The EEA Agreement and Norway's other agreements with the ...

The EEA Agreement and Norway’s other agreements with the EU

Meld. St. 5 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper)

Translation from the Norwegian. For information only.

Contents

1 Introduction ................................. 51.1 Purpose and scope ........................ 51.2 Norway’s cooperation with

the EU ............................................. 61.3 The content of the White Paper .. 8

2 Norway’s options within the framework of its agreements with the EU ........... 9

2.1 Introduction .................................... 92.2 Early involvement in

the development of policy and legislation ............................... 9

2.3 Management of the EEA Agreement ...................... 11

2.3.1 Assessment of EEA relevance ..... 122.3.2 Possible adaptations when

incorporating new legal acts into the EEA Agreement ...................... 16

2.3.3 Bodies with powers to make decisions that are binding on authorities, companies or individuals ....................................... 17

2.3.4 The options available when implementing EEA legislation in Norway ...................................... 19

2.3.5 The surveillance and court system: Norway’s approach .......... 22

2.3.6 Article 102 procedures .................. 242.4 Management of agreements

in the area of justice and home affairs ................................... 25

2.4.1 The Schengen cooperation .......... 262.4.2 Development of cooperation

in other justice and home affairs areas .................................... 28

2.5 Cooperation on foreign and security policy ................................ 30

2.5.1 Opportunities for Norwegian involvement .................................... 30

2.5.2 Norway’s participation in crisis management and military capacity building ........................... 33

2.5.3 Dialogue and cooperation ............ 332.6 Summary of actions the

Government intends to take ......... 34

3 Key priorities in Norway’s European policy ......................... 36

3.1 Norwegian companies and value creation in the internal market .... 36

3.2 Key policy areas ............................. 373.2.1 Labour relations and social

welfare ............................................ 373.2.2 Energy ............................................. 403.2.3 The environment, climate

change and food safety .................. 423.2.4 Cooperation on research

and education ................................. 443.2.5 Rural and regional policy .............. 463.2.6 Market access for Norwegian

seafood ........................................... 483.3 The Nordic countries and

Europe ............................................ 483.4 Summary of actions the

Government intends to take .......... 49

4 Key instruments of Norway’s European policy .......................... 51

4.1 Information and knowledge ......... 514.2 Transparency and inclusion ......... 534.3 EU/EEA expertise in the public

administration ................................ 534.4 Close coordination of

EU/EEA-related work in the public administration .............. 54

4.5 Mutual responsibility for managing the EEA Agreement .... 55

4.6 Summary of actions the Government intends to take .......... 56

The EEA Agreement and Norway’s other agreements with the EU

Meld. St. 5 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper)

Recommendations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of 12 October 2012, approved by the Council of State on the same day.

(Government Stoltenberg II)

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose and scope

The Norwegian Government’s European policy isbased on the Agreement on the European Eco-nomic Area (the EEA Agreement) and Norway’sother agreements with the EU. The EEA Agree-ment links Norway to the EU’s internal marketand forms the foundation of Norway’s Europeanpolicy. This White Paper will therefore not discussother forms of association with the EU.

As set out in the Government’s policy plat-form, the Government will pursue an active Euro-pean policy and will work proactively to safeguardNorwegian interests vis-à-vis the EU.

It is important for Norway that the EEA coop-eration is effective, flexible and that it ensuresmutual responsibility. Here, the word “effective” isused to mean that the EEA Agreement shouldensure equal treatment and predictability for Nor-wegian actors, as well as the greatest possibledegree of Norwegian participation in EU pro-cesses. The word “flexible” is used to mean thatdue account should be taken of the varying needs

and interests of the parties to the Agreement inthe ongoing EEA cooperation. The expression“mutual responsibility” is used to mean that bothparties should follow up the Agreement in a cor-rect and responsible way that secures the qualityand efficiency of the cooperation.

Generally speaking, Norway benefits from thedevelopment of common rules and standards forthe European market. In cases where the develop-ment of legislation is not compatible with Norwe-gian interests, the Government will use the oppor-tunities and available options provided by theAgreement to safeguard Norway’s interests.

In this White Paper, the expression “availableoptions” is used to describe the opportunities theGovernment has to influence how Norwegiancompanies and Norwegian citizens are affected bythe EEA Agreement and other aspects of Nor-way’s cooperation with the EU. The expression istherefore used to describe both the opportunitiesthe Norwegian authorities have to influence thecontent of EU legislation, and how, and to whatextent, the legislation should be implemented at

6 Meld. St. 5 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper) 2012–2013The EEA Agreement and Norway’s other agreements with the EU

the national level. An awareness of the availableoptions that exist at any given time is essential forthe sound management of Norway’s agreementswith the EU.

The main purpose of this White Paper is topromote the sound management of Norway’sagreements with the EU. It is crucial to ensure theproper follow-up of the agreements, including thebest possible use of the options available to Nor-way. This is essential not least in the light of thefar-reaching changes the EU has undergone inrecent years, for example enlargements to includea number of new member states, treaty reforms,new modes of governance, and most recentlychanges as a result of the financial crisis inEurope.

In its European policy, the Government willfocus its main efforts on areas of particular impor-tance to Norway. In following up Norway’s agree-ments with the EU, the Government will promoteopenness and awareness-raising, and will give pri-ority to enhancing knowledge and ensuring soundmanagement.

At the beginning of 2010, the Governmentappointed a broad-based expert committee, theEEA Review Committee, to review Norway’sexperience of the EEA Agreement and its otheragreements with the EU. The aim was to obtainthe best possible body of knowledge on Norway’sagreements and cooperation arrangements withthe EU. The committee, chaired by ProfessorFredrik Sejersted, presented its report on 17 Janu-ary 2012 (Official Norwegian Report NOU 2012: 2Outside and Inside: Norway’s agreements with theEuropean Union). The report is far-reaching andthorough. It contributes to the establishment of asound body of knowledge as a basis for furtherdeveloping Norway’s European policy. Thereport’s main conclusions, final remarks and sum-maries of consultative comments are reproducedin the Appendix of this White Paper (in the Nor-wegian version only). Other organisations andactors have also helped to foster a broad debateby providing their own analyses of Norway’s linksto the EU and possible alternatives to today’s formof association. These analyses are also discussedin the Appendix.

1.2 Norway’s cooperation with the EU

Norway and the EEA Agreement

When, in 1992, the required three-quarters major-ity of members of the Storting (Norwegian parlia-ment) agreed to enter into the EEA Agreement, it

was with a view to ensuring that Norway would beable to participate in the internal market that wasbeing developed in the European Community(EC). In the view of the Storting, safeguardingNorwegian companies’ equal access to the West-ern European market was important for the Nor-wegian economy and value creation. The EEAAgreement established a dynamic and homoge-nous economic area that ensured this.

There are close links between Norway and theEU countries due to historical and cultural ties,geographical proximity, common values and ashared commitment to the rule of law and humanrights. Norway has therefore also chosen todevelop its cooperation and agreements with theEU in areas outside the framework of the EEAAgreement. This applies to judicial and policecooperation, questions relating to asylum andimmigration policy, and foreign policy and secu-rity policy issues. To a great extent, Norway hastaken the initiative to develop and strengthen itscooperation with the EU in these areas. Succes-sive Norwegian governments have been guidedby a common recognition of the need for transna-tional cooperation in order to address transna-tional problems, and have sought to furtherdevelop Norway’s cooperation with the EU inthese areas, with broad support in the Storting.

The EEA Agreement has been in force foralmost 19 years, and this period has mostly beenone of stability and economic growth for Norway.The Agreement has remained an effective frame-work for economic relations between the coun-tries in the EEA, at a time when there have beensubstantial changes in the EU cooperation, partic-ularly the enlargements to include 12 new mem-ber states and changes to the founding treaties.

Europe is now dealing with the repercussionsof the crisis that hit the global economy in 2008.Most European countries have felt the economiceffects of the crisis, many have also been affectedsocially and politically. So far Norway has beenspared the worst of the crisis in Europe. However,developments in the EU and in the countries inthe EEA have important implications for Norwe-gian interests. It has therefore been natural forNorway to help reduce the effects of the currentcrises in European countries, for example byincreasing its contribution to IMF funding sche-mes and by offering bilateral loans to neighbou-ring countries. The funding Norway providesunder the EEA and Norway Grants and the contri-bution it makes as a long-term and reliable sup-plier of energy also have a positive impact ondevelopments in Europe.

2012–2013 Meld. St. 5 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper) 7The EEA Agreement and Norway’s other agreements with the EU

At a time when the EU and many of the EUcountries are experiencing their worst crisis formany years, the internal market has proved to bea robust framework for trade and economic rela-tions between the countries in the EEA. The cur-rent problems facing the EU and EU countrieshave not led to the destabilisation or break-up ofthe internal market.

The EEA, the EU and the Nordic countries

The EEA Agreement links the Nordic countriestogether in a common internal market. Withinthis framework, integration between the Nordiccountries has been consolidated and furtherdeveloped in important areas such as the reduc-tion and removal of border barriers, labour mobil-ity, welfare and employment, the environment,and foreign and security policy.

Today Nordic cooperation provides an impor-tant framework for coordinating Nordic efforts

vis-à-vis the EU. At the same time, Nordic policyhas become an increasingly important element ofEuropean policy for Norway and the other Nordiccountries. Nordic cooperation has thus become anintegral part of the European cooperation.

Cooperation between the Nordic countries onforeign and security policy has also been consider-ably strengthened, within the framework of thecountries’ respective memberships of the EU andNATO. Cooperation on defence policy hasentered a dynamic phase, as illustrated by theestablishment of the Nordic Battle Group and theNordic declaration of solidarity, in which the coun-tries state their willingness to assist one anotherin the event of natural or man-made disasters,cyber attacks or terrorist attacks.

Security policy and foreign policy cooperationbetween the Nordic countries is part of a newtrend towards closer regional cooperation inEurope. The EU and key EU countries are show-ing increasing interest in the High North. Both in

Figure 1.1 Map of the EU/EEA


the EU and NATO there is a growing interest inregional cooperation that includes both memberstates and non-member states. In the Nordic coun-tries and in northern Europe this is illustrated notleast by the fact that all the Nordic countries andthe EU meet in the key, sub-regional cooperationforums: the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, theCouncil of Baltic Sea States, the Arctic Counciland the Northern Dimension. Due to its historyand broad set of common values, the Nordic coop-eration is particularly well placed to play a role infurther developing regional cooperation of thiskind within a broader European framework.

1.3 The content of the White Paper

Chapter 2 provides a review of developments inthe EU in recent years. Chapter 3 deals with Nor-way’s cooperation with the EU, including the EEAcooperation, the Schengen Agreement/otheragreements in the area of justice and home affairs,and foreign and security policy. Chapter 4 is con-cerned with goals, principles and the implementa-

tion of the Government’s European policy, as setout in the Government’s policy platform andReport No. 23 (2005–2006) to the Storting on theimplementation of European policy. Chapter 5 dis-cusses the Government’s assessments of Nor-way’s opportunities and available options in themanagement of its agreements with the EU in theareas of the EEA, justice and home affairs and for-eign and security policy, respectively. Chapter 6covers the Government’s assessment of certainpolicy areas that will be given particular attentionin Norway’s cooperation with the EU in the timeahead, both broad cross-cutting areas and morespecific ones. Chapter 7 discusses how EU andEEA expertise can be enhanced in the publicadministration and in society as a whole, as well asways of involving relevant stakeholders moreclosely in the development of European policy.Chapter 8 contains conclusions and final remarks.

The English version of the White Paper onlyincludes chapter 1, chapter 5 (here chapter 2),chapter 6 (here chapter 3) and chapter 7 (herechapter 4).


2 Norway’s options within the framework of its agreements with the EU

2.1 Introduction

The Government will pursue an active Europeanpolicy and will focus on safeguarding Norwegianinterests vis-à-vis the EU and EU member states.The Government’s European policy is based onthe Agreement on the European Economic Area(the EEA Agreement) and Norway’s other agree-ments with the EU.

The Government intends to make use of theoptions that are available within the establishedframework in its management of the agreements.This involves both making use of the opportuni-ties Norway has to influence the development ofEEA legislation and Schengen rules, and utilisingthe options that are available as EEA legislation isimplemented in Norwegian law. Knowledge andawareness of the options that are available at anygiven time is essential for the sound managementof Norway’s agreements with the EU.

This chapter discusses how we can make useof these opportunities in the management of theagreements on the EEA and in the fields of justiceand home affairs and foreign and security policy.This is particularly important in the light of thefar-reaching changes the EU has undergone inrecent years.

2.2 Early involvement in the development of policy and legislation

Within the framework of Norway’s agreementswith the EU, Norway has greatest opportunity toparticipate in the development of EU policy andlegislation at an early stage of the legislative pro-cess, i.e. during the preparation of Commissionproposals and during preliminary discussions inthe Council of the EU (the Council) and the Euro-pean Parliament. There is less opportunity forNorway to have an influence towards the end ofthe legislative process in the EU, particularly asregards EEA legislation.

Norway participates more closely in the devel-opment of EU policy and legislation under theSchengen cooperation. The associated countriesare involved in Council discussions through theMixed Committee. Norway needs to provide inputas early as possible in the process in this area too,so that its views can be taken into account beforethe framework for the decision-making processhas been established.

It is important to ensure early involvement inlegislative processes so that we can carry out apreliminary assessment of EEA relevance whenthe EU is preparing new legislation. Moreover, bybeing actively involved at an early stage we candevelop insight that will help us to clarify andmake use of the options that are available as weimplement and apply the legislation in Norway.

In some respects the development of EU policyand legislation has changed considerably over thepast ten years. Previously, legislation tended to dealwith specific areas, and was based to a large extenton Commission proposals. Now there has been amove towards broad cross-sectoral policies and leg-islation, developed on the basis of extensive discus-sions in the Council and the European Parliament.One example is the EU climate and energy pack-age, which was adopted in 2009. Another importantfeature is the development of broad framework leg-islation that establishes goals and general princi-ples and leaves the further development andadministration of the legislation to committees orother bodies under the Commission. This type ofsystem is being used in a number of areas. A thirdkey feature is that the decision-making process isnow much quicker. In the past, new legislation usu-ally required two rounds of discussions in the Euro-pean Parliament and the Council, but now oneround of discussions is sufficient in most cases.

All in all, it has become more difficult toensure that Norwegian interests are safeguardedwhen new legislation is being developed in theEU. It is therefore crucial for Norway to establishits national positions at an early stage in the legis-lative process and to follow all stages of the pro-


cess closely from the preparatory or decision-shaping phase to the adoption of legislation. Thismay be followed by the development of commonrules for implementing the legislation (comitologyprocedures) and amendments to the legislation.The capacity of the Norwegian authorities to par-ticipate actively in such processes is limited, andfor this reason focus will be on major legislativeand policy developments. However, it is also nec-essary to follow up less crucial developments, forexample technical regulations, closely enough toensure that we have the necessary information,can assess any proposed amendments and can

ensure that legislation is implemented correctly inNorwegian law.

The Norwegian public administration is gene-rally well informed about legislation that is beingdeveloped in the EU. In addition, it is importantthat the Norwegian authorities are in a position tomake rapid assessments of the consequences forNorway of any proposed legislation and are ableto communicate their positions clearly in dialoguewith representatives of EU institutions and EUmember countries. This requires firm commit-ment and active involvement at the political levelin the relevant ministries.

Box 2.1 Consumer Rights Directive

In 2008 the Commission put forward a proposalfor a new consumer rights directive. This wasintended to replace four directives that set mini-mum standards for the protection of consumerswith a new common directive, with a view toachieving full harmonisation of EU consumerlaw. The original proposal would have weakenedconsumer protection in Norway in several ways.The Norwegian Government established itsposition at an early stage, and had clear aims: toachieve a directive setting out minimum stan-dards, and to ensure that overall consumer pro-tection in Norway was not weakened. Policyguidelines for Norway’s efforts vis-à-vis the EUwere issued. Norway was working actively onthis matter even before the Commission put for-ward its proposal. A coordination group was setup in the public administration, and maintainedclose contact with consumer and businessorganisations. Documents supporting Norway’sarguments were drawn up. The EEA EFTAstates also presented their views on the pro-posed directive in the form of an EEA EFTAComment. The senior political staff of the rele-vant ministries played an active part in the pro-cess vis-à-vis the EU. They also held meetingswith their Nordic colleagues. A Norwegian con-sumer rights expert was seconded to the unit ofthe Commission that was dealing with the pro-posed legislation.

The European Parliament presented a draftreport on the proposed consumer rights direc-tive in summer 2010 containing extensiveamendments to the Commission’s proposal.Norway held a consultation process at thisstage, and a new EEA EFTA Comment was

issued. Following extensive discussions theCouncil agreed on a general approach in Janu-ary 2011, and the Consumer Rights Directivewas formally adopted in October 2011 followingtrilogue negotiations between the Council, theEuropean Parliament and the Commission. InNorway’s view, the Consumer Rights Directiveas adopted is significantly better than the origi-nal proposal. Experience shows that that abroad-based national process at an early stageinvolving relevant stakeholders, combined withclear standpoints, is crucial if Norway is to exertan influence on a legislative process. This wasthe rationale behind Norway’s targeted effort.Norwegian analyses and views developed at anearly stage of the process served as a basis forcontacts with stakeholders in the EU who hadnot yet established clear positions. It was alsocrucial to coordinate efforts and share informa-tion at national level in order to keep ourselvesinformed about progress within the EU. It wasparticularly important to submit specific sugges-tions and not just general comments to the Euro-pean Parliament. During a trilogue, there can beopportunities to put forward concrete proposalsthat can help in reaching a compromise. At theadministrative level, we established contactswith the support staff of relevant members ofthe European Parliament and the secretariat ofthe parliamentary committee. We found that ourlong-term involvement and participation in theprocess enhanced Norway’s credibility and ouraccess to relevant actors in the EU system.Some points in the final directive were changedin line with Norway’s views and proposals.


It is also important to involve stakeholders incivil society and the business sector in Norway informulating Norwegian positions, so that Norwe-gian interests can be more clearly identified. Thiswill enhance Norway’s efforts in this area.

Sharing experience and results in specificareas at the appropriate time enables Norway as anon-member state to have its voice heard whennew policies and legislation are being developed.Norway’s targeted, long-term lobbying efforts vis-à-vis EU institutions have enhanced its credibilityand provide a solid basis for Norway to have aninfluence.

Norway should seek to play an active role in EUlegislative processes in all areas that have signifi-cance for Norway. In many cases Norway’s inputwill be of interest to the EU. As a rule it will be eas-ier to gain acceptance for Norway’s views if theseare also perceived as useful and relevant to othercountries. It is important that Norway seeks to beinvolved as early as possible in EU processes, parti-cularly in matters of importance to Norway. It isusually more effective to seek to persuade EUbodies to adjust proposed EU legislation before it isadopted than to negotiate adaptations to legal acts

when they are to be incorporated into the EEAAgreement. The European Parliament and theCouncil are showing an increasing tendency tomake amendments to the Commission proposalsfor directives and regulations. Therefore it isimportant for Norway to focus not only on theCommission’s work but also on the subsequentprocesses in the Parliament and Council.

Chapter 7 discusses ways in which knowledgeof the EU/EEA in the public administration and insociety as a whole can be strengthened, and howthe level of stakeholder involvement can be incre-ased.

2.3 Management of the EEA Agreement

As described above, Norway and the other EEAEFTA states have the opportunity to participate inthe development of EU legislation during the pre-paratory stage. However, for the EFTA states themore formal procedures do not begin until afterthe EU has adopted a legal act in an area within thescope of the EEA Agreement. These procedures

Box 2.2 The CCS Directive

Directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storageof carbon dioxide (the CCS Directive) was for-mally adopted by the EU in April 2009 and ispart of the EU climate and energy package. Itestablishes a legal framework for environmen-tally safe geological storage of CO2, includingrequirements for exploration and storage per-mits, the composition of the CO2 stream, moni-toring and reporting. The directive is largelybased on rules that had been established in 2007under multilateral agreements on the marineenvironment by which Norway is bound (theOSPAR Convention, which applies to the North-East Atlantic, and the global London Protocol).Norway played a leading role in discussions onCCS in OSPAR and other international forumsfrom 2002 onwards. Norway’s input was basedon experience of CO2 storage on the Sleipnerfield in the North Sea since 1996. The Norwe-gian authorities, including the Climate and Pol-lution Agency, prepared expert input, led work-ing groups, and put forward proposals, often incooperation with the UK, the Netherlands andFrance. The Norwegian authorities and Norwe-

gian experts were also actively involved in thepreparation of the Special Report on CarbonDioxide Capture and Storage by the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),which was published in 2005. These processesprovided a starting point for drawing up the EUdirective, which incorporates a number of thesame principles. Norway continued to play anactive role when discussions started in the EUin 2006, and was at an early stage invited to takepart in the working group set up by the EUCommission to draw up the legislation. In addi-tion to representatives of the Climate and Pollu-tion Agency, Norwegian experts from institu-tions such as SINTEF and DNV were involved.Bellona also played an important advocacy rolein the process. In cooperation with EU memberstates such as the UK and the Netherlands, andkey members of the European Parliament, thealliance of which Norway was a part succeededin gaining the necessary majority for integratingCCS into the EU’s climate policy, and thus forthe CCS Directive.


can be divided into a number of different phases:determining whether the act is EEA relevant,establishing whether adaptations are needed toincorporate an act into the EEA Agreement, thedecision-making process and national implementa-tion. The Government will work actively to ensuresound management of the EEA Agreement in allthese phases and to participate as effectively aspossible during the preparatory stage of the devel-opment of EU policy and legislation.

