Martin Eriksson

Regional Policy as Interaction between National Institutions and Regional Science : The Nordic Growth Centre Policies, 1965-1980

As a reaction to emerging regional imbalances, discussions regarding growth centre policy began in the Nordic countries during the latter part of the 1960s. At this time, a working group within the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) provided a policy option based on international theories from urban and agglomeration economics. Within the actual growth centre policies in Norway, Sweden and Finland, central elements from the EFTA concept related to the scale of the centres were, however, not adopted. Instead, growth centres were located to places that had a smaller population than the 30,000 inhabitants recommended by the EFTA concept. This outcome was related to the fact that the EFTA concept was adapted to the existing regional policy institutions. As these institutions were egalitarian and redistributive in character, the Nordic growth centre policies favoured a more dispersed settlement structure than suggested by the EFTA concept.

Why has regionalization failed in northern Sweden?Warum ist die Regionalisierung in Nordschweden fehlgeschlagen?

This article examines and discusses how different theoretical perspectives from historical political economy may contribute to the understanding of why the regionalization attempt in northern Sweden has failed. Since cohesion and adaptation at the intermediate level of government has been a crucial factor behind successful regionalization in Sweden, the article focuses on the county council in Västernorrland. It is argued that the long-standing political differences and disputes between agents from different geographical areas within the county council in Västernorrland was one of the most important causes behind the failed regionalization attempt. In order to elucidate these disputes and thereby to increase the understanding of the failed regionalization process, this article deals with three different theoretical perspectives, which complement and interface with each other. The first perspective focuses on voters and elections and is broadly based on the rational choice political theory. The second perspective deals with the role of the bureaucracy and introduces theories related to governance and control. Finally, the third perspective discusses the role of historical institutions such as spatial policy.ZusammenfassungDieser Artikel untersucht und diskutiert wie verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven der historischen politischen Ökonomie zum Verstehen beitragen könnten, wenn es darum geht, warum die Regionalisierung in Nordschweden fehlgeschlagen ist. Da Zusammenhalt und Anpassung auf dem regionalen Regierungsniveau der ausschlaggebende Faktor für erfolgreiche Regionalisierung in Schweden gewesen sind, konzentriert sich dieser Artikel auf den Provinziallandtag in Västernorrland. Es wird die Auffassung vertreten, daß die seit langem andauernden politischen Differenzen und Meinungsverschiedenheiten zwischen den Vertretern der verschiedenen geographischen Gebiete innerhalb des Provinziallandtages Västernorrland einer der wichtigsten Gründe des missglückten Regionalisierungsversuchs waren. Um diese Meinungsverschiedenheiten zu erklären und dabei das Verständnis für den missglückten Regionalisierungsversuch zu erhöhen, bezieht sich dieser Artikel auf drei verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven, die einander teils ergänzen und teils verbinden. Die erste Perspektive konzentriert sich auf Wähler und Wahlen und stützt sich auf die politische Theorie der rationalen Entscheidung. Die zweite Perspektive bezieht sich auf die Rolle der Bürokratie und introduziert Theorien in Bezug auf Regierungsgewalt und Kontrolle. Schließlich diskutiert die dritte Perspektive die Rolle der historischen Steuerungsmechanismen wie z.B. raumbezogene Politik.

Why has regionalization failed in northern Sweden? Contributions from historical political economy

