Peter Van Roy's book defines it as "an execution is called nondeterministic if there is an execution state in which there is a choice of what to do next". I believe the only thing you mention that does not conform to this definition is co-routining, but I wouldn't categorise it as concurrency either (nor does the book).
There's a nice answer on FRP at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1028250/what-is-functiona... - if choices in execution are not revealed to the program, you can still have concurrency without non-determinism. But again, one needs to call in to question what tasks are making progress concurrently, because depending on the level of abstraction you're looking at, you can say that there is concurrency or there isn't. In other words, you might have parallelism at a low level of abstraction, which is a physical optimization of concurrency, and at that low level it might even be non-deterministic, but that non-determinism may not be exposed at a higher level.
Take a spreadsheet implementation as an example. There may be multiple events coming in, and numbers in the sheet updating as the expressions are recalculated. It might even be a multi-user spreadsheet; so it seems there is concurrency (for some level of abstraction). But is there non-determinism?
