Neby, Simon; Zannakis, Mathias (2020):
Coordinating wickedness: a comparative analysis of how Norway and Sweden organize for climate policies
Routledge
Please note: This page may contain data in Norwegian that is not translated to English.
Type of publication:
Tidsskriftsartikkel
Link to publication:
Link to review:
https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2020.1821362
Comment:
Tidsskrift
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis
Number of pages:
20
ISSN:
1387-6988
Language of publication:
Engelsk
Country of publication:
Norge, Sverige
NSD-reference:
4710
This page was last updated:
1/9 2021
State units related to this publication:
- Finansdepartementet
- Norges vassdrags- og energidirektorat
- Utenriksdepartementet
- Direktoratet for utviklingssamarbeid
- Samferdselsdepartementet
- Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet
- Direktoratet for byggkvalitet
- Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet
- Statsforvalteren
- Direktoratet for samfunnssikkerhet og beredskap
- Statsforvaltaren i Møre og Romsdal
- Statsforvalteren i Nordland
- Statsforvaltaren i Rogaland
- Klima- og miljødepartementet
- Statens kartverk
- Energidepartementet
- Enova SF
- Norges vassdrags- og energiverk
- Direktoratet for samfunnssikkerhet og beredskap
- Miljødirektoratet
- Miljødirektoratet
- Statsforvalteren i Agder
- Statsforvalteren i Trøndelag
- Statsforvaltaren i Vestland
- Statsforvaltaren i Østfold, Buskerud, Oslo og Akershus
- Statsforvalteren i Innlandet
- Statsforvalteren i Vestfold og Telemark
- Statsforvalteren i Troms og Finnmark
Summary:
Through the lenses of “wicked policy problems” this article compares how Norway and Sweden organize for climate policies and analyzes the coordination challenges encountered by the two countries. Both countries’ policy fields display characteristics of complexity, divergence, fragmentation and uncertainty, indicating a substantial degree of organizational wickedness. The conditions for dealing with such wickedness is affected by contextual factors such as ministerial rule and the petroleum industry’s pivotal role in Norway, enhancing the role of administrative silos; and Swedish traditions to delegate responsibility in the governance system and prohibition of ministerial rule allows a slightly more unified approach to policies.