DOCSLIB.ORG

Norway Donor Profile

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Norway Donor Profile Norway Donor Profile NORWAY Donor Profile FUNDING TRENDS STRATEGIC PRIORITIES KEY OPPORTUNITIES Norway has exceeded its own Girls’ education is a top thematic Parliamentary elections in ODA target of 1% of GNI since priority for Norway, with climate September 2017 may lead to 2013, and there is a cross-party change and humanitarian shifts in priorities, while in- consensus to maintain this assistance also prioritized. creasing private sector focus spending level. may lead to shifts in modes of development financing. For Syria, where an estimated 2.8 million children are out of school because of conflict, Norway and partners are funding an international competition to develop an open-source smartphone app to help Syrian children learn how to read in Arabic. Google Earth. Image © 2016 CNES/Astrium. © 2016 Digital Globe. Norway Donor Profile NORWAY at a glance Funding trends • Norway is the 9th-largest donor country, spending US$4.4 billion on net official development assistance (ODA) in 2016 (in current prices). This cor- responds to 1.1% of its gross national income (GNI), making Norway the largest donor in proportion to its economic size. Norway has exceeded the 0.7% target since 1976, and has spent at least 1% of its GNI on ODA since 2013. There is a cross-party consensus to maintain this share. • Since 2015, Norway has used significant parts of its ODA budget to cover the costs of hosting refugees within the country. However, as the number of incoming refugees is sharply decreasing, pressure has been taken off the ODA budget and funds have been reallocated to development programs abroad. Strategic priorities • Prime Minister Erna Solberg has defined education, and particularly girls’ education, as a top thematic priority. According to the 2017 budget, ODA spending on education is projected to increase to NOK3.4 billion (US$540 million) in 2017, double the amount spent in 2013 (NOK1.7 billion or US$270 million). • The approved 2017 budget highlights education, humanitarian assistance, private sector development and job creation, global health, and climate, environment, and sustainable energy as priorities of Norway’s develop- ment policy in 2017. • Climate change and tropical forest protection is a key issue for Norway. The Norwegian International Climate and Forest Initiative receives about NOK3 billion per year, or US$350 million, until 2020), and aims to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions resulting from deforestation and forest degra- dation in developing countries. Key opportunities • Parliamentary elections will take place on September 11, 2017. While ODA is likely to remain at high levels, the outcome of the elections may lead to shifts in priority setting, and may provide opportunities to shape the fu- ture direction of Norway’s development policy. • The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is currently drafting a new ‘white paper’ to lay out the priorities of Norwegian ODA policy. Is it expected to be pub- lished in March or April 2017. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a ‘North Star’ for the government’s narrative on development, and will be at the heart of the new policy document. To engage effectively with the Norwegian government and other stakeholders, it is thus important to frame new initiatives and suggestions within the SDG context and empha- size the links between the individual goals. • Norway is focusing increasingly on involving the private sector in develop- ment cooperation and emphasizing public-private partnerships. Norway has significantly increased funding to Norfund, a state-owned investment fund. This may lead to more funding provided in the form of loans and eq- uity investments in coming years, however, Norfund’s investments have not yet been counted as ODA. 2 An initiative by SEEK Development March 2017 Norway Donor Profile KEY QUESTIONS the big six How much ODA does Norway provide? Norway is committed to continue spending 1% of its million). In 2016, ODA budget allocated for refugees in GNI on ODA Norway initially reached NOK7.4 billion (US$1.2 billion). Norway is the ninth-largest donor country. It spent However, Norway’s restrictive refugee policy – including US$4.4 billion in 2016 (in current prices; US$6 billion in tighter border controls in Europe – implemented from 2014 prices).1 This represents 1.1% of its gross national in- early 2016 has led to a sharp decrease in the number of come (GNI), making Norway the largest donor in relation new asylum seekers. While the government had foreseen to the size of its economy. Norway is committed to main- a decrease in asylum applications in 2016 to 10,750 (down tain its ODA at ‘high levels’, continuing its policy of from more than 31,000 in 2015), only 3,460 asylum seek- spending 1% of its GNI on ODA. ODA is expected to re- ers actually applied. This is the lowest figure since 1997. main stable in 2017. This has taken pressure off the ODA budget, and Norway ‘saved’ NOK652 million (US$103 million) in the 2016 ODA In 2015 and 2016, Norway used part of its ODA budget to budget as a result of this. This funding was reallocated to cover the costs of hosting refugees within the country, by other development programs at the end of that budget reshuffling funding that had been previously allocated to year. The largest share of the reshuffled amount (NOK500 development programs abroad and finding additional million; US$663 million) was allocated to emergency hu- funding to allocate towards refugee costs. In 2015, this manitarian assistance to the Middle East, particularly represented 14% of Norway’s total ODA (US$598 million, for Syria. For 2017, the budget foresees NOK3.7 billion more than double the amount spent in 2014 – US$279 (US$594 million) for in-country refugee costs. 