By a Newsnet reporter

According to a study published this month in the prestigious economics journal The Journal of Economic Growth, Scotland and the Basque Country would enjoy substantial economic benefits from independence.  The study also predicted that independence for  both nations is quite likely.  The study was carried out by an international team of researchers from the Carlos III University of Madrid, the Toulouse School of Economics in France, the Southern Methodist University of the USA and the New Moscow School of Economics.

The study, entitled The Stability and Break Up of Nations: A Quantative Analysis, did not specifically examine the pros and cons of Scottish or Basque independence.  According to the researchers, their aim was to create a mathematical tool to determine whether a state would break into its constituent parts or whether neighbouring states might be better off in a union.  

In devising the model the international team of economists examined pairs of countries in order to develop a mathematical model for determining how any two countries or group of countries would fare economically with greater independence or greater union between them and how likely such scenarios were.  The study ignored geopolitical factors, and instead concentrated on the economic case for independence or union.

The study also examined which EU member states would be better off from closer financial and political integration at the EU level.  The researchers found that Finland, Spain, and Greece would all enjoy an economic boost as a result of greater EU integration, but that the benefits for Germany and France were less clear cut.

Using the same model, the researchers came to the conclusion that the Basque Country and Scotland would financially benefit by leaving Spain and the UK respectively.  According to the study the amount available for public expenditure in Scotland would increase substantially after independence, the same finding was made for the Basque Country.  The study also predicted that both countries are likely to become independent in the future.  

However the same findings were not repeated for other countries in Europe which seek greater autonomy from the state they are a part of.  The study concluded that Lapland would be better off financially remaining a part of Norway and independence was unlikely.  The study also found that Sardinia would benefit economically from independence from Italy, but that Sardinia was far less likely to gain independence than Scotland or the Basque Country.

The study is based in part upon a previous study, published in 2006, which noted a correlation between poor economic performance and "artificial" states, whose borders do not correspond to those of single historical nation.  The UK and Spain are the two prime examples of such states in Western Europe.

The novel feature in this new mathematical model is that it is based not only on the economic potential of the countries but also their cultural identity, which is more original.  The model includes expected factors such as a country's wealth and other economic indicators, alongside size and cultural differences.

According to lead researcher Professor Ignacio Ortuño Ortín of the Economics Dept of Carlos III University, the most difficult aspect to quantify when making predictions is the 'measurement' of countries from a cultural point of view.  The study uses genetic differences as a proxy measurement of cultural difference.  Professor Ortuño claims that this is the most original part of the study, saying:

"We take population genetics data and then use it to support the fact that such genetic distance between regions can be used as a good tool when approaching cultural distance.

Professor Ortuño clarifies: "This does not suggest that genetics explains culture but that there is a correlation between the two.  This means that populations that have mixed more display greater cultural similarity.  We are not saying that genes explain the way a person thinks."

Using genetic data in an economic model may be controversial.  The study explains:

"Instead of relying on genetic distances as a proxy for cultural distances, an alternative would be to use data from social surveys on individuals' values.  However, the answers to many questions in opinion polls are arguably biased by short term events, such as the political business cycle.  Since we are interested in long-term decisions - secessions or unifications - information gathered from surveys or opinion polls may not be the most appropriate.  Nevertheless, we do explore this type of information, and find a strong correlation between distances based on social surveys and genetic distances."

Cultural differences are often the decisive factor in whether a country becomes independent.  After applying the model to the former Yugoslavia, the research team noted:  "Cultural differences, though small, were essential for the country's disintegration. Economic differences, though large, were not enough to cause the breakup of Yugoslavia."

When applied to the Scottish situation, the model predicts that the diverging political culture between Scotland and the rest of the UK will be the key factor leading to Scottish independence.  The model also predicts that Scottish independence is very likely to occur and that Scotland will benefit economically as a result, but does not offer a timetable.

The study will give a further boost to those who argue that Scotland will benefit financially from independence, and directly contradicts those who argue that independence would damage Scotland economically.

Comments  

 
# clootie 2011-11-27 11:04
This is the type and level of debate that should be taking place as part of the independence discussion. We should have a sensible and factual roll out of various scenarios and people can then make a balanced choice.

What do we have - the too wee / too poor /too stupid rhetoric of the unionists!
 
