Editing Politics of Norway (section)

=== Result-Oriented Reforms ===

Between 2000 and 2020, Norway has adopted several different performance-driven reforms to enhance public sector efficiency, service delivery, and governance. <ref name=":9"></ref><ref name=":10">Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & H. Rykkja, L. (2024). Governance Reforms in Scandinavia: Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Comparative Governance Reforms (pp. 64–66). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70306-5_4</ref> 

==== Healthcare Sector Reforms (2002 and 2012)  ====

The 2002 hospital reform centralized public hospital ownership under the Ministry of Health while granting management autonomy to regional and local health enterprises. The reform aimed to improve efficiency and implement performance-based governance.  <ref name=":9"></ref><ref>Byrkjeflot, H., & Vrangbæk, K. (2012). Dimensions of accountability in healthcare. In T. Christensen & P. Lægreid (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook to accountability and welfare state reforms in Europe (pp. 105–118). Routledge.</ref>

The 2012 Collaboration Reform sought to improve coordination between municipal primary care and government-controlled secondary care through performance-based incentives, contracts, and agreements. <ref name=":9"></ref>

'''The Results:'''
The Faster Return to Work (FRW) scheme introduced in 2007 reduced waiting times by 12–15 days and shortened sick leave by approximately 8 days on average. Surgical patients in the FRW scheme had 15–23 days shorter sick leave periods compared to those on regular waiting lists. <ref>Christensen, B. J., Lentz, R., Lassen, D. D., & Matiasen, J. R. (2012). Hospital capacity, waiting times, and sick leave duration: An empirical analysis of a Norwegian health policy reform (Working Papers in Economics No. 10/12). Department of Economics, University of Bergen.</ref>

==== Welfare Administration Reform (2005-2007) ====

The 2005 Welfare Administration Reform in Norway merged central government pensions and labor agencies into a single national entity, streamlining social welfare administration. A local partnership agreement was introduced integrating municipal social welfare bodies to enhance service coordination. By 2007, regional pension offices and administrative units were established, shifting certain responsibilities from local to regional levels of employment.  <ref name=":9"></ref><ref name=":10"></ref>

==== Police Sector Reforms (2001 and 2015) ====

The 2001 reform centralized police governance under a central Police Agency, reducing police districts from 54 to 27. The 2015 “Community Police Reform” further consolidated police districts to 12 and local units from 350 to 210, aiming to strengthen emergency response. <ref name=":9"></ref>

==== Regional and Municipal Reforms (2015 and 2020) ==== 

The 2015 Norwegian Municipal Reform aimed to consolidate municipalities from 428 to 356 due to local resistance. The 2020 Regional Reform reduced counties from 19 to 11, though few new responsibilities were transferred. <ref name=":9"></ref><ref>Klausen, J. E., Askim, J., & T. Christensen T. (2021). Local government reform: Compromise through cross-cutting cleavages. Political Studies Review, 19(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929919887649 </ref>

==== Digitalization and Trust Reforms (2020) ==== 

The establishment of the Digitalization Agency in 2020 aimed to accelerate public sector digital transformation and enhance coordination, efficiency, and citizen services. <ref name=":9"></ref>

In 2021, the Trust Reform was introduced, inspired by similar reforms in Denmark and Sweden. It aimed to reduce market-driven governance, enhance collaboration with labor organizations, and increase public sector employee involvement in decision-making. <ref name=":9"></ref><ref name=":10"></ref>

==== Education Reforms (2020) ====

The National Testing and Evaluation System was introduced by the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training in 2020 to measure school and student performance. <ref>Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. (2020). National Tests and Reporting in Education. Retrieved January 12, 2025, from https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/education/innsikt/national-tests/id2006130/ </ref>


'''Completion Reform Impact:''' Dropout rates in upper secondary education (VGO) have declined due to improved evaluation measures and targeted policies. The reform enhances early intervention and personalized learning to support student success. <ref>Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. (2021). Meld. St. 21 (2020–2021) The Completion Reform – With Open Doors to the World and the Future. Retrieved from 01 February 2025, https://www.regjeringen.no</ref>

'''The Results'''

•	Mathematics Performance: Norway ranks 3rd out of 38 OECD countries with a 97.1% variation, among the highest compared to the OECD average. <ref name=":11">OECD. (2022). Norway: Student performance (PISA 2022). Retrieved January 12, 2025, from https://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=NOR&treshold=10&topic=PI </ref>

•	Reading Performance: Norway ranks 11th out of 38 OECD countries, with an 88% variation, also among the largest in OECD assessments. <ref name=":11"></ref>