Reform in welfare and employment administrations in Norway

1. Reform in welfare and employment administrations in Norway Anne Lise Fimreite Potsdam 14.05.07

2. Context : • Norway has one of Europes strongest economies: • Unemployment rate: around 3% (average last 7 years) • High partizipation of women in labour market (also elderly women) • EEA – More european citizens in labour market • High share on disability benefits – also among young people (The Big Worry) • Pension age: 67 • Need for workforce enlargement • Low inflation rate: 2.8% • Petroleum-sector: employ 1% of workforce • Petroleum-fund invested abroad, kept as reserve – couces an artificially strong currency in Norway, affect the mainland production – stagnation in export-industries Tight balance to keep high employment rate, low inflation rate and not using oil-money at home

3. Context - continues: • Social policy-regime: Since 1992: • ”Work shall be the first option” • The so-called work-line as guideline. • Introduced by a Labour government • Soft and hard measures tried, but not yet cuts in benifits

4. Context - continues Traditional division of labour in this area: • National Social Insurance Directorate • National Employment Directorate (both with regional and local branches) • Local government responisible for social assistance services (431 municipalities) • This division created ”not-my-table-problems” and grey-zones.

5. A law/reform passed the Parliament in 2005: • Amalgamated the two national directorates into one huge Welfare and employment directorate (called NAV) • Made it compulsary for the local branches of the welfare and employment administration/services to coordinate their activities with the local goverment social services – mandatory one-stop-shop in every municipalities • 431 municipalities make contracts with the NAV-directorate – local organizational model is however free of choice.

6. Goals behind the reform: • More people in activity/in job • Stop the ”not-my-table-mentallity” by enabling for better coordination horizontally as well as vertically • More service-orientation – one-stop-shop • More effectiveness via more welfare for less money? (not declared as a goal but...)

7. The reform: • A new public management reform • Effectivness • Service-orientation • Whole-of-government reform • Holistic approach – regarded as a measure against fragmentation in this field of public administartion

8. But also; the most extensive welfare reform in Norway – ever: • Implemented gradually from 2006-2010 • Includes 1/3 of the budget of the state • 18 000 employees involved • Everyday:700 000 Norwegian are using the services of NAV (and that excludes retirement pensions, maternity leave-pensions, child support etc aka pensions that come automatically)

9. The reform: • Effects both content of the welfare politic and governance of the welfare area • Was desided without any political controversies and public debate • The present design is against the advices from the appointed expert commission – total amalgamation or none.

10. Why?Using a transformative perspective to understand the process: • Instrumental aspects: • Local self goverment important in Norway – political impossible to take social assistance/services away from municipalities • Consistence in political argumentation over time – work-line • Total amalgamation not that neccesary; only 15% use more than one service at a time, most focus on the large group which uses one service at a time

11. Why - continues • Cultural aspects: • Expert commissions in Norway have open mandates, but government decides • Awarness around the fact that different actors have different rational in the process

12. Why - continues • Environmental aspects: • Interest groups involved • Post-NPM: holistic perspective/idea – the reform a symbol regarding this

13. Challenges: • Horisontal coordination – both at central and local level • Vertical coordination – at central level and in the relationship between central and local government • Political control vs professional autonomy • Integrating three cultures to one • Norwegian welfare-model: based on the principle thatcentral government decides while local goverments implement is under pressure in the NAV-model, applied also to other sectors? • Unintended concequences everywhere – positive/negative – hereunder for example ICT and production of statistics • Other huge public sector reforms at the same time – totally uncoordinated Political attention crucial!

14. Evaluation program • Organized under the National Research Council but financed by the Ministry of Employment and Integration • More than 5 million Euro over 6 years • Coordinated by UoB/The Rokkan centre, but several other institutions are also involved

15. Evaluation program - continues • Premiss: • Welfare reform • Public administration reform/governance reform: • The content of politics are effected by the way the apparatues in a policy area is organised, effects: • Relations • Attention • Measures • Criteria • Concequences • Process – the creation of NAV • Effects of NAV

16. Seven projects – kick off June 2007: • Welfare model, governance system and NAV • The local NAV-office • Local implementation • A new profession? • The work-line – more people in activity? • The clients experiences • Productivity – more welfare for money? 1-4:process-focus; 5-7:effect-focus