 
# chicmac 2011-11-27 19:53
It appears that Scotland’s size, far from being ‘too wee’ is just about the optimum in terms of wealth potential (see following graphic). Of course, for this exercise it only makes sense to compare data from traditional Western Democracies (yellow background) since that history still predominates economically over former Eastern Bloc countries (blue) which, of course, are still playing catch up.

i51.photobucket.com/.../...

When I pointed this out on another well known forum, I was given the url to a new study, which although instigated in Wales still has lots of informed comment and data relevant to national size versus economic status.

tinyurl.com/csm8qsk

It is well worth studying.
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-27 11:39
An impressive list of contributors to this report. Most importantly an objective list of contributors. I'm no great believer in the genetics angle myself but I certainly believe that our culture forms the nature of our politics. We are a more inclusive culture and I believe a culture which has a far greater attachment to social democracy.

The Westminster model of patronage and greed is good simply grates on our collective conscience. Yes, I know we have our fair share of contributors in Westmidden, but I firmly believe that we're not so far distanced from the path of community in Scotland that it's lost to us.

At its core, this is what it means to be a Scot and its the crucial difference in our politics and our wider culture. I believe the FM when he says that independence is inevitable, not because its wishful thinking but because I see a tidal shift in people on the street. The horror at the carnage caused by the financial sector and the reaction of Westminster MPs to the crisis. The dissatisfaction with sitting MSPs in unionist parties who toed party lines and were willing to, in Labours case gloss over the disaster of their administration in favour of career and patronage. In the case of the Conservative and Lib Dem MSPs and MPs, their willingness to carry out awful austerity measures on an electorate which never gave them a mandate.

The report comes to the same conclusion as the FM at the end of the day. Independence is inevitable!
 
 
# deepwater 2011-11-27 13:13
Interestingly it is precisely these cultural and political differences Westminster has spent some three centuries trying to destroy.
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-27 13:41
One more thing I've noticed recently deepwater, is that the harder they try the more adverse the reaction of the Scottish electorate. Whatever reasons we attribute to the success of the SNP in May, one thing I think is certain, a massive warning shot was put across the bows of Westminster. I believe that as a collective we said enough is enough and our relationship within this union has changed permanently.

We've discovered for one thing, that we have a collective will and that an option to exercise that will is available in the shape of the SNP. Certainly interesting times!
 
 
# deepwater 2011-11-27 14:40
It is an intetresting time to be a participant in Scotland's story, while I agree with most of what you say the SNP "core vote" which in my opinion equals a "Scotland First" core vote still only stands around 30%.

When we get that "Scotland First" core vote up to ~60%, then we are doing well.

We have come a long way, but half the path is still to be walked, on the bright side it does look like its all down an ever steepening hill to the finish.
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-27 15:05
Very much agree Deepwater! At least now we're looking at a fair tilt at the ring with the country's vote pretty much split into thirds. The big crunch will come over the set up of the referendum (one or two questions) and how those who support Devo Max will jump should it prove to be status quo - yes or no. Ideally I would like to see the independence argument win a good portion of those voters over before the referendum, but we'll just have to wait and hope for the best.
 
 
# Jim Johnston 2011-11-28 12:27
Hi deepwater,

It's interesting to me that all Unionist outlets continually report the lowest common denominator %ge of Scots who are determined to see Scotland Independent, eg ca only 30% want Independence. That talk down number is no bad thing, because every Scot can see what is happening in the real world of their daily life and question the validity of such a low number. Hence it seriously weakens the credibility of all and any Unionist propaganda.

I'm more confident that the 44% who actually voted SNP in May is nearer the core independence support figure. Of course there are people in every party who will be swayed one way or the other come the referendum, but these are swings and roundabout factors, not a one way street.

Therefore, in a straight Yes / No referendum, Independence needs to pick up 7 or 8 people in every 100 voters to be certain of victory, not easy but certainly not unlikely.

The longer things go on as they are the more people are supporting Independence. Just talk to people on this issue when you are out and about, and it's very clear that they are at the very least, thinking and asking questions which were never asked before.

I believe we will vote for Independence, the question then is will the Scottish Government void the Treaty of Union immediately and accept the will of the Scottish people. Of course the SG will do exactly that. Negotiations are a Unionist myth, division of assets / liabilities are simple arithmatic and implimentation of established geographic International Laws and Conventions. That should take 3 or 4 months to achieve before Scotland will be requesting membership of the UN, and start building our own circle of international relationships.