3 An initiative by SEEK Development March 2017 Norway Donor Profile What are Norway’s strategic priorities for development? Education, humanitarian assistance, and global on climate change and the environment (2011), global health are among top priorities health (2012), fair distribution and growth (2013), global education (2014), the role of human rights in foreign and The Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA) sets priorities for development policy (2014), private-sector engagement in development policy in ‘white papers’, which summarize development cooperation (2015), human rights in devel- government strategies. The most relevant overarching opment policy (2015), and equality and foreign develop- paper for Norway’s ODA remains the 2009 white paper ment policy (2016). called ‘Climate, Conflict and Capital’. The MFA is cur- rently working on a new policy paper that will lay out the Cross-cutting priority issues within Norwegian ODA are current priorities within development. The policy will be a focus on vulnerable states, human rights, democracy, aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). women's rights and gender equality, and fighting corrup- Two consultations with civil society have already taken tion. Regarding individual sectors, the government de- place. The paper is expected to be published sometime in fines five priorities for Norwegian development coopera- March or April 2017. Other important white papers focus tion: 1) education, 2) humanitarian assistance, 3) global 4 An initiative by SEEK Development March 2017 Norway Donor Profile health, 4) private sector development, and 5) climate, en- vironment, and sustainable energy, which focuses on cli- Norway's key development priorities: mate-change adaptation and mitigation. • Education: Norway fulfilled its commitment to Since Erna Solberg became prime minister in 2013, edu- double spending between 2013 and 2017, from cation and in particular girls’ education has been a key NOK1.7 billion (US$270 million) to NOK3.4 billion focus. Between 2013 and 2017, the government of Prime (US$540 million); focus is on girls’ education Minister Solberg has doubled its ODA spending on the sector, going from NOK1.7 billion (US$270 million) to • Humanitarian assistance: A record NOK4.4 billion NOK3.4 billion (US$540 million). (US$698 million) has been budgeted for humani- tarian assistance for 2017; up 50% since 2013 The impact of the refugee crisis in Norway has meant sig- nificant increases in budget allocated to humanitarian • Global Health: The focus is on women’s and assistance. In 2017 this amount reached a record NOK4.4 children’s health as well as on fighting AIDS, billion (US$698 million). tuberculosis and malaria Environmental protection and humanitarian assis- • Private sector development and job creation: In tance are the largest sectors of bilateral funding 2017 Norway committed NOK1.17 billion (US$19 million) to business development and to Norfund Norway considers funding through multilateral organi- zations as an effective way to pursue its theme-focused • Climate, environment, and sustainable energy: agenda termed ‘global schemes’. Core contributions to Proposed budget for 2017 of NOK2 billion (US$317 multilateral organizations accounted for 23% of ODA in million), with a focus on the Green Climate Fund 2015, or US$1.3 billion. On top of this, earmarked funding and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). to multilaterals is significant: it accounted for 30% of bi- lateral ODA in 2015, bringing the total amount of ODA delivered through multilateral organizations to US$2.5 million, or 46% of total ODA. Norway is traditionally a the Global Fund for 2017 to 2019, and NOK1.6 billion strong supporter of United Nations (UN) agencies, and is (US$258 million) to the Green Climate Fund for 2015 to set to channel NOK3.3 billion (US$524 million) to them in 2018. 2017, according to the ODA budget. As part of its forestry initiative (Norway’s International The strategic orientations of Norway’s ODA are reflected Climate and Forest Initiative; NICFI), Norway pledged in its bilateral funding. In 2015, the largest share was US$350 million annually until 2020 to reduce green- used to cover the costs of hosting refugees in the country house-gas emissions caused by deforestation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Norway's Efforts to Electrify Transportation
