Go to content

Chapter 4: Nordic added value in inter-ministerial Nordic co-operation

This chapter explores the historical and contemporary uses and meanings of Nordic added value in greater detail across the sectors of official inter-ministerial Nordic co-operation. Each sub-chapter deals with one institution or sector, outlining for each:
  • a brief institutional history of that sector of co-operation;
  • the history of Nordic added value in that sector of co-operation;
  • the current use of Nordic added value in that sector of co-operation; and
  • the meanings attached to Nordic added value in that sector of co-operation.
The chapter’s final sub-chapter provides a comparative analysis and crystallisation of the chapter’s empirical findings.

The Nordic Council of Ministers and its Secretariat

Frederik Forrai Ørskov

The Nordic Council of Ministers is the official body facilitating Nordic inter-governmental co-operation. It consists of multiple individual councils of ministers, which co-ordinate co-operation on specific policy areas between the relevant ministries and which are all served by a committee of senior officials drawn from the national ministries. Its activities revolve in particular around culture, socio-political issues – including the Nordic welfare state model – the environment, research, and education.
E.g., Tobias Etzold, “The Nordic Council of Ministers: Aspirations for More Political Relevance,” Politics and Governance 8, no. 4 (2020): 12.
Currently, there are ten permanent ministerial councils and one ad-hoc ministerial council (for digitalisation) in addition to the Council of Ministers for Nordic Co-operation (MR-SAM). MR-SAM has, along with the Nordic Co-operation Committee (NSK), been delegated the practical responsibility for Nordic inter-governmental co-operation from the Nordic prime ministers, who hold formal overarching responsibility. The Nordic countries take turns holding the presidency of the Nordic Council of Ministers for one year at a time, chairing council meetings and outlining guidelines for Nordic inter-governmental co-operation through annual presidency programmes.
“About the Nordic Council of Ministers | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed March 14, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/information/about-nordic-council-ministers.
 Sweden holds the presidency for 2024.
“The Nordic Region – Safer, Greener, Freer: Programme for the Swedish Presidency 2024 of the Nordic Council of Ministers” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2023).
The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers runs inter-governmental co-operation on a day-to-day basis. It is located in Nordens Hus in Copenhagen, and its main tasks involve preparing agenda items for meetings in the various ministerial councils as well as following up on and implementing the decisions made in them (although with no formal power vis-á-vis national governments).
“About the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Secretariat | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed March 14, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/information/about-nordic-council-ministers-secretariat; Johan Strang, “Nordic Communities: A Vision for the Future” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013), 63–64.
 Moreover, the Secretary General has a right of initiative, meaning that the Secretariat can table proposals and actively shape the direction of Nordic inter-governmental co-operation.
“The Secretary General | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed March 14, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/organisation/secretary-general.
 The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers describes its tasks as:
  • initiating, implementing, and following up on policy decisions,
  • developing knowledge on which to base Nordic solutions,
  • building networks for the exchange of experiences and ideas.
    “About the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Secretariat | Nordic Cooperation.”
In practice, a large part of this work is carried out in the institutions and offices under the Nordic Council of Ministers (Figure 1). These subsidiary institutions report to the Secretariat and their basic funding and functions are outlined by the Secretariat through annual grant letters. The subsidiary institutions are analysed in the remainder of this chapter, and this sub-chapter therefore also provides the context for the analyses undertaken in this chapter’s other sub-chapters.
The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers has been a key player in the conceptualisation and operationalisation of Nordic added value in official Nordic co-operation. There are therefore overlaps between the historical accounts outlined in this sub-chapter and the outline presented in Chapter 3. Whereas Chapter 3 provides more historical context and a broader view of official Nordic co-operation, this sub-chapter provides a more detailed account of developments directly related to the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers.

