Effecting Equality: Norwegian Health Policy in Finnmark, 1945–1970s

Abstract

At the heart of “the Nordic model of welfare” is a strong will for national integration and social equality between citizens and regions. It is commonly held that that “homogeneity ethnic” is one explanatory factor behind the Nordic model of welfare. On the contrary, we claim that it is the political will to treat the population as homogeneous that influenced the creation of the model, not any factual ethnic homogeneity (which is, after all, a historical fiction, also in the Nordic context). Thus, the pursuit of integration and the strive for regional equality have challenged local autonomy and cultural diversity while at the same time underpinned arguments for a regionalization of politics and, to some extent, for ethnic particularization. Drawn between a strong state and local authority, universalism and particularization, welfare and health policies have reshaped the relationship between center and peripheries and between the majority and ethnic minorities.

The integration of the county of Finnmark into the national system of institutionalized welfare in Norway after World War II constitutes a good case to investigate not only the will, but also the ability, for national integration and equalization along the dimensions of centre–periphery and majority–minority relations, not only because of the county's position furthest to the north, but also because it held the largest minority populations. This article examines Norwegian policies to establish and effect equality between Finnmark and other regions in the field of health care facilities from 1945 until the 1970s, and the attempts to establish equal access to health services between the Sámi minority and the Norwegian majority population in Finnmark. It sheds light upon how the immanent conflict between the ideals of a national, universal welfare policy and particular measures in favor of the Sámi was conceived in the period. (The authors expected multi-culturality to be clearly visible in the sources. It was, but only with regard to one minority group, the Sámi. The Kvens were not discussed by the policy-makers in the period.) Furthermore, it has been argued that in the shaping and implementation of Norwegian health policies in the first years after World War II, primacy was given to expert knowledge. A particular point of interest in this article is how this primacy manifested itself in the choices of political strategies of universalism and particularism within the field of health policy in this particular geographical setting.