Political changemakers in Norway: The strategies and political ideas of welfare providers

Abstract

This article contributes to the knowledge of interest groups’ political power. It examines how interest groups shape political debates and decision-making, and what strategies are most successful to this end, through an in-depth case study analysis of the Norwegian transposition of the revised EU policy on public procurement. The case is unique as it illustrates a policy process that changed direction at the eleventh hour, embodies an ideational fight between different views of a good society, and—surprisingly—concludes in favour of non-profit interests. Based on hearing statements, media items, transcripts from the final parliamentary debate on the matter, and interviews with leaders of interest groups, the article demonstrates that the ability to coordinate action and frame and control the public and political debate was a vital power resource for non-profit interests, who did so using a broad range of both direct and indirect strategies. The political ideas advanced through these two strategies were nearly identical; however, the indirect strategy was more personified and strongly emphasised normative conflict.