2.3.1 Assessment of EEA relevance

With the development of the EU cooperation inrecent years, the limits for what is covered by theEEA Agreement have become less clear than theywere in the past. This is discussed in more detailin Chapter 2. EU legislation in areas within thescope of the EEA Agreement is dynamic. It is con-stantly being developed to take account of chang-ing needs, framework conditions and policy objec-tives. EEA legislation must be developed corre-spondingly in order to ensure the homogeneity oflegislation throughout the EEA, as set out in Arti-cle 102 of the EEA Agreement.

The EEA Joint Committee is responsible forassessing whether new EU acts governing areaswithin the scope of the EEA Agreement should beincorporated into the Agreement. This is a two-stage process. The first stage is to clarify whetherthe legislation is EEA relevant, i.e. whether it fallswithin the substantive and geographical scope ofthe EEA Agreement, as defined in the mainAgreement and its protocols and annexes. EEArelevance is assessed on the basis of objective andlegal criteria. However, the criteria set out in theAgreement are not precise, and assessments aretherefore to a certain extent discretionary. If anact is found to be EEA relevant, the next step is toclarify whether it can be incorporated into theEEA Agreement as it is or whether it requiresadaptations. A decision concerning this is takenon the basis of expert input and political and insti-tutional considerations.

If an act is only partly EEA relevant, thoseparts that are not EEA relevant are removedthrough an adaptation text in the Joint CommitteeDecision. Thus, only those parts of the act that areEEA relevant will be incorporated into the EEAAgreement.

The substantive scope of the EEA Agreement

The substantive scope of the EEA Agreementcan be inferred from its Article 1, which states

that the aim of the Agreement is to create ahomogeneous European Economic Area. Inorder to achieve this goal, the cooperation is toentail the free movement of goods, persons, ser-vices and capital, the setting up of a systemensuring that competition is not distorted andthat competition rules are equally respected, andcloser cooperation in other fields, such asresearch and development, the environment,education and social policy. Assessment of theEEA relevance of legal acts requires specific con-sideration of which areas fall partly or whollyoutside the scope of the EEA Agreement.

In assessing whether legal acts fall withinthe substantive scope of the EEA Agreement,the term EEA relevance may be used in morethan one sense. In the narrowest sense, legalacts are EEA relevant if their substance meansthat they must be incorporated into the EEAAgreement. This applies to legislation relatingto one of the four freedoms or in fields relevantto the implementation of the four freedoms,which must also be included to ensure that com-petition can take place on near equal terms. The

Box 2.3 Security of energy supply

Proposition No. 100 (1991–92) to the Stortingon consent to ratification of the EEA Agree-ment made it clear that the EEA Agreementwas not to encompass the development of acommon energy policy. The EC’s directives onoil stocks, which were designed to address theeffects of a supply crisis during peacetime,were specifically discussed during the negotia-tions, and it was agreed that they were not tobe part of the EEA Agreement. In accordancewith this, the position of the EEA EFTA Stateshas been that the EEA Agreement does notcover security of energy supply. In the light ofthis, Norway did not consider Council Direc-tive 2004/67/EC on security of natural gassupply or Council Directive 2006/67/EC onthe maintenance of minimum stocks of crudeoil and/or petroleum products to be EEA rele-vant. However, if the substance of an act isconsidered to affect the functioning of theinternal market, a different decision may bereached. For example, Directive 2005/89/ECon the security of electricity supply was incor-porated into the EEA Agreement because ofits clear impact on the internal market.


areas to which this applies are specified in PartsII–V of the EEA Agreement. These acts can besaid to affect the functioning of the internalmarket by establishing rules of significance forfree movement and competition across nationalborders. If such acts are not incorporated intothe Agreement, the procedure set out in Article102 may be applied, and the relevant part of theAgreement may be suspended. This procedureis described in more detail in Chapter 5.3.6.

In its broadest sense the term EEA rele-vance also encompasses activities (programmesand projects) in areas outside the four freed-oms, in the fields set out in Part VI, Article 78,of the EEA Agreement. These fields are descri-bed in more detail in Chapter 3.1.1. Under theAgreement, the parties have undertaken tostrengthen and broaden cooperation in thesefields. This extends beyond the cooperationnecessary to ensure the proper functioning ofthe internal market. In these cases, legal actsare only incorporated into the EEA Agreementif the EEA EFTA states identify a common inter-est in aligning themselves with EU cooperationin a specific field. A decision not to incorporatelegal acts in these fields into the EEA Agree-ment will not trigger application of an Article102 procedure.

An assessment of whether a legal act falls wit-hin the substantive scope of the EEA Agreementis based on an overall consideration of the provisi-ons and intentions of the Agreement, particularlyincluding the following factors: – Whether the legal act deals with one or more of

the fields specified in the main Agreement andits protocols and annexes.

– Whether it sets out rules of importance for thefree movement of goods, persons, services andcapital and free competition across nationalborders, and whether it imposes obligations onmarket actors that will have economic conse-quences.

– The purpose of the act, i.e. whether it applies tofields that are relevant for the functioning ofthe internal market, or whether its purpose iscooperation beyond this.

– Whether the act amends, follows up or supple-ments legislation that has already been incor-porated into the EEA Agreement, and whetherrelated legislation has been incorporated intothe EEA Agreement.

– The conditions set by the Storting for Nor-way’s adoption of the EEA Agreement in 1993,as described in Proposition No. 100 (1991–92)to the Storting.

It may also be relevant to consider the legal basisof the act. This may give an indication of its pur-pose, as well as in certain cases its impact on theinternal market. This applies for example in caseswhere acts are adopted under Article 114 of theTreaty on the Functioning of the European Unionon the internal market.

The geographical scope of the EEA Agreement

The geographical scope of the EEA Agreement isset out in Article 126. The EEA Agreement appliesto the territory of the Kingdom of Norway, but notto Svalbard. Norway’s position is that the term ter-ritory is to be understood in accordance withestablished practice in international law. Thismeans that the EEA Agreement applies to Norwe-gian land territory, internal waters and territorialwaters, but not to the exclusive economic zone,the continental shelf or the high seas. However,the geographical scope of the EEA Agreement isnot considered to be a legal obstacle if Norway,after an assessment of a particular matter, decidesto assume specific EEA obligations outside its ter-ritory.

If there is a strong thematic or economic linkbetween parts of a specific activity that take placewithin Norway’s territory and parts that takeplace outside Norway’s territory, Norway may incertain situations choose to incorporate legal actswhose scope encompasses the exclusive eco-nomic zone or the continental shelf into the EEAAgreement. In such cases Norway has made it acondition that expanding the geographical appli-cability of certain acts does not change the princi-ple on which interpretation of the geographicalscope of the EEA Agreement is based. In othercases Norway can take a decision at national levelto also apply rules outside its territory that anEEA act has established within its territory.

Differences between cooperation outside the four freedoms and legislation relating to the four freedoms

EU legislation relating to the four freedoms is reg-ulated by the Parts II–V of the EEA Agreement,and is incorporated into one of its annexes. Coop-eration in areas outside the four freedoms doesnot in principle entail a legal obligation to cooper-ate within the framework of the EEA Agreement,and is regulated by Part VI of the EEA Agree-ment. Legal acts in these areas are normally incor-porated into Protocol 31 to the Agreement oncooperation in specific fields outside the four free-doms. If a legal act is incorporated into Protocol


31, this creates the same type of legal obligationas incorporation into an annex, in that Norway isthen obliged under international law to complywith the provisions of the act. Article 7 of the EEAAgreement, which deals with states’ obligation tomake acts part of their internal legal order, alsoapplies to acts that are incorporated into Protocol31. There are, however, several differencesbetween incorporation of an act into an annex andincorporation into Protocol 31, the most importantof which are:

Precedence: When an act is incorporated intoan annex it can normally be assumed that laterlegislation relating to the same field will also beincorporated into the Agreement. This must bethe basic assumption even though there is a for-mal requirement for a new, independent assess-ment of any new acts relating to the same field,including amendments, before a decision ismade on their EEA relevance. The incorpora-tion of an act into Protocol 31 does not set thesame precedent, as in these cases there is inprinciple no legal obligation to cooperate withinthe framework of the EEA Agreement. The par-ties therefore have more freedom to assesswhether they wish to develop the cooperationfurther.

Horizontal adaptations: Protocol 1 to the EEAAgreement, which deals with horizontal adapta-tions, including the distribution in the EFTA pillarof tasks that are carried out by the Commission inthe EU pillar, applies only to acts listed in theannexes to the EEA Agreement and not to Proto-col 31. If this needs to be regulated, it must beagreed on separately.

Surveillance and settlement of disputes: It fol-lows from Article 79 (3) that Part VII of the EEAAgreement (Institutional Provisions) only appliesto Protocol 31 when specifically provided for. Thismeans that in principle, the EFTA SurveillanceAuthority and the EFTA Court have no role in thiscooperation. Nor are the dispute settlement rules(including the Article 102 procedure) applicable.Any disputes have to be dealt with through con-sultations between the Contracting Parties inaccordance with the intentions of the Agreement.If, for example, it is considered appropriate that anact incorporated into Protocol 31 is covered by thesurveillance procedure, this must be specificallyagreed.

The Government considers it important thatlegal acts relevant to the implementation of thefour freedoms are incorporated into an annex,while acts regulating cooperation outside the four

Box 2.4 Marine Strategy Framework Directive

In 2008, the EU adopted the Marine StrategyFramework Directive (2008/56/EC), whichrequires Member States to draw up marinestrategies (management plans) to achieve goodenvironmental status in their marine areas. Theoverall criteria for assessing good environmen-tal status are determined by the EU, and thesecriteria are adapted and further refined throughwork done under the regional marine conven-tions and at national level. The strategies are toinclude an assessment of the state of the envi-ronment and a description of environmental tar-gets, monitoring programmes and measures toachieve or maintain good environmental status.The Directive does not regulate other activitiesthat may be affected by measures of this kind,such as fisheries, maritime transport and petro-leum activities. Over the past few years Norwayhas developed the basis for an integrated marineenvironmental policy based on the ecosystemapproach. This approach is also enshrined in theDirective, and the Norwegian model has been

an important source of inspiration in developingthe Directive. In practice, Norway fulfils theDirective’s requirements on the developmentand implementation of marine strategies. Thegeographical scope of the EEA Agreementextends to the territorial limit, cf. Article 126 ofthe EEA Agreement. On the other hand, thescope of the Directive includes all marinewaters, extending to the outer limits of nationaljurisdiction, and thus including the exclusiveeconomic zone and the continental shelf. Its geo-graphical scope therefore extends beyond thatof the EEA Agreement. In 2011 the Governmentdecided that the Marine Strategy FrameworkDirective was not to be incorporated into theEEA Agreement on the grounds that it applieslargely to areas outside the geographical scopeof the EEA Agreement. A decision was alsotaken to further strengthen the already closecooperation with the EU on management of themarine environment.


freedoms should be incorporated into Protocol 31.This is in line with the intentions of the EEAAgreement, helps to clarify the basis for coopera-tion in each individual case and in general ensuresthat management of the cooperation is as orderlyand predictable as possible.

Difficulties in assessing EEA relevance

In most cases it is a straightforward matter todetermine whether or not an act is EEA relevant,but in some cases it can be more complex. TheEU is adopting an increasing number of legal actsthat fall partly within and partly outside the scopeof the EEA Agreement. This is in part due to theincreasingly cross-sectoral nature of the EU coop-eration, in part due to the abolition of the pillarstructure and in part due to changes that havebeen made to EU treaties over time. The originalparallel between EU treaty provisions and theEEA Agreement is gradually being erased. Thismakes it a more complex matter to establish EEArelevance. It can also be difficult to assess thedegree to which an act affects the internal market,and the parties may disagree on this.

New legal acts are incorporated into the EEAAgreement by consensus. The EEA Agreementcontains no provisions for dispute settlement inthe event of disagreement on the question of EEArelevance. The parties will therefore be obliged tofind a political solution. If the EU is of the view thatthe legislation concerned should be incorporatedinto the EEA Agreement, the outcome may be thatit initiates an Article 102 procedure, and the affec-ted part of the legislation may be suspended.

Assessing EEA relevance requires technicaland legal expertise, and must be carried outwithin the framework of the basic premises andprinciples of the EEA Agreement. However,there is also some room for discretion. The par-ties’ priorities and objectives for the EEA cooper-ation can to some extent determine which factorsare given most weight when assessing EEA rele-vance.

Each new legal act is independently assessedbefore a final decision is made on EEA relevance.Usually, however, if one legal act is incorporatedinto an annex to the EEA Agreement, it will be nat-ural to incorporate subsequent legal acts in thesame area into the Agreement as well, irrespec-tive of whether they are revisions of the originallegislation, related legislation or supplementarylegislation. Nevertheless, in Norway’s view, thereis no obligation to incorporate subsequent legisla-tion outside the four freedoms, even if it was

decided to incorporate the original legal act intoan annex rather than Protocol 31.

In practice, it is important to ensure that thereis a reasonable degree of consistency and coher-ence in what is incorporated into the EEA Agree-ment and what is not. This is necessary to ensureeffective cooperation and a degree of predictabil-ity for relevant stakeholders.

In order to avoid confusion, it should be madeclear when legislation and cooperation in areasoutside the four freedoms are incorporated intothe EEA Agreement that this is not something

Box 2.5 On Article 194 of the Treaty on the functioning of the

European Union

With the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, Article194 of the Treaty on the functioning of theEuropean Union now provides the legalauthority for the development of an integratedEuropean energy policy, as well as for develop-ing European legislation in the energy sector.Article 194 provides for the EU to adoptenergy legislation to ensure the functioning ofthe energy market, ensure security of energysupply in the Union, promote energy effi-ciency and energy saving and the develop-ment of new and renewable forms of energy,and promote the interconnection of energynetworks. This has given the EU broader pow-ers in the following areas: 1. Security of energy supply in general (previ-

ously only in the event of serious problemsrelating to security of energy supply)

2. Infrastructure (previously only guidelinesfor infrastructure, as a general rule)

3. Energy efficiency in general (previouslyonly in the context of the environment)

Since Article 194 provides for the adoption oflegislation serving so many different pur-poses, it may be difficult to assess the EEA rel-evance of legal acts. It is likely that legal actswill be adopted that are intended to serve sev-eral purposes, of which one may be outsidethe scope of the EEA Agreement (such assecurity of energy supply), while others maycome within it (such as ensuring the function-ing of the energy market). There are alsolikely to be legal acts in which not all the provi-sions can be regarded as EEA relevant.


that the parties are under a legal obligation to do.Clarity about the basis for cooperation in eachcase has become even more important as the pro-cedures for the development of EU legislationhave become more complex, so that the distinc-tion between EEA-relevant elements of the legisla-tion and elements that fall outside the scope of theEEA Agreement is sometimes less clear. Whenassessing whether or not a legal act should beincorporated into the EEA Agreement, and if sohow, the Government will also seek to avoid set-ting unwanted precedents. The fact that it may bedifficult to foresee how legislation will be furtherdeveloped in a given area should be taken intoaccount when making an assessment of this kind.

The Government’s position is that Norway’sobligations under the EEA Agreement only applyon Norwegian territory. If, in special cases, it isappropriate to extend the geographical applicabil-ity of legislation to the exclusive economic zone orthe continental shelf, the Government’s premiseis that this does not change the fundamental prin-ciple that the geographical scope of the EEAAgreement is limited to Norway’s territory.

The Government will seek to ensure a prelimi-nary assessment of EEA relevance at the earliestpossible stage when the EU is considering newlegislative proposals. This is crucial if Norway’sassessments and views are to be put forwardeffectively.

2.3.2 Possible adaptations when incorporating new legal acts into the EEA Agreement

The main principle underlying the EEA Agree-ment is that legislation should be implementedand applied in the same way throughout the EEA.This is essential to ensure the homogeneity of leg-islation, equal conditions of competition and pre-dictability for companies and citizens alike. As ageneral rule, adaptations in the form of deroga-tions and transition periods of any length areincompatible with this principle. However, if spe-cial circumstances so require, it will be natural toseek adaptations to legislation when incorporatingit into the EEA Agreement.

Almost all new EU legislation is incorporatedinto the EEA Agreement unchanged. This beingsaid, the Agreement does allow for the parties toagree on substantive adaptations. In such cases,the general objective of ensuring the homogeneityof legislation will be part of the political assess-ment. Adaptations may concern delimitation ofsubstantive or geographical scope, institutional

adjustments, transitional arrangements or deroga-tions. Adaptations of this kind may be particularlyappropriate if only parts of the legislation are EEArelevant, if it contains institutional solutions thatneed to be adapted to the two-pillar structure ofthe EEA Agreement, or if special circumstances inNorway make them necessary. In some instancesadaptations may also be appropriate if the legisla-tion involves a change in Norwegian policy that isconsidered to be problematic.

The EU’s increasingly cross-sectoralapproach to developing legislation, the abolitionof the pillar structure within the EU and new reg-ulatory methods may mean that it becomes morerelevant to negotiate adaptations in the form ofsubstantive delimitations and institutional adjust-ments when incorporating legislation into theEEA Agreement.

In certain cases, there may be a need to makea joint or unilateral declaration when incorpora-ting legislation into the EEA Agreement, to clarifyor delimit the parties’ understanding of the legis-lation in question. A joint declaration expressesthe parties’ common understanding of the legisla-tion, while a unilateral declaration only gives Nor-way’s interpretation.

Few transitional arrangements and deroga-tions have been agreed for the legal acts that havebeen incorporated into the EEA Agreement. Thisis partly because the EEA EFTA states have con-sidered it to be in their interests to have commonrules wherever possible, and they have thereforesought to limit the use of different rules atnational level. It is also because the EU follows arestrictive line as regards transitional arrange-ments and derogations, because its aim is toachieve the greatest possible degree of homoge-neity throughout the EEA. The question of sub-stantive adaptations to legal acts that are incorpo-rated into the EEA Agreement should also beseen in the context of the options available to Nor-way when implementing EEA legislation atnational level. Even if Norway does not gainacceptance for an adaptation when incorporatingan act into the EEA Agreement, it may in a num-ber of cases nevertheless be possible to imple-ment the legislation in a way that also safeguardsNorwegian interests.

2.3.3 Bodies with powers to make decisions that are binding on authorities, companies or individuals

To an increasing extent, the EU is adopting legis-lation that gives agencies and supervisory bodies


powers to make decisions that are binding onauthorities, undertakings or individuals in mem-ber states. This raises questions of a legal andpolitical nature, including in relation to the EEAAgreement’s two-pillar structure and the Norwe-gian Constitution.

The concept “two-pillar structure” refers to thefact that the EEA cooperation is organised in twoseparate pillars: the EFTA pillar and the EU pillar(for more on this see Chapter 3.1.3). This isreflected in Part VII of the EEA Agreement, oninstitutional provisions. The principle is that itshould be an EEA EFTA body that exercisesauthority vis-à-vis an EEA EFTA state.

In cases where the European Commission, EUagencies or supervisory bodies have the power to

make decisions that are binding on authorities,companies or individuals in the EU, the EEAEFTA states must decide whether and how corre-sponding powers are to be exercised in the EFTApillar. This may be done by giving the EFTA Sur-veillance Authority corresponding powers, bydeciding that corresponding decisions are to bemade by the EEA Joint Committee, or by assign-ing the powers to national authorities in therespective EEA EFTA states. It is generally only inthe field of competition that the EEA Agreementexplicitly gives the EFTA Surveillance Authoritythe authority to make decisions that have a directeffect on companies. However, the EEA Agree-ment and the Storting’s basis for accepting theAgreement in 1993 cannot be said to rule out alimited transfer of powers in other areas, provid-ing that Norway agrees to this in each case. TheEEA Agreement also provides for departuresfrom the two-pillar structure through special adap-tations. This means that in special cases, it may bedecided to grant EU agencies or supervisory bod-ies powers to make decisions that are binding onEEA EFTA states, or that have a direct effect onlegal entities in the EEA EFTA states.

When it is proposed to transfer powers to abody either in the EU pillar or the EFTA pillar, theapplicability of the rules on the conclusion of trea-ties set out in the Norwegian Constitution must beclarified. The basic premise of the Constitution isthat the authority with which it is concerned is, asa general rule, to be exercised by the Norwegianbranches of government. Therefore, any transferof legislative, executive or judicial authority thathas direct legal effect in Norway is in principleincompatible with the Constitution and musttherefore be effected in accordance with the ruleson amendments to the Constitution set out in Arti-cle 112. Alternatively, in some cases, powers maybe transferred with the consent of the Stortingunder Article 93 of the Constitution, whichrequires a three-fourths majority and applies tothe transfer of powers to an international organisa-tion to which Norway belongs or will belong.

According to established constitutional prac-tice, an agreement involving a transfer of powersthat is considered not to encroach too far on con-stitutional powers may be entered into in the sameway as an ordinary treaty, cf. Article 26 of the Con-stitution. Article 26 does not itself give any guid-ance on how to assess when this is the case. Anassessment of what can be accepted must bebased on the specific provision of the Constitutiongranting the powers that would be affected ineach case (Article 3, 49, 75, 88, 90, etc).

