Regional governance change in Northern Norway. Insights for Northern Ontario, Canada

Abstract

Northern Ontario has been inadequately governed, perpetuating chronic health, social and economic issues. Recent policy discourse has suggested that the region take more control through the development of new regional governance or governments. The region should also look to other Northern jurisdictions for ideas.

This comparative case study examined the state of regional governance in two Northern regions, comparing the calls for regional governance change to more effectively administer Northwestern Ontario (as a part of Northern Ontario) against the Norwegian state-mandated amalgamation of Troms and Finnmark Counties (as part of Northern Norway). Six public officials– elected officials (politicians) or public servants (bureaucrats)– were interviewed in Northwestern Ontario and four were interviewed in the former Troms and Finnmark Counties.

Informants in both countries validated the concept of Northern alienation and generally agreed that better regional governance and less central control was needed. Important considerations from Norway experience’s could inform Northern Ontario should it embark on regional governance change, including: consider a collaborative approach rather than a top-down, forced amalgamation; avoid determining the “form before function”; consider a “place-based” approach; consider regional rivalries and the impact of “re-centralization” to new capitals; include an external perspective; and involve Indigenous people from the beginning. Finally, in both Northern Norway and Northern Ontario, the most important overarching observation may be that public and Indigenous governance remains on separate tracks. This is of greater concern to Northern Ontario, where public regional governance appears to be stagnant while Indigenous governance continues to evolve.