Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland) are amongst the richest countries in the world.
These countries share a similar philosophical approach to governance and distribution of wealth. In all aspects of governance, consensus-building is very important for decision-making by government bodies.
This “Whole-of-government” approach is implemented in foreign policy matters. These countries support a separation of military/civilian matters and view themselves as impartial mediators. They widely ascribe to the concepts of a welfare state, in which all citizens are given equal access to all types of benefits, such as health care and unemployment. This analysis will be covering common approaches to governance and challenges faced by Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland.
Globalization
Globalization, as a process, is being debated within the Nordic countries. Egil Kallerud, Senior Researcher, Editor at the Norwegian Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education; Marja Häyrinen-Alestalo, professor of science and technology studies and leader of the Research Group for Comparative Sociology of the Helsinki Institute of Science and Technology Studies, Ulf Sandström senior lecturer at Linkoping University in Sweden; Karen Siune, Research Director at Aarhus University in Denmark; and, Thorvaldur Finnbjørnsson of The Icelandic Centre for Research provide research on how globalization is being debated in Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway.
Sweden – confidence and consensus
…Globalization denotes opportunities which Sweden has proven highly adept at exploiting in the past, and the conditions are largely in place for continuing to do so in the future. Hence, confidence and consensus seem to characterize Swedish debate on the challenges and opportunities of globalization. Coping with the globalization challenges and the competitiveness/knowledge economy nexus is more or less an issue of “business as usual”.
The tenets of the “Nordic model” – the combination of pro-active economic restructuring and social security – is also an integral part of the conceptualisation of that approach, although without much explicit use of that term itself.
Finland – moving on from front position
Finland is similar to Sweden in also having firmly incorporated the globalization process into the core of established research and innovation policy… In contrast to Sweden, Finland however appears to be more acutely aware of the fragility of what has been achieved and of the need to anticipate threats and opportunities through continued efforts to restructure the research and innovation systems and to reframe policies.
Debates on globalization are to a higher extent than in Sweden, and somewhat similar to recent Danish debate, characterized by strong initiatives and numerous suggestions on how to develop further and draw ever more radical policy implications from the globalization challenge…
Denmark – the new globalization agenda
In Denmark, the globalization term and frame appears to have played a relatively subdued role in Danish research policy debate until the governmental initiative in 2006 to launch a globalization policy process. Since then it has become intensive, addressing contentious issues in the process of the quite radical reorganisation that has been initiated…
Norway – no imminent threat
While the globalization theme do figure in Norwegian debates on research and innovation, it appears to be relatively marginal. It has not lead to any initiatives of radical and/or contentious restructuring and change, and consequently it has not become a controversial topic. The voices promoting the hegemonic globalization debate are all to be found among a narrowly defined group of stakeholders, i.e., representatives of industry and economic experts. A distinctive aspect of Norwegian debates about these issues, is that they tend to downplay the idea of a knowledge economy, reflecting, no doubt, the apparent ‘Norwegian paradox‘, i.e., that Norway has profited immensely from the globalization of the economy without having moved much beyond its character as an economy based on raw materials.
Kallerud, Egil, and Marja Häyrinen-Alestalo, Ulf Sandström, Karen Siune and Thorvaldur Finnbjørnsson. “Public debate on globalization and research in the Nordic countries.” Forskningspolitik.
This article by Bjorn Nuland of FAFO, a Norwegian research foundation describes the concept of social democracy, an economic model used by Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (also known as Scandinavia).
