Coordination
#4Key Findings
Norway falls into the top group (rank 4) in the category of coordination.
The Office of the Prime Minister is comparatively small. The Ministry of Finance helps coordinate policy proposals, with most formal coordination taking place through the annual state budget process. Coordination of new policy proposals is largely informal, typically taking place during coalition negotiations and via ad hoc collaboration between junior ministers.
The governance system is highly sectorized, with each ministry focusing on its own area. This has posed challenges when dealing with cross-cutting issues. The government holds weekly formal meetings, called government conferences, to discuss policies, while informal meetings between party leaders occur when national compromises are needed.
Although national standards guide service quality, with equal access to high-quality public services a goal, the provision of public services is decentralized to local authorities. Ministry directorates offer professional advice, certify professional staff and create crisis-management plans.
The Office of the Prime Minister is comparatively small. The Ministry of Finance helps coordinate policy proposals, with most formal coordination taking place through the annual state budget process. Coordination of new policy proposals is largely informal, typically taking place during coalition negotiations and via ad hoc collaboration between junior ministers.
The governance system is highly sectorized, with each ministry focusing on its own area. This has posed challenges when dealing with cross-cutting issues. The government holds weekly formal meetings, called government conferences, to discuss policies, while informal meetings between party leaders occur when national compromises are needed.
Although national standards guide service quality, with equal access to high-quality public services a goal, the provision of public services is decentralized to local authorities. Ministry directorates offer professional advice, certify professional staff and create crisis-management plans.
Graph View
Graph View
To what extent do established coordination mechanisms between the government’s office and line ministries effectively enhance policy coherence?
10
9
9
Functional coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are in place.
8
7
6
7
6
Largely functional coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are in place.
5
4
3
4
3
Coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are only somewhat functional.
2
1
1
Coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are not at all functional.
The office of the prime minister (PMO) in Norway is small in size compared to the line ministries. Of a total of 4,500 employees in the ministries, only 190 work at the PMO. The formal task of coordinating policy proposals from the line ministries lies with the Ministry of Finance (MoF). Because most policy proposals have fiscal implications, the MoF must consent to any new policy that results in rising public expenditures. However, if new policies can be financed within existing budgetary constraints, the MoF typically does not interfere. Most formal coordination takes place as an integrated part of working on the annual state budget, with two regular conferences: one in March and one in August, before the budget proposal is sent to parliament in mid-October.
Coordination of new policy proposals is systematic but informal, occurring through two mechanisms.
The first mechanism is the formation of coalition governments. Executive power requires a parliamentary majority and, given the existing party structure and the actual distribution of votes, all governments must be coalitions of two or more parties. To form a stable coalition government, the participating parties negotiate a common policy program. Even in cases of a one-party minority government, clarifications with supporting parties take place before presenting a parliamentary program. This process of producing a program effectively has a significant coordination impact.
The second mechanism of coordination is the frequent use of ad hoc collaboration between junior ministers. If a policy problem or proposal cuts across conventional lines of sectoral responsibilities, the coordination challenge is handled by junior ministers from each of the involved ministries.
Implementation of the UN SDGs and efforts toward sustainable development challenge the bureaucracy in new ways. Norway’s 2021 SDG Action Plan recommends using the OECD framework for policy coherence for sustainable development. However, implementing this framework is not straightforward in all countries (Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, 2021). Moreover, action plans do not always lead to behavioral change (Stave 2022). Proposed tools for increasing policy coherence include systematic environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and new indicators for policy coherence as an independent target (OECD, 2023).
Citations:
Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation. 2021. “White Paper no. 40 (2020-2021). Meaningful Goals. Norway’s Action Plan to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.” https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/bcbcac3469db4bb9913661ee39e58d6d/no/pdfs/stm202020210040000dddpdfs.pdf
OECD. 2023. Driving Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development: Accelerating Progress on the SDGs. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a6cb4aa1-en
Stave S.E. 2022. Handling med mening. Verktøy for en mer samstemt politikk.
for bærekraftig utvikling. Fafo-notat 2022:03. https://www.fafo.no/images/pub/2022/10364.pdf
Coordination of new policy proposals is systematic but informal, occurring through two mechanisms.
The first mechanism is the formation of coalition governments. Executive power requires a parliamentary majority and, given the existing party structure and the actual distribution of votes, all governments must be coalitions of two or more parties. To form a stable coalition government, the participating parties negotiate a common policy program. Even in cases of a one-party minority government, clarifications with supporting parties take place before presenting a parliamentary program. This process of producing a program effectively has a significant coordination impact.
The second mechanism of coordination is the frequent use of ad hoc collaboration between junior ministers. If a policy problem or proposal cuts across conventional lines of sectoral responsibilities, the coordination challenge is handled by junior ministers from each of the involved ministries.
Implementation of the UN SDGs and efforts toward sustainable development challenge the bureaucracy in new ways. Norway’s 2021 SDG Action Plan recommends using the OECD framework for policy coherence for sustainable development. However, implementing this framework is not straightforward in all countries (Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, 2021). Moreover, action plans do not always lead to behavioral change (Stave 2022). Proposed tools for increasing policy coherence include systematic environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and new indicators for policy coherence as an independent target (OECD, 2023).