    Rolling the snowball: Norway’s efforts to electrify transportation Nathan Lemphers Environmental Governance Lab Working Paper 2019-2 Rolling the snowball: Norway’s efforts to electrify transportation EGL Working Paper 2019-2 September 2019 Nathan Lemphers, Research Associate Environmental Governance Lab Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy University of Toronto [email protected] Norway’s policies to encourage electric vehicle (EV) adoption have been highly successful. In 2017, 39 per cent of all new car sales in Norway were all-electric or hybrid, making it the world’s most advanced market for electric vehicles (IEA 2018). This high rate of EV ownership is the result of 30 years of EV policies, Norway’s particular political economy, and significant improvements in EV and battery technology. This paper argues that Norway’s sustained EV policy interventions are not only starting to decarbonize personal transportation but also spurring innovative electrification efforts in other sectors such as maritime transport and short- haul aviation. To explain this pattern of scaling, the paper employs Bernstein and Hoffmann’s (2018) framework on policy pathways towards decarbonization. It finds political causal mechanisms of capacity building and normalization helped create a welcoming domestic environment to realize early uptake and scaling of electric vehicles, and subsequently fostered secondary scaling in other modes of transportation. The initial scaling was facilitated by Norway’s unique political economy. Ironically, Norway’s climate leadership is, in part, because of its desire to sustain oil and gas development. This desire steered the emission mitigation focus towards sectors of the economy that are less contentious and lack opposing incumbents.
    [Show full text]
  • Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Countries
    POWER, COMMUNICATION, AND POLITICS IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES POWER, COMMUNICATION, POWER, COMMUNICATION, AND POLITICS IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES The Nordic countries are stable democracies with solid infrastructures for political dia- logue and negotiations. However, both the “Nordic model” and Nordic media systems are under pressure as the conditions for political communication change – not least due to weakened political parties and the widespread use of digital communication media. In this anthology, the similarities and differences in political communication across the Nordic countries are studied. Traditional corporatist mechanisms in the Nordic countries are increasingly challenged by professionals, such as lobbyists, a development that has consequences for the processes and forms of political communication. Populist polit- ical parties have increased their media presence and political influence, whereas the news media have lost readers, viewers, listeners, and advertisers. These developments influence societal power relations and restructure the ways in which political actors • Edited by: Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard Kristensen, & Lars Nord • Edited by: Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard communicate about political issues. This book is a key reference for all who are interested in current trends and develop- ments in the Nordic countries. The editors, Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard Kristensen, and Lars Nord, have published extensively on political communication, and the authors are all scholars based in the Nordic countries with specialist knowledge in their fields. Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Nordicom is a centre for Nordic media research at the University of Gothenburg, Nordicomsupported is a bycentre the Nordic for CouncilNordic of mediaMinisters. research at the University of Gothenburg, supported by the Nordic Council of Ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Change and Economic Policy: the Norwegian Model Under Pressure
    Structural change and economic policy: the Norwegian model under pressure JAN FAGERBERG*, ÅDNE CAPPELEN** & LARS MJØSET*** Abstract During the 1950s and 1960s, a coherent system of economic policies was implemented in Norway. The article analyses the origins and functioning of this Norwegian model and shows how it broke down under the influence of both external and internal pressures from the mid-1970s onwards. By the early 1990s no new coherent system could be found, while financial deregulation had created huge problems in the banking system and unemployment persisted. *) Norwegian Institute for International Affairs, P.O. Box 8159 DEP, 0033, Oslo, Norway; **) Central Bureau of Statistics, P.O. Box 8131 DEP, 0033, Oslo, Norway; ***) Institute for Social Research, Munthesgt.31, N-0260 Oslo, Norway. Note. This paper first appeared as NUPI Working-paper No. 456 (February 1992). It is an “accepted manuscript” version of an article that was subsequently published by Taylor & Francis as Fagerberg, J., Cappelen, Å. & Mjøset, L. (1992), Structural change and economic policy: the Norwegian model under pressure, Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift - Norwegian Journal of Geography, Vol. 46, 95-107, available online at: http://wwww.tandfonline.com/DOI:10.1080/00291959208552288. 2 1. Introduction Most analyses of macro-economic polices focus on general factors that are assumed to be important in all developed, capitalist economies. This paper demonstrates another approach; combining structural and institutional factors, it searches for peculiar patterns of national economic policies routines which tend to become stable models in certain historical periods. We relate the process of macroeconomic policy formation to the industrial structure of the country, the geographical location of its population and industry, as well as to the class structure, the party system and the system of public administration.
