise with others for the greater good. Unfortunately, the differences amongst member states are often substantial and their issues complex, making integration a daunting task.

For Sweden, the prospect of membership into the European Union had been seen as a potential way to curb its rising unemployment, maintain its expensive welfare system, and reinvigorate its sluggish economy by increasing its access to European markets. (Nordstrom, 2002; Guttman, 1995) Despite these positive outlooks, Swedish efforts at European integration have been met with intense criticism at each step along the way from their skeptical citizenry. Referendums on Swedish accession and European Monetary integration have both shown an extremely large portion of the citizenry to be against EU participation, demonstrating that Swedish citizens are hesitant to deepen integration. (Lindahl, 2005) Political scientists have described this rift as a “significant cleavage between public opinion and the political elite,” and it has served to alienate the populace from their government (Lindahl, 2005: 65). Given unenthusiastic public opinion towards European integration and optimistic expectations by the Swedish government, is the European Union a positive or negative force in solving the complex issues facing Sweden? By analyzing the issues surrounding Sweden’s accession and the ability of membership to impact its economic problems, social concerns, environmental policy, and international relations, one can see that Sweden has been able to maintain a significant degree of autonomy, while still reaping the benefits of its membership in the EU. Investigation will show that Sweden has prospered during its association with the EU and that a continuance of this relationship is of benefit to the country. 

Many politico-historical factors have contributed to Sweden’s decision to remain an “EU outsider” for much of the twentieth century. Sweden had held back from joining the European Union because of its “policy of neutrality” that it has maintained since long before integration began (Gan, 1995). By remaining neutral, Sweden has been able to remain outside of worldwide conflicts, thus serving to maintain its deep-seeded stance against war. After the 1989 collapse of the Berlin Wall marking the end of the Cold War, Sweden no longer perceived EU membership as contrary to their traditional position of nonintervention. (Nordstrom, 2002; Regeringskansliet, 2005). In addition, prior to 1990, most Swedish people and politicians had been “federo-sceptic,” meaning that they had been against any move that would integrate Sweden towards the level of a federalist system, in which legislative powers would be shared between different levels of government and backed by a Constitution (Lindahl, 2005). Most of the populace had preferred that Sweden confront relations with the EU as an outsider so as to maintain their sovereignty, or supreme authority within their territory. (Lindahl 2005) By loosing their sovereignty, Sweden itself would no longer have the ability to enact legislation as it deemed fit if it did not comply with EU principles. Critics felt that if the sparsely populated, small Sweden were to join the EU, the country would have little influence over issues surrounding the greater Europe, and instead, would become heavily influenced by the “Franco-German core.” It wasn’t until around 1990 that the difficulties faced by the Swedish economy became overwhelming and served to balance the cause for EU integration. (Lindahl, 2005)

Since the early twentieth century, the Swedish economy has been characterized by its extensive focus on its “welfare state” (Nordstrom, 2002). Numerous social benefits have been provided to all citizens mostly free of charge, and have included health care, preschool and senior citizen-related care, pensions, education, public transportation, and maternity leaves. (Nordstrom, 2002) To the average worker, these services have not come without a price, a price that has usually been levied in the form of heavy taxes. In fact, prior to its accession to the EU, nearly one third of Sweden’s GDP was spent on its welfare state. (U.S. State Dept., 2005) By 1990, Sweden was experiencing a series of compounding economic problems. The skyrocketing cost of maintaining the welfare state had been coupled with inflation, an aging manufacturing sector, poor performance of Swedish products on the worldwide market, a surmounting national debt, and massive amounts of unemployment. (Nordstrom, 2002) The state of economic uncertainty that these problems amounted to paved the way for Sweden’s concession, especially among its political leaders, towards EU membership.