Box 2.6 Derogations from EU legislation

When the EEA Agreement was concluded,Norway was granted some adaptations andderogations, for example with regard to theTelevision Without Frontiers Directive, theCommunity Co-Insurance Directive and legis-lation on pesticides. Moreover, transitionalarrangements were agreed in the chemicalsfield so that Norway could maintain a highlevel of protection. Norway’s technical inputduring the development of EU chemicals leg-islation helped to bring the level of protectionprovided under EU legislation closer to thatprovided under Norwegian legislation, so thatthere was no longer any need for derogations.Norway has also obtained some derogationssince the EEA Agreement was concluded. Oneof these concerns Directive 2004/54/EC ontunnel safety, and permits Norway to makeuse of other safety facilities than emergencyexits. According to Official Norwegian Report2012:2, Outside and Inside, by June 2011 Nor-way had obtained derogations from a total of55 legal acts, Iceland from 349 and Liechten-stein from 1056 legal acts. The majority ofthese derogations are in the areas of goodsand transport. The main reason for the largedifferences between the EEA EFTA countriesis that a number of legal acts are not relevantto Iceland and Liechtenstein for geographicalor other reasons. Liechtenstein’s bilateralagreements with Switzerland are another rea-son for the differences.


Practice, primarily as expressed in the Stort-ing’s deliberations on previous cases, will provideguidance on where the line should be drawn.According to this, relevant factors in an assess-ment include the type of powers to be transferredand the scope of the transfer, including whether ornot the transfer of powers would apply to a spe-cific and well-defined area. It is also of importancewhether the transfer of powers would be based onreciprocity and equal participation. In practice,importance has also been attached to the degreeto which the Norwegian authorities would be ableto mitigate any undesirable effects of the transferof powers. The nature of the social or political

interests that would be affected is also taken in toaccount.

So far, solutions have been found that havemade it possible to incorporate rules of this typeinto the EEA Agreement in most cases. However,the increased competences being given to newEU agencies and supervisory bodies are creatingchallenges as regards the two-pillar structure ofthe EEA Agreement. In certain cases, it has beendecided to depart from the general two-pillar prin-ciple, either because it is not always possible toadapt the EU cooperation to the traditional two-pil-lar structure, or because it, for resource or otherconsiderations, has not been considered appropri-

Box 2.7 Common rules for civil aviation and the power of the EFTA Surveillance Authority to impose fines

Before Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 on com-mon rules in the field of civil aviation was incor-porated into the EEA Agreement, its relation-ship to the Norwegian Constitution was consid-ered. The Regulation authorises the EuropeanAviation Safety Agency to request the Commis-sion to impose fines and periodic penalty pay-ments on national companies for breaches ofprovisions of EASA rules or individual certifi-cates. Because of the two-pillar structure of theEEA Agreement, an adaptation text was neededgiving the EFTA Surveillance Authority thesame powers as regards companies in the EEAEFTA states. The adaptation text also had to beassessed against the constitutional requirementfor the Storting to give its consent to transfer ofthese powers to the Agency.

The Legislation Department of the Ministryof Justice considered the matter and concludedas follows in a statement issued on 18 January2010:

“...In principle, transferring the power toimpose sanctions directly on Norwegianundertakings [to a body outside Norway]must be regarded as a considerableencroachment on Norway’s administrativeauthority. On the other hand, the transfer ofpowers in this case has limited substantivescope, in that it will only have an impact onundertakings that already have or laterobtain certificates issued by the EuropeanAviation Safety Agency. Currently, this onlyaffects four Norwegian undertakings. Fur-

thermore, it does not appear to be politicallycontroversial to put further sanctions at thedisposal of the European Aviation SafetyAgency in addition to its already existingpower to withdraw certificates. This wouldmake it possible to respond in a more bal-anced and proportionate way to breaches ofthe rules, and would be beneficial for theAgency’s work on aviation safety. On thisbasis, we are inclined to conclude that, all inall, the transfer of powers set out in Article 25of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 is not toomuch of an encroachment on constitutionalpowers, so that the Regulation can be incor-porated into the EEA Agreement, providedthat the Storting gives its consent in accor-dance with Article 26, second paragraph, ofthe Constitution. As mentioned initially, how-ever, the Storting’s views on the constitu-tional assessment will be of importance incases of doubt.”

The Regulation was incorporated into the EEAAgreement on the basis of the Ministry’s state-ment. Constitutional requirements were indi-cated, meaning that the consent of the Stortingis required before the Regulation can enter intoforce in the EEA EFTA states. A declarationfrom the EFTA states was also appended to theJoint Committee’s decision, stating that givingthe EFTA Surveillance Authority the authorityto impose fines in the area of aviation safety iswithout prejudice to solutions in similar cases inthe future.


ate to give the EFTA Surveillance Authority thesame powers as the European Commission.

It is important for Norway to have the opportu-nity to participate in the shaping of legislation thattakes place in EU agencies and supervisory bod-ies. Developments in the EU and new forms ofcooperation mean that in a growing number ofcases the EFTA states may have to accept newsolutions as a condition for being able to partici-pate. However, the EU member states mustacknowledge that the EEA EFTA countries partic-ipate in the internal market on other institutionaland legal terms than they do, and that this placesconstraints on the solutions that can be chosen.

In the Government’s view, balanced and well-functioning cooperation requires a pragmaticapproach from all parties to the agreement. Practi-cal solutions should be sought that will in the bestpossible way take account of the institutionalstructure of the EEA Agreement, the desire forlegislative homogeneity and national interests.The Government will consider the consequencesof the growing number of EU agencies and super-visory bodies for Norwegian participation, pro-cesses and policy formation, and which approachwill best safeguard Norway’s interests in interac-tions with these bodies.

2.3.4 The options available when implementing EEA legislation in Norway

It follows from Article 3 of the EEA Agreementthat Norwegian law must be in accordance withEEA obligations. Article 3 states that the partiesmust take all appropriate measures to ensure thatthey fulfil their obligations under the Agreement,and abstain from any measures that could jeopar-dise the attainment of its objectives. This is knownas the general principle of loyalty in the EEA. Theprinciple applies to the implementation of legalacts that are incorporated into the EEA Agree-ment, and also to Norwegian legislation in areasthat are within the scope of the EEA Agreement,but not regulated by specific acts. Norwegianlegislation must be in line with the general provisi-ons in the main part of the EEA Agreement, suchas the provisions on the free movement of goods,persons and services across national borders,unless EEA law provides for derogations.

On this basis, the Norwegian authorities canuse various options to enable them to implementlegislation in a way that takes different conside-rations into account. As far as directives are con-

cerned, the authorities can as a general ruledecide on the best approach to implementationin Norwegian law. Thus, Norwegian values andpolitical and economic considerations can betaken into account within the framework of the

Box 2.8 Gaming and betting services

The Storting has decided that certain servicesof particular social significance are only to beprovided by the state, i.e. a public agency or awholly state-owned company. One of the ser-vices covered by this decision is gaming andbetting services. In Norway, the state lottery(Norsk Tipping) has sole rights to operate themost important money games, such as Lottoand betting on sports competitions, while thehorse-betting service Norsk Rikstoto can onlyoffer betting on trotting races and flat-racing.In 2003, the Storting extended this right sothat it now also applies to gaming terminals.

Gaming and betting services are coveredby EEA legislation. Since 2003, two cases havebeen filed on this issue in the EFTA Court. Inthe first of these, the gaming machine indus-try lodged a complaint against the Norwegianstate with the EFTA Surveillance Authority,and brought a case before a Norwegian court.The gaming machine industry argued that theextension of the Norwegian system to prohibitgaming machines run by private operatorswas a contravention of the EEA Agreement. Inthe second case, the international bookmak-ers and gaming company Ladbrokes claimedthat the Norwegian state monopolies (NorskRikstoto and Norsk Tipping) and the fact thatonly Norwegian charitable organisationscould offer certain kinds of games were a vio-lation of the EEA Agreement. The Norwegianstate won both cases outright. The Ladbrokescase continued to be brought before variousNorwegian courts for many years, but waseventually withdrawn. In the meantime, theEuropean Court of Justice had passed a judg-ment in a similar Portuguese case, makingclear that national authorities have a good dealof latitude to make use of state monopolyschemes in the gaming industry. Thus, theEEA Agreement allowed for the continuationof the Norwegian monopoly arrangements.


directive. This will vary depending on how theprovisions of the directive are formulated. If adirective is very clear and concise and leaveslittle room for interpretation or discretion, it willbe difficult to depart from the wording of thedirective to any great extent. In cases where thedirective merely gives a more general descrip-tion of the rules that are to be implemented in

national law, or explicitly sets out that states maydepart from the provisions of the directive in oneway or another, the authorities will have conside-rably more leeway when implementing the direc-tive at the national level. In such cases, the aut-horities should implement the directive in a waythat is in accordance with established Norwegianlegislative practice, as this will make it simpler

Box 2.9 The system of reversion

In June 2001, the EFTA Surveillance Authorityargued that Norway’s 1917 Industrial LicensingAct infringed Articles 31 and 40 of the EEAAgreement on freedom of establishment andnon-discrimination between Norwegian and for-eign undertakings. This was because licenceswithout time limits for the acquisition of prop-erty rights to waterfalls could only be issued toNorwegian public undertakings. In all othercases, the property rights would revert to thestate after a certain period. The Norwegianresponse was based on the argument that thesystem of reversion forms part of Norway’snational management of its natural resourcesand is therefore outside the scope of the EEAAgreement. Furthermore, Norway held that thesystem of time-limited licences and reversion ofproperty rights to the state is part of the Norwe-gian state’s system for managing property rightsto hydropower resources, and Article 125 of theEEA Agreement states that the Agreement“shall in no way prejudice the rules of the con-tracting parties governing the system of prop-erty ownership”. The EFTA SurveillanceAuthority recognised a state’s right to decidewhether or not a natural resource is to be used,and the fact that states are fully entitled to man-age their own resources. However, it arguedthat the management system must be in accor-dance with the provisions of the EEA Agree-ment. Discrimination on grounds of nationalitywas a key element of the Authority’s arguments.When the EEA Agreement was concluded, Nor-way changed the system of reversion so thatNorwegian private undertakings and undertak-ings from other EEA states were treated equally.However, Norwegian public undertakings werestill given preferential treatment in the form oflicences with no time limits and exemption fromthe system of reversion. According to theAuthority, this entailed indirect discrimination

against foreign undertakings. In June 2007, theEFTA Court found that the differences betweenthe rules applying to public and private ownersof hydropower resources constituted an indi-rectly discriminatory restriction on the EEArules on the right of establishment and the freemovement of capital. According to the EFTACourt, the problem was not Norway’s system ofreversion and state ownership in itself, nor wasit the fact that the system involved nationalrestrictions. However, restrictions could only bejustified as part of a complete and consistent sys-tem of public ownership. As a result of the EFTACourt’s judgment, the Norwegian authoritieshad to find other ways of safeguarding the sys-tem of reversion. But this also provided the keyto a new solution: Norway could comply withthe judgment by strengthening public owner-ship. On 10 August 2007, the Governmentadopted with immediate effect a provisionalordinance under Article 17 of the NorwegianConstitution, to rectify the situation that hadarisen following the ruling of the EFTA Court.Its purpose was to ensure that Norway’s hydro-power resources are under public ownershipand that they are managed for the commongood. Under the ordinance, private undertak-ings were no longer to be granted licences forthe acquisition of waterfalls and power plants.On the other hand, private undertakings couldown up to a third of the capital and votes in pub-lic undertakings that had ownership rights towaterfalls. The provisional ordinance was laterreplaced by amendments to the IndustrialLicensing Act adopted in the autumn of 2008 andset out in Proposition No. 61 (2007–2008) to theOdelsting. In the spring of 2009, the Stortingadopted additional amendments that allowed theletting of hydropower plants for periods of up to15 years, as set out in Proposition No. 66 (2008–2009) to the Odelsting.


for those affected by the legislation to under-stand and interpret it. Furthermore, in areassuch as the environment, where minimum direc-tives are often used, it is possible to set morestringent national requirements, so that the aut-horities can choose from a wider range ofoptions.

As a rule, the greatest range of options is avail-able in areas that are not regulated by specificacts. In these cases, it is the general provisions inthe main part of the EEA Agreement that apply.Much of the public regulation of Norwegian soci-ety has a bearing on the four freedoms (freemovement of goods, services, persons and capi-tal), and EEA law provides some flexibility here.Restrictions on the exercise of one of the fourfreedoms can be justified on the grounds of publicinterest if the public interest cannot be safe-guarded as effectively using less restrictive mea-sures (the principle of proportionality).

The narrowest range of options is availablewhen an area is governed by a regulation that hasbeen incorporated into the EEA Agreement.Under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, a regula-tion must be made part of Norway’s internal legalorder. This is interpreted as meaning that regula-tions must be implemented in national law verba-tim, normally as an act or regulation stating thatthe regulation concerned (in EEA-adapted form)is to apply as Norwegian law.

The number of new EU regulations has increa-sed in recent years. Key examples in this contextare the EU’s comprehensive legislation on chemi-cals (the REACH regulation) and food security,both of which have been incorporated into theEEA Agreement. Recently, there has also been atrend towards the use of regulations in the area offinancial markets. Following the financial crisis of2008–09, the EU has made increasing use of regu-lations to ensure as much legal homogeneity inthis area as possible. Previously, legal acts in thearea of financial markets were generally directi-ves, often minimum directives, which gave mem-ber states various options for implementation innational law. These developments show howimportant it is for Norway to make use of opportu-nities to exert influence at an early stage in thedevelopment of EU legislation.

It will often be possible to realise Norway’spolicies and objectives through various types ofregulatory measures, some of which will be morereadily compatible with EEA law than others.Both central and local authorities should be awareof this. There are a number of factors that affect

the options available, including how national regu-latory measures are designed, their purpose, andthe grounds given for using them.

National regulatory measures that do notdiscriminate on the basis of nationality or origincan under EEA law be justified on many moregrounds of public interest than measures that aredirectly discriminatory. Such public interestsinclude environmental concerns, consumer inter-ests, considerations of regional policy and socialpolicy, as well as public order, public security and

Box 2.10 Tax deductions for donations to charitable

organisations

The tax deductions scheme for donations tocharitable organisations has existed since2000, and is very important for Norwegianorganisations. Under the scheme, taxpayerscan claim a tax deduction for donations of overNOK 500 per organisation per year, to certaincharitable organisations, with a ceiling ofNOK 12 000 per taxpayer. In 2009, the Euro-pean Court of Justice ruled that a similarscheme in Germany infringed EU law. In thesame year, the EFTA Surveillance Authoritydelivered a reasoned opinion to Norway, main-taining that the Norwegian tax deductionscheme was an infringement of the EEAAgreement and that the legislation would haveto be amended. The reason was that the Nor-wegian tax deduction scheme only applied toorganisations with headquarters in Norway,and not to organisations in other EEA coun-tries. In the Authority’s view, this was incom-patible with the provisions in the EEA Agree-ment on the free movement of capital. Norwayhad two choices: either to abolish the schemeor to change its tax rules so that the tax deduc-tions scheme also applied to donations to char-itable organisations headquartered in otherEEA states. The Government chose to changeNorway’s tax rules, so that all organisationswithin the EEA that meet certain require-ments are now treated alike. This case showsthat it may be possible to continue Norwegianschemes within the EEA, provided that theytreat Norwegian and foreign organisationsequally and do not discriminate on grounds ofnationality.


public health. It is important to make it clearwhich grounds are used to justify such regulatorymeasures, both in preparatory documents andelsewhere. Usually this means that the public inte-rests that are to be safeguarded must be clearlystated. It must also be shown that the proposedarrangement will be suitable for this purpose, andthat these public interests cannot be safeguardedas effectively by other means that would limittrade within the EEA to a lesser extent.

Much of EEA legislation is technical in nature.In these cases, it will be purely technical and sci-entific considerations that determine how thelegislation is to be implemented in Norway. Inareas where Norway has important interests, theGovernment will make use of the options availableto safeguard them.

In order to identify the options available underEEA law, the public administration must have ahigh level of expertise in the EEA legal system,EEA legislation and the case law of the EU Courtof Justice and the EFTA Court. The Governmentwill therefore give priority to further developingthis expertise in the public administration, and toensuring that good routines are established forusing the options available actively and appropria-tely.

Before EU legal acts are incorporated into theEEA Agreement, they must be translated intoNorwegian. Unofficial translations are sufficientat the time of incorporation, but these must laterbe thoroughly revised before they are made offi-cial. High-quality translations are needed toensure correct implementation at the nationallevel. This is important for the Norwegian author-ities, Norwegian companies and other stakehold-ers who have to comply with the legislation inquestion. The steady increase in the amount oflegislation being incorporated into the EEAAgreement has led to a significant increase intranslation work. The Government will ensurethat priority is given to this work.

2.3.5 The surveillance and court system: Norway’s approach

EU law is dynamic, and the European Court ofJustice plays an active role in its developmentthrough its case law. To ensure the homogeneityof legislation, EEA law should as a general rule bedeveloped correspondingly. When the EFTACourt and the European Court of Justice makestatements concerning the interpretation of EEAlegislation they influence the development of EEAlaw. In the same way, decisions taken by the EFTA

Surveillance Authority may have implications forhow EEA legislation is applied in practice. Thus,the decisions of the courts and the Authority mayaffect the development of Norwegian law in areasthat fall within the scope of the EEA Agreement.

Provision has been made for the EEA EFTAstates to influence such decisions and thereby thedevelopment of EEA law. Norway can have aninfluence in two types of cases in particular.Firstly, it can defend its position in cases where itis claimed that Norway has not complied withEEA law in a certain area (infringement cases, seeFigure 5.1). Secondly, Norway has an opportunityto exert an influence in cases where the EFTACourt and the European Court of Justice makestatements on how EEA law is to be interpreted,either in the form of preliminary rulings/advisoryopinions or when the EFTA Court deals withinfringement cases against other states. In bothcases, Norway can make submissions detailingNorway’s interpretation of EEA law.

Previously, the EEA EFTA states and theEFTA Surveillance Authority were also able tointervene in cases relating to EEA law betweenEU member states and EU institutions before theEuropean Court of Justice, for example if theCommission initiated infringement proceedingsagainst an EU state. Since 2010, the EuropeanCourt of Justice has followed a different practice,and the EEA EFTA states have no longer had thesame opportunity to intervene. Norway considersit important that the EEA EFTA states have thisopportunity, and the EEA EFTA states and theAuthority have raised the issue with the EU, bothin the EEA Joint Committee and in the EEA Coun-cil. The Government will continue to work activelyto gain acceptance for its view on this matter.

In December 2011, the EFTA Court proposedto the EEA EFTA states a number of amendmentsto the Surveillance and Court Agreement relatingto the composition of the EFTA Court and its for-mation. The proposals aimed to further reinforcethe professional competence and standing of theCourt and thus to enhance its legitimacy.

The proposed amendments contained threeelements: the possibility of calling ad hoc judgesto the bench for an Extended Court in importantcases, the establishment of an Evaluation Panelfor candidate judges, and the creation of the postof Advocate General at the EFTA Court.

Thus far, the Government has not seen a needto make amendments to the institutional setup ofthe EFTA Court. The proposals of the Court arecurrently under review by the three EEA EFTAStates.


Infringement cases

Under the EEA Agreement, it is the task of theEFTA Surveillance Authority to ensure that theparticipating EFTA states respect their obliga-tions under the Agreement. The Authority can dothis on its own initiative or on the basis of com-plaints from private parties.

There have been disagreements between theEFTA Surveillance Authority and Norway on theinterpretation of the EEA Agreement in a numberof individual cases. In some of these the Autho-rity’s position has been upheld, while in othersNorway’s views have won acceptance. Experienceshows that close dialogue with the Authority isimportant if Norway is to gain acceptance for itsposition. This should be initiated before any for-mal case is brought, to ensure that Norway isaware of the Authority’s assessments at an earlystage. In order to safeguard Norwegian interests,it is also important that the Authority receives allrelevant information as early as possible and that

Norway’s point of view is supported by sound,consistent arguments. It is crucial that there isclose coordination between the relevant minis-tries in processes relating to the EFTA Sur-veillance Authority. The involvement of the Minis-try of Foreign Affairs, other relevant ministriesand the Office of the Attorney-General is determi-ned in each case in accordance with specific guid-elines. Procedures have also been established forsubmitting matters relating to the EFTA Sur-veillance Authority to the Government.

The Government attaches importance toensuring the best possible coordination betweenthe relevant ministries and the Office of the Attor-ney-General. This will ensure that we have asmuch information as possible about a case at anearly stage and can put forward a coherent argu-ment.

In cases where it is not possible to reachagreement with the EFTA Surveillance Authority,the Government may decide to bring the casebefore the EFTA Court.

Figure 2.1 Procedures in possible infringement cases


Advisory opinions from the EFTA Court and preliminary rulings by the European Court of Justice

A national court may ask the European Court ofJustice or the EFTA Court to give its interpretationon a point of EU or EEA law by referring to themfor a preliminary ruling or requesting an advisoryopinion respectively. The European Court of Jus-tice and the EFTA Court only give an opinion onquestions of EU/EEA law. It is the national courtthat takes the final decision in a case.

Norway is entitled to make submissions relat-ing to all requests to the EFTA Court for an advi-sory opinion and to all questions referred to theEuropean Court of Justice for a preliminary rulingthat fall within the scope of the EEA Agreement.

It is established procedure that the Ministry ofForeign Affairs submits all such matters that mayhave EEA relevance to the ministries concerned.The ministry responsible assesses whether Nor-way should make use of its right to make a sub-mission to try to ensure that the law is interpretedin a way that accords as closely as possible withNorwegian interests. The Office of the Attorney-General and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs act asthe legal representatives for the state in thesecases.

