The Norwegian Central Administrative System – Development Features and Principles of Organization

1. The Norwegian Central Administrative System – Development Features and Principles of Organization Professor Tom Christensen, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo Presentation at University of Zagreb, May 29., 2013

2. 1. Questions to be focusedon • Whataresomeofthedevelopmentfeaturesofthe Norwegian centraladministration? • Whatarethe driving forces? • Whataresomeofthechallenges in the system? • How doesthe system compare to other administrative systems – typical Norwegian?

3. 2. Development features • A. Before World War II • Norway subordinated to Denmark for 400 yearsuntil 1814 • Then Norway gottheir first Constitution and becamesubordinated in a union withSweden • First hierarchicalministries in 1814 – finance, military, church/education and interior

4. The Norwegian governmentthe first 100 yearsverymuchdominated by civil servants • First agency in 1850s afterindependent ‘Swedishmodel’ – dominant form historically • Integrated ‘Danish agencymodel’ introduced at the same time • Period 1914-1940 introduced ‘Norwegian agencymodel’ – bothdivision and agency

5. B. Periodafter 1945 • Verystronggrowth in numberofemployees in ministries and in particularagencies • Increasedverticalspecialization – more leadershiplevels, agencies and SOEs • Increasedhorizontalspecialization – new types of units internally • More regulatoryagencies

6. Strong sector ministries and weak coordination ministries – weak PMO • Ministries more ‘secretariats for political leadership’ • Means more focus on helping political leaders and more coordination/policy development • Less of single cases – moved to agencies

7. Big demographicchange: • Right after 1945 70-80 % ofcivil servants educated in law, nowaround 20% • National economistsrecruited from the 1950s • Social scientists from 1970s – nowlargestgroup • Business economists from 1980s • Strongincrease in shareofwomen – from 12% to 45-50% during last 40 years

8. Extensive reforms from 1980s: • NPM – structuralfragmentation – more independentagencies and SOEs • More efficiency-orientedorganizing • More focusonusers • Last decade more post-NPM – increasedcoordination and centralization - mergers

9. Oftenmixed and hybrid reforms: • Police reform 2000 – newagency and mergerofpolicedistricts • Immigration reform 2001 – new super-independentcomplaint body, more independentagency, but later more control • Hospital reform 2002 – centralgovernmentowner, butdelegation to regional and localhealthcompanies

10. Regulatoryagency reform 2003 – more autonomy for someagencies, but not others • Welfare administrative reform 2005 – mergerofpension and employmentagencies • Establishment of one-stop shows in everymunicipality, in collaborationwithlocalsocial services • Reform reorganized in 2008, more centralization and regionalizationagain

11. 3. Driving forces • A. Political and administrative leaders behind • Formal hierarchicalpositionsareimportant • Leaders have hadrelativelyclear goals/motives and have rationallydecided and implemented • In particularrelated to publiccommisions and reform processes

12. B. Gradual development • Informal norms and values important for administrative development • Path dependency important – ‘roots’ determine ‘routes’ • Cultural development is eventually leading to formal changes

13. C. Symbolic processes • Design, reorganization and reforms are reflecting symbols and ‘fashion’ • Myths about what a modern administration is • Some symbols and solutions are dominating in certain period – changing myths • Decoupling of symbols and reality in public administration

14. 4. Whataresomeofthechallenges in the system? • A. Political-administrative control • How to maintainpoliticalcontrol, whilethe system is more decentralized and delegated? • Political leaders oftengettheblame, butlackinformation and influence • How to maintainstandardization in services?

15. B. How to nurture autonomy? • How to give actors at lower levels enough leeway to act inside central goals? • How to balance central control with professional competence and interests of external stake-holders? • Main features of report and scrutiny system?

16. C. How to increasecoordination? • Structuralmeasures, networks or softer and more informalcollaboration? • Focuson ‘wickedissues’, i.e. especiallydifficult cross-sectoral problems? • How muchcentralcontrolofthehorizontalcoordination?

17. 5. What is typical Norwegian concerning administrative development? • Political and administrative leaders share important norms and values – few conflicts • Rechtsstaat values and equality • Modified hierarchy and a lot of autonomy inside administrative units - teamwork

18. Agencies have had a lot of trust and autonomy • Administrative leaders with long careers • Corporatist features important: • Strong contact between government and large interest groups • Norway is a reluctant reformer – late with reforms and uses the less extreme ones