History of the Nordic Council of Ministers

The Nordic Council of Ministers was established in 1971. Its creation followed the collapse of the hopes to create a Nordic Economic Community, the so-called NORDEK plan, at the end of the 1960s, exemplifying what has occasionally been described as the Phoenix effect in Nordic co-operation, where more pragmatic forms of co-operation have emerged from the ashes of failed grander ambitions.
Strang, “Introduction: The Nordic Model of Transnational Cooperation?,” 5; Sundelius and Wiklund, “Nordisk förnyelse i etapper,” 22.
 It was part of what some scholars have described as “the second track change” of Nordic co-operation, lasting from approximately 1970 to 1975, in which sectoral co-operation infrastructure was created along with a strengthened foundation for inter-governmental co-operation through the establishment of civil servant committees, secretariats, and other common organs.
Sundelius and Wiklund, “Nordisk förnyelse i etapper,” 18–19.
In the following decades, the Nordic Council of Ministers spawned a range of new projects and institutions, granting official Nordic co-operation renewed vitality as part of a wider build-up of common-Nordic institutions.
Strang, “Nordic Communities: A Vision for the Future,” 64; “History of the Nordic Council of Ministers | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed March 18, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/information/history-nordic-council-ministers.
 However, the Nordic Council of Ministers was reformed following the end of the Cold War and increasing Nordic involvement in the European integration process in the early 1990s. Among the structural reforms following from this were the introduction of the annually rotating presidency, the inauguration of new offices in the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russia, and the trimming down of institutions under its purview.
Opitz and Etzold, “Seeking Renewed Relevance,” 2.
Subsequent reforms have seen additional changes to the Nordic Council of Ministers as part of efforts to maintain and renew its political relevance and adapt to changing external pressures, not least imperatives to face the perceived challenges of the 21st century, including globalisation, European integration, and the climate crisis. The number of ministerial councils was reduced from 18 to 11 between 2005 and 2006, while the Secretariat was restructured twice in the late 2000s.
Opitz and Etzold, “Seeking Renewed Relevance,” 2; Etzold, “The Nordic Council of Ministers: Aspirations for More Political Relevance,” 14; Connie Hedegaard, “Redegørelse af 6/10 2005 om det nordiske samarbejde (Redegørelse nr. R 2)” (The Danish Parliament, 2005).
Another reform process was initiated in 2014 with the then Secretary General Dagfinn Høybråten’s Nyt Norden reform report,
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nyt Norden.”
 which offered a string of recommendations aiming to make the Nordic Council of Ministers and its subsidiary institutions more flexible, demand-oriented, and politically relevant.
Etzold, “The Nordic Council of Ministers: Aspirations for More Political Relevance,” 14–16.
 This was followed up by another reform report, Nyt Norden 2.0, in 2016.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nordens tid er nu.”
 The resulting reforms promoted, among other things, the role of the Secretariat in catalysing new initiatives, while a greater role was envisioned for the Nordic heads of government in the activities of official Nordic co-operation in a bid to heighten its political legitimacy and visibility.
Etzold, “The Nordic Council of Ministers: Aspirations for More Political Relevance,” 14–16.
 This latter ambition has at least partly been realised with the Nordic prime ministers’ joint declaration – Vision 2030 – which now provides the overall guideline for the work of the Nordic Council of Ministers as well as official Nordic co-operation as a whole.
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Our Vision 2030 | Nordic Cooperation.”

