Strekk i laget for den ‘nordiske modellenʼ?

Internationally, ‘the Nordic model’, with its comprehensive, institutionalized and universal welfare policies, is portrayed as unique; however, it faces challenges, particularly concerning the growth in immigration. Do the Nordic countries respond to these challenges with different solutions, and if so, why do some countries move further away from the basic principles of the Nordic model than others do? We investigate these questions through a comparative case study of Denmark and Norway’s historical development of welfare and integration policies, along with two political processes that resulted in different measures to promote refugees’ labor market integration after the refugee crisis in 2015. While Denmark introduced a particular ‘low wage’ track for refugees, Norway responded to the refugee crisis not by challenging the principle of universalism, but rather by embracing it. Denmark and Norway’s policy directions show clear traits of path dependency, further developing particular welfare and integration policies paths of the past. Copyright © 2021 Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-2936-2021-03-01 Årgang 37, nr. 3-2021, s. 139–156 ISSN online: 1504-2936 VITENSKAPELIG PUBLIKASJON Additionally, the analysis reveals cross-national differences in the relevant actors’ self-interest along with the strength of the principle of universalism. Furtermore, the content of the principle of universalism in Denmark has developed to mostly involve Danish citizens – and exclude refugees and other immigrants. In summary, after the refugee crisis, Denmark drifted further from central principles in the Nordic model while Norway has embraced these same principles.