1. Definition of the Position (Simons/Tripp (2003) „The Negotiation Checklist“)
1.1. What is negotiation purpose of FINLAND?
The aim of negotiations is to allow the use of vegetable substitutes (production of chocolate
consisting of vegetable fat other than cocoa butter) not just among seven Member States,
but also in the European Union
1.2. What are the negotiations subjects?
1.3. How important are these subjects for FINLAND?
1.4. What is „BATNA“ (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (Fisher/Ury)) for
FINLAND?
1.5. Partners of negotiation: what are their purposes? How important for them are their
purposes? What are their BATNAs?
1.6. Negotiations situation: Are there temporal restrictions? Who is in to the most
impatient one? Which justice-norms are there?
1.7. Relations between the negotiations participants. Which strategies and tactics turn
other negotiations participants in?
2. Which negotiation outcome would be a) in ideal, b) realistical evaluation of situation?
3. How I evaluate proposal of Commission in the light of preferences of FINLAND?
4. If FINLAND would be member of Presidency of Council: how I would evaluate proposal
of Commission in the light of preferences of Council Presidency?
5. Which negotiation strategies will help to achieve aims of FINLAND (Presidency)?
6. Does FINLAND see any differences between their position of strategy in the first and
second reading in the Council of Ministers and does FINLAND think that strategies of
negotiation will be different between readings?
7. What would failure of directive mean for FINLAND (Presidency)?
8. What kind of consequences do I except for FINLAND’S negotiation manner? (If I am not
BELGIUM or UK).
9. What will mean failure of directive for both antipodes – BELGIUM and UK?
10. What kind of consequences can I draw of possible negotiation strategies of both actors?
11. Which countries can I probably win over, which countries should I outvote?
12. If you only would choose one actor and only at a time in co-decisive procedure your lobby
activities unfold could – which time and which actor you would choose?
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- INTRODUCTION
- FINLAND
- 1. Definition of the Position (Simons/Tripp (2003) „The Negotiation Checklist\")
- 1.1. What is negotiation purpose of FINLAND?
- 1.2. What are the negotiations subjects?
- 1.3. How important are these subjects for FINLAND?
- 1.4. What is „BATNA\" (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (Fisher/Ury)) for FINLAND?
- 1.5. Partners of negotiation: what are their purposes? How important for them are their purposes? What are their BATNAS?
- 1.6. Negotiations situation: Are there temporal restrictions? Who is in to the most impatient one? Which justice-norms are there?
- 1.7. Relations between the negotiations participants. Which strategies and tactics turn other negotiations participants in?
- 2. Which negotiation outcome would be a) in ideal, b) realistical evaluation of situation?
- 3. How I evaluate proposal of Commission in the light of preferences of FINLAND?
- 4. If FINLAND would be member of Presidency of Council: how I would evaluate proposal of Commission in the light of preferences of Council Presidency?
- 5. Which negotiation strategies will help to achieve aims of FINLAND (Presidency)?
- 6. Does FINLAND see any differences between their position of strategy in the first and second reading in the Council of Ministers and does FINLAND think that strategies of negotiation will be different between readings?
- 7. What would failure of directive mean for FINLAND (Presidency)?
- 8. What kind of consequences do I except for FINLAND'S negotiation manner? (If I am not BELGIUM or UK).
- 9. What will mean failure of directive for both antipodes – BELGIUM and UK?
- 10. What kind of consequences can I draw of possible negotiation strategies of both actors?
- 11. Which countries can I probably win over, which countries should I outvote?
- 12. If you only would choose one actor and only at a time in co-decisive procedure your lobby activities unfold could – which time and which actor you would choose?
- REFERENCES
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This document is a position paper for Finland regarding negotiations for a European Union directive concerning cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption. The paper aims to outline Finland's position on the key aspects of the negotiations, including the use of vegetable fat substitutes in chocolate, labeling requirements, and the potential impact on developing countries.
- The impact of the directive on the chocolate industry in Finland and its export markets.
- The potential for using vegetable fat substitutes in chocolate production, including their benefits and drawbacks.
- The implications of the directive for developing countries, specifically those involved in cocoa production.
- The importance of ensuring consumer transparency and clarity regarding the use of vegetable fats in chocolate.
- The potential implications of the directive for the free movement of goods within the European Union.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- INTRODUCTION: This section introduces the background and context of the proposed directive on cocoa and chocolate products, highlighting its purpose and the history of its development. It outlines the directive's key objective of simplifying regulations to ensure the free movement of chocolate products within the European Union.
- FINLAND: This section lays out Finland's position on the proposed directive, focusing on the country's negotiating objectives, key concerns, and potential strategies. It explores the importance of the chocolate industry to Finland's economy and the potential impacts of the directive on the country's exports.
- 1. Definition of the Position (Simons/Tripp (2003) „The Negotiation Checklist\"): This section delves into the specifics of Finland's negotiation position using the framework of the "Negotiation Checklist." It details the purpose of the negotiations for Finland, identifies the key negotiation subjects, and assesses their importance. It also analyzes Finland's "Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement" (BATNA) for each subject, offering a clear understanding of Finland's negotiating leverage.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The key topics of the text include: European Union, chocolate directive, cocoa butter, vegetable fat substitutes, labeling, developing countries, free movement of goods, negotiation strategies, and trade agreements.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Karina Oborune (Autor:in), 2008, Simulationskurs Entscheidungsprozesse, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/156860