This article examines and discusses how different theoretical perspectives from historical political economy may contribute to the understanding of why the regionalization attempt in northern Sweden has failed. Since cohesion and adaptation at the intermediate level of government has been a crucial factor behind successful regionalization in Sweden, the article focuses on the county council in Västernorrland. It is argued that the long-standing political differences and disputes between agents from different geographical areas within the county council in Västernorrland was one of the most important causes behind the failed regionalization attempt. In order to elucidate these disputes and thereby to increase the understanding of the failed regionalization process, this article deals with three different theoretical perspectives, which complement and interface with each other. The first perspective focuses on voters and elections and is broadly based on the rational choice political theory. The second perspective deals with the role of the bureaucracy and introduces theories related to governance and control. Finally, the third perspective discusses the role of historical institutions such as spatial policy.ZusammenfassungDieser Artikel untersucht und diskutiert wie verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven der historischen politischen Ökonomie zum Verstehen beitragen könnten, wenn es darum geht, warum die Regionalisierung in Nordschweden fehlgeschlagen ist. Da Zusammenhalt und Anpassung auf dem regionalen Regierungsniveau der ausschlaggebende Faktor für erfolgreiche Regionalisierung in Schweden gewesen sind, konzentriert sich dieser Artikel auf den Provinziallandtag in Västernorrland. Es wird die Auffassung vertreten, daß die seit langem andauernden politischen Differenzen und Meinungsverschiedenheiten zwischen den Vertretern der verschiedenen geographischen Gebiete innerhalb des Provinziallandtages Västernorrland einer der wichtigsten Gründe des missglückten Regionalisierungsversuchs waren. Um diese Meinungsverschiedenheiten zu erklären und dabei das Verständnis für den missglückten Regionalisierungsversuch zu erhöhen, bezieht sich dieser Artikel auf drei verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven, die einander teils ergänzen und teils verbinden. Die erste Perspektive konzentriert sich auf Wähler und Wahlen und stützt sich auf die politische Theorie der rationalen Entscheidung. Die zweite Perspektive bezieht sich auf die Rolle der Bürokratie und introduziert Theorien in Bezug auf Regierungsgewalt und Kontrolle. Schließlich diskutiert die dritte Perspektive die Rolle der historischen Steuerungsmechanismen wie z.B. raumbezogene Politik.

A troubled continuity: Agencies and path dependence in interwar Swedish railway policy

This article deals with the abortive attempt by the Swedish Socialisation Commission to reform the Swedish State Railways (SJ) after World War I. It is argued that the decisive opposition to this proposal from SJ and the Swedish Federation of Industries may be related to the fact that railway policy in Sweden, as in many other countries, included a number of conditions that predisposed these agencies to established policy and budgets. In this regard, the article demonstrates how existing railway policy constrained the involved actors to such an extent that they persisted with the established arrangements, even if that decision implied a continued inability to deal with the financial imbalances that gradually undermined the railway sector.

Beyond industrial policy : State intervention in the Swedish electricity supply industry, 1936–1946

As in other Western European countries, the emergence of a national network for electricity transmission in Sweden was accompanied by a greater degree of State intervention in the electricity supply sector. The aim of this article is to elucidate the institutional background to the decision in 1946 by the Social Democratic government to transfer control of the national grid to the Swedish National Power Board. It is demonstrated that this decision not only was linked to a general industrial policy to promote energy supply. It was also linked to the agricultural and cohesion policies which emerged during the 1940s.

Compensating for the war : railway nationalisation and transport policy change in Sweden, 1939–47

This paper deals with the negotiations and the decision-making process related to the nationalisation of the GDG rail network in Sweden during the period 1939–47. It highlights some of the distinct features of the railway nationalisation process in Sweden. It is noted that the nationalisation of GDG was exposed to factors and contexts that had not been anticipated when Parliament made the policy decision to nationalise the non-State railways in 1939. During World War II, the financial situation of GDG had benefited from new transport conditions which limited road–rail competition. Furthermore, the Social Democrats began to implement a more active transport policy as part of their post-war economic policy. This led to an outcome in 1947 where the GDG shareholders were compensated more generously than they would have been in 1939.