The court proceedings are mainly written, andconsiderable effort goes into this part of the pro-cess. A short oral hearing is usually held after thewritten submissions have been received. If this isdone, parties other than those who made writtensubmissions also have an opportunity to makeoral submissions. In cases where it is initially con-cluded that there is no need for a written submis-sion from Norway, but where it subsequentlybecomes clear that written submissions by otherparties include information or assertions that Nor-way should comment on, a possible solution maybe to request an oral hearing and to make a state-ment there.

In cases where other EEA states have similararrangements to Norway or have a similar under-standing of the legal act in question, the possibil-ity of establishing contact and where appropriatealso coordinating arguments is considered.

In Norway’s experience, submissions made byNorway to the European Court of Justice are con-sidered on an equal footing with submissionsmade by member states. It is the quality of thesubmission and the strength of the argumentsthat determine whether the views put forwardgain acceptance. It is difficult to gauge the extentto which a submission has influenced the Court inits final decision, particularly when several states

have put forward similar arguments. There are,however, several examples where it is apparentthat the Court has based its decision directly onarguments put forward by Norway, including incases where Norway’s views have differed fromthose of other actors.

The same applies to the EFTA Court. Fewerstates tend to make submissions to the EFTACourt than to the European Court of Justice. Thismeans that there is an even greater need for Nor-way to comment on cases and try to ensure thatthe best possible decisions are made from Nor-way’s point of view.

In the Government’s view, Norway shouldmake active use of opportunities to make submis-sions relating to requests for advisory opinionsand references for preliminary rulings in order toset out Norway’s interpretation and understand-ing of the legislation in cases of importance forNorway. Norway should as a general rule makesubmissions relating to requests for advisoryopinions from the EFTA Court. Norway shouldalso make submissions relating to questionsreferred to the European Court of Justice for apreliminary ruling if they are particularly relevantfor the interpretation of the EEA Agreement inareas of importance to Norway.

2.3.6 Article 102 procedures

In the event of disagreement between the partiesto the EEA Agreement on whether new EU legis-lation is to be incorporated into the Agreement,the procedures set out in Article 102 may beapplied: these describe what happens if a partydecides not to incorporate legislation, includingthe possibility of provisional suspension of theaffected part of the Agreement. The provisions ofArticle 102 stipulate that the parties are to makeevery effort to reach agreement. It is the partythat wants a legal act to be incorporated into theEEA Agreement that decides whether and whenan Article 102 procedure is to be initiated. Such adecision is not conditional on the other party hav-ing expressed a formal reservation about theincorporation of the new legislation; it may also bebased on the fact that one party is of the opinionthat a disproportionately long time is being takento incorporate the act into the EEA Agreement.

Since the EEA Agreement entered into forcethe procedures set out in Article 102 have beenactivated twice. The first time was in 2002, andconcerned Liechtenstein and the EU SecondMoney Laundering Directive. The second timewas in 2007, and concerned Iceland/Liechtenstein


and legislation for the free movement of persons.In both cases the EU considered that it was takingtoo long to incorporate the legislation into theEEA Agreement. Following further dialogue, theparties reached agreement and the acts wereincorporated into the EEA Agreement.

Norway has stated that it does not intend toincorporate the Third Postal Directive, but the EUhas so far not initiated an Article 102 procedure.

Once an Article 102 procedure has been initi-ated the EEA Joint Committee has six months totry to find a solution. The parties have a duty tomake every effort to reach agreement. The EEAJoint Committee must examine all possibilities tomaintain the good functioning of the EEA Agree-ment. If the parties fail to reach agreement, and ifthe EEA Joint Committee has not taken a decisionto the contrary, the affected part of the EEAAgreement will be provisionally suspended. How-ever, a suspension may not take effect if the Par-ties agree that it is not necessary. In practice, it isup to the EU to decide whether a reservation byan EFTA state should result in parts of the EEAAgreement being provisionally suspended or not.

According to Article 102 (5), it is “the affectedpart” of the Annex to the EEA Agreement intowhich the act should have been incorporated thatis to be provisionally suspended. In Norway’sview, this means that only the part of the relevantAnnex that is directly affected can be suspended.This view is based on a joint reading of Article 102(2) and (5). The EEA Agreement does not providea more detailed definition of what is meant by thedirectly affected part of the Annex. If there is dis-agreement between the parties on which acts areaffected, a political solution must be sought. Inpractice it is difficult to make a general assess-ment of the possible extent of a suspension. Thismust be considered in the light of each specific sit-uation.

As described above, experience of the applica-tion of Article 102 is limited. According to thewording of the provision, once the procedure hasbeen initiated and the deadline of six months hasexpired without the parties having reached agree-ment, suspension will take effect without a priordecision by the EEA Joint Committee. However,when the EEA Agreement was signed, the partiesagreed (in the Agreed Minutes Ad Article 102(5)EEA in the Final Act to the EEA Agreement) thatif a provisional suspension does take effect, itsscope and entry into force should be adequatelypublished. In other words, there must be somekind of confirmation of the suspension that

ensures that the legal situation is sufficiently pre-dictable for those affected by the suspension.

The purpose of Article 102 is to ensure thatthe EEA Agreement functions as intended, and itsprocedural rules are formulated with this in mind.Even if agreement on the incorporation of a legalact into the EEA Agreement is not reached, andparts of the Agreement may be temporarily sus-pended, the EEA Joint Committee will pursue itsefforts to agree on a mutually acceptable solutionin order for the suspension to be terminated assoon as possible.

Any decision not to incorporate legislation intothe EEA Agreement must be based on an assess-ment that takes into consideration both Norway'sinterests in the matter in question and the risk andpotential consequences of a possible negativeresponse on the part of the EU. Generally speak-ing, Norway benefits from the development of com-mon rules and standards for the European market.Experience has shown that relevant legal acts havebeen accepted by Norway. Nevertheless, the possi-bility of entering a reservation is an integral part ofthe EEA Agreement. It is a necessary mechanismfor those cases where there are important strategicinterests that warrant its use. The Government willconsider entering a reservation in cases where par-ticularly important Norwegian interests may bejeopardised by legal acts that are proposed forincorporation into the EEA Agreement.

2.4 Management of agreements in the area of justice and home affairs

Justice and home affairs has become an increas-ingly important area of cooperation for the EU, pri-marily within the EU itself, where ensuring thefreedom and security of EU citizens is an importantgoal. Transnational crime in its many forms makeseffective international police cooperation essential.International cooperation is also required to meetthe challenges Europe is facing in terms of refugeeflows and illegal immigration. The common exter-nal border and the internal free-travel area meanthat all participating states must implement andapply the common rules in an effective and respon-sible manner. Policy instruments in the area of jus-tice and home affairs are also an important compo-nent of the EU’s external policy.

Norway participates in important aspects ofEU cooperation in this area. As a Schengen mem-ber state, we are dependent on the effective imple-mentation of legislation and measures relating to


control of the common external border across theentire Schengen area.

Other parts of the EU cooperation in this areaalso affect us in varying degrees. For this reasonit has been Norwegian policy to seek broad partic-ipation in EU cooperation in the field of justice andhome affairs and to work actively to ensure thatthis cooperation functions well.

The most important aspect of Norway’s partic-ipation in EU cooperation in the area of justice andhome affairs is its participation in the Schengencooperation, with all its practical implications. As aSchengen member state, Norway is entitled totake part in Council discussions on legal acts andmeasures at all levels, at expert, senior official andministerial level. The Government intends to con-tinue to build on the Schengen cooperation.

In addition, Norway has entered into severalspecific association agreements through which itparticipates in other parts of EU cooperation in thearea of justice and home affairs. These agreementscover areas such as cooperation with Europol, theEuropean Police College (CEPOL) and the Euro-pean Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit (Eurojust),mutual assistance in criminal matters, access toother countries’ criminal records (under the PrümConvention), adoption of the European arrest war-rant, and participation in EU agencies. Norway alsoparticipates in EU cooperation on combating ter-rorism through the Counter-Terrorism Group(CTG). In addition, Norway participates in cooper-ation under the Dublin Regulation, which estab-lishes the criteria and mechanisms for determiningthe member state responsible for examining anasylum application.

The Norwegian authorities have found thatthere are good opportunities for cooperation anddialogue with the EU in the field of justice andhome affairs in areas where Norway has experi-ence and expertise. This also applies to areas suchas asylum and refugees, where we have notentered into separate association agreements withthe EU. Norway is a valuable partner for the EUwhen it comes to developing asylum systems in anumber of EU member states and third countries.

2.4.1 The Schengen cooperation

Norway’s agreement with the EU on participationin the Schengen cooperation entitles us to take partin Council discussions on new legislation. Norwayand the other non-EU Schengen states (Iceland,Liechtenstein and Switzerland) participate in theEU’s negotiations through the Mixed Committee.This has implications for the way Schengen mat-

ters are dealt with at the national level, not least theneed to develop Norway’s positions and ensurethat these have the necessary political backing atall levels throughout the legislative process frominitial discussions up to a final decision by the EU.

Schengen relevance

When the Commission draws up draft legislationin the area of justice and home affairs, it must con-sider whether the proposed legislation is Schen-gen-relevant or not. This will determine whetherthe legislation in question is to be discussed in theMixed Committee and could be binding for Nor-way.

Under the Schengen association agreement,its procedures are to be followed when any legisla-tion that changes or builds on the existing Schen-gen acquis is being drafted. In most cases it isclear whether a proposed legal act falls within oroutside this definition. However, in some casesthis may be more difficult to determine, for exam-ple if some parts of an act build on the existingSchengen acquis while other parts do not.

The issue of Schengen relevance has givenrise to disagreement primarily in cases whereNorway has sought to associate itself with cooper-ation areas that in the view of the Commission orsome of the member states fall outside the scopeof the Schengen Agreement. The solution hasgenerally been for Norway to enter into separateagreements with the EU in the areas concerned.

If a legal act is deemed to be Schengen-relevantand the procedures set out in the Schengen associa-tion agreement are followed, Norway will be noti-fied when the act is finally adopted by the EU. Nor-way must then consider whether the act in questionshould be accepted and implemented in Norwegianlaw. The issue of Schengen relevance must there-fore be clarified before discussions in the Councilworking group begin, so that Norway has theopportunity to participate and influence the contentof the legal acts by which it will later be bound.

Some legal acts are in a grey zone between theSchengen Agreement and the EEA Agreement.Others might fall within the scope of both agree-ments. In such cases, Norway and the EU mustagree on what form of association Norway shouldhave with the legislation in question. So far inthese cases, solutions have been found that havetaken Norwegian considerations into account.This issue is also relevant for other countries.Switzerland is not a party to the EEA Agreement,and the UK and Ireland do not participate in theSchengen cooperation.


Horizontal legislation

Assessing Schengen relevance has become moredifficult in step with institutional developments inthe EU. Justice and home affairs is no longerdefined as a separate pillar of the EU cooperation.With the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon,the EU adopted a standard decision-making sys-tem that generally applies to all types of legal acts,including those in the area of justice and homeaffairs. The system enables the adoption of hori-zontal legislation that applies to several differentpolicy areas. Some of these areas may be Schen-gen-relevant, while others are not. Other legalacts may contain certain provisions that seen inisolation are Schengen-relevant, while the rest ofthe act is not. It may be difficult to apply the defini-tion of Schengen relevance set out in the Schen-gen association agreement to these types of acts.

Experience to date has shown that in somecases the EU has applied a somewhat narrowerdefinition of Schengen relevance than the defini-tion used by Norway. The abolition of the pillarstructure could lead to an increase in the numberof disagreements regarding Schengen relevance.Effective cooperation on border controls requiresthe participation of all the parties concerned, andcooperation with the EU in this area is in generalcharacterised by a will to find solutions within theframework of our association agreement. TheGovernment will seek to maintain close contactwith the Commission to ensure that the interestsof the non-EU Schengen states are taken into con-sideration when new laws are being drafted.

The importance of the Mixed Committee

Norway takes part in Council discussions onSchengen-relevant legislation through the MixedCommittee. Norway and the other non-EU Schen-gen states do not have the right to vote at anystage of the decision-making process and do notparticipate in the formal adoption of legislation. Inpractice, however, experience has shown that thisis less important than the opportunities we haveto influence other countries by putting forwardeffective, coherent arguments.

The most important stage for influencing thedevelopment of Schengen legislation is early inthe Council’s decision-making process, i.e. inworking groups and committees under the Coun-cil, immediately after the Commission has put for-ward a proposal for a legal act. Schengen memberstates, including Norway, participate at this stageby providing expert input in the fields concerned.

The extent to which the efforts of each of thecountries have an impact at this stage dependslargely on the quality of the expertise providedand the arguments used. Norway has the sameopportunities to promote its views as the EUmember states.

Norwegian politicians and representatives ofthe Norwegian public administration take partdirectly in discussions on Schengen-related mat-ters at all levels under the Council, on an equalfooting with EU member states. This means thatNorway’s Schengen-related work requires a dif-ferent approach from that needed under ourother agreements with the EU. Norway has todevelop its positions on an ongoing basis beforerelevant legal acts are discussed in the MixedCommittee. This means that Norway’s viewsneed to be regularly reviewed and endorsed atthe political level, which helps to ensure theinvolvement of the senior political staff in the rel-evant ministries.

Because of these differences in how Norway isinvolved in the different processes, it can be diffi-cult to draw parallels between Norway’s efforts toexert an influence in the Schengen cooperation andits efforts to do so under the EEA Agreement.Experience has shown, however, that activeinvolvement at the political level at an early stage isessential if Norway is to gain acceptance for itspoints of view.

The Government will continue to give priorityto making use of the options available under theSchengen cooperation by developing nationalpositions that can be put forward at an early stageof the decision-making process in Brussels.

Implementation in Norway

Once new Schengen legislation has been adopted,Norway’s options for implementation will dependamong other things on whether the act is a direc-tive, a regulation or a decision. Particularly if anact establishes common minimum standards,there may be a number of options.

As regards Schengen legislation, it is essentialfor Norway to put forward its national positions atan early stage of the Mixed Committee’s discus-sions. There is no opportunity at a later stage toseek adaptations, either in terms of content or tim-ing of implementation. If Norway needs to seekadaptations of any kind this must be done duringdiscussions in the Council’s working groups andcommittees. Thus it is essential for Norway tohave clear national positions that have the neces-sary political backing.


Evaluation mechanism and the courts within the Schengen cooperation

There are normally no checks on persons at theinternal borders of the Schengen area. Thismakes it essential for all the Schengen countriesto implement and enforce the Schengen ruleseffectively. The Schengen Agreement was origi-nally an intergovernmental agreement, and it isstill the Schengen member states that have themain responsibility for regular evaluation of theimplementation of the Schengen acquis. Applica-tion of the Schengen acquis in Norway, Iceland,Liechtenstein and Switzerland is evaluated in thesame way.

In addition, the Commission has competenceto monitor EU countries to ensure that they applythe Schengen area rules correctly, and the juris-diction of the European Court of Justice has nowbeen extended to include Schengen cases and therest of the area of justice and home affairs.

Norway’s association agreement with Schen-gen is an agreement between Norway and the EU.The EFTA bodies do not play a role in the Schen-gen cooperation. This means that neither theEFTA Surveillance Authority nor the EFTA Courthas competence to make decisions on legal issuesrelating to Norway’s implementation of the Schen-gen Agreement. In the event of a dispute aboutthe application of the acquis, the dispute settle-ment arrangements set out in the agreement mustbe initiated.

However, Norway is entitled to make submis-sions to the European Court of Justice in casesreferred by national courts in the EU memberstates that relate to the interpretation of theSchengen acquis. This does not apply to casesbetween the Commission and EU member states.This means, for example, that Norway cannotmake submissions in cases brought against theCommission concerning the definition of the termSchengen relevance.

So far Norway has not made use of its right tomake submissions in Schengen cases. The Gov-ernment will do so, if appropriate, both in casesdealing with matters of principle and those wherethe ruling could have a direct impact on Norway’simplementation of the acquis.

Interparliamentary cooperation

The joint declaration on parliamentary consulta-tion contained in the Final Act to the Schengenassociation agreement paves the way for interpar-liamentary cooperation between Norway and the

European Parliament on Schengen-related mat-ters. Experience of interparliamentary coopera-tion under the EEA Agreement has shown thatthis is a useful channel into the European Parlia-ment’s work on EEA matters. The Governmentassumes that this would also be the case underthe Schengen cooperation. So far none of the par-ties have taken the necessary steps to establishsuch consultations. It is up to the Storting to con-sider whether cooperation with the European Par-liament should also encompass Schengen-relatedmatters.

2.4.2 Development of cooperation in other justice and home affairs areas

The Government has a stated aim of pursuing anactive European policy in the field of justice andhome affairs, including areas that fall outside theframework of the Schengen cooperation, as setout in the White Paper on Norwegian refugee andimmigration policy in a European perspective(Meld. St. 9 (2009-2010), which discusses chal-lenges and cooperation relating to illegal immigra-tion. Closer cooperation in police and criminal lawmatters will be useful for preventing and combat-ing crime. In addition, enhanced judicial coopera-tion in civil matters will contribute to the imple-mentation of the internal market.

Norway currently has formal cooperationarrangements with the EU in a number of justiceand home affairs areas beyond the Schengen,Dublin and EEA cooperation.

In certain areas, such as asylum, Norway hasdeveloped its own legislation independently but toa large extent in line with EU legislation.

In areas where Norway and the EU have amutual interest in developing closer cooperation,and where the aim is to create mutual rights andobligations between the parties, formal agree-ments need to be put in place. Some agreementsof this kind have been developed in cases wherethere has been an absence of full agreementwithin the EU as to the Schengen relevance ofspecific legal acts. There are also some separateagreements in areas where Norway and the EUfor varying reasons have had a common interestin further developing cooperation.

Experience shows that negotiations on theseseparate, specific agreements are time-consum-ing. Since Switzerland and Liechtenstein joinedthe Schengen cooperation, these two countrieshave also been invited to take part in negotiationson participation in areas outside the Schengencooperation. The negotiating processes may be


further complicated by the fact that the EU wantsits agreements with each of the four associatedcountries to be as near identical as possible.

In Official Norwegian Report NOU 2012:2Outside and Inside: Norway's agreements with theEuropean Union, the EEA Review Committeedescribes Norway’s overall affiliation to EU jus-tice and home affairs policy as inadequate. Thecommittee recommends that the Norwegianauthorities explore the possibility of establishing acomprehensive framework agreement for Nor-way’s association with EU cooperation in the areaof justice and home affairs, which would encom-pass the Schengen cooperation, the other areas inwhich Norway has specific association agree-ments and any other areas the parties may agreeon. The issue of establishing a more comprehen-sive framework for Norway’s agreements with theEU is also raised in the Council conclusions onEU relations with EFTA countries of December2010.

In the Government’s view, establishing a morecomprehensive framework agreement encom-passing the Schengen legislation, other currentagreements and any other possible areas of coop-eration would not be in Norway’s interests. Asmentioned above, within the framework of theSchengen cooperation the associated states areentitled to take part in Council discussionsthrough the Mixed Committee. Other separateassociation agreements do not allow for this. Fur-thermore the need to develop cooperation andspecific association agreements will vary fromarea to area in the field of EU cooperation on jus-tice and home affairs.

However, there may be reason to look into thepossibility of simplifying procedures for associa-tion with parts of the EU justice and home affairslegislation outside the Schengen cooperation ifNorway is interested in this. Aspects of the EU’sjudicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters,in particular, may be relevant in this context.There has been extensive cooperation betweenthe Nordic countries in the area of civil law, whichhas become more difficult as a result of the coun-tries’ differing forms of association with the EU.Norway has already entered into some agree-ments in the areas of criminal law and police coop-eration.

The EU’s judicial cooperation in civil mattersprimarily encompasses legislation on the mutualrecognition of legal and administrative decisions.It also authorises the development of measures toenhance cooperation on serving judicial and extra-judicial documents, taking evidence, rules on

applicable law, and access to justice. To a certainextent it allows for the development of rules thatharmonise national legislation, but the mainemphasis is on procedural cooperation based onthe national legislation of the member states. Leg-islation has been adopted on bankruptcy, mea-sures to simplify the recovery of small and uncon-tested claims, the service of documents in otherstates, the taking of evidence in other states, com-pensation for victims of violent crime etc.

Norway is a party to the Lugano Conventionon jurisdiction and the recognition and enforce-ment of judgments in civil and commercial mat-ters, a parallel to the EU’s Brussels I Regulation.We have also requested negotiations on Norwe-gian association with EU legislation on the serviceof documents and the taking of evidence. This iscurrently under consideration in the Commission.

The EU’s judicial cooperation in criminal mat-ters is also based on the principle of mutual recog-nition of judgments and judicial decisions bymember states, and it allows for the developmentof legislation on recognition of all types of judicialdecisions and on the prevention and settlement ofconflicts of jurisdiction. The EU treaties alsoauthorise the harmonisation of national legislationon both criminal procedure and criminal law. Mea-sures to support the member states’ crime preven-tion efforts may also be developed. There are alsoprovisions relating to the EU’s Judicial Coopera-tion Unit (Eurojust) and the establishment of aEuropean public prosecutor’s office.

Secondary legislation has been adopted in thearea of judicial cooperation in criminal matters,such as the European Arrest Warrant, which sim-plifies surrender procedures; rules on taking evi-dence and the recognition of evidence taken inother states; the recognition and implementationof alternative sanctions to custodial sentences;conditional release; the transfer of sentenced per-sons; the collection of fines; and the use of certaincoercive measures in criminal investigations.Rules governing the exchange of informationfrom national criminal records have also beenadopted.

The Schengen agreement contains certain pro-visions relating to cooperation in criminal matters.However, most of the cooperation that takes placein this area lies outside the scope of the Schengencooperation. Norway has signed a parallel agree-ment to the European Arrest Warrant, an agree-ment on mutual assistance in criminal matters andan association agreement with Eurojust.

