Search results

The paper aims to compare and discuss the findings of discursive constructions of patients in legal texts from the three Scandinavian countries. Since traditional welfare state systems in Scandinavia are being challenged by new governance systems, new questions are being raised about patient positions and agency, carrying with them potential ethical dilemmas for healthcare professionals.

The methodology of the paper is inspired by critical discourse analysis. Comprehensively analysing the findings of previous discourse studies on how “the patient” is constructed in central policy texts, this study compares the position of the patient in Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

The paper reveals ideological struggles across the Scandinavian countries, operating at a political level, a legislative level and a healthcare level. It is shown that national governance systems still exert hegemonic power by strongly influencing patients' degree of choice and autonomy. The discursive struggle between welfare state governance and other governance systems in Scandinavia indicates a shift towards a commercial healthcare market although a traditional welfare model is advocated by professionals and researchers.

Because of the specific conditions of Scandinavian healthcare policy, the findings lack generalisability. The research approach should therefore be explored further in additional contexts.

The findings of this study can inform policymakers, professionals and patients of the ideological values underlying seemingly objective shifts in national policy.

A comparative critical discourse analysis can expose patterns in the Scandinavian approaches to patient rights.

Immigration represents one of the most contentious and complicated issues for social democracy in many national contexts. In Scandinavia, the social democratic parties have been particularly tormented, being split internally on central concerns related to immigration policy. Social democratic parties in Scandinavia have had a basically ambiguous relationship to the issue from the initiation of the era of ‘new immigration’. This chapter argues that this can be explained by the specifically strong attachment and ‘ownership’ of these parties to the Scandinavian welfare model, with its particular claims on a strong tax base and an orderly labour market. ‘Social democracy’ is dealt with mainly as an institutional and political entity, close to what goes as ‘The Nordic Model’ in the international literature. The chapter describes and analyses similarities and differences between the three Scandinavian countries, through a historical exposé of the period after the early 1970s; on the one hand, the institutional and normative prerequisites for social democracies in handling migration, and on the other hand, the way in which recent flows of migrants have influenced the very same social democracies. Theoretically, the chapter is drawing on conceptual tools from political economy, citizenship discourse and institutional theory.

In the twenty-first century, societies around the world are facing a wide range of daunting global mega-challenges: poverty, unemployment, income inequality, unequal distribution of political power, ageing populations, uncontrolled migration, segregated urbanisation, increasing greenhouse gas emissions and a massive decrease in biodiversity. In recent years, politicians, journalists and academic observers have singled out the Nordic countries, Denmark in particular, as model societies of trusting and happy people that have handled many of these challenges with remarkable effectiveness. And yet others warn against ‘becoming Denmark,’ painting a picture of a dysfunctional, socialist nightmare with high taxes, low job motivation and a general lack of private initiative. In this introductory chapter, the editors cut through the noise of the international debate and set the scene for the nuanced analyses presented here of contemporary public governance in Demark and its capacity to tackle some of the most pressing problems of our time. Specifically, the chapter discusses various conceptualisations of the Danish welfare state, delineates some of its most important historical and structural traits and outlines the main empirical features of contemporary Danish public governance. Finally, it outlines the structure of the book and briefly introduces each of its subsequent chapters.

Today, the need for renewable energy is rising steadily. Various steps are being taken by nations to address the rising need. The developments occurring in proportion to the industrial structures and economic levels of the countries, these efforts, the political structure of the country, some established patterns from the past, and many other external factors affect the use of renewable energy and therefore sustainable development, which has been one of the most important agendas since the early 1990s. In this study, it is examined whether certain characteristics of the Scandinavian Welfare Model affect the background of this successful image of Finland, Denmark, and Sweden, which rank in the top three positions in both the Global Energy Innovation Index and the Sustainable Development Report. As a result, although the use of fossil fuels increases the ecological footprint in the Scandinavian countries, which are evaluated as in the rest of the world, continuing the principles of innovation, trust, equality, openness, and sustainability with determination, the Nordic approach has not departed from the welfare state principle compatible with its own codes, unlike the transformations experienced by other welfare regimes, and has become a distinctive factor.

This chapter presents the principal interpretations that took place in Denmark and Sweden regarding the discourse on ‘Diversity Management’. We organise our presentation around three major themes that are central to the local Scandinavian context: gender equality, migration and moral grounds. This chapter shows the important role of gender equality work practices and how these practices now tend to be progressively incorporated in a broad Diversity Management construct, possibly leading to a less radical stance. Moreover, the comparison between Denmark and Sweden reveals the political associations with Diversity Management and migration in Denmark, but not in Sweden. Our third contribution unveils the tensions between the value of equality, which remains strong in the Scandinavian welfare state model, and the actual practices of Diversity Management.

