Why didn't Sweden, Denmark and England abandon their national currency and opt for the Euro?

Résumé du document

The adoption of the single Euro currency by twelve countries is an unprecedented event in the history of The European Union. In fact the loss of its own currency as a symbol of sovereignty and the giving up of the pursuit of an independent economic and budgetary policy represents a major change. After the introduction of the Euro in 2002, one cannot judge the efficiency of this single currency within a short period of time. Moreover it seems that there are three countries which are not ready to give up their currencies in the favor of the Euro .

Extraits

[...] Historical background: the refusal of Euro: Major and common reasons: National reasons: Any regrets? Different degrees of Economic Integration or how EU tends to become a true “Economic Union” The different levels of integration in the trade agreements must be pointed out in order to understand the degree of cooperation within members countries of same trade area. In fact General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) or World Trade Organization (WTO) represent simple agreement to reduce particular barriers. But when these agreements try to dealt with sharp issues as dumping or agriculture, things are becoming difficult and making an agreement with all countries is revealed nearly impossible. [...]

[...] The Danish and Swedish referendums reveal that the people in Europe were not certainly ready to share a common currency together and so transcend their cultural differences. III) Negative effects of Euro in general: Mundell's impossible trilogy with the loss of sovereignty and the theory of Optimal Currency Area This theoretical part is based on “inconsistent trinity principle” developed by Mundell and the theory of Optimum Currency Area. The drawbacks of the Euro and so the arguments of EMU opponents can not be understood without those two fundamental theories. [...]

[...] In others words why did the UK, Denmark and Sweden refuse to give up their national currencies for the benefit of Euro? With the view to answering to those questions, I divided my term paper into four major parts. In the first part I stress the different degrees of International Integration in order to see how the European Union is heading in the direction of “Economic Integration”. Secondly I bring the positive expected effects of the Euro or why twelve have accepted to entry to Euro currency area. [...]

[...] Somewhere for me, a stable currency is the rule and devaluations, revaluations the exceptions. But if I consider the events in the 80's I am wrong. The book intituled EMU explained: the impact of Euro stresses precisely the ups and downs of moneys in this period. Between 1981 and 1983 there were three French franc devaluations, four lira devaluations, three revaluations of the mark, and devaluation and then revaluation of the Danish crown and Belgian franc. And this instability and volatility of the currencies lasted until the beginning of 90's. [...]

[...] For example a country has a high unemployment rate and another one has not workers enough. If the labour is allowed to move freely from one country to another, the situation will be balanced since a country should use the surplus of workers coming from other region. So the optimality of currency area depends on the degree of “Economic Integration” that is to say the level of trade in goods and services and the factors mobility within a given area. [...]