Moral obligation and the Nordics

Predictably the Nordic countries once again top the United Nations' Human Development Report

Predictably the Nordic countries once again top the United Nations' Human Development Report. Rather like good students who cause no trouble, Norway and Sweden consistently score well, with Norway No 1 and its neighbour placed second.

Historically these countries are endowed with an abundance of natural resources. The exploitation and successful management of these resources have made both Nordic neighbours affluent. But it is not just the head start on other economies that counts.

Yes, these countries reaped benefits earlier than most, but they are leaders because they capitalised on that wealth for the benefit of the majority. Imbued with strong social democratic virtues, political parties pursued a welfare policy which many other countries are now just beginning to follow.

The emphasis on a broad social agreement - the social contract - sees Nordic countries actively taking a moral responsibility for the less well off in their societies. And this contract is not limited to their own but extends to other less fortunate parts of the world.

READ MORE

Indeed Sweden and Norway are two of the few countries that have reached the minimum aid target of .07 per cent. And still these countries say they should be doing better. This commitment to improved targets underlines the basic attitude in Scandinavia.

In the realm of welfare politics the Scandinavians have clearly surpassed their neighbours. Despite recent criticisms amid cutbacks in education and health and a labour shortage compounding further the problems in these sectors, the service and care provided still exceed those of other countries.

Take, for example, third-level education. It is easier for the working class in Sweden to attend university, as student loans are available to all. And public schools are often regarded as better than private institutions, something hard to imagine in other countries.

So whatever criticisms are voiced, most Scandinavians cherish their welfare society and vehemently guard against any changes. Unlike other countries the difference between rich and poor appears slim in the Nordic countries.

Yes, critics will argue this is all changing, but it is still not enough to make a significant difference. Indeed there is little excuse to be poor in Scandinavia. Of course, there are the homeless. Some 5,000 people a night in the greater Stockholm area will testify to that.

However, this is more to do with being outside the system. The current housing crisis in Stockholm, for example, which makes it virtually impossible to find accommodation unless you are willing to pay through the roof, is perhaps the clearest marker so far of who is rich and who is poor.

Scandinavia is not picture-perfect. There are many flaws and, as recent debates relating to the housing crisis, the health system and education reflect, there are a lot of niggling problems.

But it is this attitude grounded in the social contract ideals that makes Nordic countries leaders.