I argue that globalization has not meant the end of social democracy…This paper contends that the social democratic model is still an alternative as a political economy that can be suited to a world of mobile capital.…
The Social Democratic Model
Whether described as an “institutional redistributive model” or a “social democratic welfare-state regime”, one of the most distinctive traits of Scandinavian welfare policies is that public benefits are instituted as social rights to high-level benefits. This implies that the benefits, in principle, cover all citizens, regardless of achievements or financial means…
The main characteristics of the social democratic model is the commitment to the values of solidarity and equality and to the strategy of using democratic institutions to promote policies informed by these values. Generally, one can split it into two dimensions, the welfare state dimension and the labor market dimension. The aspects of the welfare state dimension are universal benefits (based on citizenship) with universal coverage of generous high quality services, high involvement of the middle classes, and social services related to gender policies. In short, one may call it a commitment of providing middle class status for all citizens. The labor market dimension concerns the commitment to full employment, promoted by the government through active labor market policy…
A common logic behind these welfare states is thus the close relation between the institutions of welfare and labor; the Scandinavian countries stand out as both strong “work societies” and “strong welfare states.” The active role of the state, interfering in the labor market and industrial relations, is at the core of the tension between the market and political solutions…
Nuland, Bjorn. "Social Democracy and Globalization: Scandinavia and the Continuance of the Social Democratic Model in a Globalized Economy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004.
Health
Jon Magnussen, Professor of Health Economics at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim and at the University of Oslo, describes Scandinavia’s system of resource allocation in health care and its present challenges.
Scandinavian healthcare systems are built on the same principles of universalism, strongly expressing a goal of equal access to services regardless of social class, income, or place of residence. To reach this goal, the Scandinavian model has relied on public ownership and control, limited use of market-based incentives such as choice or competition, and rationing in the form of (at times long) waiting lists. Out-of-pocket payments play a minor role and are also accompanied by safety nets in the form of maximum annual outlays.
Furthermore, the Scandinavian countries have been noted for providing healthcare within a decentralized public model; that is, a model where local – municipal or county – political bodies are responsible for providing both necessary healthcare services to their population and managing the healthcare providers.
However, over the past 20 years, the Scandinavian healthcare model has undergone major changes, though still without rocking its fundamentals. ..First, two of the three countries – Norway being the stubborn exception – became members of the European Union (EU). While healthcare within the EU is still a matter of national discretion, its mere existence puts substantial external pressure on the national healthcare systems. In particular, the EU’s tendency to impose detailed regulations comes in conflict with a Scandinavian model that traditionally has been more laid back, flexible to local solutions and country variations.
Secondly, choice, once seen as an unnecessary trait of a market-based system (such as that of the United States), has now been introduced in all Scandinavian countries. This reflects, in part, the fact that the information age has also come to healthcare…Also, choice implies recognition that increased use of market-type initiatives is an excellent way of correcting inefficiencies in a system that has been characterized by structural as well as managerial rigidity.
Notably, though, choice in the Scandinavian setting is still limited to the hospital – choice of physician with-in the hospital is not high on either the public or the political agenda.
Thirdly, and also in part influenced by parallel developments in other countries, the method of financing services has gradually changed from annual adjustments of historic costs to more sophisticated contracts aiming at improving both performance and quality…
Thus, at present, the Scandinavian decentralized model of local governance has taken three different directions: Norway has abolished local governance altogether for specialized healthcare, leaving the responsibility to the state. Denmark has merged counties into fewer and larger regions, strengthening central control, but still leaving regionally elected politicians in charge. Sweden has stuck to its model of 21 counties, less state involvement, and no immediate plans of centralization...
How the three countries will deal with the introduction of new and costly technologies in the future will signal how well they will be able to cope with the necessity for rationing.
It is hard to envisage a tax-funded expansion of the healthcare sector. The Scandinavian countries are already among the countries with the highest level of taxation, and there is no political climate for increasing taxes…This implies that the only way of avoiding more rationing of services is to increase efficiency…
But it is difficult to see how Norway, Sweden, and Denmark can support their present systems without allowing for more diversity in how services are financed and provided. We already see that the market for private supplementary health insurance is growing rapidly in all three countries.
As the pressures from the EU are likely to increase and make way for a rights-based use of foreign hospitals, the likely development is a tightening of the public benefit package combined with a loosening of the restrictions on the use of private healthcare. Whether this also implies an end to the Scandinavian model as we know it today remains to be seen.