What Westminster do post referendum is a matter wholly reserved to Westminster. I wish them well.
 
 
# chicmac 2011-11-28 14:07
Jim,
There is a series of polls from tns brmb.

The options given were:-

"I AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state."

"I DO NOT AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state."

Here is a graph of the results so far:

i51.photobucket.com/.../...

Note that in the more recent polls the Yes's have overtaken the No's.

Note also those polls call for 'negotiation with Westminster' rather than Y/N to Independence but they are still reasonable trendicators.

However, I would point out that there was a series of Polls which did ask a straight Y/N to independence.

Here is a graphic listing most of them:

i51.photobucket.com/.../...

There were a few more after this so that there was an overlap with the start of the tns brmb polls.

It could be seen by comparison at that time that there appeared to be a 'loss' in support between the straight independence question and the 'negotiate with Westminster' version of about 5-10%.

On investigation, albeit based on anecdotal evidence, I am of the opinion that that 'loss' was largely down to an element of nationalist support who objected on principle to negotiation with Westminster and used the poll to register that.

I therefore place 'loss' in inverted commas because when push comes to shove in an actual referendum, those who thus registered objection would in my opinion, in that instance still vote Yes. Indeed this is exemplary of the kind of difference which exists between polls and the real thing. There are others I won't go into here, but all are positive for the Yes campaign.
 
 
# Jim Johnston 2011-11-28 16:09
Hi chicmac, thanks for the links.

One thing is glaringly obvious from the results shown, the wording and date of the referendum is extremely important, hence the Unionist clamour to dictate both. It is unfortunate for Unionists that the SNP alone have a mandate to determine both question and date.

For a long time I've held the view that the fewer words in any question on any subject, the clearer the understanding of the question, and the clearer the answer is.
Words which in themselves appear to offer alternative interpretations , such as negotiate, separate, divide etc., should never be used to frame a concise question.

No doubt all these words will be used in debate, if the Unionists ever get round to debate, but the actual question should have very few words. If poeple are expected to answer Yes or No, there must be no ambiguity in the question.

The old lawyers question "Have you stopped beating your wife, answer Yes or No" is impossible to answer, simply because it is a completely ambiguous question.
Answer either "Yes", then you used to beat her ?, or "No", then you are still beating her ?

I'm very confident that Scotland will be asked the correct question, and the resulting answer will be crystal clear.

My own question would be

DO YOU AGREE SCOTLAND SHOULD BE AN INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN NATION....YES / NO

I'm sure there are better brains than mine who will ask a precise question, but is should be framed in no more than 10 words which can be interpretated as nothing other than Yes or No.

Thanks again for the links chicmac.
Roll on the referendum sometime in any of the three halfs of this Parliament as Mr Grey suggests.
 
 
# chicmac 2011-11-28 22:30
Thanks Jim. In a recent post in the Herald in response to Iain McWhirter's article on the Referendum question I responded including links to the polls above. The editor removed them from my post so what was left didn't make complete sense.

They seem as keen as ever that people do not find out the true position for support of independence.
 
 
# Rabbie 2011-11-27 13:49
Ay, they kent whit they war daein. It wis aboot 1850 that they stertit sendin inspectors roond aw the Scottish scuils tae mak shair that baith the teachers an the bairns wis speakin juist English in the clessrooms. Syne thon time, the bairns o Scotland haed yin leid for the clessroom (English) an anither leid for the playgrund (Scots or Gaelic).
 
 
# rhymer 2011-11-27 18:02
Stop it Rabbie !
Thou art not funny.
 
 
# gus1940 2011-11-27 18:11
I look forward to this survey leading tomorrow's BBC News Bulletins and headlining The Scotsman, Retard and Mail.

It will no doubt replace the story about Flying Pigs.
 
 
# Sleekit 2011-11-27 19:01
I am going to do everything I can to get this story out to work colleagues as I get the feeling that the MSM will not publish it!
 
 
# dogbite 2011-11-27 19:40
aye Sleekit Facebook can send this message to millions around the globe
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-11-27 19:12
Hark what is that noise I hear......

