> Shortages persisted as a result of high import tariffs on butter to protect the domestic dairy industry against foreign competition

But, there's also a duty for governments to support national and local industries that are important for the country's long-term security.

In the country of my birth, until about 50 years ago, the shoe-making industry was considered important - and the producers managed to convince the government that a tarrif on shoes would protect a vital national industry and all the associated jobs. And indeed it did; but the result is plain in photos from the era; most people wore old worn out shoes particularly the poor.

Personally I think to deprive the relatively poor of access to cheap foreign food/clothes/etc. to ensure a tiny segment of the population is "protected" is immoral. But the political power of industrialists in concert with labour unions is formiddable.

Yes. It also proves that the import restrictions threaten that stability.

why would they make themselves economically dependent on Sweden for everyday commodities?

To keep the stable supply that they are unable to maintain on their own, as this story shows. And why would they be dependent on Sweden? Would other countries refuse to export to Norway?

I read somewhere that the psychological profile of CEO's and criminals are remarkably similar... Growth hacking is also a variation of criminal behavior, and many successful startups use it to their advantage.

Let's just hope you stick to that when the difference between following legislation and not is risk to your household, hunger or bodily harm.