Magnussen, John. “The Scandinavian Healthcare System.” Medical Solutions. May 2009.
Culture/Migration
One of the key challenges facing this region is the friction between the growing Muslim population and the general population. Sweden had an extremely liberal refugee policy allowing citizenship applications after five years of residency. The following article highlights the challenges faced by Muslim communities in Sweden.
An article by the leader of the far-right Sweden Democrats claiming that Islam is the biggest threat to Sweden since World War II is tantamount to hate speech, according to legal experts.
A number of jurists believe the text, published in the opinion section of the Aftonbladet newspaper, qualifies as agitation against an ethnic group (hets mot folkgrupp).
On Monday, Aftonbladet published an opinion piece by party leader Jimmie Åkesson in which the prominent far-right politician slams Islam.
According to Åkesson, “today’s multicultural Swedish power-elite are totally blind to the dangers of Islam.”
He goes on to claim that more than ten Muslim terrorist organizations have established themselves in Sweden, that Sweden has the most rapes in Europe, and that Muslim men are highly overrepresented among the perpetrators...
“This is the same sort of propaganda as the Nazis' anti-Semitism,” said Jan Hjärpe, an emeritus professor of Islamic Studies at Lund University, to Aftonbladet...
“I think that the Chancellor of Justice (Justitiekanslern - JK) should prosecute it. The article is uniformly directed against and is hateful toward Muslims as a group,” said attorney and media expert Peter Danowsky.
“To single out an entire religion as the greatest external threat is very close to agitation against an ethnic group,” attorney Peter Althin told Aftonbladet.
“A tough jury assessing the boundaries of free speech would condemn this article. It’s an expression of disrespect towards Muslims as a group,” said Per Hultengård, a lawyer with the Swedish Newspaper Publishers’ Association (Tidningsutgivarna).
But Chancellor of Justice Göran Lambertz said he has no plans to launch a preliminary investigation himself as to whether Åkesson’s article violates Swedish rules governing the freedom of expression...
“Islam 'Sweden's biggest threat': far-right leader.” The Local. October 19, 2009.
Environment
The Nordic countries are considered to be at the forefront for adoption of treaties that protect the environment. All of the countries place a high value on sustainability and on the protection of the environment. This video highlights how one Swedish city transformed itself by becoming more sustainable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTlerYo873w
International Law and Organizations
The Scandinavian approach to foreign policy relies on decision-making by consensus. Their approaches, the Comprehensive Approach (CA) and Whole-of-Government Approach (WGA) are based on integrated and coordinated decision-making. The following summarizes how these approaches apply to Scandinavian involvement in Afghanistan.
Conclusion: Similar Challenges --But No Nordic Whole of Government Model
Karsten Friis
From the brief explorations in this report, we may conclude that there is no such thing as a Nordic whole-of-government model. The four countries in question have differed in their approaches to national strategies, organization and field deployments. These differences probably stem from domestic organizational and political cultures, formal international affiliations and alliances (EU, NATO), as well as commitments to the partners in the on-going operations. There are, however, also similarities to be found. Let us begin by summarizing some of the findings in this report, starting from the top political and strategic level. Only Sweden and Finland have developed national strategies for participation in peace support, security-building and/or crisis-management operations. These seek to harmonize development, security and diplomacy and lay the foundations for concerted action. Norway and Denmark have no similar documents or strategies for international operations.
Despite this, on the institutional or implementation level of crisis management, Denmark is perhaps the country with the most sophisticated model; it includes ministerial coordination, a steering group, a secretariat and a reference group. Although this is a rather new structure which is yet to become fully operational, it is based on the experiences of the Afghanistan task force. Both Sweden and Finland have similar models in the pipeline as a result of their national strategies. Norway is the ‘odd man out’ here, with no inter-ministerial standing crisis management architecture similar to the other three countries. Concerning Afghanistan in particular, Sweden, Finland and Denmark have all developed national policy directives or strategies for their activities.