The EU’s police cooperation mainly encom-passes information gathering and exchange. Nor-


way is associated with parts of this cooperationthrough the Schengen agreement. Norway hasalso signed a parallel association agreement to thePrüm Decision, and association agreements withEuropol and with the European Police College(CEPOL).

As regards the fight against transnationalcrime, Norway is in many ways in the same situa-tion as the EU member states. More extensivecooperation with the EU on police and criminalmatters could have a positive impact on crime pre-vention in Norway.

It would be useful to clarify whether negotia-tions with the EU in the areas mentioned abovecould be speeded up. This would not entail anyobligation for any of the parties to enter into newagreements, but could simplify the negotiatingprocess.

The Government will examine the possibilityof establishing an understanding with the EU thatwould make it quicker and easier for Norway toenter into new agreements with the EU in specificareas, in cases where this is of mutual interest.

2.5 Cooperation on foreign and security policy

Norwegian foreign policy is based both on theneed to safeguard clearly defined national inter-ests and on recognition of Norway’s responsibili-ties in an increasingly globalised world. The Gov-ernment presented the main features of Norwe-gian foreign policy in the White Paper Interests,Responsibilities and Opportunities (Report No. 15(2008–2009) to the Storting).

The EU is seeking to develop a more uniformforeign policy, which will also have implicationsfor our cooperation with the EU. Our Nordicneighbours Sweden, Denmark and Finland aremembers of the EU, as are most of our closestallies in NATO. Norway and the EU countriesshare fundamental values and attitudes and oftensimilar objectives. This applies to core policyareas such as human rights, democracy-building,our policy of engagement, climate change and theenvironment. The EU supports the internationallegal order and has a stated aim to promote globalpeace, security and development. It is in Norway’sinterests that the EU has a clear foreign policy inareas where we have common interests. It is oftenalso in Norway’s interests to cooperate closelywith the EU on foreign policy in order to achievegreater influence and have a greater impact inter-nationally.

A number of steps have already been taken tofurther develop the EU’s common foreign policy,including the establishment of the EuropeanExternal Action Service (EEAS), which has pro-vided a more coherent organisational frameworkfor EU foreign policy. The EEAS has an importantrole to play in carrying out the responsibilities ofthe High Representative for Common Foreign andSecurity Policy. The High Representative and theEEAS are therefore important dialogue partnersfor Norway in the field of foreign policy. However,some key areas continue to fall under the compe-tence of the Commission.

Norway generally cooperates with the EU inareas where the parties share common interestsand see each other as relevant partners. In orderfor Norway to be able to gain a hearing for itsviews in the EU, it is essential that we can offerexperience, expertise and networks that giveadded value. Norwegian experience that is ofvalue in one area can serve as a door opener to EUactivities in other areas. This is the rationalebehind our efforts to maintain and further developthe meeting places we have with the EU in the for-eign policy field.

The absence of formal agreements in the fieldof foreign and security policy has not prevented usfrom extending our cooperation with the EU in anumber of foreign policy areas where Norway andthe EU share common interests. At the sametime, there are a number of options open Norwayin its foreign policy cooperation with the EU, andthe Government intends to make use of these.

2.5.1 Opportunities for Norwegian involvement

Norway is often regarded by the EU as an impor-tant partner with interests that coincide withthose of the EU and a global policy of engage-ment. This was evident, for example, during theclimate negotiations in Durban in 2011 in whichthe EU was a leading force, in alliance with theleast developed countries and small island states.Norway played a key supporting role for the EUin the discussions.

At the international level Norway has taken ona particular responsibility for climate changefinancing and efforts to reduce deforestation andforest degradation, and has been a leading advo-cate of ambitious targets for emissions reductions,with a view to achieving the goal of limiting therise in global temperature to 2°C. These will con-tinue to be key areas in our cooperation with theEU at the regional level and in our role as a strate-


gic partner to the EU in the global climate negoti-ations. Norway and the EU cooperate both for-mally and informally in the global climate negotia-tions and our positions often coincide. This coop-eration is valuable; experience shows that bymaintaining close dialogue with the EU, Norwayis able to influence the EU’s negotiating positions.As a non-member state, Norway has more latitudeon issues where the EU’s freedom of action maybe limited by internal processes. This may be par-ticularly valuable for maintaining the momentumof the negotiations. Norway and the EU workedtogether successfully to secure an agreement inDurban on a new commitment period under theKyoto Protocol, as well as the launch of negotia-tions for a legally binding agreement for theperiod after 2020, to include all countries, and aworkplan designed to achieve greater emissionscuts before 2020. There is a widely held view thatthe future climate agreement must be an ambi-tious one that can limit the rise in global tempera-ture to below 2°C, and under which each countrycontributes according to its capacity.

The EU’s ability to respond rapidly and flexi-bly in negotiations can be limited in certain situa-tions by the requirement for internal consensus.In such cases Norway has more latitude to advo-cate views that many EU countries may agreewith, but that they cannot always promote activelyoutside the EU while the member states are stillin the process of developing a common position.We have seen evidence of this in connection withthe Middle East peace process and the EU’s pol-icy towards Myanmar. In these areas, Norway is apartner the EU listens to. Norway may also beperceived by many partner countries and by coun-tries receiving international aid as a more flexibleactor than the EU.

The High North is Norway’s most importantstrategic foreign policy priority. It is therefore inNorway’s interests to maintain close dialoguewith the EU on developments in the High North.Arenas such as the Northern Dimension enableNorway – and Iceland and Russia – to maintain aclose dialogue with the EU on High North policy.Since 2008 the EU has been working on develo-

Figure 2.2 EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton visited Oslo and Svalbard for talks on developments in the Arctic and High North in March 2012. Here seen talking to Governor of Svalbard Odd Olsen Ingerø at the Return of the Sun celebration in Longyearbyen on 8 March.

Photo: Lars-Erik Hauge, Norwegian Mission to the EU


ping a common Arctic policy. The Norwegian aut-horities have had extensive discussions on theHigh North with EU institutions. For Norway ithas been important to provide adequate informa-tion and to explain and promote its views on keyissues: the established legal framework in theHigh North, in particular the UN Convention onthe Law of the Sea, and the importance of ensur-ing that the Arctic remains a peaceful region,where cooperation and mutual respect for dutiesand rights is the norm, including issues relating tothe situation of the indigenous peoples in theregion. The Government has attached importanceto demonstrating that Norway is a responsible ste-ward of the environment and maintains highsafety standards in the High North.

The Government has made it clear that it iswilling to cooperate with the EU on Arctic issues.The EU has recognised the Arctic Council as thekey political cooperation forum for Arctic issuesand the European Commission is now seekingpermanent observer status in the Council. A deci-sion on this issue is expected to be taken at theArctic Council’s ministerial meeting in May 2013.The Government has openly and consistently sup-ported the Commission’s application.

Relations with Russia are another importantarea for Norway. Norway enjoys constructive,pragmatic cooperation with its neighbour Russia,based on common interests. The two countriesmaintain a particularly close dialogue on issuesrelating to the High North. Norway and Russiasigned the Treaty concerning Maritime Delimita-tion and Cooperation in the Barents Sea and theArctic Ocean in 2010, and it entered into force in2011. The treaty has created a basis for enhancedcooperation between our two countries in theHigh North. Relations with Russia are also impor-tant for the EU and it is of consequence to Norwaythat the EU and Russia enjoy constructive coope-ration.

Developments in other parts of Europe, out-side the EEA, are also a priority for the Govern-ment, and one we share with the EU. The EUdefines the countries of the Western Balkans aspart of the European project and is working toenhance the prospects of EU membership forboth the candidate countries and other countries.Norway attaches importance to supporting com-mon European stabilisation and developmentefforts in the Western Balkans. Norway’s effortsin the Western Balkans are in line with a broad-based international approach that seeks to sup-port these countries’ aim of integration into Euro-Atlantic structures (the EU and NATO).

Norway and the EU cooperate closely and arestrongly engaged in the Western Balkans. Ourinterests in the region coincide to a large extent.Norway has been recognised for its efforts andthe EU has sought Norwegian participation forexample in developing the justice sector and inde-pendent control bodies. Both Norway and the EUgive priority to improving coordination of assis-tance to the region. Norway is regularly invited toconsultations with the EU on the Western Bal-kans, and in addition Norway holds consultationson the Western Balkans at senior-official level inEU capitals. These are examples of Norway’s suc-cessful political and practical cooperation with theEU.

The transition processes in North Africa in thewake of the Arab Spring have led to a much stron-ger engagement in the region by Norway and theEU, both politically and in the form of aid. Thenew strategy for the European NeighbourhoodPolicy, which was presented in May 2011, is theEU’s long-term response to political developmentsin its neighbouring areas, particularly in theSouth. The aim of the policy is to promote sustain-able stability through lasting democratic changeand inclusive economic development in the EU’sneighbouring countries to the South and the East.Relations with the EU will focus not only on mar-ket access and economic integration, but also onpromoting respect for common democratic val-ues. The EU also attaches importance to theimplementation of migration initiatives (such asreturn agreements and control measures.)

Norway’s objectives in the region coincide to alarge extent with those of the EU: the promotionof democracy, economic development, the rule oflaw and good governance. Dialogue with the EUon the neighbourhood policy is valued by bothparties. Norway and the EU also have many of thesame partners in the region, such as the UN sys-tem, the World Bank, the Council of Europe andthe European Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-opment. In connection with their efforts to sup-port democratic reform processes it is useful forNorway and the EU to be able to exchange politi-cal assessments of developments in the region.Thus, it is in Norway’s interests to be invited toparticipate in forums where the neighbourhoodpolicy is discussed.

Norway is also strongly engaged in othermore general foreign policy issues, such ashuman rights, democracy building, humanitarianissues and development. The EU is an importantactor in these areas – not least as the world’s larg-est development aid donor, providing approxi-


mately 60 % of the total global volume of aid. Nor-way has aligned itself with EU positions in interna-tional forums on several occasions (for example inconnection with the Paris Declaration on AidEffectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action).EU priorities in the area of development policyhave over time gradually moved closer to Norwe-gian priorities. Norway has on several occasionsbeen invited to participate at informal meetings ofdevelopment ministers and has played an activerole at these meetings.

The EU’s role in the field of human rights isalso developing. The EU has begun the process ofaccession to the European Convention on HumanRights, and the European External Action Serviceis playing an increasingly important role in coordi-nating EU positions in the UN Human Rights Coun-cil. In June 2012 the EU adopted a Strategic Frame-work on Human Rights and Democracy, which setsout the EU’s updated policy for promoting humanrights in all its external relations. EU prioritiesinclude promoting freedom of expression and free-dom of religion or belief, fighting discrimination inall its forms, and continuing the campaign againstthe death penalty worldwide, priorities which Nor-way also shares. An Action Plan on Human Rightsand Democracy has also been adopted to imple-ment the Strategic Framework, and an EU SpecialRepresentative for Human Rights has beenappointed. This is the first time the EU hasappointed a non-geographically based special rep-resentative in a cross-cutting field.

To make progress in multilateral efforts in thefield of human rights, it is essential to be able towield the necessary influence, and the EU is animportant actor in this respect. At the same time,Norway as a non-EU member country can act as abridge-builder between different groups of coun-tries and in this way help to create coalitions andsecure broader international support for key ini-tiatives.

2.5.2 Norway’s participation in crisis management and military capacity building

During the last 10 years Norway’s participation inEU crisis management operations has been animportant factor in its close cooperation with theEU in the area of foreign and security policy.

Participation in EU operations provides animportant basis for active dialogue with the EU onkey security policy issues. It makes Norway a rel-evant partner and provides us with insight andopportunities to exert an influence, both on the

ground in areas where we have a presence, and atstrategic level in formal and informal forums inBrussels.

Norway provided a larger contingent to theEU’s police mission in Afghanistan from 2007 to2012 than many EU member states, thereby gain-ing the right to participate in decision-making dur-ing the mission.

The EU has become more receptive to theidea of Norway and other third countries partici-pating in crisis management operations. At Nor-way’s request, for example, the EU allowed thirdcountry participation in the civilian mission inIraq (the European Union Integrated Rule of LawMission for Iraq (EUJUST LEX-Iraq), which isproviding assistance to the Iraqi authorities indeveloping the criminal justice system. Norway isnow participating in the mission and is the firstthird country to do so. Our participation in thisEU operation gives us access to far more informa-tion than we would have were we operating alone.We would also face far greater security challengesif we were operating on our own.

Norway is also closely involved in efforts toalleviate the situation in the Horn of Africa in bothhumanitarian and political terms. The EU is alsoactively engaged in the region. Norway is nowmore often being invited to take part in talksabout operations that are still at the planningstage. Previously we often received the first for-mal information only after the decision to estab-lish a mission had been taken. We have noticedthis over the course of the past year; the EU hasconsulted Norway more extensively than it hasdone in the past on the planning of a new missionto support maritime capacity building in the Hornof Africa. This gives us more time and a betterbasis for considering whether we wish to partici-pate in an operation when it is launched.

To ensure an integrated strategic approach tothe EU, there is close cooperation between thevarious Norwegian actors involved in security anddefence policy (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Jus-tice and Public Security).

2.5.3 Dialogue and cooperation

The Government is working to strengthen cooper-ation arenas with the EU to ensure that theyremain relevant and effective. The NorwegianMission to the EU in Brussels plays an importantrole in facilitating cooperation with the EU, build-ing contacts and providing updated informationon emerging issues. A valuable network has been


established with the European External ActionService, the Commission and other actors such asthe missions of the member states.

The Commission delegations in third coun-tries have now been developed into EU diplomaticmissions, with extended areas of responsibilityand mandates. It is in Norway’s interests to fur-ther develop contact and cooperation with EU del-egations in third countries, both so that we canstand together on relevant issues and so as tomaintain dialogue on the assessments and viewsof EU and Norwegian diplomatic missions in thecountries in which we operate.

The Government intends to consider furtherhow we can present our foreign policy and ourpositions effectively in different EU arenas. It isessential for our participation in these arenasthat Norway sets clear priorities and communi-cates a message that is of interest to the EU. Thiscan be done through briefings to various EUworking groups, and to the European Parlia-ment, in areas where Norway has particularexpertise. We have for example provided brief-ings on the Middle East prior to the meetings ofthe Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC), whichcoordinates international assistance to Palestineand is chaired by Norway.

It is also possible for Norway to align itselfwith EU sanctions against third countries, and wehave done so on many occasions. The Govern-ment intends to further examine the possibility ofNorway participating more closely in the pro-cesses leading up to, during and after EU deci-sions on measures of this kind. It is important toensure that sanctions are implemented in themost uniform and therefore the most effectiveway in cases where Norway chooses to align itselfwith EU measures.

The Government will continue to attach con-siderable importance to developing bilateral con-tacts with individual EU member states as well aswith the EU itself, as governments still play a keyrole in developing the foreign policy positions ofthe member states. For this reason maintainingNorwegian diplomatic and consular missions inthese countries will continue to be an importantelement of Norwegian foreign policy.

2.6 Summary of actions the Government intends to take

The Government considers it important that Nor-way makes full use of the opportunities and avail-able options provided by the EEA Agreement and

Norway’s other agreements with the EU to pro-mote Norwegian interests as effectively as possible.

The Government will: – Continue to develop an active European policy

along the lines set out in Report No. 23 to theStorting (2005–2006) on the implementation ofNorway’s European policy.

– Work to ensure that the EEA Agreement con-tinues to secure equal treatment and predict-ability for Norwegian companies and otheractors operating in the internal market. Themain principle underlying the EEA Agreementis to ensure the homogeneity of legislation.Generally speaking, Norway benefits fromthis, and Norway will work at the Europeanlevel to promote the development of homoge-neous legislation that is in line with Norway’sinterests.

– Play an active part in developing legislation forthe internal market, ensure that Norwegianinterests are formulated and promoted clearlyand at an early stage, as well as safeguard ourability to influence the development of legisla-tion in the EU at all stages of the legislative pro-cess, in accordance with the conditions estab-lished under the EEA Agreement.

– When new legislation is being considered bythe EU, make sure that a preliminary assess-ment of its EEA relevance is carried out asearly as possible. This is crucial if we are to beable to promote Norway’s interests effectively.When assessing whether, and how, a legislativeact should be incorporated into the EEA Agree-ment, the Government will also seek to avoidsetting unwanted precedents.

– Seek modifications to new legislation that isbeing incorporated into the EEA Agreement incases where Norway has important interests tosafeguard or where there are special circum-stances that warrant this. Any decision not toincorporate legislation into the EEA Agree-ment must be based on an assessment thattakes into consideration both Norway’s inter-ests in the matter in question and the risk andpotential consequences of a possible negativeresponse on the part of the EU. The Govern-ment will consider entering a reservation incases where particularly important Norwegianinterests may be jeopardised by legal acts thatare proposed for incorporation into the EEAAgreement.

– Develop good and pragmatic solutions toenhance Norway’s links with and participationin the various EU agencies and supervisorybodies, on the basis of the framework and pro-


cedures set out in the Norwegian Constitution,in the two-pillar system of the EEA Agreementand in the Schengen Agreement.

– Defend Norway’s views in cases broughtbefore the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA)and the EFTA Court, and actively promote ourviews in cases brought before the EFTA Courtand the European Court of Justice that are par-ticularly relevant for the interpretation of theEEA Agreement in areas of importance to Nor-way.

– Make active use of the opportunities Norwayhas to make submissions to the EuropeanCourt of Justice in cases referred by nationalcourts in the EU member states that relate tothe interpretation of the Schengen acquis, par-ticularly cases dealing with matters of principleand those where the ruling could have a directimpact on Norway’s implementation of theacquis.

– Build on the Schengen cooperation by activelyparticipating in the development of new Schen-gen-related legislation.

– Safeguard and make use of the rights to partic-ipate granted to us under our association agree-ments in the field of justice and home affairs.

– Help to ensure that all Schengen memberstates are able to fulfil their obligations underthe Schengen cooperation.

– Actively participate in efforts to combat trans-national crime in Europe.

– Examine the possibility of establishing anunderstanding with the EU that would make itquicker and easier for Norway to participate inspecific areas of the EU’s cooperation in thefields of civil justice, criminal justice and policecooperation, in cases where this is of mutualinterest.

– Further develop our close foreign and securitypolicy cooperation with the EU in areas of stra-tegic importance to Norway and fields wheretogether we can make an effective contributionto international cooperation, for example in theHigh North, democracy building and humanrights, climate change and the environment,international development assistance andefforts to promote peace and reconciliation.


3 Key priorities in Norway’s European policy

Norway’s interests in the context of its coopera-tion with the EU are complex and diverse. Theyare primarily related to areas where Norway iscovered by EU policy and legislation, and to thefurther development of the internal market. Nor-way is also affected by EU policy in areas that lieoutside the scope of its agreements with the EU,though more indirectly.

The Government will work to safeguard Nor-wegian interests in all aspects of Norway’s rela-tions with the EU. However, to achieve results, itis also important for Norway to concentrate itspolitical efforts on priority areas. This chapter out-lines some of the key policy areas that will begiven particular attention in the time ahead.

A more comprehensive review of Norway’spriorities and interests is given in the annual workprogramme for EU/EEA issues. The Governmentintends to develop the work programme into amore strategic instrument of Norway’s Europeanpolicy.

3.1 Norwegian companies and value creation in the internal market

Under the EEA Agreement, Norwegian compa-nies, workers and consumers have access to theinternal market on the same terms as citizens andcompanies in the other 29 EEA countries. Thiseffectively increases the size of the Norwegianmarket from 5 million to 500 million people.Developments in the EU in this area are thereforehighly significant for the Norwegian economy.

The Government will seek to influence thedevelopment of new EU/EEA legislation andimplement legislation in such a way that Norwe-gian citizens and companies can more easily par-ticipate in the internal market. The developmentof common rules ensures predictability and equalconditions of competition for all actors operatingin the internal market.

In the wake of the financial crisis, developingthe internal market has moved higher up the polit-ical agenda once again. The internal market isseen as an important tool for stimulating new eco-

nomic growth at a time when Europe is feeling theeffects of the global financial crisis. This is clearlyreflected in the Europe 2020 strategy. In April2011, the European Commission presented aCommunication on the internal market, the SingleMarket Act I, which identified 12 levers to boostgrowth and strengthen confidence. Revitalisingand deepening the internal market is consideredparticularly important for enhancing the growthpotential of small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs).

The Commission carried out an extensive con-sultation process in connection with the prepara-tion of the Single Market Act I. Norway partici-pated in this process, and as part of this work theGovernment conducted an open dialogue withrepresentatives of Norwegian companies andorganisations. The Government intends to con-tinue this dialogue with stakeholders when devel-oping and preparing Norway’s input on the devel-opment of the internal market.

The European Commission presented a sec-ond Communication on the internal market, BetterGovernance for the Single Market, in June 2012.This Communication proposes a number of mea-sures to improve governance of the internal mar-ket including measures to promote more effectiveimplementation of internal market rules, to speedup procedures for dealing with breaches of EUlaw and to ensure smarter use of IT technology.The Commission also urges all the states to estab-lish Single Market centres as national centres ofexpertise on the internal market. A European net-work of single market centres will also be estab-lished. The Government will consider whether toestablish a centre of this kind in Norway.