When deciding whether or not to apply for membership, Swedish leaders certainly considered the level of modification the country would have to undergo to become a member. With long-term trade and economic agreements with other European countries stretching as far back as 1960, the Swedish economic system was adaptable to Union ideals. In 1960, Sweden, along with six other non-European Community members formed the European Free Trade Association, which created a free market amongst them and initiated a common external tariff barrier to the European Community (EC). From that point forward, Sweden has maintained an economic relationship with the European Union and its various incarnations. In 1972 and 1992 respectively, Sweden and the EC signed a Free Trade Agreement and established a European Economic Area, both of which further integrated the Swedish economy into that of the EC. (Regeringskansliet, 2005) These early agreements served to prepare Sweden’s institutional structure for an easy transition to membership. (Sweden.Se, 2005)

In 1991, Swedish leadership submitted an application for EU membership, as it was seen as a way in which to influence European politics, ensure economic growth and stability, and access to European markets, which had accounted for seventy-five percent of the Swedish export market (Guttman, 1995). During the negotiation process that preceded its membership, Sweden was able to bargain with EU leaders to ensure that their concerns would be addressed in exchange for their welcomed membership. (Sweden.Se, 2005) As enshrined in its accession treaty, Sweden can maintain its autonomy in foreign policy and defense; sustain most of its high environmental standards within Swedish territory; provide protection for Sweden’s farmers and fisherman; receive regional development funding; continue the Swedish “monopoly” of its alcohol producing giant named Systembolaget; and not restrict a previously banned type of chewing tobacco within its territory. (Nordstrom, 2002; Sweden.Se, 2005) Without the European Union ceding to the conditions that Sweden had required, the process of accession might not have gone as smoothly as it did.

In 1994, just prior to their entering the EU, the question of membership was put up to a national referendum. After fierce campaigns, Swedes voted with 52.3 percent in favor and 46.8 percent against EU membership. (Regeringskansliet, 2005) While they had given the green light to their national government to go ahead with integration, it was clear from early on that a large portion of the population remained doubtful that EU membership would help Sweden; contrary to the views of the majority of their politicians. (Lindahl, 2005) In a November 1994 speech by Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson to the Swedish Parliament, he outlined Swedish goals within the context of the greater Europe. He believed that Swedish membership would provide the country with “stability, predictability, influence, and, of course, accessibility to the EU market” (Guttman, 1995: 1; Carlsson, 1995). For the greater Europe, Sweden would focus its efforts on maintaining peace throughout the continent, improving the European environment, spreading openness and transparency in government to the EU level, increasing gender equality, and supporting efforts to enlarge the Union to include Eastern and Central Europe. (Guttman, 1995) Many Swedes perceived these ambitious goals to be utopian, as they did not believe that such a small country could evoke such radical changes. What Sweden would find is that as a member of the European Union, they would be able to significantly influence Europe as a whole, improve their economic performance, and still maintain a portion of their sovereignty.

Sweden has long focused its efforts on curbing environmental hazards, both at home and abroad. These concerns have included the use of toxic chemicals, the prevalence of urban air pollution and water pollution, and the issues surrounding acid rain. (Kronsell, 2001) When Sweden sought to become a member of the European Union, it was granted special permission to maintain its high levels of environmental standards, which would generally have been perceived to be contrary to EU principles of free trade. (Carlsson, 1995) If Sweden had chosen to ban a particular chemical from use within the country, Sweden would traditionally be deemed to have prevented that product from flowing freely within the European Union, thus violating EU treaties. With the concessions that Sweden was able to secure from EU leaders prior to its membership, Sweden was given the ability to maintain a portion of its sovereignty in relation to its high standards of environmental regulation, a deeply held value of the Swedish people. 

Many factors have played into strengthening Sweden’s role on environmental issues within the greater EU. Since the 1970’s, Sweden has realized that it must look beyond its borders to prevent environmental dangers from dispersing into its territory. In 1972, Sweden initiated a UN conference to tackle the issue of acid rain. (Kronsell, 2001) Throughout the past three decades, the Swedish government has met with environmental agencies worldwide and leaders of the international community to discuss ways to regulate the environment, and as such, has developed a reputation as being knowledgeable and resourceful on issues surrounding environmental policy. (Guttman, 2006) In addition, Sweden’s well-developed domestic policies regarding the environment have served as a model for environmental improvements at the EU level. (Kronsell, 2001) EU leaders are therefore able to examine Swedish legislation and determine which environmental reforms would be beneficial to the greater Europe. Also, the solid position of the Swedish national government with regards to the environment serves to strengthen its recognition in EU decision-making. (Kronsell, 2001) For these reasons, Sweden’s small size surely has not hindered its voice within the European Union. In contrast, it has emerged as a well-respected and knowledgeable asset to the Union.

