<p>The purpose of this study is to illustrate why Norway is not a member of the EU from a rational choice perspective. In order to fulfil this purpose, two questions will constitute the framework of the study. These are:</p><p>1. What are the arguments of the EU-opposers in the Norwegian EU-debate?</p><p>2. Is it rational for Norway to stand outside the EU?</p><p>The first question was answered by analyzing and mapping out the arguments of the Norweigan EU-opponents and then using a critical literature study to analyse them. To demarcate the study, only the arguments of the parliamentary parties that are opposing a Norwegian EU-membership, and the official organisation Nei til EU (No to the EU) were included. The second question was tested by using a rational choice theory and a number of keywords from the classical rational actor model; objectives, alternatives, consequences and choice. These keywords constituted the main analyzing instrument of the study and was applied on the empirical material.</p><p>The main arguments of the opposers of a Norweigan EU-membership, are widely spoken democracy, freedom of action, environment and solidarity. The debate is hard to map out because of its general character but is very homogeneous. The second question is answered partly in the light of the first one and the result shows that it is rational for Norway to stay outside the EU today, but the question may have to be reassessed in the future, and probably will be since the debate is still so fervent.</p>

The purpose of this study is to illustrate why Norway is not a member of the EU from a rational choice perspective. In order to fulfil this purpose, two questions will constitute the framework of the study. These are: 1. What are the arguments of the EU-opposers in the Norwegian EU-debate? 2. Is it rational for Norway to stand outside the EU? The first question was answered by analyzing and mapping out the arguments of the Norweigan EU-opponents and then using a critical literature study to analyse them. To demarcate the study, only the arguments of the parliamentary parties that are opposing a Norwegian EU-membership, and the official organisation Nei til EU (No to the EU) were included. The second question was tested by using a rational choice theory and a number of keywords from the classical rational actor model; objectives, alternatives, consequences and choice. These keywords constituted the main analyzing instrument of the study and was applied on the empirical material. The main arguments of the opposers of a Norweigan EU-membership, are widely spoken democracy, freedom of action, environment and solidarity. The debate is hard to map out because of its general character but is very homogeneous. The second question is answered partly in the light of the first one and the result shows that it is rational for Norway to stay outside the EU today, but the question may have to be reassessed in the future, and probably will be since the debate is still so fervent.