In many areas it is more important to imple-ment existing rules than to develop new legisla-tion. For Norwegian companies and value cre-ation in Norway, it is important that the rules areimplemented at national level in a timely mannerand in a way that ensures the good functioning ofthe internal market. A thorough knowledge of therights and obligations of the various actors operat-ing in the internal market is also vital if we are tomake the most of the opportunities it offers. The


Government will work to ensure that the relevantactors are informed of their rights and of how tomake effective use of them. In this way the posi-tive effects of the EEA Agreement can beenhanced. Putting in place tools to address theseneeds is part of ensuring good governance of theinternal market, as is establishing effective sys-tems for cooperation between the authorities inthe EEA states.

In autumn 2012 the Commission will proposefurther measures to strengthen the internal mar-ket, in the form of the Single Market Act II. TheGovernment has expressed its support for theseefforts, with particular emphasis on promotinggood governance of the internal market and thesystematic reduction of trade barriers, and onstrengthening the social dimension and consumerrights and developing the digital internal market.

Banking system and financial services

Rules regulating the banking system and financialservices account for an increasing proportion ofinternal market legislation. This is largely due tothe financial crisis. The EU recently adoptedextensive new capital requirements for insurancecompanies and new securities legislation. TheCommission has also proposed new capitalrequirements for banks and investment firms, anew directive on deposit guarantee schemes, anew EU framework for bank recovery and resolu-tion, as well as a regulation on insider trading andmarket manipulation (market abuse). Most ofthese are considered to be EEA relevant.

In 2010–11, the EU established new supervi-sory authorities for the financial sector. The newEuropean Systemic Risk Board is responsible forthe macro-prudential oversight of the financialsystem, i.e. for monitoring systemic risk acrossthe entire European financial market. Three newsupervisory authorities are responsible for super-vising financial activities at the micro level, i.e. forsupervising individual institutions in the banking,insurance and pensions, and securities sectors.Norway’s association with these new bodies hasnot yet been clarified, see Chapter 5.3.3. Morerecently, the EU also presented plans for a bank-ing union involving joint regulation and supervi-sion of major banks operating in several countries,as well as a joint deposit guarantee scheme forthese banks.

Norway intends to contribute to the develop-ment of effective common international rules andframework conditions for the financial sector. Thisis important for reducing the risk of crisis and

economic collapse. However, the increasing har-monisation of legislation may reduce the optionsavailable to individual countries at national level.In the view of the Norwegian authorities it is cru-cial that legislation promotes the development ofstrong financial institutions to the greatest extentpossible.

The EU’s increasing use of supervisoryauthorities raises issues in relation to the EEAAgreement’s two-pillar structure and the Norwe-gian Constitution’s provisions on transfer of pow-ers, as discussed in Chapter 5.3.3. It does notappear appropriate to develop corresponding pow-ers relating to the financial sector in the EFTAinstitutions. As long as Norway is unable to partic-ipate fully in the work of the EU’s new financialsupervisory authorities, the extent to which Nor-wegian legal entities can be made subject to thedecisions of these authorities is clearly limited. Sofar, contact with the EU has indicated that it willbe difficult for the Norwegian authorities to gainmore than limited observer status in the Euro-pean supervisory bodies. The fact that the Norwe-gian authorities do not participate in the Europeanfinancial supervisory bodies on the same footingas the EU member states, and in particular theother Scandinavian countries, may prove to bechallenging. The establishment of the proposedbanking union in the EU could lead to more prob-lems of this kind. These issues are being dis-cussed with the EU.

3.2 Key policy areas

3.2.1 Labour relations and social welfare

In the Government’s view it is essential to ensurethat the Norwegian model of labour relations ismaintained. This involves continuing the tripartitecooperation between employers, trade unions andthe state, and retaining the ability to enforce Nor-wegian rules on pay and working conditions effec-tively.

The main features of the Norwegian model oflabour relations – legislation and agreements,wage determination, cooperation between thesocial partners and labour market policy – havebeen in place since 1994. In general, the period1994–2012 has been one of positive developmentin terms of investment, employment, pay andworking conditions, and the collective agree-ments. Cooperation between the social partnersand the authorities has been strengthened. Work-ing life in Norway is well organised; most peopleare in permanent employment and have written


contracts of employment. The proportion of peo-ple in temporary employment in Norway is lowerthan in many countries in Europe. The Norwegiansocial model, of which the tripartite cooperation isa cornerstone, is set to last.

Since the enlargement of the EU/EEA in 2004and 2007, Norway has been one of the countrieswhere labour immigration from other EEA coun-tries has been highest in proportion to the popula-tion. This is partly due to the strong demand forlabour and high wage levels in Norway. Theselabour immigrants have contributed greatly togrowth in production and employment, not leastin rural districts, and thus have also played a rolein safeguarding the Norwegian welfare system.

At the same time this increase in labour immi-gration has made it more challenging to ensuredecent work and combat social dumping in Nor-way. The Government has taken a number ofsteps to deal with these issues, including produc-ing two action plans against social dumping. It hasbeen possible to introduce far-reaching measures,such as employer joint and several liability underthe system of general application of wage agree-ments, within the framework of the EEA Agree-ment. The measures have also strengthenedefforts to improve conditions in certain branches,such as the cleaning industry, that had unresolvedproblems relating to unscrupulous practices longbefore 2004. Norway’s efforts to combat socialdumping are further discussed in a White Paperfrom the Ministry of Labour, Joint responsibility fora good and decent working life (Meld. St. 29 (2010-2011)), and in Chapter 16 of the report Outsideand Inside: Norway's agreements with the Euro-pean Union (NOU 2012: 2).

Given the continuing and sometimes large dis-parities in pay and working conditions betweendifferent EEA countries, labour migration and theassociated risks of low-wage competition and cir-cumvention of legislation must be expected tocontinue. In future, the level of labour immigra-tion to Norway will depend in part on the develop-ment of the labour market in Norway and howthis compares with the situation in other coun-tries. This in turn will be affected by economicdevelopments in Europe in the light of the finan-cial and debt crisis. In times of economic decline,labour rights can come under pressure. The Gov-ernment has worked to prevent this. Togetherwith the social partners, the Government willmaintain its efforts to combat social dumping andunscrupulous practices in Norway.

Through the EEA Agreement, Norway partici-pates in efforts to strengthen the EU’s social

dimension, which is based on the establishment ofcommon minimum rules for the working environ-ment and workers’ rights. In many areas theserules have also strengthened the rights of Norwe-gian workers.

In order to find a balance between conflictingconsiderations and interests in the labour and ser-vices markets, the EU has adopted legislationsuch as the Posting of Workers Directive (96/71/EC) and the Directive on Temporary AgencyWork (2008/104/EC). In recent years the Euro-pean Court of Justice has dealt with several casesthat have had implications particularly for the freemovement of services and freedom of establish-ment. Some of these judgments, often referred toas the Laval Quartet, have sparked controversy.They illustrate the way in which contentiousissues in labour market policy in the EU and EEAare to a large extent decided through the judicialsystem. These decisions also have implications forNorway. National courts, the EFTA SurveillanceAuthority and the EFTA Court also set precedentsin this area. There has been disagreement bet-

Box 3.1 The Government’s initiative to ensure decent work

The Government has introduced a number ofinitiatives, within the framework of EEA law,to ensure decent work in Norway. Theseinclude: – Service centres for foreign workers in

Oslo, Stavanger and Kirkenes – ID cards in the building and construction

industry – The right of access to information for

employee representatives – The duty to provide information on regula-

tions concerning general application ofwage agreements and to ensure compli-ance with them.

– Requirements to observe Norwegian stan-dards for working conditions in municipalcontracts – ILO Convention no. 94

– Joint and several liability for employersunder wage agreements that have beenmade generally applicable

– Regional safety representatives in thehotel, restaurant and cleaning industry

– An authorisation scheme for cleaning com-panies and ID cards for the cleaning indus-try


ween Norway and the Authority over certain pro-visions of the regulations on pay and working con-ditions in public contracts. Some aspects of theregulations concerning general application ofwage agreements in the shipping and shipbuild-ing industry have also been subject to judicialreview.

The Government will seek to ensure that newEU rules do not obstruct measures that Norwayhas introduced or plans to introduce, for examplein connection with the action plans against socialdumping. For Norway it is particularly importantto safeguard pay and working conditions for work-ers who are involved in business establishmentand the provision of services across national bor-ders, and to protect collective rights, including theright to strike.

There is no reason to expect that the EU willintroduce extensive new labour legislation. How-ever, in March 2012 the Commission put forwarda proposal for an Enforcement Directive to correctweaknesses and inadequacies in the way the Post-ing of Workers Directive is applied. The purposeis to increase monitoring and compliance and tocombat unfair competition and social dumping.The Government is, in principle, in favour ofimproving the enforcement of posted workers’rights, but has certain concerns about the pro-posed directive.

A new Regulation, known as the Monti II Reg-ulation, was proposed at the same time, with theaim of removing the uncertainty surrounding theexercise of the right to take collective action thathas arisen following the European Court of Jus-tice rulings. The draft Regulation gave equal sta-tus to the national right to strike and the freedomto provide services. The proposal met consider-able resistance in many EU countries and in 2012the Commission decided to withdraw the pro-posal. The Government’s view is that it is inappro-priate to introduce legislation that restricts theright to strike.

Participation in working life brings with it enti-tlement to many welfare benefits, both for individ-ual employees and for their family members.These apply equally to foreign and Norwegianworkers.

Under the EEA Agreement, the general rule isthat social security benefits are to be paid irre-spective of where the person who is a member ofthe social security scheme or his/her family mem-bers are resident. Entitlements under Norway’sNational Insurance Scheme are adapted to thehigh salary levels and cost of living in Norway,and the payments are therefore very generous

when used abroad. For people resident in Norwaythe benefits are generally designed to make itmore attractive to work than to collect benefits.This incentive is undermined if the benefits arepaid out in countries where the cost of living islower. However, the recorded export of benefitsamounts to only a small proportion of the totalexpenditure channelled through the NorwegianLabour and Welfare Administration. Nevertheless,with the rise in labour immigration to Norway andthe increased mobility of people between Norwayand other EEA countries, the proportion of bene-fits that are exported is growing. The possibilitythat benefits will be exported is assessed whenthe various schemes are developed. The Govern-ment is monitoring the situation closely to ensurethat benefit schemes are not abused.

In 2009, the Government appointed the Wel-fare and Migration Committee, chaired by Profes-sor Grete Brochman, to assess the elements in theNorwegian welfare model that influence and areinfluenced by increasing migration. The commit-tee presented its recommendations in June 2011in Official Norwegian Report NOU 2011: 7 Welfareand Migration. As part of the follow-up to the com-mittee’s recommendations, the Ministry ofLabour has initiated an internal process with aview to carrying out a comprehensive review ofcurrent rules for membership of the NorwegianNational Insurance Scheme and the export of ben-efits received under the scheme. This will involvean assessment of the existing rules for the variouspension schemes, such as the retirement pensionand the disability pension, as well as for tempo-rary benefits, such as sickness benefits and unem-ployment benefits and other forms of cash pay-ment under the National Insurance Scheme. Thereview will also look at rules for exporting bene-fits to other EEA countries, countries with whichNorway has a social security agreement and coun-tries with which it has no such agreement. Thepurpose of this work is to provide a basis forachieving the best possible understanding of theproblems associated with increased mobilityacross national borders and the legal options opento Norway, and to identify areas where adjust-ments are needed.

The Government takes a broad approach in itsefforts to promote Norwegian views and interestsin the area of employment and social affairs vis-à-vis the EU. Norway participates in various work-ing groups, expert groups and meetings withinthe EFTA/EEA, for example concerning the freemovement of workers, health, safety and environ-ment, and labour law. Norway is also involved in


relevant Nordic working groups and committeeswhere topics relating to EU/EEA are discussed.Norway cooperates with its Nordic neighbours inareas where the Nordic countries have commoninterests. Like Norway, several EU countries havebeen sceptical to aspects of the Commission’swork on labour legislation. Norway is therefore ina good position to continue to work together withlike-minded countries to influence developmentsso that they take the desired direction.

Labour rights are also safeguarded throughother international conventions by which Norwayis bound, including several human rights conven-tions and labour conventions.

Cooperation on cross-border health threats and health preparedness

Safeguarding health and welfare and ensuringadequate emergency preparedness and responseare important goals of international cooperation.Over the past few years our emergency prepared-ness and response systems have been put to thetest in situations that have varied widely in natureand in scope. Major incidents such as the terroristattack on the government offices in Oslo and theisland of Utøya on 22 July 2011, the earthquakeand tsunami in Japan in March 2011, the volcaniceruption in Iceland in 2010 and the 2009 flu pan-demic have led to new demands for civil protec-tion and emergency preparedness and response,and have demonstrated the need for cooperationat both national and international level.

Norway cooperates with the EU in the area ofhealth security, in particular through the EU’sHealth Security Committee, the European Centrefor Disease Prevention and Control and the Euro-pean Food Safety Authority. The cooperationencompasses information exchange, prevention,monitoring and risk assessment, and the develop-ment of early warning and response mechanismsfor dealing with incidents that may pose cross-bor-der health threats. This cooperation is particularlyimportant for ensuring that national measures andplans are adequately coordinated with those ofour neighbouring countries and the rest of theworld. It also enables us to learn from other coun-tries’ experiences and solutions.

Norway’s cooperation with the EU in the field of security and emergency preparedness and response

Norway’s cooperation with the EU in the area ofcivil protection is regulated primarily through theEEA Agreement. Norway has participated actively

in the Community Mechanism for Civil Protec-tion, which coordinates the response to incidentsboth inside and outside Europe. The main func-tion of the EU’s Monitoring and Information Cen-tre, a tool under the Mechanism, is to monitorpotential and actual emergencies, receive and dis-tribute requests for assistance and coordinate themember states’ offers of assistance. The Norwe-gian Directorate for Civil Protection and Emer-gency Planning is responsible for following up thework of the mechanism on behalf of the Ministryof Justice and Public Security and is the nationalcontact point for requests from both NATO andthe Monitoring and Information Centre.

In recent years the Community Mechanismfor Civil Protection has developed considerably,particularly in terms of its operational role. Ini-tially an emergency preparedness and responsemechanism for dealing with incidents withinEurope, it has now become a relevant and muchneeded resource for responding to natural disas-ters outside Europe too. There is also focus onensuring close coordination between civil protec-tion and humanitarian aid efforts, as well as onareas such as critical infrastructure, environmen-tal contamination, major accidents etc.

As part of the EU Action Plan on combatingterrorism the EU has initiated a process to regu-late and limit access to explosives and chemical,biological, radiological and nuclear materials. Nor-way has followed this process closely. The pro-posed measures fall within the scope of the EEAAgreement.

3.2.2 Energy

As a major net exporter of energy, Norway is in aunique position in the EEA, with interests,resources, needs and opportunities which maydiffer from those of other countries. The Govern-ment gives priority to managing Norway’s inter-ests in such a way that its energy resources bene-fit the entire Norwegian population.

The EU has expanded regulatory measuresfor energy and developed a more comprehensiveenergy policy over the years, particularly as aresult of the desire to create a more integratedinternal market. The EU has not, however, chal-lenged the right of individual countries to controltheir own energy resources, and the memberstates continue to develop their own energy poli-cies based on national interests. Under the EEAAgreement, Norway has implemented all themost significant EU energy legislation related tothe internal market.


Under the Lisbon Treaty, the EU now has theauthority to develop a more integrated energy pol-icy, which has heightened ambitions of developinga common European energy policy. Resourcemanagement still remains a national responsibil-ity. The 2007 climate and energy package estab-lished what are known as the 20–20–20 targets, (a20 % reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions,raising the share of EU energy consumption pro-duced from renewable resources to 20 %, and a20 % improvement in the EU’s energy efficiency).Legislation intended to achieve these targets hasalso been introduced. In March 2011, as a follow-up to 20–20–20 targets, the EU adopted theEnergy Efficiency Plan 2011 for the period up to2020. The Energy Efficiency Plan is in principlenot part of the EEA Agreement, but contains mea-sures supported by EU legislation that may beEEA relevant. It is therefore in Norway’s intereststo follow the implementation of the Energy Effi-ciency Plan closely.

According to the Energy Roadmap 2050,which was under discussion in the Council in2011–12, the primary objective for the EU’senergy policy is to ensure a secure, sustainableand competitive energy supply. The long-termstrategic choices the EU makes in the period up to2050 will be important for Norway as a major sup-plier of oil and gas to the EU and part of the EUinternal energy market. The roadmap focuses onthe need to cut CO2 emissions to 80–95% below1990 levels by 2050, but also identifies security ofsupply and reduced import dependency as addi-tional incentives for transforming the energy sys-tem. The EU’s efforts to increase renewableenergy production must be seen in this light. It isdifficult to estimate how much renewable energyproduction will grow in the period up to 2050, butit seems clear it will increase. An increase inrenewable energy production in the EU will makeproduction more unpredictable and irregular,which will increase the need for flexibility in therest of the power system. Hydropower and gascould be important in this context and may openup new opportunities for Norway.

More than 60 % of the gas and more than 80 %of the oil used by the EU is imported. Given thelarge volumes of energy imported by the EU, itwill not be enough to develop a common internalenergy market. Relations with countries outsidethe EU are also important for achieving the EU’sprimary energy policy objectives. In this contextNorway is an important partner for the EU.

Norway is a major supplier of energy to theEU, in the form of natural gas, electricity and oil.

Some 20 % of the EU’s natural gas consumptioncomes from Norway. Norway therefore plays animportant role in ensuring security of supply inthe EU. At the same time, as an export nation Nor-way is dependent on well-functioning and predict-able markets for its energy products. EU policyaffects the Norwegian energy sector both directlythrough EEA legislation and indirectly as a resultof the impact it has on the gas and electricity mar-kets. This is particularly important in the case ofgas. In this context, indications from the EU thatnatural gas has a long-term place in the futureEuropean energy mix are very significant.

Norway has been an integral part of the EU’sinternal electricity market for a long time. TheNorwegian electricity grid is physically connectedto the other Nordic countries and the Netherlandsthrough a number of power lines and cable links.Work is currently underway to establish two newcable links in the near future, first to Germany andthen to the UK.

Through the EEA Agreement, Norway partici-pates fully in the internal energy market. This hasincluded close cooperation with the EU on energyefficiency, renewable energy and the developmentof new energy technologies within the frameworkof the EEA Agreement, for example through rele-vant EU programmes. Norway has a clear interestin participating in the development of EU legisla-tion and in EU programmes. EU legislation in thearea of energy is important for Norway, as energyis an area in which Norway has strong economicinterests. Close follow-up is required throughoutthe entire legislative process, from the early deci-sion-shaping phase to the work on EEA adapta-tions and implementation in Norway.

The EU aims to have a fully functioningenergy market in place in 2014. Three internalenergy market packages, the most recent ofwhich was adopted in 2009, have resulted in mar-ket opening and increased integration of theenergy markets in the EU. The Government willwork actively to enable Norway to participate inthe bodies and joint structures that are developedin Europe as far as possible on an equal footingwith the EU member states, within the frameworkof the EEA Agreement. Norway participates as anobserver in the EU’s committee on cross-bordertrade and in the forums for national regulatoryauthorities and member states under the Commis-sion – the Electricity Regulatory Forum (FlorenceForum) and the Gas Regulatory Forum (MadridForum).

In the area of energy technology Norway par-ticipates in the EU’s Seventh Framework Pro-


gramme for Research and Technological Develop-ment as well as in the European CommunitySteering Group on Strategic Energy Technologiesand subsidiary groups under the Strategic EnergyTechnology Plan, which establishes guidelines forfuture EU research and technology cooperation.Norwegian participation in the new EU Frame-work Programme for Research and Innovation,Horizon 2020, which is due to be launched in2014, will be a key priority in the future. Norwayalso participates in relevant initiatives and cooper-ates with the EU on carbon capture and storage.

Norway maintains close dialogue with the EUon energy issues. In 2002, as a complement to theEEA Agreement, a regular dialogue on energypolicy with the EU’s Commissioner for Energywas established. Over the course of 10 years thishas been an important channel for raising issuesof particular significance to Norway’s relationswith the EU. The dialogue is an important instru-ment and has enhanced understanding both of EUpolitical processes relating to energy and of Nor-way’s energy situation. The dialogue addressesissues relating to key topics such as energy infra-structure, energy development in the period up to2050, natural gas, renewable energy and the inter-nal market. The Government attaches greatimportance to cooperation with the EU in the areaof energy and regards the energy dialogue asextremely important in this context.

3.2.3 The environment, climate change and food safety

The major environmental problems we are facingtranscend national borders and make bindingcooperation and common rules essential. Norwayand the EU base their environmental policy on thesame fundamental principles and an understand-ing that environmental considerations must alsobe an integral part of other areas of policy. As setout in the EEA Agreement, Norway and the EUshare the same aims: to ensure a high level of pro-tection concerning health, safety and the environ-ment and to preserve, protect and improve thequality of the environment. Since the EEA Agree-ment was signed, it has therefore been a politicalaim to maintain close, binding cooperation withthe EU on environmental policy, and much of theEU’s legislation on environmental issues has beenincorporated into the EEA Agreement. Norwaytherefore participates actively and extensively inthe development of common EU environmentalrules. This participation is also important in termsof developing knowledge and ensuring effective

implementation of relevant legislation in Norwe-gian law.

EU environmental legislation has developedconsiderably since the conclusion of the EEAAgreement. Nowadays the tendency is towardsframework directives and cross-sectoral policyinstruments and objectives. Like legislation inother policy areas, new environmental legislationmust be independently assessed to determine itsEEA relevance and the consequences for Norwayif it is incorporated into the EEA Agreement. Thisis further discussed in Chapter 5.

