Skip Navigation

Norway

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE


Current Action Plan

2019-2021

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 8
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

Norway is currently implementing 8 commitments from their 2019-2021 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to beneficial ownership, public procurement, open cultural data, extractives transparency and local legislative openness.


Commitments


Resources

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

    2013, Research Product, Web page

  2. IRM Regional Snapshot: Nordics

    2020, Resource, Web page

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

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

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

    2019, Letter, Web page

  5. Norway – Under Review Letter – February 2021

    2021, Letter, Web page

  6. Norway Action Plan 2013-2015

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  7. Norway Action Plan 2019-2021

    2019, Action Plan, Web page

  8. Norway Design Report 2019-2021

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

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

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

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

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

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

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

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

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  13. Norway First IRM Progress Report 2011-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  14. Norway Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

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

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

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

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  17. Norway National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  18. Norway Progress Report 2013-2014 – Comments

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

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

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

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

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  21. Norway Second IRM Progress Report 2013-2014

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  22. Norway Self Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  23. Seeking Synergy: OGP & EITI

    2019, Research Product, Web page


Current Data

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

Commitment Performance

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

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

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

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

How to Get More Starred Commitments

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

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 4

Public Participation

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

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

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

Implementation

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

OGP Global Report Data

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

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

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

Action implications

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

IRM-based findings

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

 

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

Third-party scores

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

Anti-Corruption

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Civic Space

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Open Policy Making

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Access to Information

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Fiscal Openness

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Recent Posts

6203558248_45a438dd6c_o

What’s Next for Open Government in the Nordics

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

PRESS RELEASE: Breakthroughs on open government at UK Anti-Corruption Summit

OGP recognized by global leaders for its value in advancing anti-corruption reform OGP highlights from the Summit: Strong endorsement for Open Government Partnership (OGP) in the Anti-Corruption Summit Communique, signed by 40 attending governments, including role of civil society and…

Show More
Open Government Partnership