Eliminating the secondary earner bias : Policy lessons from the introduction of partial individual taxation in Sweden in 1971

Abstract This paper examines the different elements included in the Swedish partial individual taxation reform in 1971. The purpose is to identify what policy lessons this reform holds for contemporary tax policy in the European Union member states that currently apply joint tax and benefit provisions. Even though contemporary circumstances have changed in relation to the historical context for Swedish reform, the common strand is that the provisions create both inactivity incentives on the labor market and low income traps for secondary earners. We suggest that a shift to individual taxation should be a part of family and social policies that promote gender equality, and that in turn should be consolidated within a sustainable idea about tax fairness.

The Role of Cities in Nordic Regional Development Policy

‘Modern regional policy,’ the territorially directed policies developed after WWII represent only a subset of the measures a central power may use to direct development in its territory. The larger set of policies we denote ‘Classical regional policy.’ The policies developed in Nordic countries after 1950 could not promote a limited set of cities, although ‘growth center policies’ had been attempted with some success in France and the UK. Instead, tax and subsidy structures, support for investments, and transport subsidies directed towards less populated areas were favored. We argue that this choice was a result of the political processes in the Nordic welfare states. The attempts to implement growth pole strategies in the Nordic countries are discussed and analyzed in a context where unbalanced growth between regions is generic and the alternatives available to a national power in order not to lose control over its territory are made explicit. The attempts to implement a city-based growth pole-oriented regional policy in Norway, Sweden, and Finland are summarized. We find that such an explicit policy mostly is impossible within ‘modern regional policy’, but that the pitfalls of this policy in the 1980s led to the ‘broad regional policy.’ This policy has much in common with the classical policy. However, we also found that such a policy was, to some extent, actually formulated when the location of public facilities was decided.

Why has regionalization failed in northern Sweden

This article examines and discusses how different theoretical perspectives from historical political economy may contribute to the understanding of why the regionalization attempt in northern Sweden has failed. Since cohesion and adaptation at the intermediate level of government has been a crucial factor behind successful regionalization in Sweden, the article focuses on the county council in Västernorrland. It is argued that the long-standing political differences and disputes between agents from different geographical areas within the county council in Västernorrland was one of the most important causes behind the failed regionalization attempt. In order to elucidate these disputes and thereby to increase the understanding of the failed regionalization process, this article deals with three different theoretical perspectives, which complement and interface with each other. The first perspective focuses on voters and elections and is broadly based on the rational choice political theory. The second perspective deals with the role of the bureaucracy and introduces theories related to governance and control. Finally, the third perspective discusses the role of historical institutions such as spatial policy.ZusammenfassungDieser Artikel untersucht und diskutiert wie verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven der historischen politischen Ökonomie zum Verstehen beitragen könnten, wenn es darum geht, warum die Regionalisierung in Nordschweden fehlgeschlagen ist. Da Zusammenhalt und Anpassung auf dem regionalen Regierungsniveau der ausschlaggebende Faktor für erfolgreiche Regionalisierung in Schweden gewesen sind, konzentriert sich dieser Artikel auf den Provinziallandtag in Västernorrland. Es wird die Auffassung vertreten, daß die seit langem andauernden politischen Differenzen und Meinungsverschiedenheiten zwischen den Vertretern der verschiedenen geographischen Gebiete innerhalb des Provinziallandtages Västernorrland einer der wichtigsten Gründe des missglückten Regionalisierungsversuchs waren. Um diese Meinungsverschiedenheiten zu erklären und dabei das Verständnis für den missglückten Regionalisierungsversuch zu erhöhen, bezieht sich dieser Artikel auf drei verschiedene theoretische Perspektiven, die einander teils ergänzen und teils verbinden. Die erste Perspektive konzentriert sich auf Wähler und Wahlen und stützt sich auf die politische Theorie der rationalen Entscheidung. Die zweite Perspektive bezieht sich auf die Rolle der Bürokratie und introduziert Theorien in Bezug auf Regierungsgewalt und Kontrolle. Schließlich diskutiert die dritte Perspektive die Rolle der historischen Steuerungsmechanismen wie z.B. raumbezogene Politik.