Norway will continue to be a leading nation inenvironmental and climate policy and will work tosecure ambitious and binding multilateral envi-ronmental agreements. Norway cooperates withthe EU with a view to establishing ambitious cli-mate targets at the international level and cost-effective, market-based instruments to reduceemissions in the EEA. The further development ofthe EU emissions trading system will be particu-larly important for Norway. With the extension ofthe system in 2013, it will apply to approximately50 % of Norway’s greenhouse gas emissions. Afurther tightening of the cap (reducing the totalnumber of emission allowances) is being dis-cussed by the EU and is supported by Norway.Norway will cooperate with the EU on establish-ing stricter standards for vehicles and encourag-ing the use of more environmentally friendly fuelsto reduce emissions in the transport sector, as dis-cussed in the most recent White Paper on Norwe-gian climate policy (Meld. St. 21 (2011–2012). TheEU’s work on these issues is also important forreducing emissions in Norway.

In accordance with the precautionary principle,Norway attaches importance to the further devel-opment of EU chemicals legislation to ensure riskassessment of new substances, including nanoma-terials and endocrine disruptors, as well as toensure better consideration of the combinedeffects of chemicals (the cocktail effect). Norwayalso considers it important that legislation govern-ing articles imported from outside the EEA isstrengthened. Norway intends to play an activerole in further developing the EU chemicals legisla-tion, the REACH Regulation, both because it is partof the EEA Agreement and as such has a directimpact on Norwegian chemicals policy, andbecause it can be used to gain acceptance for Nor-way’s proposals on raising the level of ambition inthis area in Europe. In the current economic situa-tion it is important to support REACH and promoteits further development and improvement. Thislegislation is also helping to raise global standards,


since countries outside Europe are also adapting toit. The Norwegian authorities were activelyengaged in lobbying efforts vis-à-vis the EU in con-nection with the development of the REACH Regu-lation during both the preparatory and the adoptionphase of the legislative process. This work is nowcontinuing in the implementation phase as thescope of the regulation is continually beingexpanded to encompass new substances.

In the area of waste management countrieshave considerable flexibility in implementing therules as the EU’s waste legislation only estab-lishes minimum standards, allowing countries tointroduce stricter rules in their national legisla-tion. One example is the rules on take-backschemes for waste electrical and electronic equip-ment under the WEEE Directive, which have nowbeen revised by the EU. Norway’s experience andexpertise in waste management has made it possi-ble to exert an influence on the development ofEU legislation, and the EU’s new WEEE Directiveis closer to Norwegian waste legislation. Norwayhas long had a high profile in this area and hastaken a proactive approach throughout the entireprocess, both by providing written input at thepolitical level and through meetings with seniorEU officials.

Marine and inland water management in theEEA is a key area for Norway. Norway has a par-ticular responsibility here in its capacity as stew-ard of vast sea areas and of the environment andnatural resources in the High North. Both themanagement plans for sea areas and the manage-ment plans drawn up under the Water Manage-ment Regulations are important tools for achiev-ing a more integrated approach to the varioustypes of environmental pressure. Norway hasplayed a pioneering role in the development ofintegrated marine management plans, and theEU’s Marine Strategy Framework Directive hasbeen developed largely along the same lines asthe plans for Norway’s sea areas. In 2011 the Gov-ernment decided that the Marine Strategy Frame-work Directive was not to be incorporated into theEEA Agreement on the grounds that it applieslargely to areas outside the geographical scope ofthe EEA Agreement. A decision was also taken tofurther strengthen the already close cooperationwith the EU on management of the marine envi-ronment. The implementation of the WaterFramework Directive in the EEA, the implementa-tion by the EU countries of the Marine StrategyFramework Directive and the ongoing reform ofthe EU’s common fisheries policy are important inthis context.

The EU is developing comprehensive strate-gies for climate and environmental policy throughwhat are known as roadmaps and environmentalaction programmes. In 2012 the EU is due toestablish a new strategy in the form of a seventhEnvironmental Action Programme, which will setout important guidelines for environmental andclimate policy in the EEA for the next decade. TheEU’s Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe is atool for promoting a green economy and the sus-tainable use of resources. The roadmap contains anumber of initiatives and proposals for new legis-lation. Key themes include waste as a resource,the value of ecosystem services and green publicprocurement. Norway has wide experience ofusing environmental taxes and of integrating envi-ronmental considerations into all sectors of theeconomy.

High priority will be given to cross-sectoralefforts, as new environmental and climate legisla-tion, such as maritime spatial planning andrevised air pollution legislation, will primarily becross-sectoral in nature. Norway will continue tocooperate with the other Nordic countries at alllevels to build alliances and coordinate input intodecision-making processes.

Food safety

Legislation relating to food safety accounts for byfar the largest proportion of legislation under theEEA Agreement. Norway and the EU share manycommon interests and values in this area, includ-ing an interest in ensuring a high level of con-sumer protection and effective controls at allstages of the food production chain. Food safetylegislation is constantly being further developedand revised. It is therefore essential to maintain afocus on this area. Priority will be given to ensur-ing active Norwegian participation and involve-ment in the development of EU policy and legisla-tion. Norway will work to ensure that food is safeand wholesome, and will give priority to prevent-ing food safety problems by taking an integratedapproach to environmental considerations, inter-mediate inputs, animal health and human health.It is important that we use the options available tous under the EEA Agreement to ensure that Nor-way’s food legislation is as flexible as it is in theother EEA countries. Caution must be exercisedwhen new technologies are harnessed and thefocus must be on production methods that areconsidered safe. We will continue to pursue arestrictive policy with regard to genetically modi-fied organisms.


3.2.4 Cooperation on research and education

An integrated policy for the internationalisationof research and education is essential for ensur-ing quality, increasing competitiveness andaccess to new knowledge, and for strengtheningcooperation on societal challenges and in policyareas that are important for Norway. Participa-tion in the EU framework programmes forresearch and technological development and EUprogrammes for education and training is crucialin this context. The EU’s Seventh FrameworkProgramme for Research (FP7) is the largestprogramme in which Norway participates underthe EEA Agreement. It accounts for close to 70 %of Norway’s total contribution to EU programmecooperation.

Norway has taken part in the EU frameworkprogrammes for research and in EU educationand training programmes since the 1980s and1990s respectively. Through the EEA Agreement,Norway participates on an equal footing with theEU member states. Norway has observer status

in most of the committees that administer the pro-grammes and in other advisory bodies, and is reg-ularly invited to participate at informal ministerialmeetings.

The need for a common research effort in pri-ority policy areas has led to a strengthening ofresearch cooperation across national borders inEurope. Under Article 179 of the Lisbon Treaty,the EU countries have undertaken to worktowards the achievement of a European ResearchArea (ERA). The ERA is described as an openspace for research within the internal market inwhich there is free movement of knowledge – the“fifth freedom”. The ERA is discussed in moredetail in Box 6.2.

The EU research programmes have served asimportant instruments for promoting concretesteps towards the development of the ERA, whichis also a key element of the Commission’s greenpaper on a new strategic framework for EU rese-arch and innovation funding, Horizon 2020, to belaunched in 2014. Participation in the ERA is the-refore closely linked to participation in EU rese-arch programmes.

Figure 3.1 The Norwegian company Pharmaq has received funding under the EU’s Eurostars Programme to develop new salmon vaccines, together with the Swedish company Isconova. The Eurostars Pro-gramme provides funding to research-performing small and medium-sized enterprises.

Photo: Kjetil Malkenes Hovland


Horizon 2020 will focus on three priority areas:excellent science, competitive industries and bet-ter society. The programme will provide the basisfor innovation and policy development in a num-ber of sectors, with a view to meeting commonsocietal challenges relating to the environmentand climate change, energy, health and food secu-rity, transport and civil protection.

Norway’s contribution to the programme bud-get is calculated on the basis of the ratio between

Norway’s GDP and the combined GDP of all theEU countries. For the period 2014–20 the Com-mission has proposed a budget of approximatelyEUR 88 billion. It has been challenging for Nor-way to obtain as much in project funding from theEU as it contributes to the programme budget,despite the fact that Norwegian research groupshave a high profile in Europe and contribute topolicy development in the EU in fields such as theenvironment, climate, polar issues, and themarine and maritime sector. Health researchgroups are also increasingly focusing their effortson EU research initiatives, and Norway plays anactive role in several joint programming initiativeson health policy issues. However, project fundingreceived from the EU is only one of the benefitsNorway gains by participating in EU researchcooperation. Norwegian research groups are ableto build valuable networks and gain access to allthe knowledge generated in the projects in whichthey participate. Continued Norwegian participa-tion in EU research programmes must be asses-sed from a societal, business, budgetary and broa-der foreign policy perspective. Horizon 2020 willbe discussed further in the forthcoming WhitePaper on research policy.

The EU’s growth strategy, Europe 2020, pro-vides the political framework for the next periodof education and research programmes.

The proposed new EU programme for educa-tion, training, youth and sport, Erasmus for All, isbroader in scope than the current education pro-grammes. The main motivation for developing theErasmus for All programme is to strengthen thelinks between the development of education andtraining policy and education programmes at theEU level, from early childhood to adult education.The programme will also promote a knowledge-based economy in the EU – for example by creat-ing a solid foundation for innovation. There will bea new focus on strengthening partnershipsbetween the education sector and employers. Theprogramme will promote innovation, entrepre-neurship, growth and employment, as well asdemocracy-building, active citizenship and multi-cultural understanding in Europe. In addition itwill have a greater and more visible internationaldimension and will promote cooperation beyondEurope’s borders.

The Government intends to follow the pro-cesses in the EU closely and will revert to theStorting about Norway’s participation in Erasmusfor All and Horizon 2020 once the programmeshave been adopted by the EU.

Box 3.2 About the ERA

The Commission launched the idea of a Euro-pean Research Area in 2000. The aim was tocreate a space for the free movement of knowl-edge, by strengthening cooperation and theintegration of research policies in Europe. Thedevelopment of the ERA therefore involvesestablishing a framework for integratingresearch policy at the European level andidentifying ways in which Europe can addresscommon priorities and challenges throughjoint programmes. Concrete examples of thisare the joint programming initiative to meetthe challenges regarding European seas andoceans (JPI Oceans) and cooperation on theestablishment of an integrated pan-Europeaninfrastructure for state-of-the-art research ontechnologies enabling CO2 capture, transportand storage (CCS). In 2007–08 the idea of theERA was further defined and five areas for fur-ther development and cooperation were identi-fied: joint programming initiatives; policies tosafeguard working conditions and careerdevelopment opportunities for mobileresearchers; common European researchinfrastructures; policies to promote access toand transfer of scientific knowledge; and inter-national research cooperation with countriesoutside Europe. Under the Lisbon Treaty, theEU countries are committed to workingtowards the realisation of the ERA. Norwayparticipates in the ERA, both in specific pro-grammes and in advisory committees andcooperation bodies. This participation enablesus to encourage initiatives in areas that arepolitically important to Norway (for exampleon marine and maritime issues and in areassuch as climate change, energy, health andfood).


The Government will also follow the develop-ment of the ERA and work to ensure close cooper-ation in priority policy areas.

3.2.5 Rural and regional policy

The objectives of the Government’s rural andregional policy are to ensure equal living condi-tions, to maintain settlement patterns, and to pro-mote value creation, employment and welfarethroughout the country.

The population of Norway is relatively small,and settlement is dispersed. Overall, Norway hasa high rate of population growth, high levels ofemployment, low levels of unemployment and ahigh standard of living. The positive populationgrowth in many municipalities in recent years canlargely be explained by immigration.

However, some regions of Norway face con-siderable challenges. These relate primarily topopulation decline (an aging population and out-ward migration) and a lack of job opportunities.Domestic net migration towards the centralregions of Norway is in part due to the greaternumber of jobs that are attractive to young peopleto be found in these areas. However, these chal-lenges must be said to be moderate in comparisonwith those faced by the other Nordic countriesand the rest of Europe.

A characteristic feature of interactionsbetween urban and rural areas in Norway is thatnatural resources and production tend to belocated in less central regions, whereas the headoffices of companies serving national and interna-tional markets are located in the larger cities, as ismost of the public administration. The Norwegianexport sector is largely located in the coastalcounties of Norway. The Norwegian economy,based as it is on raw materials and exports, isdependent on the existence of good, stable inter-national framework conditions for foreign trade.International framework conditions are thereforevery important for Norway’s rural and regionalpolicy.

Economic growth in Norway in recent years islargely due to improvement in its terms of trade,in other words between export prices for productssuch as oil and fish on the one hand and consumergoods that Norway imports on the other. Marketaccess and the economic situation in our tradingpartner countries are two key factors that affectthe overall Norwegian economy. Because of thestructure of the Norwegian economy, these fac-tors are also highly significant for Norway’s ruraland regional policy.

The links between regional development inNorway and developments in the rest of Europehave become increasingly clear in recent years.Parts of the Norwegian public and private sec-tors are experiencing a shortage of labour.Labour immigration therefore has a positiveimpact on business development and the provi-sion of public services. Following the enlarge-ment of the EU to include the countries of Cen-tral and Eastern Europe, there has been consid-erable labour immigration to Norway from theEU. Many of these labour migrants come fromthe Baltic countries and Poland, as well as fromSweden. It will be important in the future to fol-low the further development of this labour immi-gration and to assess the consequences for localcommunities and companies in Norway of a pos-sible return migration.

One of the objectives of Norway’s rural andregional policy is, as mentioned above, to maintainthe main features of present settlement patterns.To achieve this goal, the Government is seekingto promote local and regional growth in areaswhere economic growth is relatively low, dis-tances to markets are long, the economy is poorlydiversified and the population is stagnant ordeclining.

The challenges Norway’s regions are facingdiffer somewhat from those seen in EU regions.In Norway wealth is relatively evenly distributed,but low population density and long distancesbetween communities and economic centres poseproblems for companies in peripheral regions. Itin is Norway’s interests to continue to be able topursue a vigorous policy to meet the challengesNorway’s regions are facing. Key instruments ofrural and regional policy, covered by the EEAAgreement, are regional investment aid and thedifferentiated employers’ national insurance con-tribution scheme. It is important for Norway tocontinue to be able to use schemes such as theseto support business development and therebypopulation growth in sparsely populated areas.Positive economic and social development in theEU is also very important for Norway’s rural andregional policy in terms of providing a solid basisfor Norwegian exports.

The Government will monitor EU processesthat may have implications for the range ofoptions available to Norway in pursuing an activeand targeted rural and regional policy. EU com-petition legislation is very important in this con-text, in particular legislation on state aid andregional aid. Public procurement legislation is ofcrucial importance for Norway’s municipalities


and counties in their role as purchasers of goodsand services, and compliance with the legislationrequires significant resources and expertise. Inconnection with the ongoing revision by the EUof the existing public procurement directives, areview of Norwegian legislation will also be car-ried out. A committee will be appointed to reviewthe specifically Norwegian aspects of public pro-curement legislation, including an assessment ofthe national threshold value and the need fornational rules of procedure over and above thosearising from Norway’s international obligations.Experience of the legislation in the municipalsector and in Norwegian companies will beimportant in this work.

Norway has gained acceptance for continuedsupport for business development in the form ofregional investment aid and differentiated employ-ers’ national insurance contributions in areas oflow population density and population decline. EUlegislation is revised periodically. The Govern-ment will seek to participate in formal and infor-mal arenas to discuss and obtain information ondevelopments in this field.

The Government will also make use of Nordicarenas for discussion and will seek to cooperatewith countries that are facing similar challengesas regards rural and regional policy. Experiencehas shown that cooperation at Nordic level isimportant for making views heard and for obtain-ing information in the EU.

The Government will also promote trainingand development in rural districts and regionsthrough participation in regional developmentprogrammes together with EU member states.Through the INTERREG programmes, whichsupport interregional cooperation across Europe,Norwegian participants have gained new inspira-tion and ideas for solutions to concrete issues, inareas ranging from business development to envi-ronmental problems. This cooperation has alsoenabled the Norwegian municipal sector, theresearch and consultancy community, privatecompanies and public institutions to expand theirnetworks, acquire knowledge on differentapproaches to regional development and achievebetter results than they could have done workingalone.

Box 3.3 Differentiated employers' national insurance contributions

The Norwegian scheme for differentiatedemployers’ national insurance contributions isan important instrument of regional policy.Under the scheme, the country is divided intodifferent geographical zones with varying ratesof national insurance contributions. Employersin more peripheral areas pay lower nationalinsurance contributions than employers in cen-tral areas. State aid schemes that existed whenthe EEA Agreement came into force in 1994 hadto be submitted to the EFTA SurveillanceAuthority for approval. Norway did not considerthe scheme for differentiated employers’national insurance contributions to be state aid,and so did not submit it for approval. TheAuthority disagreed with this assessment andopened an investigation procedure in 1995. In1997 the Authority concluded that aspects of theNorwegian scheme must be regarded as stateaid and required Norway to amend the scheme.In 1999 the Norwegian authorities brought thecase before the EFTA Court. Norway lost thecase, but the Court ruled that the schemeinvolving different zones and rates could be con-tinued, if amended in accordance with the deci-

sion of the Authority. In 2002, following a similarcase in the EU, the Authority required Norwayto make further amendments to the scheme.With broad backing from all the political parties,Norway received support from Iceland andLiechtenstein to invoke an exemption clause inthe Surveillance and Court Agreement and con-tinue parts of the scheme, i.e. the zero rate inFinnmark and Troms. The Authority’s decisionwas thereby set aside. In 2004 the Commissioncarried out a further revision of the guidelinesfor regional aid. Norway cooperated closely withSweden and Finland to achieve the desiredadjustments to the guidelines. In 2005 the Com-mission adopted new regional aid guidelinesthat allowed for aid to be provided to regionswith low population density to prevent outwardmigration. As a result Norway was able to rein-state the system of regionally differentiatedemployers’ contributions of 2007. There hasbeen broad political agreement about thescheme in Norway and the Norwegian authori-ties will give priority to ensuring that the currentscheme can be continued after the next revisionof the guidelines for regional aid in 2013.


3.2.6 Market access for Norwegian seafood

Norway and the EU are partners in the manage-ment of living marine resources, and are mutuallydependent on one another as regards the manage-ment of common stocks. Norway is the EU’s mostimportant supplier of seafood and the EU is Nor-way’s most important market for the export ofseafood. Some 60 % by value of Norwegian sea-food exports go to the EU, and Norway is thecountry that supplies the largest share of seafoodimports to the EU (20 %). Norway alone has a totalannual catch of approximately 2.5 million tonnes,whereas the total annual catch for all the 27 EUmember states combined is no more than around5 million tonnes (figures for 2011 from Eurostat).

Norway is one of the world’s leading fisheriesnations, and Norwegian fisheries and aquaculturemanagement are highly respected in EU institu-tions. Norway is therefore an important partnerfor the EU when it comes to addressing commonchallenges and promoting common interestswithin marine resource management. Norway’scooperation with the EU in this area is based on acommon approach to some of the major issuesrelating to the sustainable management of livingmarine resources. It is in the interests of both par-ties to maintain and further develop this coopera-tion.

Market access for Norwegian seafood in theEU is not satisfactory and over time a complexsystem of over 50 bilateral tariff quotas has devel-oped, while at the same time the EU has retainedcustoms duties on important fish species. The EUhas introduced restrictions on the import of Nor-wegian fish on several occasions. The Norwegianauthorities will continue to work to improve mar-ket access for Norwegian seafood in the EU.

3.3 The Nordic countries and Europe

There are many examples of how Nordic coopera-tion has contributed to wider European coopera-tion and put its imprint on policy developments inEurope. This is particularly evident in areas suchas social and health issues, gender equality, theworking environment, environmental protection,electricity supply and transparency and access toinformation.

The Government gives priority to strengthen-ing the contacts and information exchange on theEU and European issues that takes place underthe Nordic cooperation in a wide range of areas.The Government is seeking to maintain close Nor-

dic cooperation on important European issues andwill make active use of bilateral ties and networks.Norway has enjoyed particularly fruitful coopera-tion with the EU Presidency when it has beenheld by a Nordic country, most recently by Den-mark in the first half of 2012. It is important thatissues that are to be dealt with in the EU and EEAand that have relevance for all the Nordic coun-tries are discussed in a Nordic context at an earlystage. Nordic cooperation enables Norway to fol-low legislative developments in the EU moreclosely than would otherwise be possible. Muchof this cooperation focuses on what the Nordiccountries can contribute to the development of EUlegislation in terms of input and expert documen-tation, as well as on supporting work on globalconventions. At the same time it is also importantto be informed at an early stage of cases wherethe Nordic countries do not have common inter-ests.

Norway chose the welfare state in a Nordicperspective as the main focus area for its presi-dency of the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2012.This theme was chosen against the backdrop ofthe current situation in Europe, including the con-tinuing impact of the financial crisis, the debt cri-sis and the economic, social and political chal-lenges the EU and a number of EU member statesare facing. The economic situation in Europe andits consequences have also affected the Nordiccountries. The Nordic countries can bring experi-ence and examples of political solutions reachedacross national borders to the EU cooperation asconcrete contributions to policy development inEurope. Thus, policy development in the Nordiccountries and Europe are closely intertwined in aprocess where dialogue and exchange of experi-ence are crucial.

In the Government’s view, the Nordic coun-tries are well placed to become a pioneer regionwithin Europe, particularly in the field of greengrowth, i.e. economic growth and developmentwithin safe ecological limits. During its Presi-dency of the Nordic Council of Ministers the Gov-ernment will also focus on the links between edu-cation, research and innovation, green growth andsustainable health and welfare systems.