    [Show full text]
  • Somalis in Oslo
    Somalis-cover-final-OSLO_Layout 1 2013.12.04. 12:40 Page 1 AT HOME IN EUROPE SOMALIS SOMALIS IN Minority communities – whether Muslim, migrant or Roma – continue to come under OSLO intense scrutiny in Europe today. This complex situation presents Europe with one its greatest challenges: how to ensure equal rights in an environment of rapidly expanding diversity. IN OSLO At Home in Europe, part of the Open Society Initiative for Europe, Open Society Foundations, is a research and advocacy initiative which works to advance equality and social justice for minority and marginalised groups excluded from the mainstream of civil, political, economic, and, cultural life in Western Europe. Somalis in European Cities Muslims in EU Cities was the project’s first comparative research series which examined the position of Muslims in 11 cities in the European Union. Somalis in European cities follows from the findings emerging from the Muslims in EU Cities reports and offers the experiences and challenges faced by Somalis across seven cities in Europe. The research aims to capture the everyday, lived experiences as well as the type and degree of engagement policymakers have initiated with their Somali and minority constituents. somalis-oslo_incover-publish-2013-1209_publish.qxd 2013.12.09. 14:45 Page 1 Somalis in Oslo At Home in Europe somalis-oslo_incover-publish-2013-1209_publish.qxd 2013.12.09. 14:45 Page 2 ©2013 Open Society Foundations This publication is available as a pdf on the Open Society Foundations website under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Kreftkoordinator/Kontakt for Alvorlig Syke I Oslo
    Kreftkoordinator/kontakt for alvorlig syke i Oslo Tlf. til Oslo kommune 21 80 21 80 Bydel Kontaktperson Telefon Lovisenberg sektor: Gamle Oslo (1) Kreftkoordinator Liv Inger Stokvold 416 76 217 [email protected] Grünerløkka (2) Kreftkoordinator Veronica Richardsen Johansen 913 01 842 [email protected] Sagene (3) Kreftkoordinator Adina Ekeli Berg 46 90 76 23 [email protected] St. Hanshaugen (4) Kreftkoordinator Johanna Kvisle 918 32 665 [email protected] Diakonhjemmet sektor: Frogner (5) Kreftkoordinator Helle Christensen, pall.spl 404 52 326 [email protected] Kreftkoordinator Oddfrid Nesse 994 41 287 [email protected] Ullern (6) Kreftkoordinator Hilde Berggard 417 05 634 ¨ [email protected] Sykepleier Trude Stensholt 915 30 823 [email protected] Vestre Aker (7) Kreftkoordinator Malgorzata (Gosia) Zygewicz 994 83 284 [email protected] Kreftsykepleie Cathrine Stokke 415 28 949 [email protected] Revidert januar 2020 Oslo Universitetssykehus sektor: Bjerke (9) Kreftkoordinator Bjørn Ulsaker 417 54 691 [email protected] 23 43 97 00 Østensjø (13) Koordinator for alvorlig syke Tor Arne Henningsen 932 30 170 [email protected] Nordre Aker (8) Kreftkoordinator Ida Smith Hald 917 80 848 [email protected] Nordstrand (14) Kreftkoordinator Lisbeth Klemetsen 992 85 124 [email protected] Søndre
    [Show full text]
  • Byer/Bydeler