These documents seek to encompass the security, governance, economic and humanitarian aspects of the engagement, but show weaknesses when it comes to coordination with military (Sweden) or political aspects (Denmark). In the case of Norway, the political direction can be found in government documents and statements, but not as explicitly elaborated as in its three neighbours...
All four countries have some sort of inter-ministerial Afghanistan task force. The chief difference lies in the degree of permanence and political anchoring of this structure. Norway has chosen a non-institutionalized ad hoc approach, whereas the others seem to be using Afghanistan as a stepping stone to more permanent crisis management structures. Still, Denmark appears to be the only country which has seriously attempted to bridge the civilian–military gap – in Afghanistan and beyond.
All four have faced practical challenges related to civilian–military cooperation in their PRTs. Finland has stopped sending civilian experts to the PRTs; Norway is planning to move them out and further strengthen the operational divide between them and the military. Sweden also separates civilian and military efforts in the strategy and in its PRT, leaving the latter more as part of ISAF than of the Swedish strategy. Denmark is the sole Nordic country to conduct joint civilian– military operational planning (in conjunction with the UK). However, Denmark and others have been experiencing challenges in recruiting senior civilian (MFA) representatives at the tactical levels.
We may conclude that the main common Nordic feature is this: while efforts are being made to streamline various ministries at the policy level, little is done on the practical level – in the field in Afghanistan. As a result, the coherence developed in the national capitals appears to get lost in the implementation phase. The effectiveness of the efforts and the impact on the overall peace or stability thus seem limited…
As a result, the Swedish military and the civilian agencies have different mandates and priorities. The Danish example shows something similar: Danish national coordination had to await the conclusion of UK coordination. If the Swedish military were to be fully integrated into the national Swedish strategy, it would likely be at odds with the ISAF strategy. Similarly, if Denmark had pressed ahead with its own national strategy irrespective of the priorities of its major partner in the field, the plan would probably not contributed to overall effectiveness and coherence.
Hence, effectiveness in terms of improved results must be measured in inter-agency coherence in the field. It is the coherence among and between the key actors – the UN (UNAMA, UNDP, etc.), WB, OCHA, USA etc., – that determines effectiveness, not national coherence. Fully streamlined national contributions will not be positive for overall coherence if they are not in tune with the large actors.…
The Nordic reluctance to apply significant civilian assets in conjunction with the military clearly weakens the impact of the PRTs and thus also the military contributions… Ensuring that military contributions are integrated and coherent with civilian efforts is a logically a responsibility for the troop-providing nation, but this way of thinking appears to be unfamiliar ground for the Nordic countries, where military and political/development tasks have traditionally remained separated.
We may therefore conclude that what matters is not primarily national coordination but field coordination. However, whole-of-government solutions among the ministries in the Nordic capitals are still important, as it is necessary to make sure the various national contributions to the wider efforts are coordinated…
Friis , Karsten and, Sanaa Rehman. “Nordic Approaches to Whole-of-Government.” NUPI Report. Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.
Human rights
 The Sami, indigenous people living in Norway, Sweden and Finland, face different challenges in each of the countries. Finnish journalist Linus Atarah writes about the Sami’s struggles in Finland.
The difficulty facing us is that we are facing comprehensive and complete assimilation all the time," Pekka Aikio, former president of the Sami Parliament told IPS.
The Sami are recognised in the Finnish Constitution as an indigenous people. They have an elected parliament that handles their affairs, and have the right to receive services in their own language. But parts of the state administration do not pay attention to the constitutional recognition, says Martin Scheinin, professor of international law at the Åbo Academy in Turku city, 170km from capital Helsinki…
The Sami are an indigenous people of Northern Europe inhabiting mostly Sweden, Norway and Finland, with an estimated population of about 100,000. About 8,000 of them live in Finland. Hundreds of Sami families are involved in reindeer herding, their traditional source of livelihood. But the process of assimilation means many of the Sami have taken on the lifestyle of other Finns.