Since its membership, Sweden has demonstrated its immense capacity to influence environmental policy within the EU. In 2001, Sweden had the chance to set the agenda when it took the reigns for a six-month term in the EU presidency, and it introduced a variety of environmental proposals that the EU later adapted. (Sweden.Se, 2005) These included policies on curbing the acid rain problem, restricting the use of toxic chemicals, and regulating pollution. (Kronsell, 2001) At the Göteberg Summit, also during its presidency, Sweden was able to secure environmental protections on development policy, meaning that research on the environmental consequences of such policies must be complied prior to the EU reaching its final decision. (Widfeldt, 2002) Sweden’s strong stance on issues of protecting the environment juxtaposed to its ability to persuade the greater European Union to enact environmental policy served to contradict some of the initial concerns that the Swedish populace had towards the European Union. Although Sweden is a smaller, sparsely populated state, changes in environmental policy have demonstrated that it can still make a difference within Europe.

In 2003, Swedish voters were faced with the prospect of integrating their monetary system. Sweden had come under pressure to join the European Monetary Union (EMU), which included the initiation of the Euro, the new EU currency, after twelve member states approved the changes in 2002. (Lindahl, 2005) Integrating monetary policy was seen by many as a way in which to reinvigorate the Swedish economy by encouraging foreign investment and further increasing trade with Europe. (Reed, 2003) Supporters of the Euro had believed that if Sweden were to sign on, the EMU would serve to further decrease its isolation from the rest of Europe, and would provide the country with a stronger role in EU decision-making. (Lindahl, 2002) Many viewed monetary integration as a practical shift, as many Swedes often traveled within the Euro countries. (Lindahl, 2002) In addition, Swedish businessmen believed that it would force Swedish politicians to put a cap on their out of control spending habits. (Reed, 2003) But these proponents were met with strong criticism, as statistics demonstrated that Swedish businesses had outperformed the economies of the countries that had signed onto the Euro, and many were unwilling to allow Sweden to become a net contributor. (Reed, 2003) In addition, by switching to the Euro, Swedish businesses including Volvo and Svenska Cellulosa would no longer be as closely tied to fluctuations in the Swedish krona, thus having the ability to impede upon economic stability. Furthermore, many people saw monetary integration as a route to further erode Swedish sovereignty, and criticized the EU in its entirety for its “democratic deficiency” (Lindahl, 2002) Both campaigns provided strong arguments both for and against EMU participation, and the issue divided the populace.

In September 2003, the issue was put to referendum. After an extremely high voter turnout, 56% opposed the switch to the Euro, and only 42% approved it. (Lindahl, 2002) These results demonstrated that public opinion was out of sync with Swedish leadership, and in addition, showed that the majority of the people were still hesitant to integrate into the European Union. While these results likely resulted in national tension, it nonetheless demonstrated that Sweden has been able to maintain their autonomy in certain areas, and as such, has had an easier time working within the context of the European Union.

Sweden has now been a member of the European Union for eleven years. During that period of time it has witnessed a bolstering of its previously lethargic economy. Economic revival was paramount among Swedish concerns when it originally sought to enter the Union, and in many respects, the EU has been a positive force in the Swedish economy. For example, Sweden’s prior approach to foreign investment was very restrictive, and as such, discouraged businesses from investing in the country. (Country Watch, 2005) Today, Sweden is no longer perceived as an undesirable place to invest. Entry into the European Union has placed Sweden in a more favorable light within the international community. EU membership has brought about an increase in foreign investment, and such growth has stimulated Sweden to implement business reforms that have aided foreign investors. (U.S. State Dept., 2005) These self-perpetuating changes have resulted in a cataclysmic increase in foreign ownership within the country. As a result, unemployment has fell significantly, as foreign businesses now employ twenty percent of the business work force. (Country Watch, 2005) In fact, overall Swedish unemployment rates have declined by at least three percent since joining the EU. (U.S. State Dept., 2005) Corporate taxes have also seen a steady decline since membership in the EU commenced, and Sweden can now take pride in being one of Europe’s lowest. (Country Watch, 2005) The international community now sees Sweden as a lucrative business prospect. Certainly, a shift in global opinion has occurred since Sweden’s entry into the EU that has resulted in benefits to its economy, and the European Union must be given credit for a significant portion of that change.

