Skip Navigation

Norway

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 5

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2023-2027

Action Plan 5

  • Number of Commitments: 7
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

Norway has delivered their 2023-2027 action plan.

OpenStories for OGP site

OpenStories

Everyone has a story. Together we have a mission. Explore stories from across the open government community, and submit your own.

Contact

Point of Contact

Maria Egeland Thorsnes Policy Director, Ministry of Digitalisation and Public Governance Maria-Egeland.Thorsnes@dfd.dep.no

Commitments

Resources

  1. Fiscal Openness in Nordic+ Fact Sheet (June 2024)

    2024, Research Product, Web page

  2. Norway Action Plan 2023-2027 (December)

    2023, Action Plan, Web page

  3. Bringing Organized Interest Groups into Decision-Making

    2023, Guidance Document, Web page

  4. Norway – Contrary to Process Letter (August 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  5. Norway Results Report 2019-2022

    2023, IRM Report, Web page

  6. Norway – Procedural Review Resolution by C&S Subcommittee (April 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  7. Norway Results Report 2019-2022 – For Public Comment

    2023, Report Comments, Web page

  8. Norway – Contrary to Process and Status Letter (February 2023)

    2023, Letter, Web page

  9. Norway Co-Creation Brief 2022

    2022, IRM Report, Web page

  10. Norway – Under Review Letter – February 2021

    2021, Letter, Web page

  11. Norway Design Report 2019-2021

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  12. IRM Regional Snapshot: Nordics

    2020, Resource, Web page

  13. Norway Design Report 2019-2021 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  14. Norway Action Plan 2019-2022

    2019, Action Plan, Web page

  15. Norway End-of-Term Report 2016-2018

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  16. Norway – Notification of Late Action Plan (Cohort Shift) – January 2019

    2019, Letter, Web page

  17. Norway End-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  18. Norway Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  19. Norway Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  20. Norway Mid-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  21. Norway Progress Report 2013-2014 – Public Comment Section

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  22. Norway Progress Report 2013-2014 – Comments

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  23. Norway Progress Report 2013-2014 – Public Comment Section

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  24. Norway End-of-Term Report 2014-2015

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  25. Norway National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  26. Norway Second IRM Progress Report 2013-2014

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  27. Norway First IRM Progress Report 2011-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  28. Norway – First National Action Plan – 2012-2013

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  29. Norway Action Plan 2013-2015

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  30. Norway Self Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  31. Case Study (2013): The Norwegian Plain Language Project

    2013, Research Product, Web page

Current Data

The following data is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
0
0
0
Action Plan 3
1
0
2
Action Plan 4
0
0
0

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 1

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.00 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.18 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.93 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.92 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.49 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.96 Sources
Regulatory Governance
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
4.00 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.79 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.40 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.87 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.50 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.24 Sources
Participation
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.96 Sources
Oversight
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.48 Sources

Recent Posts

Beneficial Ownership money
Nigeria · Armenia · Mexico · Latvia · Kenya · United Kingdom · Norway · Slovak Republic

Beneficial Ownership Leadership Group: Impact, Achievements, and Future Directions

Launched in 2019, the Beneficial Ownership Leadership Group (or the Leadership Group) set out to advance global policy toward open beneficial ownership (BO) data, and achieve concrete progress by 2023. This summary examines the group's achievements, lessons learned by Open Ownership and the Open Government Partnership from co-convening the group, and future directions to advance BO reform.

IMG_1850
Norway

Faces of Open Government: Torunn Reksten

Meet Torunn Reksten, a plain language expert at the Language Council of Norway and Vice President of the Plain Language Association International. She has played a pivotal role in championing plain language as a powerful tool for enhancing government communication,…

6203558248_45a438dd6c_o
Sweden · Norway · Finland · Denmark

What’s Next for Open Government in the Nordics

The Nordics top the rankings on good governance, showing strong institutions, rule of law, and high levels of public trust See what they're doing in OGP.

Show More
Open Government Partnership