The Nordic Welfare Model – Still a Supermodel?












            ******************************************************************************************

            * The Nordic Welfare Model – Still a Supermodel?
            ******************************************************************************************
            As European citizens we can count ourselves lucky to live in one of the most stable, devel

            the planet. However with their consistent placing at the top of every index, table and gra
            from quality of living to longest life expectancy, to happiest people, there is one group 
            always reign supreme. The five golden boys of Europe – Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, a

            the Nordic countries as they are also known, can seemingly do no wrong. Thus, a guest lect
            from a distinguished professor on the topic of the Nordic Welfare Model, seemed like a goo
            to learn more about Europe’s goodie-two shoes states, how they have found their success, a

            still a formula reaping rewards in today’s ever-changing society.
            As a couple dozen students gathered into a small classroom in Celetná Street building, we 

            to Professor Stein Kuhnle, teacher of Comparative Social Policy and Welfare State Reform a
            of Bergen. As we learned of his vast experience in giving seminars on the topic around the
            US to Australia, and serving as honorary professor in universities in Denmark and China, i

            there was no better person to shed some light on the topic, and of course an honour to hos
            University. The welfare structure of any state has large consequences of the type of socie
            and so an exploration of the Nordic model began, including not only its characteristics an

            also the challenges it faces, the main points of which I will subsequently discuss.
            The Nordic welfare model has been dubbed with many taglines throughout the decades, from m
            different schools of thought. These include, ‘the middle way’, relating to how this system

            1930s when the clash of ideologies was reigning over Europe, ‘the third way’, ‘the politic
            but perhaps most suitably of all is the label ‘consensual democracy’. As Mr Kuhnle familia
            the characteristics of the Scandinavian system, two of the most dominant themes were that 

            participation and also the importance of universalism. Essentially these socially democrat
            financed by generally high taxation across the board, take a strong role in providing and 
            services to its people. These services are provided to all, ‘universally’, with unlike man

            countries, residency being the sole criteria to be eligible to these services and welfare.
            What may be of interest here is learning of the style of governments of these nations, per
            some unique secret to their success? Mr Kuhnle assured us that there is no magical solutio

            Europe is following, merely guaranteeing a high level of consensus within the multi-party 
            including the opposition, when it comes to decision-making. This importance on consensus m
            can be broad political compromises made on major reforms on issues such as taxes and pensi

            help see long term results and the expectation that reforms will last longer than just the
            of government. There is also a high level of participation of civil society, with a somewh
            relationship between the government, trade unions, and employer associations. This focus o

            policy-making contribute to the sky high scores of the Nordic countries in terms of state 
            in terms of input and output. The high level of participation and consultation also enhanc
            equality seen in these countries whether it be through gender, regions, or income distribu

            When discussion turns to the question of the welfare state in crisis, Mr Kuhnle takes an o
            He presents us a list of books throughout the past decade or so which have argued that thi
            nearing its end, that it is facing a catastrophe, that it fails to address the problems of

            market and changing society. Among this list, one book stands alone, ‘Survival of the Welf
            Stein Kuhnle himself, as he remains positive about the welfare model and the kind of socie
            whilst still conceding that any open economy is vulnerable to global trends and crises. Th

            that these countries face are similar to the rest of Europe, and to be fair, it is difficu
            country on the continent can escape such issues as the Europeanisation of social policy an
            One of the major challenges not only Europe but the world has faced in the past number of 

            global financial crisis. Mr Kuhnle explains that the Nordic countries were not excluded fr
            see a decline for one or two years. However, as seems in their character, they responded w
            implemented several reforms to make their model more sustainable. These include introducin

            increasing individual responsibilities and adapting the pension system in response to the 
            aging demographic composition of the state. Another of these reforms in response to societ
            that of parental leave schemes which has undoubtedly been a factor in the high involvement

            social policy and government. Quotas on shareholders boards also assist in balancing the s
            states graduated from ‘family welfare’ to ‘state welfare.’
            So this all sounds great right? Why can’t we all implement this kind of system and live ha

            after? In response to this question of transferring the model, Mr Kuhnle makes several val
            first of these is history and context. In terms of the Nordic states, the close relationsh
            and society is one with long historical roots, with a largely positive outcome. The same c

            around Europe, and herein lies another factor required with this model, a high level of tr
            institutions. With such high tax rates and thus a massive amount of funding available for 
            maintaining trust that this money will be spent responsibly and fairly is an integral part

            model and perhaps the rest of Europe’s biggest challenge in transferring to it. This level
            to be built up over a long period of time and also necessary is that people see positive r
            the government is acting in their best interests.

            I think I speak for many when I say that increased accountability in government can only b
            and is a positive stride in building trust up between the ordinary people and the people w
            affecting them. If we can move away from this so called ‘institutionalised distrust cultur

            Europe, perhaps we can start to take efficient steps in looking after our societies throug
            consensual and objective governments who can earn our trust. Let that be the ambition as I
            say in the words of Mr Stein Kuhnle, long live the ‘survival of the Welfare State’!