Social conditions in Sweden have also shown improvement since entry into the European Union. Prior to its membership, Sweden had not had to contend with the same degree of social problems facing other countries in the EU. Nonetheless, it was plagued with social tensions and an economy that struggled to support its social institutions. (Country Watch, 2005) The last eleven years have seen an easing of social tensions as economic conditions have improved. Education levels have surpassed those of prior years, and by 2001, Sweden had a literacy rate of ninety-nine percent, ranking it amongst the worlds highest. (Country Watch, 2005) In addition, the Swedish health care system is viewed as one of the best in the world.  The economic benefits of Sweden’s membership within the European Union can clearly be extrapolated to social benefits.

Sweden has undoubtedly prospered as a result of its association with the European Union. During its tenure, Sweden’s economic and social institutions have thrived. Many of the earlier concerns of EU membership have diminished with the plethora of new economic opportunities that it has brought. In addition, the European Union has assisted Sweden in becoming increasingly competitive, both economically and politically, within the international arena. Environmental concerns, a subject of great importance to the Swedes, have been given the utmost attention by the EU. These issues have served to place Sweden in a position to expand its cause by influencing the environmental policies of the entire European Union. Unfortunately, sovereignty issues have remained paramount. Economic gains not withstanding, the debate over the adaptation of the Euro has shifted the balance towards disfavor of the European Union amongst Swedes. Despite major concessions by the EU, the fear that common monetary policy would cause too great a loss of their autonomy has divided the Swedes, and the populace still remains skeptical towards efforts at further integration. This mentality jeopardizes the very continuance of the EU. Nonetheless, most Swedes would concede that their country has gained tremendous benefit from its membership within the European Union, and that dissociation at this point would likely cause it to revert back to its earlier isolationistic stance. If Sweden were to lose the international recognition and global clout that it has achieved since entry into the EU, it would likely have to face issues of much greater complexity for its survival than its currently perceived loss of autonomy. In order for harmony to prevail, the EU must enact changes that please a greater majority of its Swedish constituents, and Sweden will have to decide what role it will play in the future of the European Union.

Works Cited

Carlsson, Ingvar. "Swedish Interests in the European Union." Presidents & Prime Ministers 4 (1995): 1-3. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and European Union.

Gan, Delice. Cultures of the World: Sweden. 1st ed. Vol. 1. Tarrytown, NY: Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 1996. 38.

Guttman, Robert J. "New EU Member Seeks Influence." Europe 1 (1995): 1-3. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and European Union.

Kronsell, Annica. "Can Small States Influence EU Norms?" Lund University 1 (2001): 287-304. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and the European Union.

Lindahl, Rutger, and Daniel Naurin. "Sweden: the Twin Faces of a Euro-Outsider." European Integration 27 (2005): 65-87. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and European Union.

Nordstrom, Byron J. The History of Sweden. 1st ed. Vol. 1. Westport, CT: Greenwood P, 2002. 123-155.

Reed, Stanley, Ariane Sains, and Andy Reinhardt. "To Euro or Not to Euro." Business Week 1 (2003): 44. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 21 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and European Union.

"Sweden: Country Conditions." Country Watch 1 (2005): 1-16. Political Risk Services. Country Watch. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and the European Union. [cited in text as “Country Watch”]

"Sweden in the European Union." Sweden.Se: the Official Gateway to Sweden. Oct. 2005. Sweden.Se. 21 Apr. 2006 <http://www.sweden.se/templates/cs/FactSheet____12852.aspx>.

[cited in text as Sweden.Se]

"Sweden's Road to EU Membership." Regeringskansliet. 15 July 2005. Govt. Offices of Sweden. 22 Apr. 2006 <http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/3470/a/20685>.

[cited in text as Regeringskansliet]

United States. Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. U.S. Department of State. Aug. 2005. <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2880.htm>. [cited in text as U.S. State Dept.]

Widfeldt, Anders. "Sweden." European Journal of Political Research 41 (2002): 1089-1094. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. 22 Apr. 2006. Keyword: Sweden and European Union.