    Vedlegg 10.1; Fordelingen av tilskudd til storbyordingen 2011 ‐ Fattiggdomstiltak Byer/bydeler Ansvarlig Tildelt Tiltak Oslo kommune sentralt JobbX ‐ jobbsøkerkurs Antirasistisk senter 400 000 Leirvirksomhet ‐ Hudøy Stiftelsen Hudøy 300 000 Alle skal med Bydel Bjerke 200 000 Aktivitetsgruppa Nedre Ullevål Bydel St. Hanshaugen 50 000 Aktivitetsgruppa Nedre Ullevål Bydel St. Hanshaugen ‐ RNB 50 000 Fra jobb til fullført skolegang Bydel Østensjø 200 000 Wild X, Flere kulturelt sommerprogram Norges Jeger‐ og Fiskerforbund 400 000 Norges Jeger‐ og Fiskerforbund ‐ Wild X, Flere kulturelt sommerprogram 100 000 RNB Ferie for alle Østfold Røde Kors 300 000 Ferie for alle Røde Kors Østfold ‐ RNB 100 000 Agemda X ‐ sommerleir Antirasistisk senter 250 000 Agenda X ‐ sommerleir Antirasistisk senter ‐ RNB 100 000 Sommertilbud 2011 Bydel Frogner 75 000 Fokus på egen fremtid Oslo Røde Kors 50 000 Gruppe foreldre og barn Bydel Nordre Aker 75 000 Gruppe foreldre og barn Bydel Nordre Aker ‐ RNB 60 000 Foreningen for fangers pårørende FFP Ung 350 000 Foreningen for fangers FFP Ung 100 000 pårørende ‐ RNB Nysirkus Bydel Bjerke 400 000 Jobbsjansen Vålerenga mot rasisme 350 000 Cafe Condio Oslo Røde Kors 250 000 Turgruppa Bydel Bjerke 125 000 Sum 4 285 000 Bydel Gamle Oslo Ferie‐ og fritidsaktiviteter for barn og unge Bydel Gamle Oslo 500 000 Ferie‐ og fritidsaktiviteter for barn og Bydel Gamle Oslo ‐ RNB 200 000 unge Ungdomsverksted/Sommer‐ Bydel Gamle Oslo, Riverside 250 000 verksted ungdomshus Bydel Gamle Oslo, Riverside Ung og aktiv 300 000 ungdomshus Kampen
    [Show full text]
  • Westside, Best Side?
    Master’s Thesis 2020 30 ECTS School of Economics and Business Westside, best side? - A study of converging housing prices in the city of Oslo Kjetil Hodder Hovden Master of Science in Economics Acknowledgements This thesis marks the end of my time studying a master’s degree in economics at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU). The years spent at NMBU have been a great experience for me, and I will have many fond memories of this chapter of my life. As for this master thesis, I would like to thank my supervisor, affiliated Ph.D. candidate Mari Olsen Mamre, for her guidance during this semester. Your knowledge, feedback and suggested literature have been of great help and undoubtedly increased the quality of this thesis. I would also like to thank Eiendomsverdi AS for sharing their data. Finally, I want thank those who have helped me with proofreading the paper. Kjetil Hodder Hovden Ås, December 15, 2020 1 Abstract The goal of this thesis was to analyse the housing price pattern in Oslo, and to find evidence of price segmentation between the 15 districts in Oslo. To form the price index used to test for convergence, the weighted repeated sales model created by Case and Shiller (1987) was used. The analysis was based on quarterly data from 1998 to 2019 was used in this analysis. A panel model developed by Phillips and Sul was used to run the convergence tests. This was done for both total prices and prices per square meter. No evidence for overall convergence was found.
    [Show full text]
  • Innvandreres Demografi Og Levekår I Groruddalen, Søndre Nordstrand, Gamle Oslo Og Grünerløkka Rettet 5
