ABSTRACT:
This article compares regional policies in Norway to regional policies in Sweden. The article suggests that geographical and geopolitical factors are the main factors that have influenced regional policies. The article points out that the government in Sweden, immediately following WW2, also assumed the role of the active state. However, in contrast to Norway, its policies were disadvantageous to northern Sweden. Later, Swedish governments also implemented policies aimed at strengthening the economic and social conditions in the north. The article demonstrates that even bourgeois governments, who are traditionally ‘less-state-more-market’ oriented than social democratic governments, have used active state measures in their regional policies in Norway. The article points out that geographical and geopolitical factors represent interests that are shared by Norway’s centre and periphery and argues that these factors work as political guidelines that fundamentally influence the continuous use of active state policies by bourgeois governments. It concludes that this influence is stronger than bourgeois governments’ ideological foundations, Keynesian economics and the bureaucracy. Northern Sweden, in comparison, lacks the geographical and geopolitical factors of northern Norway, which explains why fewer active state measures have been used by governments in Sweden than in Norway.
Artikkelen kan leses her:
https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v14.5090https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v14.5090