Citations:
Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation. 2021. “White Paper no. 40 (2020-2021). Meaningful Goals. Norway’s Action Plan to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.” https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/bcbcac3469db4bb9913661ee39e58d6d/no/pdfs/stm202020210040000dddpdfs.pdf
OECD. 2023. Driving Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development: Accelerating Progress on the SDGs. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a6cb4aa1-en
Stave S.E. 2022. Handling med mening. Verktøy for en mer samstemt politikk.
for bærekraftig utvikling. Fafo-notat 2022:03. https://www.fafo.no/images/pub/2022/10364.pdf
To what extent are there positive (formalized) forms of coordination across ministries that aim to enhance policy coherence?
10
9
9
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
8
7
6
7
6
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence sometimes provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
5
4
3
4
3
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence rarely provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
2
1
1
There are no interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence that provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
Despite the formal coordination role of the Ministry of Finance and the informal mechanisms of inter-party cooperation in coalition governments, the Norwegian governance system is generally regarded as highly sectorized rather than fragmented. Each ministry is responsible for research and policy development within its specific area of formal responsibility. There is no tradition of job rotation within the civil service, nor is there a central effort to use new technologies to enhance cooperation. Additionally, most interactions with policy stakeholders and interest groups are structured according to traditional sectoral lines.
This sectorization is increasingly seen as a challenge in developing new policies that cut across traditional divisions, such as measures to expedite the transition to a low-emission, sustainable economy and digitalization (see Szulecki and Kivimaa, 2022). A new Ministry of Digitalization will take effect in January 2024, while the responsibility for contributing to the “green shift” remains a sectoral responsibility for the line ministries.
The government and all ministers meet formally every week in so-called government conferences (“regjeringskonferanser”) to discuss issues. These conferences are the primary forum for formal coordination between departments, ensuring that the government is united in its policies.
Digital technologies are extensively used to facilitate coordination across ministerial areas. They are more commonly employed in ministries than in agencies and more often by managers than by lower-ranking officers. Civil servants working on transboundary tasks and policies use these technologies more frequently and view them as helpful in enhancing coordination.
Citations:
Szulecki, K., and Kivimaa, P. 2022. “Norway needs energy and security policy coherence.” https://www.nupi.no/en/publications/cristin-pub/norway-needs-energy-and-security-policy-coherence
Ministry of Digitalisation and Public Governance website. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dep/dfd/id810/
Christensen, T., and P. Lægreid. 2022. “ICT Use in Central Government: Scope, Predictors and Effects on Coordination Quality.” International Journal of Public Administration 45 (3): 273-286.
This sectorization is increasingly seen as a challenge in developing new policies that cut across traditional divisions, such as measures to expedite the transition to a low-emission, sustainable economy and digitalization (see Szulecki and Kivimaa, 2022). A new Ministry of Digitalization will take effect in January 2024, while the responsibility for contributing to the “green shift” remains a sectoral responsibility for the line ministries.
The government and all ministers meet formally every week in so-called government conferences (“regjeringskonferanser”) to discuss issues. These conferences are the primary forum for formal coordination between departments, ensuring that the government is united in its policies.
Digital technologies are extensively used to facilitate coordination across ministerial areas. They are more commonly employed in ministries than in agencies and more often by managers than by lower-ranking officers. Civil servants working on transboundary tasks and policies use these technologies more frequently and view them as helpful in enhancing coordination.
Citations:
Szulecki, K., and Kivimaa, P. 2022. “Norway needs energy and security policy coherence.” https://www.nupi.no/en/publications/cristin-pub/norway-needs-energy-and-security-policy-coherence
Ministry of Digitalisation and Public Governance website. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dep/dfd/id810/
Christensen, T., and P. Lægreid. 2022. “ICT Use in Central Government: Scope, Predictors and Effects on Coordination Quality.” International Journal of Public Administration 45 (3): 273-286.
How effectively do informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination?
10
9
9
Informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
8
7
6
7
6
In most cases, informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
5
4
3
4
3
In some cases, informal coordination mechanisms undermine formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
2
1
1
Informal coordination mechanisms undermine formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
Norwegian politics is best characterized as consensus-driven rather than partisan and confrontational. A symbolic expression of this is the seating arrangement in parliament, where members are seated by geography rather than by party affiliation. The political system’s capacity to forge broad policy compromises on important issues is significant. Examples include a radical pension reform, the system of value-added and income taxes, foreign policy, and the decision to accumulate state income from the oil and gas sector into one of the world’s largest sovereign wealth funds. Another example is the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, where there was broad consensus across the political spectrum to provide sufficient economic support for both corporations and unemployed citizens during the crisis.
Informal meetings between party leaders from different ideological backgrounds are not formalized but still occur frequently when national compromises are needed.
Meetings between ministers largely take place in formal settings, particularly during the weekly government conferences.
