Why social democracy is not a civil society regime in Norway

Journal of Political Ideologies

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 289-301

  Selle, Per ^a   Wollebæk, Dag ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^b Centre for Research Civil Society and Voluntary Sector   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CIVIL SOCIETY; DEMOCRACY; POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY; POLITICAL ORGANIZATION;

NORWAY;

EID: 77957957620     PISSN: 13569317     EISSN: 14699613     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2010.513872     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. T. Janoski, Citizenship and Civil Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998);
2. L. M. Salamon and H. K. Anheier 'Social origins of civil society: explaining the non-profit sector cross-nationally', Voluntas, 9(3) (1998), pp. 213-247.
3. P. Berger and J. Neuhaus, To Empower People: From State to Civil Society (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1996); A. Etzioni, The Spirit of Community (London: Fontana Books, 1995); F. Fukuyama, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity (New York: Free Press, 1995); B. A. Weisbrod, The Voluntary Nonprofit Sector (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1977); A. Wolfe, Whose Keeper? Social Science and Moral Obligation (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1989).
4. D. Baer, 'Voluntary association involvement in comparative perspective', in L. Trägårdh (Ed.) State and Civil Society in Northern Europe: The Swedish Model Reconsidered (New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2007), pp. 67-125;
5. T. Lundström and L. Svedberg, 'The voluntary sector in a social democratic welfare state-the case of Sweden', Journal of Social Policy, 32(2) (2003), pp. 217-238;
6. E. Schofer and Fourcade Gourinchas, The structural contexts of civic engagement: voluntary association membership in comparative perspective', American Sociological Review, 66(6) (2001), pp. 806-828;
7. D. Wollebæk and P. Selle, 'The origins of social capital. Socialisation and institutionalisation approaches compared', Journal of Civil Society, 3(1) (2007), pp. 1-14.
8. Salamon and Anheier, op. cit., Ref. 1.
9. G. Esping-Andersen, Three Political Economies of the Welfare State (Cambridge: Polity, 1990).
10. The other categories are liberal, statist and corporatist.
11. L. Tranvik and P. Selle, 'The rise and fall of popular mass movements: organizational change and globalization-the Norwegian case', Acta Sociologica, 50(1) (2007), pp. 57-70;
12. D. Wollebæk and P. Selle, 'A social democratic model of civil society?', in B. Jobert and B. Kohler-Koch (Eds), Changing Images of Civil Society. From Protest to Governance (Routledge, 2008), pp. 47-69.
13. Formannskapslovene (1837) established the municipalities as political entities. The abolition of the Conventicle Act in 1842 and the Dissent Law (1845) increased religious freedom.
14. S. Kuhnle and P. Selle (Eds), Government and Voluntary Organizations: A Relational Perspective (Aldershot: Avebury, 1992);
15. P. Selle and N. Berven (Eds), Svekket kvinnemakt? De frivillige organisasjonene og velferdsstaten (Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk, 2001).
16. G. Grendstad, P. Selle, K. Strømsnes and Ø. Bortne, Unique Environmentalism: A Comparative Perspective (New York: Springer, 2006).
17. D. Wollebæk and P. Selle, Det nye organisasjonssamfunnet: demokrati i omforming (Bergen: Fagbokforl, 2002a); Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
18. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
19. L. Salamon, H. K. Anheier, R. List, S. Toepler and W. Sokolowski (Eds), Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project, 1999); K. H. Sivesind, H. Lorentzen, P. Selle and D. Wollebæk, The Voluntary Sector in Norway-Composition, Changes, and Causes (Oslo Report/Institute for Social Research, 2002), p. 2.
20. D. H. Smith, 'The rest of the nonprofit sector: grassroots associations as the dark matter ignored in prevailing "flat earth" maps of the sector', Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26(2) (1997), pp. 114-131.
21. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 11.
22. W. A. Maloney and S. Rossteutscher (Eds), Social Capital and Associations in European Democracies (New York: Routledge, 2007).
23. B. Ibsen, 'Foreningslivet i Danmark', in T. P. Boje and B. Ibsen (Eds) Frivillighed og nonprofit i Danmark - omfang, organisation, økonomi og beskæftigelse (København: Socialforskningsinstituttet, 2006).
24. P. Selle, 'Forståinga av sivilsamfunnet. Er det berre opp til augo som ser?' Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, (4) (2008), pp. 613-628.
25. L. Torpe and M. Ferrer-Fons, 'The internal structure of associations', in L. Trägårdh (Ed.) State and Civil ciety in Northern Europe: The Swedish Model Reconsidered (New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2007).
26. T. Skocpol, Diminished Democracy (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003).
27. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
28. Torpe and Ferrer-Fons, op. cit., Ref. 19, p. 119.
29. 57% of the associations surveyed by Torpe and Ferrer-Fons' (2007) are affiliated with regional or national organizations, compared to 74% in Norway (Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7, p. 65).
30. D. Wollebæk, P. Selle and H. Lorentzen, Frivillig innsats. Sosial integrasjon, demokrati og økonomi (Bergen: Fagbokforl, 2000); Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
31. K. Gaskin and J. Davis Smith, A New Civic Europe? A Study of the Extent and Role of Volunteering (London, UK: Volunteer Centre, 1995), p. 33.
32. D. Wollebæk, P. Selle and H. Lorentzen, op. cit., Ref. 24.
33. Salamon and Anheier, op. cit., Ref. 1.
34. J.W. vanDeth and J. R. Montero (Eds), Citizenship and Involvement in EureopanDemocracies: A Comparative Analysis (New York: Routledge, 2007).
35. 9.6% of Norwegians, 4.8% of Swedes and 4.2% of Danes volunteered for a social and humanitarian organization. The average for all countries was 1.9% (Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7, p. 56).
36. Selle, op. cit., Ref. 18.
37. The issues raised by NSM's were early integrated into the political programmes of political parties and public bureaucracies making it difficult for the movements to stay radical and mobilize widely (Grendstad et al. 2006).
38. S. Rokkan, 'Geography, religion and social class: crosscutting cleavages in Norwegian politics', in S. M. Lipset and S. Rokkan (Eds) Party Systems and Voter Alignments (New York: The Free Press, 1967); P. Selle and B. Øymyr, Frivillig organisering og demokrati: det frivillige organisasjonssamfunnet endrar seg 1940-1990 (Oslo: Det Norske Samlaget, 1995).
39. Kuhnle and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 9; Selle, op. cit., Ref. 18.
40. For an analysis of more long term consequence of this, see Tranvik and Selle (2007).
41. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
42. Wollebæk and Selle, ibid.
43. Wollebæk and Selle, ibid., p. 59.
44. D. Wollebæk and P. Selle, 'Generations and organisational change', in P. Dekker and L. Halman (Eds) The Values of Volunteering: Cross-cultural Perspectives (New York: Kluwer, 2003).
45. Wollebæk and Selle, ibid.
46. G. Ødegård, 'Troløs ungdom. Endringer i ungdoms deltagelse i frivillige organisasjoner fra 1992 til 2002', in Å. Strandbu and T. Øia (Eds) Ung i Norge. Skole, fritid og ungdomskultur (Oslo: Cappelen, 2007).
47. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 11.
48. Wollebæk and Selle, ibid.
49. Wollebæk and Selle, ibid.
50. Skocpol, op. cit., Ref. 20.
51. Torpe and Ferrer-Fons, op. cit., Ref. 19.
52. D. Wollebaek, M. Siisiäinen and B. Ibsen, 'Local associations in Norway, Finland and Denmark', in R. Alapuro (Ed.) Nordic Civicness Revisited in the Age Association (European Voluntary Association Network, Forthcoming), Vol. 1.
53. E. Jeppsson-Grassman and L. Svedberg, 'Medborgarskapets gestaltningar: insatser i och utanför föreningslivet', in E. Amnå (Ed.) Civilsamhä llet SOU 1999:84 (Stockholm: Fritzes, 1999); M. Siisiäinen, 'Vuoden 1997 yhdistykset', in S. Hänninen, A. Kangas and M. Siisiäinen (Eds) Mitä yhdistykset välittävät: tutkimuskohteena kolmas sektori (Jyväskylä: Atena, 2003), pp. 11-37; Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 11.
54. We cannot know if organizations have changed over time, or if organizations that have disbanded have differfrom survivors. However, the basic characteristics of organizations are imprinted in them at 'birth' and unlikely to change radically (Hannan and Freeman 1984). Furthermore, the developments we describe are in alignment with what can be learned from other sources (see Selle and Øymyr (1995) and Wollebæk and Selle (2002a, 2004) for more detailed overviews of the historical developments).
55. Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.
56. Individual-collective orientation is measured by relative agreement/disagreement with the followingstatements: (1) Most of the organization's activities are open to members only vs. most of the organization's activities are open to all. (2) The organization works primarily for the benefit of its members vs. the organization works primarily for the benefit of the local community. Agreement with the latter alternatives is interpreted as collective orientation. Conflict-consensus orientation is operationalized by the two statements:
57. (1) It is not important for us to convince others of our values vs. it is very important to us to convince others of our values. (2) We are not in opposition to dominant attitudes in society vs. we are in opposition to dominant attitudes in society. Agreement with the latter alternatives is interpreted as conflict orientation.
58. NOU, Fritid med mening. Statlig støttepolitikk for frivillige barne- og ungdomsorganisasjoner (Oslo: Barne-og kestillingsdepartementet, 2006), p. 13.
59. For an extensive discussion of this, see Wollebæk and Selle, op. cit., Ref. 7.