SGI 2024 | Norway | Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Recent Governments Experts

SGI experts on Norway

Kåre Hagen

Kåre Hagen is director at The Centre for Welfare and Labour Research at Oslo Metropolitan University. He is a political scientist, and his fields of research are comparative welfare state policies, public sector reform and implications of European integration on EU member states. He has had positions at the Department for Political Science at the University of Oslo and at the Norwegian School of Management (BI). Hagen if frequently used by Norwegian Governments to prepare reports on public sector reform.

Jonas Lund-Tønnesen

Jonas Lund-Tønnesen is a Researcher at the Department of Government, University of Bergen. He obtained his PhD in Political Science from the University of Oslo. He was previously University Lecturer at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and was a visiting researcher at the University of Potsdam, Germany. His main research areas include digitalization of the public sector (particularly issues concerning surveillance and privacy), crisis management, and learning in public administration.

Mi Ah Schøyen (Coordinator)

Mi Ah Schoyen is Senior Researcher at NOVA Norwegian Social Research. She holds a PhD in political and social sciences from the European University Institute and works mainly in the field of comparative welfare state research. Her interests include the welfare mix, the politics and social consequences of welfare state reforms, intergenerational solidarity and the interplay between climate and social policy. She has published on topics such as the Nordic welfare state model, the eco-social agenda in Europe and cross-national comparisons of consequences of early job insecurity. She has experience from several large collaborative international research projects.

Norway is a consolidated multiparty democracy with a parliamentary constitution, where the rule of law guarantees fundamental civil and political rights. Policymaking is transparent, and corruption is minimal. Social and economic interests are well organized within a robust civil society, represented at the national level through media, political parties, and interest organizations. A tax-financed welfare state provides universal health and welfare services throughout the country, with social rights based on citizenship rather than employment. This contributes to high labor market mobility and economic modernization. Education, including university, is free, leading to a highly educated population.

This favorable situation can be understood through three key factors:

First, there is a historical tradition of democratic politics as a problem-solving enterprise, ensuring that all affected societal interests are heard. While political parties are positioned along a left-to-right ideological spectrum, coalitions and alliances can change, as coalition governments are necessary due to the constitutional rule requiring a majority in parliament. This fosters a political culture of pragmatic compromise.

Second, the state benefits from solid financial foundations, primarily through taxes from petroleum extraction and increasingly from income generated by the state’s petroleum fund’s global investments. Despite significant revenue from oil, gas, and financial assets, high taxation on income and VAT has been maintained. This strong fiscal position enables the state to address challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the influx of refugees from the war in Ukraine without resorting to austerity measures.

Third, there is a high level of popular trust in the political system and a tripartite regime for economic policymaking involving the state, labor, and capital. Income distribution is relatively egalitarian, and policies promoting equal opportunities and anti-discrimination have been fairly successful.

Norwegian politics also has a territorial dimension, balancing the interests of the center and the periphery. The population of 5.4 million is spread over a large area, with significant portions sparsely populated. There are 357 municipalities, half of which have fewer than 5,000 people. These municipalities have their own democratic systems and are responsible for providing education and welfare services according to national quality standards and citizens’ rights. Tensions exist between local autonomy and national objectives, paralleling a similar tension between a financially robust central state and resource-constrained local authorities. Initiatives to merge municipalities, regions, and hospitals into larger units typically encounter strong local opposition.

The national governance system is fragmented. The government consists of 16 line ministries, each with defined sectoral responsibilities. The Ministry of Finance coordinates public expenditures, but each ministry is responsible for infrastructure investments, planning, research, and policy assessments within its sector. Cross-sectoral policy challenges often lead to coordination issues and weak implementation capacity at the national level. There is a significant backlog of investments in physical, digital, and social infrastructure. Consequently, while there are numerous good intentions and plans, there is no effective institutional mechanism to implement national policy.

Norway is a strong promoter of international cooperation and legal regimes, with a tradition of effectively incorporating such agreements into national legislation. This is most explicit in European cooperation. Although Norway is not an EU member, it is part of the European Economic Area and the Schengen Agreement. Almost all EU legislation, with some exceptions in agriculture and fisheries, is implemented into Norwegian law through effective national procedures. When international commitments are less binding and more aspirational, their incorporation into domestic law is less systematic and often left to sectoral authorities. All new national legislation requires a systematic assessment of EEA commitments, whereas the implementation of the UN’s sustainability goals and climate commitments is more decentralized.

Overall, Norway’s democratic institutions, rule of law, social protection system, and state finances are solid. On paper, this provides an excellent foundation for a future-oriented reformed system of national governance. However, because contemporary institutions have performed so well, there is hesitancy to reform core features of the Norwegian government. In practice, the drive for transformation to a sustainable society often becomes an elite message from the center, with little appeal throughout the country.