In a world where authoritarian threats to democracy are becoming increasingly common, Norway stands out as a country that consistently ranks highly in international democracy rankings. nonetheless, even the best democracies have their challenges and areas for improvement. That’s why six researchers at the University of Oslo’s Department of Political Science have conducted an analysis of Norwegian democracy on behalf of the government. Despite its high ranking, the researchers have identified potential vulnerabilities in Norway’s democracy that need to be addressed. These include lobbying and corruption, where resourceful interest groups have significant influence, and voting rights, as a significant percentage of residents do not have the right to vote in parliamentary elections. By acknowledging and improving these aspects of democracy, Norway can better prepare itself against possible authoritarian threats. It is important not to be complacent and to constantly strive for a more robust and inclusive democracy.
If we manage to produce an even more well-functioning democracy, with broad participation and high legitimacy in various groups, we will probably be even better equipped on the day an authoritarian threat should come. An element of risk is a naive belief that our democracy is immune to such threats.
- Six researchers at the Department of Political Science at the University of Oslo have carried out an analysis of the state of Norwegian democracy on behalf of the government.
- Although Norway is regularly ranked high in various international democracy rankings, the researchers point out that there are several potential challenges and areas for improvement in Norwegian democracy.
- Lobbying and corruption is seen as an area for improvement, as a large percentage of experts in the study believe that resourceful lobby groups have significant influence on national, regional and local politics.
- Voting rights are also an area that is being considered for improvement. Around 10% of Norway’s permanent residents do not have the right to vote in parliamentary elections, a number that has grown in the last decade due to stricter rules for citizenship.
- The researchers believe that a further strengthening of Norwegian democracy can help the country in the face of possible authoritarian threats, and call for increased awareness of democracy’s weak points.
CARL HENRIK KNUTSEN, professor
SIRIANNE DAHLUM, professor,
ELIN HAUGGSJERD ALLERN, professor
JAN ERLING KLAUSEN, associate professor
MARTIN SØYLAND, postdoctoral fellow
TORE WIG, professor, all at the Department of Political Science, University of Oslo
“It is typically Norwegian to be positive”, as Gro Harlem Brundtland famously stated. Every year, Norway reigns at the very top, if not at the top, in various international democracy rankings.
But even the best democracies in the world are not perfect.
The challenge with existing democracy rankings is that they can pick up weaknesses and potential challenges in a high-quality democracy like Norway’s – which will always get top scores when compared to the world’s dictatorships and low-quality democracies.
In order for Norway to be able to move forward towards the “perfect democracy”, we should reflect critically on what this ideal actually looks like, and set high (and measurable) demands for what we must do to get there.
This can be unpleasant, both because it highlights the shortcomings of a democracy we are otherwise used to celebrating, but also because it can turn out that “democratizing measures” can come into conflict with other political considerations.
In a new one state analysis of Norwegian democracy commissioned by the government, we make such a critical assessment. We have mapped the system’s strengths and weaknesses. Where is the potential for improvement, and where are potential vulnerabilities?
We have developed a framework that can capture improvement potential also in high-quality democracies. We have drawn on several hundred democracy-relevant measures from Norwegian and cross-national data sets, but also conducted a separate survey of more than 100 experts on Norwegian politics and democracy.
The product is 15 fine-grained democracy indices that measure Norway along a broad spectrum of democratic principles and institutions at national, regional and local level.
A broad survey of Norwegian democracy can be an important precautionary measure. A number of countries – among them Hungary, the USA, Turkey and India – have experienced democratic erosion in recent years, and in several cases crossed the border to authoritarian rule.
The threats to democracy have often come from within: elected leaders have gradually dismantled democratic institutions and increased their own power, often by exploiting loopholes in the political system.
In such times, democratic countries should look at themselves in the mirror and ask: how can we strengthen our democracy and map (and improve) its vulnerable aspects?
Unsurprisingly shows our analysis that Norwegian democracy, seen as a whole, is strong. We also document how – along various dimensions – it has been very stable over the past five to seven years.
But we also point to several potential challenges. Here is a small selection:
Room for improvement: lobbying and corruption
Discussions about how resource-rich interest groups can gain influence over politicians and parties, and thus turn legislation in their favour, are a regular occurrence in democracies.
Norway is no exception here. There have been many discussions in the Norwegian public about how to regulate and counteract such biases in influence. Recent debates have centered on the introduction of lobby register for the Storting or election campaign contributions from organized interests and wealthy citizens.
Several of our indicators suggest that these debates reflect a broader systemic feature that can be improved. In our expert survey, a high proportion of experts answered that resourceful lobby groups have great influence – not only in national politics, but also locally and regionally.
This violates a democratic principle of political equality between citizens, since some resourceful citizens will in practice be able to gain more political power than others.
Another example of money and politics mixing in unfortunate ways is corruption. There have been several corruption scandals in recent years, and we find that Norwegian citizens, in surveys, perceive that corruption and other illegal favoritism are widespread, especially in local politics.
Interestingly, the perception of corruption in local politics is stronger among residents than the local politicians themselves. Corruption is difficult to estimate the extent of, since it typically takes place in secret.
But no matter how (little) corrupt the Norwegian system may be, it has a legitimacy problem for many citizens perceives that such practices are widespread.
More room for improvement: Voting rights
The right to vote in elections is at the heart of democracy. Nevertheless, around ten percent of permanent residents in Norway today do not have the right to vote in parliamentary elections. The reason is that the right to vote in general elections is linked to citizenship. The proportion who have not been able to vote due to this criterion has increased in recent years, partly as a result of tightening of the rules for citizenship.
They involve, for example, at least eight years of residence in Norway in the last eleven years. Therefore, many residents, even if they are affected by Norwegian laws, pay taxes and are politically engaged, cannot take part in parliamentary elections.
In this field, Norway is not an internationally leading country. One the study finds that Norwegian democracy, on a widely used cross-national democracy indexwould fall from first to tenth place if we took into account how many permanent residents have the right to vote.
If we used the rules for municipal elections – with a requirement of three years’ residence in Norway – also for parliamentary elections, we would many more had the right to vote.
What about Norwegian democracy in the future? Is it robust enough to withstand authoritarian threats, should they come? There may be different opinions about this.
That is why we asked more than 100 experts on Norwegian politics and democracy to estimate how resistant Norwegian democracy is to significant decline in the next three and ten years.
A majority have positive faith in a robust Norwegian democracy in the future as well. Nevertheless, Norwegian democracy is not unharmed: The typical (median) expert states that the probability of a significant democratic decline in Norway is five percent in three years’ time and ten percent in ten years’ time.
These are not insignificant probabilities, given how serious the scenario would have been.
If we manage to produce an even more well-functioning democracy, with broad participation and high legitimacy in various groups, we will probably be even better equipped on the day an authoritarian threat should come. An element of risk is a naive belief that our democracy is immune to such threats.
Hopefully, our analysis of the situation can contribute to a greater awareness of democracy’s vulnerable aspects, and thus a heightened preparedness against future undemocratic currents.
– –
“Very democratic, but not democratic enough: An analysis of the state of Norwegian democracy, 2015-2021”, is published today.
#Debate #democratic #Norwegian #democracy