Citations:
OECD. 2022. “Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Norway.” Building Trust in Public Institutions. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/81b01318-en
Regjeringen.no. 2014. “Regjeringen i arbeid.” https://www.regjeringen.no/no/om-regjeringa/slik-blir-norge-styrt/regjeringen-i-arbeid-2/id2001100/
Informal meetings between party leaders from different ideological backgrounds are not formalized but still occur frequently when national compromises are needed.
Meetings between ministers largely take place in formal settings, particularly during the weekly government conferences.
Citations:
OECD. 2022. “Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Norway.” Building Trust in Public Institutions. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/81b01318-en
Regjeringen.no. 2014. “Regjeringen i arbeid.” https://www.regjeringen.no/no/om-regjeringa/slik-blir-norge-styrt/regjeringen-i-arbeid-2/id2001100/
Graph View
To what extent does central government ensure that subnational self-governments meet national (minimum) standards in delivering public services?
10
9
9
The central government effectively ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the time, the central government ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
5
4
3
4
3
The central government rarely ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national minimum standards for public service delivery.
2
1
1
The central government does nothing to ensure that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
Equal access to high-quality public services across the country for all citizens is a national policy objective. The provision of these services is decentralized to 356 local authorities and, for specialized health services, to four regional state enterprises. The legislation regulating service production is based on the principle of providing citizens with rights to services of high, professionally defined quality.
The combination of local responsibility for provision and national quality standards creates tension within the system. A comprehensive system of central state economic transfers to local authorities aims to match the amount given to each municipality with quantitative indicators of service needs. For medical general practitioners and childcare, the state also transfers resources directly to the service providers. This system is intended to ensure equal and high service quality for all citizens. However, national performance and quality indicators are controversial and exist only for some diagnosis-related treatments in hospitals.
The tension between central standard-setting and local service provision is not restricted to traditional welfare services; it is also evident in the provision of other public goods, such as well-functioning ecosystems and area planning.
The combination of local responsibility for provision and national quality standards creates tension within the system. A comprehensive system of central state economic transfers to local authorities aims to match the amount given to each municipality with quantitative indicators of service needs. For medical general practitioners and childcare, the state also transfers resources directly to the service providers. This system is intended to ensure equal and high service quality for all citizens. However, national performance and quality indicators are controversial and exist only for some diagnosis-related treatments in hospitals.
The tension between central standard-setting and local service provision is not restricted to traditional welfare services; it is also evident in the provision of other public goods, such as well-functioning ecosystems and area planning.
To what extent do national policymakers effectively collaborate with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services?
10
9
9
National policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
8
7
6
7
6
In general, national policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
5
4
3
4
3
National policymakers rarely work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
2
1
1
There is no effective multilevel cooperation between the central and subnational governments.
There is a well-established link between the national and local levels in Norway. Municipalities are independent legal entities and do not form part of the state hierarchy. Consequently, the central government does not have instructional authority over the municipalities and can only intervene based on legislation or budgets adopted by the parliament (Storting).
The line of responsibility from national policymaking to service delivery starts at the ministry and its corresponding directorate, while local authorities are legally responsible for service provision. Political objectives and priorities are set by the government. The directorate has a dual function: it produces the knowledge base and provides scientific advice to national policymakers, and it monitors all professional aspects of service production at the local level. This includes offering professional advice, setting standards, certifying professional staff and production units, and planning for crisis management.
Local authorities are organized as an interest group called the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS). Hospitals, organized as state enterprises, have their own interest organization, Spekter.
The primary pattern of interaction between the local and national levels involves these interest organizations and the respective ministries. The provision of welfare services is labor-intensive, with wages constituting 70-80% of expenditures. In Norway, wages are set through national negotiations, making it necessary for the central state to compensate the local level for rising labor costs. Additionally, the changing needs of target groups for national welfare policy are expressed in this interaction.
The agenda is relatively consistent: local authorities assert their need for increased state transfers to meet national standards, while the central government remains restrictive, focusing on maintaining growth in public expenditures and keeping inflation at acceptable levels.
Citations:
Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities. https://www.ks.no/om-ks/ks-in-english/
https://www.spekter.no/om-spekter/english/
The line of responsibility from national policymaking to service delivery starts at the ministry and its corresponding directorate, while local authorities are legally responsible for service provision. Political objectives and priorities are set by the government. The directorate has a dual function: it produces the knowledge base and provides scientific advice to national policymakers, and it monitors all professional aspects of service production at the local level. This includes offering professional advice, setting standards, certifying professional staff and production units, and planning for crisis management.
Local authorities are organized as an interest group called the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS). Hospitals, organized as state enterprises, have their own interest organization, Spekter.
The primary pattern of interaction between the local and national levels involves these interest organizations and the respective ministries. The provision of welfare services is labor-intensive, with wages constituting 70-80% of expenditures. In Norway, wages are set through national negotiations, making it necessary for the central state to compensate the local level for rising labor costs. Additionally, the changing needs of target groups for national welfare policy are expressed in this interaction.
The agenda is relatively consistent: local authorities assert their need for increased state transfers to meet national standards, while the central government remains restrictive, focusing on maintaining growth in public expenditures and keeping inflation at acceptable levels.
Citations:
Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities. https://www.ks.no/om-ks/ks-in-english/
https://www.spekter.no/om-spekter/english/