    Rapporter Reports 2015/43 • Kjersti Stabell Wiggen, Minja Tea Dzamarija, Bjørn Thorsdalen og Lars Østby Innvandreres demografi og levekår i Groruddalen, Søndre Nordstrand, Gamle Oslo og Grünerløkka Rapporter 2015/43 Kjersti Stabell Wiggen, Minja Tea Dzamarija, Bjørn Thorsdalen og Lars Østby Innvandreres demografi og levekår i Groruddalen, Søndre Nordstrand, Gamle Oslo og Grünerløkka Rettet 5. november 2015 Statistisk sentralbyrå • Statistics Norway Oslo–Kongsvinger Rapporter I denne serien publiseres analyser og kommenterte statistiske resultater fra ulike undersøkelser. Undersøkelser inkluderer både utvalgsundersøkelser, tellinger og registerbaserte undersøkelser. Rettet s. 127 og 129 © Statistisk sentralbyrå Standardtegn i tabeller Symbol Ved bruk av materiale fra denne publikasjonen skal Tall kan ikke forekomme . Statistisk sentralbyrå oppgis som kilde. Oppgave mangler .. Publisert oktober 2015 Oppgave mangler foreløpig … Tall kan ikke offentliggjøres : Null - ISBN 978-82-537-9226-2 (trykt) Mindre enn 0,5 av den brukte enheten 0 ISBN 978-82-537-9227-9 (elektronisk) Mindre enn 0,05 av den brukte enheten 0,0 ISSN 0806-2056 Foreløpig tall * Brudd i den loddrette serien — Trykk: Statistisk sentralbyrå Brudd i den vannrette serien | Desimaltegn , Rapporter 2015/43 Innvandreres demografi og levekår Forord I denne rapporten beskriver vi demografi og levekår til personer med innvandrer- bakgrunn i bydelene Gamle Oslo, Grünerløkka, Bjerke, Grorud, Stovner, Alna og Søndre Nordstrand, samt i området Tøyen i bydel Gamle Oslo. Utgangspunktet er Groruddalssatsningen og Handlingsprogram Oslo Sør som ble satt i gang for perioden 2007-2016. «Områdeløft Tøyen» er en del av Tøyensatsningen - et nytt tiltak som ble satt i gang i 2013 og avsluttes i 2018. Tøyensatsningen vil ha betydning for bydelene Gamle Oslo og Grünerløkka, så disse to sentrumsbydelene er innlemmet i beskrivelsene.
    [Show full text]
  • Innvandrere På Oslo- Kartet
    Befolkningsutvikling i Oslo – rutenettkart 2000 og 2015 Innvandrere på Oslo- kartet Oslo har mange innvandrere, og andelen med innvandrerbak- grunn er høyere i noen bydeler enn i andre. Utviklingen over tid kan illustreres ved hjelp av rutenettkart, der alle rutene er like store og uendret over tid. Kartet viser at det er store varia- 112 000 sjoner i andelen av befolkningen som har innvandrerbakgrunn flere med innvandrer- også innenfor den enkelte bydel. bakgrunn i Oslo På 15 år, fra 2000 til 2015 har antall innvandrere og norskfødte med innvan- drerforeldre økt i Oslo med 112 000 personer, en økning fra 19 til 32 prosent de siste 15 årene av befolkningen (se tekstboks). Bosatte med bakgrunn fra Polen er gruppen som har økt aller mest, fulgt av bosatte fra Somalia, Sverige, Irak og Pakistan. Stovner er i dag bydelen med høyest andel med innvandrerbakgrunn, med 53 prosent, mens Nordstrand har lavest andel med 16 prosent. Innenfor den enkelte bydel og delbydel er det imidlertid betydelige forskjeller i innvandrer- tettheten. Dette kan illustreres ved hjelp av rutenettkart. Figur 1. Innvandrere og norskfødte med innvandrerforeldre i bydelene i Oslo per 1.1.2000, som andel av bosatte. I ruter på 250x250 meter. Dagens bydelsgrenser VESTRE AKER NORDRE AKER GRORUD STOVNER SAGENE BJERKE ULLERN ST.HANSHAUGEN ALNA GRÜNERLØKKA FROGNER SENTRUM GAMLE OSLO ØSTENSJØ NORDSTRAND Prosent innvandrere og norskfødte med innvandrerforeldre 0 1 - 9 10 - 24 25 - 49 Even Høydahl 50 - er geograf og seniorrådgiver SØNDRE NORDSTRAND i Statistisk sentralbyrå, Seksjon for befolkningsstatistikk. (even.hø[email protected]) Kartdata: Kartverket. Kilde: Befolkningsstatistikk, Statistisk sentralbyrå. 30 Samfunnsspeilet 3/2015, SSB Befolkningsutvikling i Oslo – rutenettkart 2000 og 2015 I år 2000 hadde nesten halvparten av rutene i kartet over Oslo (se figur 1) Definisjoner under 10 prosent innbyggere med innvandrerbakgrunn.