No secure landrights
Scheinin says the Sami way of life is threatened significantly by competing usage of land -- often by the government itself -- through cutting down forests. This destroys pastoral lands of the reindeer, and besides the harm done to reindeer herding, brings social and emotional stress.
A central issue, according to Scheinin, is that the Sami have no secure land rights in Finland. Large areas of land in the north where many Sami live is state-owned. "Nobody knows how the government got this land, from whom they bought it. They simply took it," said Prof. Scheinin.
The Reindeer Act protects the rights of the Sami people. "Nevertheless, it is the government that decides, and over and time again the state forestry agency decides that they can continue cutting the forest while claiming that it is a small project that would not negatively affect Sami reindeer herding. But when you look at the totality, it has huge impact," Scheinin said.
Aikio says reindeer herding is a general right. "It means others can own that land and we can be there with our reindeer but we have no right to complain if others are harvesting their timber or if they are starting a mining project or they are constructing a lake. In such circumstance we lose the pastoral lands almost without any compensation. Samis can use the land insofar as it is not being used." In Norway, Aikio says, where a majority of the Sami people live, the situation is better because the government has given joint land ownership to the Sami and other local people. Norway has also allocated more money for the Sami than other countries have, he said.
The land usage rights of the Sami people is complicated by the fact that Finland has not ratified International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 169 on land rights for indigenous and tribal peoples. The Convention was adopted in 1989 and came into effect in 1991.
Article 14 of the Convention says: "Governments shall take steps as necessary to identify the lands which the peoples concerned traditionally occupy, and to guarantee effective protection of their rights of ownership and possession."
ILO Convention 169 would require Finland to start demarcation of land that belongs to the Sami either through ownership or through protected usage rights.
According to Prof. Scheinin, the resource rights related to land are crucial to the maintenance not only of the nature-based way of life of the Sami people, but also their language and culture.
"The Sami language lives and dies with the Sami way of life because the social activities around reindeer herding and in the nature-based forms of livelihood really keep up the living language. If it is isolated to a museum piece I think there will be no future for the Sami language," Scheinin said.
Finland´s Minority Ombudsman Johanna Suurpää...acknowledged difficulties over language. "The law provides that Sami people have the right to receive services in their own language but what is received is inadequate," she said. This is because there are no civil servants in the north who know the Sami language well enough...
Atarah, Linus. ” RIGHTS: Finland´s Sami Fear Assimilation.” Galdu. July 4, 2008.
Global Education
Universities under pressure
The globalization debate has in most Nordic countries driven a process of, and hence triggered a discussion on, restructuring the university system and systems for funding university research.
In both Sweden, Finland and Denmark the globalization agenda tend to emphasize the need for institutional reorganisation and concentration of resources, in order to create research institutions and groups of world class quality. This agenda seems to be particularly “aggressive” in Finland, where it has triggered debates about the need to concentrate resources and reorganise its large and dispersed university system. This includes a debate on the value of consortiums, federations and mergers inside the university system, the primary argumentation being that the days of university expansion are over and that it is time to cater to innovation policy needs.
Predictably, the fast and extensive reorganisation of the Danish research system in terms of creating world class universities and research institutions is also accompanied by extensive public debate. Similar concerns are expressed in the Swedish debate on its research funding system, which is seen by many as inappropriate and ineffective for sustaining the development of world class research. While similar reform processes do take place in Norway, they take place at a relatively slow pace, are less radical than in some other Nordic countries, and the globalization debate seem to play a relatively more marginal role in framing and driving those changes. Hence, globalization plays a minor, although not non-existent, role in debates about these issues in Norway.
Kallerud, Egil, Marja Häyrinen-Alestalo, Ulf Sandström, Karen Siune and Thorvaldur Finnbjørnsson. “Public debate on globalization and research in the Nordic countries.”
* Picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dbjorn/247093572/ | 