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

Ach tis only another nail being knocked into the coffin of unionism. :D
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-27 22:06
Ah've goat a shovel! :)
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-11-27 23:20
I hope it's a BIG shovel Macart. :D
 
 
# Glasgow 2011-11-27 19:29
Quoting Macart:
The report comes to the same conclusion as the FM at the end of the day. Independence is inevitable!



I. I. I!
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-27 22:07
OK Glasgow I've got no idea what that means but I'm hoping its a good thing. :0)
 
 
# Sleekit 2011-11-27 23:27
Independence.
Is.
Inevitable.
 
 
# Macart 2011-11-28 08:03
Cheers Sleekit, definately slow off the mark there! Thought it was some net slang I'd never seen. Heh! :0P
 
 
# scottish_skier 2011-11-27 20:02
OT, but out of interest, is it just me, or are supermarkets going out of the way to advertise things as 'Scottish' recently.

I recall having the Union Jack on stuff to show 'local sourcing' was popular for a while previously, but today I found Tesco Galashiels today was saltire central. Anything Scottish had a wee flag on it.

Maybe their marketing folk have found that that's good for sales?
 
 
# whitburnsfinest 2011-11-28 02:45
Wish my local co-op would learn that lesson, scottish_skier. They've still got their union jacks all over the place. I'm really starting to find that offensive.
 
 
# clootie 2011-11-27 21:57
Feels good - another step along the road.
Independence in my lifetime :D
 
 
# Colin 2011-11-27 22:24
CBI or Danny Alexander make pro-union statements with no evidence; it becomes a top story on the BBC.

Several institutions come to a pro-independence conclusion (and they're certainly not biased since they advocate closer union for other places); not a mention on the BBC.

Where is the fairness? Pro union stories as well as pro independence stories deserve to take the top story on the BBC.
 
 
# raisethegame 2011-11-27 23:42
Re British Broadcasting Corporation - preserving the status quo is their natural position. When push comes to shove, they will always put the union interest first. There will be no fairness until broadcasting is devolved and the Scottish Broadcasting Corporation (if that's what we get) becomes as zealous on behalf of Scotland's interests as the current set-up is to the UK
 
 
# creag an tuirc 2011-11-28 02:34
Could the BBC's closure of comments to the Scottish people not be tackled via this?

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states that:

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
 
 
# ready4anything 2011-11-28 08:55
There is no doubt that the BBC, with its undeserved but undoubted power, can be used as a state propaganda machine. And that abused power can even be brought to bear on its own reporters who want to air a different opinion to that of the establishment. I have seen this at first hand in African countries where certain inconvenient truths were assigned to the cutting bin instead of worldwide airwaves. I wonder if, at the time of the Clearances, a BBC reporter would have been despatched from London to cover the story of warming home fires being lit, ready for a barbecue of roast mutton brought in especially for the well-being of poor wee (starving) Highlanders. Biased! I hear a shout - and I agree. Especially with those who think the BBC to be the most biased news agency on the airwaves.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2011-11-28 12:56
With all the comments about the EBC that appear on this site perhaps we should stop calling it the British Broadcasting Corporation.

Anyone who watched the programme on BBC ALBA last week about how the efforts of the Independence movement were undercut by Wastemonster will no doubt have seen the clip of the Welsh Language Society protesting for their own T.V. channel, S4C. I was drawn to a few of the placards being used in this demonstration. They read:

British Brainwashing Corporation.

I would like to suggest that we "borrow" this description of the BBC and use this whenever we refer to the BBC. I think it has a much better hit factor and more importantly it gets straight to the core of the BBC's problem. They constantly try and brainwash the Scottish electorate!
 
 
# ready4anything 2011-11-28 14:07
Arbroath1320

What a wonderful name! And you are so right on the brainwashing, I will think of it whenever BBC is mentioned. A great big thank you from James.Stewart1745!!
 
 
# Marga B 2011-11-28 19:18
If this study misses out Catalonia or says it would be better off with Spain it has no credibility at all.

The Basque Country already has FFA and Catalonia subsidises the rest of Spain with a strangling 10% of its GDP (compared with max. 4% in German Lande).

And Catalans are forbidden to speak their own language in the national parliament! (re. the Plaid speech reported here, when someone - Edna - said it was "rude" to say even "diolch" (thanks) in a re-assertion of linguistic rights!

I'll try to find out more and trust the study proves reliable.
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Banner

Latest Comments