The aim of the article is to discuss the challenges from immigration to Nordic (gender) politics, theories and research. The research question is to what extent Nordic welfare and gender equality politics is based on exclusive solidarity biased towards the native majorities. A key issue is how Nordic gender theory and research has addressed multiple inequalities. The article briefly revisits the academic debates about gender equality, diversity and multiculturalism, which arguably represent two different paradigms: multicultural approaches have addressed the accommodation of minorities with diversity as the key concept, while feminist approaches have focused on gender (in)equality with gender as the key concept.

The intersectional approach suggests that increased migration and mobility present similar challenges for the two bodies of thought to address complex and multiple inequalities within and beyond the nation state. The main part explores “the multicultural dilemma” in greater detail focusing on the intersections between gender and etho‐national minorities in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

Perceptions of diversity and gender equality/women's rights are contextual and dynamic as intersecting diversities and inequalities are embedded in national histories, institutions and policies. Scholars have demonstrated that the discourse about women's rights and gender equality has become an intrinsic part of Nordic identities and belongings. The article suggests that the new forms of inequalities among women can be interpreted as a Nordic gender equality paradox between the relative inclusion of the native majority women and the relative marginalization of women from diverse ethnic minorities in society.

The intersectionality approach to gender and ethnicity in Scandinavia is in this article combined with a transnational approach to gender, diversity and migration.

Globally, Denmark stands out in terms of achieving high employment rates, containing unemployment and providing a labour market model combining flexibility, security and activation with a strong role for the social partners. The Danish labour market institutions and policies are seen as the catalyst for the transformation from industrial economy to a globalised, post-industrial and knowledge-based economy in which socio-economic equality and workforce security go hand in hand with competitiveness and the adaptability of business. In the 2000s, this mutual relationship came to be known as the Danish flexicurity model. Meanwhile, as a policy blueprint, ‘flexicurity’ has never really influenced Danish politics, and the reforms implemented since the 2000s have deviated from the premises of the model. This paper critically assesses the Danish model and its institutional components. It tracks the emergence of the Danish collective bargaining model as well as the flexicurity model. It scrutinises the challenges and performance of the current Danish labour market institutions and policies in a comparative perspective and discusses the extent to which the Danish experiences can and should be imitated abroad.

The expansion of social welfare in advanced capitalist countries following the Second World War has been phenomenal. Concomitant to this is the mushrooming of comparative social research devoted to the analysis of welfare states. The central question in comparative policy discourse has been the search for the determinants of social welfare development. There is no consensus over the structural determinants for welfare efforts. However, the literature on comparative social policy has identified a significant number of variables which spur social policy development: industrialization, urbanization, modernization, working‐class mobilization, union strength, state and its particular structure, open economy, diffusion, military spending, and national ideology (Wilensky & Lebeaux, 1965; Wilensky, 1975; Uusitalo, 1984; Wilensky, 1985; Flora, 1987; O'Conner, 1988; Esping‐Andersen, 1990; Pierson, 1991; Wong & Daley, 1991; Janoski & Hicks, 1994).

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the changes that have taken place in the central regulation of social care in Finland since the 1970s. The changes in vertical central‐local relations are discussed in the context of economic and welfare state development.

The paper is a case study, applying the concept of “the Nordic welfare municipality” to the case of Finland. With this concept, the author refers to the inherently contradictory character of the Nordic model of welfare governance: to a system that emphasises local self‐government but that, at the same time, perceives regional harmonisation as imperative.

After strong central control during the most intensive construction period of the Finnish welfare state in the 1970s and 1980s, a radical decentralisation reform was implemented in 1993. However, since the early 2000s pressure for centralisation has increased again as emerging regional inequalities in care service provisions came under criticism.

The paper identifies a cycle of decentralisation and recentralisation that reflects the fundamental discrepancy between the maxims of local autonomy and regional equality that are both formative elements of local governance within the Nordic welfare model.

The economic depression of the mid‐1970s gave reasons to question many presuppositions taken almost for granted earlier. This was the case with the welfare state too, which was seen to be in crisis. This study focuses on one particular aspect of the welfare state, namely, its acceptability or legitimacy among the citizens of Finland.