Democracy in Norway

Abstract

In international comparative studies, the Norwegian system is consistently at the top of the range in democratic quality. However, in a scrutiny against more absolute standards of ”democraticness,” it has been found to perform less well. The strength of this system is less in lofty democratic idealism than in its down-to-earth solidity in the making of public policy, and its weakness more in democratic virtue than in public policy management. Strength is explained by historical factors, by a consistent experience of progress, and by solidity of public policy decision-making. Weakness is in what has been identified as a disruption in the democratic chain of command in constitutional institutions. Three general observations follow. First, the double set of observations-a robust democracy, comparatively, nevertheless with notable weaknesses in trends-suggests that the state of democracy in the world is far from impressive in qualitative terms. The democracies of the world, even the most established ones, are very different in quality, and democracy overall is and remains a fragile and endangered system of government. Second, is the significance of solidity in policy procedures. What other democracies can learn from the Norwegian case might primarily be the importance for democratic order and legitimacy of firm, stable, and established procedures and institutions in the system of government. Third, is the pervasive importance of the elusive quality of democratic culture. Democratic leaders have a duty not only to their voters but also to the needs of democratic systems for good governance.