From Good Governance to Development? A Critical Perspective on the Case of Norway’s Oil for Development

Abstract

Good governance is a key buzzword in development aid discourse. It is a catch-all term denoting capacity building, poverty reduction and democracy, where the latter two elements function as legitimising factors. This paper discusses the Norwegian aid programme Oil for Development's understanding of good governance. Good governance discourse rests on a vision of African states as 'failed', and explains the lack of development as a product of poor governance. In Oil for Development, good governance simultaneously works as a condition to qualify for aid, a tool to implement aid and a goal for aid. Oil for Development sees good governance as mainly technical capacity-building, aiming to maximise government revenues from oil and clarifying roles in the state apparatus to contribute to a balance of power between the state and the oil industry. Poverty reduction and democracy building enter as legitimising elements providing the programme's rationale. This approach to development rests on a hope of a 'trickle-down' effect from increased capacity in the state apparatus to poverty reduction. This expectation is unlikely to materialise, as the formal structures of Oil for Development seeks to strengthen are trumped by informal ones. Further, the programme pretends to build its approach on an international consensus among researchers on governance, which effectively depoliticises aid and sees governance as an issue for experts. What constitutes 'good' in governance is however not a straightforward issue of clarity in roles and increased capacity.

How global norms matter: norm diffusion and the tangled web of localization in Ghana’s extractive industry

“…Within the oil industry, this broader trend was sustained by a measure of consensus within the epistemic networks around reform that upheld critical exemplars from outside. To reiterate, the example of Norway, in particular, often comes up in discussions around the country's ability to manage its oil resources (see Appiah-Adu, 2016;Solli, 2011). In our interviews with representatives of international organizations such as the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ), there was consistent reference to Norway and other Western examples.…”

Resource Governance and Developmental States in the Global South

“…This is the core of Solli's (2011) argument in his analysis of Norway's Oil for Development programme, which is explicitly based on the 'good governance' approach. Solli suggests that depoliticisation is a key function of good governance, as it works to disguise disagreements about how development is achieved.…”

“…Norway is also typically cited as an exemplar of good governance, for the way it transfers its oil revenues to social welfare programmes, for its stable and transparent democracy and for its sovereign wealth fund-saving revenues for future pension expenditures. Through its Oil for Development-aid programme, Norway is now exporting the ideas of good governance and the particular lessons derived from its own experience (Solli, 2011) and often cited as a system of governance that developing countries ought to strive to emulate.…”

Back to the Future? Charting Features of the Not-So-New Convergence in Aidland

“…This will likely place the Norwegian petro-complex at an advantage in scrambles for concessions and contracts at the huge oil/gas fields off the Brazilian coast. Similarly, the stated objective of flagship Oil for Development program has no direct commercial utilityit is about helping the recipient state manage its oil/gas resources and the revenues thereof, in an orderly and sustainable fashion (Solli 2011). However, when Norwegian experts and diplomats have shaped a country's petro-management model, and are acquainted with the regulators, the private petro-complex is well positioned to obtain advantages.…”