In certain areas the Nordic countries shouldseek to develop models of cooperation and solu-tions that can later be implemented in the EU andthe EEA. The Nordic countries deregulated theirelectricity markets long before the other Euro-pean countries, for example, and have establishedthe Nordic electricity exchange Nord Pool Spot.Institutionalised Nordic cooperation under the


Nordic Council of Ministers has also proved effec-tive in various areas. It is perhaps particularly ben-eficial for small countries to develop meetingplaces such as these to establish close contact andlearn more about each other and about othergroups. This could also have a positive impact onour cooperation with the EU and EEA.

Border barriers and mobility

The removal of border barriers between the Nor-dic countries is a key area of cooperation underthe Nordic Council of Ministers. The free move-ment of labour, goods and services is essential forthe development of a well-functioning internalmarket. One of the priorities of the Norwegianpresidency in 2012 is the removal of existing bor-der barriers and the prevention of new ones.Efforts are underway to draw up an overview ofexisting border barriers and ensure that new bar-riers are not created as a result of new EU legisla-tion.

The Nordic countries, the international community and Europe

Due to the close Nordic cooperation in interna-tional forums and processes, our Nordic neigh-bours are also close partners in an EU context.Close Nordic cooperation on international andsecurity policy issues, for example in the UN, is animportant supplement to the cooperation thattakes place between Norway and the EU withinthe framework of the EU Common Foreign andSecurity Policy. The further development of coop-eration between NATO and its partner countries,including in Afghanistan, Libya and towards Syriaand other Arab Spring countries, offers opportuni-ties for a Nordic approach to European coopera-tion. The involvement of the Nordic countries inpeace and reconciliation efforts, for example inMyanmar, is another important contribution toEuropean foreign and security policy cooperation.

The Nordic countries have particular advan-tages in that they have developed stable demo-cratic institutions and promoted human rights, inparticular women’s rights, over the course ofmany years. Many countries are therefore seek-ing to learn from their experience. The Nordiccountries have a common message, share thesame values and employ similar policy instru-ments, and as a result reinforce each other’s posi-tions.

The Government will present a White Paperon Nordic cooperation in autumn 2012.


The Government will: – Promote the development of a well-functioning

internal market that ensures good frameworkconditions for Norwegian companies, valuecreation and welfare. In this work emphasis isplaced on maintaining close dialogue withstakeholders in Norway.

– Make use of the opportunities and availableoptions provided by the EEA Agreement whenimplementing EEA legislation in Norway, so asto promote the development of a well-function-ing internal market and safeguard the Norwe-gian model of labour relations, the needs ofNorwegian companies and Norwegian valuecreation.

– Ensure that the Norwegian model of labourrelations is maintained. This involves continu-ing the tripartite cooperation between employ-ers, the trade union movement and the state,safeguarding pay and working conditions inconnection with the establishment of compa-nies and the provision of services acrossnational borders, and protecting collectiverights, including the right to strike.

– Cooperate with the EU in the areas of healthsecurity and civil protection.

– Promote the development of well-functioningand predictable energy markets in Europe andsafeguard Norwegian interests in connectionwith the development of EU policy and legisla-tion, particularly that relating to natural gas,electricity, oil and renewable energy. The Gov-ernment attaches importance to continuingNorway’s energy dialogue with the EU.

– Continue its close, binding cooperation withthe EU on environmental policy. This involvessafeguarding Norway’s environmental inter-ests and promoting a sound environmental pol-icy in Europe.

– Seek to ensure that the EU’s new programmesfor 2014–20 are developed in line with Nor-way’s views and priorities, particularly in thefields of education and research. Norwegianparticipation in the EU’s new framework pro-gramme for research and innovation (Horizon2020) must be assessed not only in terms of itsresearch and innovation dimension, but alsofrom a societal, business, budgetary andbroader foreign policy perspective.

– Continue to pursue an active regional policywithin the framework of the EEA Agreement. Itis particularly important that support for busi-


ness development in the form of regionalinvestment aid and differentiated employers’national insurance contributions can continueto be provided to areas of low population den-sity and population decline.

– Work to secure improved market access forNorwegian seafood in the EU market and fur-ther develop cooperation on joint managementof the marine environment and living marineresources.

– Promote the development of a sound Europeanregulatory framework for the financial sector

as well as strong financial institutions, andthereby reduce the risk of crisis and economiccollapse.

– Seek to maintain close Nordic cooperation onimportant European issues. The Governmentconsiders it important that issues to be dealtwith in the EU and EEA and that have rele-vance for all the Nordic countries are discussedin a Nordic context at an early stage.

– Further develop the annual work programmefor EU/EEA issues so that it becomes a strate-gic instrument in Norway’s European policy.


4 Key instruments of Norway’s European policy

The Government pursues a proactive Europeanpolicy based on the objectives set out in the Gov-ernment’s policy platform and Report No. 23(2005–2006) to the Storting on the implementa-tion of European policy. The Government consid-ers it important that Norwegian positions are for-mulated as far as possible on the basis of open andinclusive consultative processes. This will ensurethat Norwegian positions are better informed andwill help to enhance political awareness of mattersunder discussion in the EU. Strengthening knowl-edge of the EU/EEA in the public administrationand ensuring more systematic dialogue with rele-vant stakeholders will be key policy instruments.The Government is also seeking to strengthen thedemocratic basis for the development of Norway’sEuropean policy by increasing the level of interestin and debate on the EU and the EEA in Norway.Ensuring access to better information and promot-ing knowledge about Norway’s agreements withthe EU in Norwegian society is of key importancein this context.

4.1 Information and knowledge

The Government’s aim is to pursue an open Euro-pean policy that encourages debate and dialogue.Our relations with our European partners, whichare governed by the EEA Agreement and Nor-way’s other agreements with the EU, affect mostsectors of Norwegian society.

The Government will work to promote thehighest level of transparency in EU/EEA pro-cesses. Priority will be given to ensuring access toinformation on important EU/EEA processes.The EEA database on the Government’s Euro-pean portal (“Europaportalen”) will be furtherdeveloped, and a database for justice and homeaffairs matters will be established.

The web-based information channels are cru-cial to the Government’s efforts in this area.Updating and improving the European portal hasbeen a key part of the Government’s work tomake information on the EEA and Norway’s rela-tions with the EU more accessible, and the portal

will be further developed in the future. Theupdated portal was launched in July 2012. The aimhas been to make the new European portal a com-prehensive source of information on Norway’scooperation with the EU. This means that relevantEU/EEA information both from the ministriesand from the Norwegian Mission to the EU inBrussels is now gathered on one website.

The European portal has also been made moreuser-friendly. It contains a combination of back-ground information and information on currentissues and is aimed at different target groups,such as the public administration, interest organ-isations, Norwegian companies, school pupils andstudents.

Sound information is essential but not in itselfsufficient to secure awareness of and politicaldebate on key EU/EEA issues. The Governmentwill work to ensure that information is communi-cated in such a way that it stimulates broaddebate, which is important for safeguarding effec-tive democratic processes.

The European portal will have a separate web-page for new Commission initiatives. The Com-mission sends information about new initiatives tothe EEA/EFTA bodies, and the Government willmake this information available to the public viathe portal. The aim is to ensure that relevantstakeholders in Norway have access to informa-tion about new EU initiatives at the earliest possi-ble stage.

The public debate concerning the referen-dums on EU membership in 1972 and 1994showed a great deal of popular interest in issuesrelating to Norway’s cooperation with the EU.People were generally well-informed and therewas broad participation in the debate.

The Government considers it important interms of safeguarding Norwegian interests thatNorwegian citizens have an adequate knowledgeof Norway’s cooperation and agreements with theEU.

A new generation has grown up since the sec-ond referendum in 1994. In a survey of knowledgeof the EU and Norway’s agreements with the EUamong the Norwegian population, which was car-


ried out by the Sentio Research Group in May2011 in connection with the preparation of OfficialNorwegian Report NOU 2012:2 Outside andInside: Norway's agreements with the EuropeanUnion, young people in particular reported thattheir knowledge of these areas was poor. Both theofficial report itself and a large number of com-ments received in connection with its preparationindicate a need to increase efforts to enhanceyoung people’s knowledge of Norway’s agree-ments with the EU. Knowledge of the EU/EEA isone of the subject areas included in the currentnational curriculum for social studies and in thelearning objectives set for years 7, 10 and the firstyear of upper secondary school. The Governmentwill support the work carried out by schools toensure that these learning objectives areachieved. It is important for young people to haveaccess to up-to-date and neutral information. TheGovernment will therefore facilitate the develop-

ment of information material that can be used tosupport teaching in schools.

Norwegian research on European issues

Since the 1990s Norwegian researchers havegained international recognition for their in-depthresearch on European integration and its conse-quences. Norwegian research on European issueshas helped to promote public debate in Norway,enhance education at various levels andstrengthen the knowledge base for Norway’sEuropean policy. Given the importance of develop-ments in the EU and of European integration forNorway in a wide range of areas, the Governmentwill continue to promote the development of astrong community of researchers on Europeanissues in Norway. It is vital that the results ofresearch projects are made available to the gen-eral public.

Figure 4.1 An upgraded European portal was launched in summer 2012. The new portal is a comprehen-sive source of information on Norway’s cooperation with the EU.


4.2 Transparency and inclusion

One of the Government’s clear aims is to securethe involvement of Norwegian stakeholders in theauthorities’ work on EU/EEA matters at an earlystage. The Government considers it important toobtain information about how new EU initiativesaffect private individuals, organisations, compa-nies and the local and regional public administra-tion. The Government also emphasises the impor-tance of ensuring that, through their participationin European umbrella organisations, relevantstakeholders have access to information andopportunities to exert an influence, both of whichare important when promoting common interests.

The Government has taken several steps toincrease the level of stakeholder involvement inwork on EU/EEA matters. These include estab-lishing a number of dialogue forums where Euro-pean policy issues are discussed. These effortswill be further strengthened in the future.

The EU decision-making process is rapid, andthe Commission’s proposals are often amendedduring discussions in the Council and the Euro-pean Parliament. Ensuring that stakeholders inNorwegian society have the opportunity to putforward their assessments and views well beforethe EU takes a decision that may have implica-tions for Norway is one of the Government’s clearobjectives. It is also important to obtain technicaland legal expertise from outside the public admin-istration, including from relevant stakeholders, onthe issue of how EEA legislation should be imple-mented into Norwegian law in specific fields.

4.3 EU/EEA expertise in the public administration

Work on EU/EEA-related matters requires knowl-edge of EU policy and legislation in the variousfields. It also requires knowledge about institu-tions and decision-making processes in the EUand EEA. Expertise in EU/EEA law is also cru-cial, as are language skills, knowledge of meetingpractices and the ability to build networks. More-over, a high level of EU/EEA expertise is essen-tial if Norway is to be able to participate actively atan early stage of the EU legislative process. It isalso crucial if Norway is to be able to make use ofthe options available at the national level whenimplementing EEA legislation. In-depth knowl-edge of the EU/EEA is needed not only in the cen-tral government administration and its subordi-nate agencies, which are responsible for following

up cooperation with the EU on an ongoing basis,but also in the local and regional administration,which has considerable responsibility for applyingthe legislation in practice, in accordance with ourEEA obligations. It is also important that stake-holders in the private sector and in society as awhole are well informed about the EU/EEA. Thiswill enhance Norway’s ability to identify and pro-mote its interests effectively.

Training courses

A great deal of expertise on the EU/EEA hasbeen developed in the public administration, butthere is scope for improvement. A survey carriedout by the Agency for Public Management andeGovernment in 2008 indicated that knowledge isparticularly good among employees who haveworked on EU/EEA-related matters for a longtime. However, this knowledge is to some extentheld by individual employees, which makes gov-ernment agencies vulnerable to employee turn-over. The survey showed that knowledge of theEU/EEA is generally poor among employees whoare not directly involved in work in this area,including at management level. EU/EEA issuesaffect most areas of society and are a cross-cuttingelement of almost all activity within the publicadministration. It is therefore vital that all civil ser-vants have some general knowledge of the EUand EEA. Training courses in this area should befurther developed within already existing struc-tures. The Government will work to ensure thatbasic knowledge of EU/EEA issues is integratedinto training courses provided at all levels of thepublic administration. Information on EU/EEAmatters will be part of the general training pro-vided to all new employees and to new managersin the public administration.

Civil servants in ministries and governmentagencies who work with EU/EEA legal issuesmust have a thorough knowledge of EU/EEA lawso that Norway can make good use of the optionsavailable at the national level when implementingEU/EEA legislation. At present no systematictraining in EU/EEA law is provided to lawyersand other employees responsible for dealing withEEA legislation. The Government thereforeintends to strengthen and systematise the trainingprovided. This can be done by including a moduleon EU/EEA law in the programme on Norway’scooperation with the EU offered by the Agencyfor Public Management and eGovernment. TheAgency plans to carry out an evaluation of thisprogramme in autumn 2012, which will give an


indication of whether it is successfully meetingthe needs of the users and will provide a basis forits further development.

Making good use of existing expertise

In addition to improving the training provided toemployees, it is important to make the best possi-ble use of existing resources. Priority will there-fore be given to ensuring that expertise that hasbeen developed through work on EU/EEA mat-ters is put to good use. Much of the EU/EEAexpertise to be found in the Norwegian publicadministration has been developed through par-ticipation in expert groups and committees underthe Commission. In addition, participation in EUagencies and administrative networks, and in thecontext of the Schengen cooperation in the MixedCommittee under the Council, has become impor-tant in terms of providing opportunities for learn-ing and developing expertise. Sound expertiseand the continuity of Norwegian participation areessential if Norway is to be able to exert an influ-ence in these forums. To ensure the transfer ofknowledge, new employees should be involved inthis work, for example by participating in meet-ings together with more experienced employees.

National experts

Under the EEA Agreement, Norway has theopportunity to second national experts to theCommission, and also to EU agencies that areunder the Commission’s administrative authority.However, we have no such agreement with theother EU institutions. Nevertheless, in the period2006–09 a national expert from the Ministry ofTrade and Industry was seconded to the secretar-iat of the European Parliament’s Committee onthe Internal Market and Consumer Protection.This provided an important channel into the Euro-pean Parliament for both the Norwegian publicadministration and other Norwegian stakehold-ers. Due to the success of this secondment, theGovernment is seeking to continue this arrange-ment.

It is important to ensure that the ministriestake full advantage of the opportunities we have tosecond national experts to the Commission. TheGovernment will give priority to ensuring that sec-onded national experts from the Norwegian pub-lic administration are as far as possible given pol-icy-oriented tasks while working at the Commis-sion. This means that we have to be able to pro-vide highly qualified candidates who can offer rel-

evant expertise. Experience shows that in manyareas, such as food safety, Norwegian nationalexperts are given responsibility for key policyareas on the basis of their qualifications and as aresult of their well-developed networks in the EUsystem and a proactive recruitment policy by therelevant Norwegian authorities.

The Agency for Public Management and eGov-ernment recently conducted a survey on the pub-lic administration’s use of seconded nationalexperts to the Commission, which showed thatbetter use could be made of the scheme. The Gov-ernment will work to ensure that all ministriesdevelop a strategic approach to recruitment,choice of place of service, contact during theperiod of secondment and the use of acquiredexpertise following return to Norway. The Gov-ernment will also work to make it possible forlocal and regional authorities to second expertsand other personnel to the Commission.

4.4 Close coordination of EU/EEA-related work in the public administration

The increase in cross-sectoral initiatives and legis-lation in the EU has led to a need for closer coordi-nation in the public administration. The Govern-ment is seeking to improve coordination betweenthe ministries, based on the current division ofresponsibilities between members of the Govern-ment. The political and constitutional responsibil-ity for the various fields lies with the relevant min-ister. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsi-ble for ensuring that Norway fulfils its obligationsunder the EEA Agreement and its other agree-ments with the EU, and also for ensuring that Nor-way has an integrated European policy by coordi-nating Norway’s views and communicating acoherent position to the EU and our EFTA part-ners. The Ministry of Finance’s responsibility forcoordinating the budget and implementing eco-nomic policy also encompasses EU/EEA matters.

Coordination will be strengthened on the basisof existing structures, including separate coordi-nating committees for EEA and Schengen mattersand a well-developed system of EEA special com-mittees. In priority areas where there is a particu-lar need for coordination, the Government will beable to appoint working groups on a more ad hocbasis within this framework. Efforts will also bemade to involve relevant stakeholders moreclosely and systematically in the public adminis-tration’s work on EU and EEA matters.


The Norwegian Mission to the EU in Brusselshas a key role to play in communicating Norway’sviews to EU institutions. The mission’s staff arerecruited from all parts of the government admin-istration. The mission’s role includes followingpolitical developments in the EU in the variousfields, analysing these developments and keepingrelevant ministries informed on an ongoing basis.

Firm commitment and active involvement atthe political level in the ministries is essential toenable Norway to put forward its views at an earlystage. In connection with this, it is important toensure close coordination between relevant minis-tries and their subordinate agencies, since the lat-ter often represent the Norwegian authorities inexpert groups and committees. Defining clearnational positions requires an understanding ofthe fundamental issues involved in each case. It istherefore an important task to identify and com-municate the politically important aspects of anew case as early as possible. This does notrequire the creation of new structures, but ratherthat there are effective procedures for transfer-ring relevant information from the public adminis-tration to the political level.

Municipalities and counties are responsible forfollowing up much of EEA legislation once it hasbeen incorporated into Norwegian law. The Gov-ernment will therefore work to promote a moresystematic dialogue between the various levels ofthe public administration, as part of its efforts todevelop Norwegian positions and promote Nor-way’s views, and in connection with the implemen-tation of new EEA legislation.

Increasing the involvement of the research community and other external actors

A number of Norwegian research groups, stake-holders, municipalities and counties participateactively in efforts relating to the EU through vari-ous European organisations. A common feature ofthese actors is that they have important expertiseand often also access to networks and informationthat the Norwegian authorities lack. It is thereforecrucial to coordinate the work of relevant authori-ties and external actors more systematically thanis the case today. The Government will seek toincrease the level of involvement of the researchcommunity and relevant stakeholders in thedevelopment of Norway’s policy towards the EUin priority areas. The plan is to hold annual consul-tations on important European policy issues basedon the model of the six-monthly consultationswith the Storting.

The Government is also seeking to strengthenits contact with stakeholders in its ongoing workon EU/EEA matters. Most of the EEA specialcommittees have appointed reference groups con-sisting of representatives of relevant interestgroups and local authorities. The Government willencourage the special committees to involve thereference groups to a greater extent and at anearly stage in the work of developing Norway’spositions on EU/EEA matters.

The possibility of offering secondments orinternships at the Norwegian Mission to the EUin Brussels for representatives of Norwegianorganisations will also be considered.

4.5 Mutual responsibility for managing the EEA Agreement

EU institutions and member states have repeat-edly expressed their satisfaction with the EEAAgreement and other agreements between theEU and Norway. Through the EEA Agreementthe EU enjoys orderly and predictable relationswith Norway, a key trade partner and importantsupplier of energy, seafood, capital, maritimetransport services, environmentally sound solu-tions and so on. Both the EU and Norway have aclear interest in maintaining these good relations.The EU generally appears to have great confi-dence that the EFTA Surveillance Authority andthe EFTA Court function as intended and are ableto ensure compliance with the provisions of theEEA Agreement.

In 2011, responsibility for managing the EEAAgreement was transferred from the Commissionto the European External Action Service (EEAS),the EU’s new diplomatic corps. The assumption isthat by concentrating responsibility for the EUsexternal relations in the EEAS, the EU will be in abetter position to develop a coherent foreign pol-icy. This could strengthen the basis for a broaddialogue between the EU and Norway. There arealso indications that the EU’s relations with thirdcountries are becoming more streamlined. Partici-pation in EU expert groups and committees isbased on the rights conferred by the EEA Agree-ment. It is important for Norway that this is con-tinued, in line with the intentions and principles ofthe EEA cooperation. It is important to emphasisethat it is in the interest of both parties that theEEA Agreement functions as well as possible, andboth parties are responsible for ensuring that itdoes so. This means that it is essential that the EUalso has a thorough knowledge of the EEA and


that work related to the EEA Agreement is giventhe necessary attention.

Day-to-day work relating to the EEA Agree-ment involves extensive contact between Norwe-gian officials and the Commission and relevantexpert bodies. This is crucial for the EEA cooper-ation in the various fields and helps the EU tomaintain its knowledge of key EEA matters. TheNorwegian Mission to the EU, the Norwegianembassies and relevant ministries play an impor-tant role in providing information to EU institu-tions and the member states. In addition, the Min-istry of Foreign Affairs holds regular meetingsand conferences on Norwegian European policyat which representatives of the EU participate.The Government will continue to give priority tothese contact-building and information activities.


The Government will: – Support the work carried out by schools to

ensure that established learning objectives areachieved, and facilitate the development ofinformation material that can be used to sup-port teaching in schools.

– Promote the development of a strong commu-nity of researchers on European issues in Nor-way.

– Work to strengthen knowledge about the EEAat all levels of the public administration by pro-viding relevant training and making better useof existing expertise.

– Work to ensure that all ministries take fulladvantage of the opportunities we have to sec-ond national experts to the Commission. In theGovernment’s view, local and regional authori-ties should also be given the opportunity to sec-ond experts and other personnel to the Com-mission.

– Work to ensure the secondment of nationalexperts to the European Parliament.

– Continue to promote close coordination andefficiency in the public administration’s workon EU and EEA matters.

– Strengthen dialogue with stakeholders andlocal authorities in ongoing work on importantEU and EEA matters.

– Involve the research community and stake-holders in efforts to assess important Euro-pean policy issues.

– Make sure that the business sector is providedwith adequate information about the EEAAgreement and Norway’s other agreementswith the EU.