    [Show full text]
  • A Quality-Adjusted Rent Index for the Oslo O Ce Market
    Online Appendix for the paper Location, Location, Location! -A quality-adjusted rent index for the Oslo oce market∗ André K. Anundsen,y Christian Bjørlandzand Marius Hagen April 30, 2021 ∗This paper combines two previous working papers: Anundsen and Hagen (2020) and Bjørland and Hagen (2019). This paper should not be reported as representing the views of Norges Bank. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reect those of Norges Bank. We thank Henrik Borchgrevink, Francesco Furlanetto, Karsten Gerdrup, Torbjørn Hægeland, Christian Lorange, Nina Larsson Midtehjell, Erling Røed Larsen, Ella Getz Wold, Sigmund Aas and an anonymous referee from the Norges Bank Working Paper series for helpful comments. This paper was presented at various seminars in Norges Bank and at a workshop in the Nordic-Baltic Forum in 2019. We are thankful to the participants at these seminars for useful comments. yHousing Lab Oslo Metropolitan University, [email protected] zNorges Bank, [email protected] Norges Bank, [email protected] 1 A Appendix Figure A.1: Number of observations by year 1500 1000 500 Number of observations 0 2004 2008 2012 2016 Year 2 Figure A.2: Lag between signature date and start date. Number of days .25 .2 .15 .1 Frac. of contracts .05 0 100 200 300 400 500 Days Notes: The gure displays only contracts where the number of days between signature and contract start date is 500 days or less (excludes three percent of the observations). 3 Figure A.3: Map of Oslo divided into dierent city districts Alna Bjerke Frogner Gamle Oslo Grorud Grunerløkka Nordre Aker Nordstrand Sagene City Centre St.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges in the 21St Century Edited by Anu Koivunen, Jari Ojala and Janne Holmén
    The Nordic Economic, Social and Political Model The Nordic model is the 20th-century Scandinavian recipe for combining stable democracies, individual freedom, economic growth and comprehensive systems for social security. But what happens when Sweden and Finland – two countries topping global indexes for competitiveness, productivity, growth, quality of life, prosperity and equality – start doubting themselves and their future? Is the Nordic model at a crossroads? Historically, consensus, continuity, social cohesion and broad social trust have been hailed as key components for the success and for the self-images of Sweden and Finland. In the contemporary, however, political debates in both countries are increasingly focused on risks, threats and worry. Social disintegration, political polarization, geopolitical anxieties and threat of terrorism are often dominant themes. This book focuses on what appears to be a paradox: countries with low-income differences, high faith in social institutions and relatively high cultural homogeneity becoming fixated on the fear of polarization, disintegration and diminished social trust. Unpacking the presentist discourse of “worry” and a sense of interregnum at the face of geopolitical tensions, digitalization and globalization, as well as challenges to democracy, the chapters take steps back in time and explore the current conjecture through the eyes of historians and social scientists, addressing key aspects of and challenges to both the contemporary and the future Nordic model. In addition, the functioning and efficacy of the participatory democracy and current protocols of decision-making are debated. This work is essential reading for students and scholars of the welfare state, social reforms and populism, as well as Nordic and Scandinavian studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining Norway's Noncompliance with the Gothenburg Protocol
    Norms, Incentives, or Deadlines? Explaining Norway’s Noncompliance with the Gothenburg Protocol • Andreas Kokkvoll Tveit* Abstract Norway, previously an international frontrunner concerning reductions of transbound- ary air pollution, fell far short of its 2010 target for nitrogen oxides (NOx) under the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol. In this article I show that leading international compliance theories cannot explain much of this noncompliance. While little evidence supports the management school’s explanations, Norwegian policies are also inconsistent with the enforcement school. Albeit too late to meet the deadline, Norway imposed a NOx tax in 2007. Moreover, the resulting emissions reductions were deeper than in a business- as-usual scenario, despite no international enforcement. That the NOx tax was imposed only after an environmentalist party gained considerable influence over NOx policies in 2005 supports an office-incumbent hypothesis. However, as emissions also declined significantly in many other European countries after 2005, the explanation is likely struc- tural. One possibility is the deadline-pressure hypothesis: As the deadline approached, decision-makers across Northern and Western Europe considered emissions reductions to be more urgent than before. When scientific and public awareness of acid rain rose in the 1970s, Scandina- vian countries served as front runners in international efforts to address the problem (Wettestad 2012, 25–26). As cooperation grew increasingly institu- tionalized over the following decades, Norway was eager to keep this position. Therefore it may seem surprising that Norway failed to comply with its 2010 1 target for nitrogen oxides (NOx) under the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol. * Parts of the research were carried out at the Fritjof Nansen Institute, Lysaker, Norway.
    [Show full text]