Institutional history of Nordic added value

The 1995 reform led to a restructuring of the Nordic Council of Ministers and the termination of many of its institutions. As discussed in Chapter 3 of this report, the degree of nordisk nytta achieved by the institutions under the Nordic Council of Ministers was evaluated individually in the 1995 Nordisk nytte report that led to the restructuring. The evaluation took place according to the following dimensions:
  1. the geographical width/impact
  2. the cost efficiency/competency utilisation, and
  3. the quality of the results in terms of visibility, demand, efficiency, and impact.
In the evaluation of each institution’s nordisk nytta outlined in the report, the individual institutions’ performance in each of these three overall dimensions could be evaluated according to three evaluation parameters for nordisk nytta, namely:
  1. the demonstrable positive impact,
  2. whether and to which degree Nordic cohesion was manifested or developed, and
  3. whether and to which degree there was an increase in Nordic competences and competitiveness.
    Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995, 6–7.
Finally, the project group outlined more specific criteria linking each of the dimensions with each of the evaluation parameters, thereby forming the basis for a series of analytical questions to support its evaluation of the individual institutions.
The report led to the termination of 13 Nordic institutions and a shift towards a stronger emphasis on temporary project funding vis-á-vis basic funding for permanent Nordic institutions.
Opitz and Etzold, “Seeking Renewed Relevance”; Tønnesson, “Tvil Om Nytten,” 2002.
 The terminated institutions were not unequivocally the ones scoring lowest on the report’s scale of nordisk nytta, however,
Nordic Council of Ministers’ Analytical Unit, “Internal Working Document: Nordisk Nytta Text I,” 2020.
 just as the working group did not always recommend termination of the low-scoring institutions (but often recommended reforming their operations or opting for different forms of institutional ownership or funding).
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995.
From the early-to-mid 2000s onwards, nordisk nytta was frequently cited in official documents describing and outlining the work of the Nordic Council of Ministers. In English-language documents, terms such as added value, benefit, advantage, and synergy were frequently cited, seemingly not according to any set principles.
As had been the case in the mid-1990s, nordisk nytta was often used to describe the perceived essence of Nordic co-operation in the early 2000s, and to rhetorically delimit the areas where official Nordic co-operation was believed to be most useful or most cost-efficient in a changing international context. In the Danish presidency programme for 2005, for example, nordisk nytta was used to legitimise the concurrent reform of the Nordic Council of Ministers. For the future of Nordic co-operation, it was stated that it was decisive that political results could be delivered “for the benefit [gavn] of the citizens of the Nordic countries.” Notably, “renewal” and “nordisk nytte” were described as “key words in the presidency programme for 2005,” with the invocation that “Nordic cooperation must be result-oriented, politically relevant and must not drown in bureaucracy and technocracy!”
The Danish presidency of the Nordic council of Ministers, “Norden i en ny tid: Viden, dynamik og samarbejde: Kortversion af Danmarks formandskabsprogram for Nordisk Ministerråd 2005” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2004), 6.
 Likewise, in the foreword of a joint annual report from that year, the Director of the Nordic Council and the Secretary General of the Nordic Council of Ministers stated that:
The reform process will now continue down a path designed to pursue the benefits that Nordic co-operation offers, while bearing in mind that co-operation must be seen in a wider European and international context than has previously been the case.
“A Year of Renewal: The Nordic Council and Nordic Council of Ministers,” Annual Report (Nordic Council of Ministers, Nordic Council, 2006), 4.
Nonetheless, a reform report from 2008 relayed a sense among some – if not all – officials in the ministerial councils who saw the political added value of the ministerial councils as being limited.
Ottosson, “Fortsättning på reformen av Nordiska ministerrådet,” 6.
Yet, notions of nytta and mervärde have also been frequently cited outside of reform contexts. While “Nordic added value” has not been used as a standardised term in the presidency programmes of the Nordic Council of Ministers, the visions, ambitions, and proposed projects of the presidencies have consistently been motivated with reference to terms and phrases such as the added value of Nordic co-operation, Nordic synergy, the potential Nordic benefit or mutual benefits, etc. When it comes to the notion of added value, the following snippets from the English-language versions of the annual programmes offer a representative selection (in the Scandinavian-language versions of the presidency programmes, nordiskt mervärde in its different Scandinavian forms is used as the equivalent in most of the examples cited below):
  • “the added value that comes about through co-operation” (2007)
  • “so that Nordic co-operation continues to generate added value for our citizens” (2010)
  • “it is important to identify projects that will generate real added value” (2011)
  • “prioritise projects which create Nordic value-added for the environment and society” (2014)
  • “it is crucial that we continue to generate real added value and come up with tangible solutions to new challenges as they arise” (2015)
  • “at the EU level the Nordic countries can assess in what area Nordic co-operation on water resources delivers added value with a view to ongoing work and national implementation” (2016)
  • “generates considerable added value in terms of raising the profile of the region” (2017)
  • “four projects will be launched […] in areas where we see a clear added value of stepping up Nordic co-operation and exchange of experiences” (2018), and
  • “the projects […] are based on the principle that Nordic co-operation can add value beyond what each country has to offer individually” (2019).
In the presidency programmes, notions related to added value have frequently been used in relation to Nordic co-operation in general, but have increasingly been cited in reference to outcomes of specific or envisioned projects outlined in the programmes, especially from 2014 onwards. In the programmes, the policy areas involved have related in particular to environmental issues, socio-political issues, and the region’s international profile.
In the course of the 2010s, the international profile of the Nordic region was referred to as an additional parameter for nordisk nytta to the three outlined in the 1995 report, namely that the nordisk nytta of an activity also depended on whether it strengthened Nordic influence internationally.
Nordic Council of Ministers’ Analytical Unit, “Internal Working Document: Nordisk Nytta Text I.”
 In a vision outlined for the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2014 entitled Together we are stronger, it was similarly asserted that Nordic co-operation needed to have a clear profile in relation to the rest of the world “so that the value of the Nordic identity is fully utilised,” while it was similarly argued that it was both “in inter-Nordic and international affairs” that Nordic co-operation had to “generate Nordic synergies, add value for all and lead to tangible political results.”
“Vision for the Nordic Council of Ministers: The Nordic Region – Together We Are Stronger” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2014).
Also in 2014, the Nyt Norden reform process involved a conscious operationalisation of the concept of Nordic added value. According to the then-Secretary General of the Nordic Council of Ministers, the desire for reform of what was perceived as an inflexible and bureaucratic organisation came from an assumption that the “nordisk nytta, the mervärde of working together” could be increased. For that purpose, attempts were made to operationalise nordisk nytta – already present in the organisation as “a kind of slogan” – in order to “offer a sharpened tool, but also to offer a more political agenda as a menu for the politicians, so that they could see the possibilities to a greater extent and exploit those opportunities based on the political considerations made internally in their own country and in the Nordics.” As part of broader initiatives to make the Nordic Council of Ministers more politically relevant, there were also efforts to transform Nordic added value from a slogan into an operationalizable concept that could guide “more practical, [or] sometimes less practical reform work, but with a clear ambition to lift more politics into Nordic co-operation, raise the political ambitions, and get the governments to exploit the political opportunities” of Nordic co-operation.
Interview with Dagfinn Høybråten.
In the Secretary General’s Nyt Norden reform report, 39 reform recommendations were outlined for the Nordic Council of Ministers and presented to the Ministers for Nordic Co-operation. Six of these recommendations were specifically aimed at achieving more nordisk nytte from the projects and programmes of the Nordic Council of Ministers and all were approved by the Ministers for Nordic Co-operation. These recommendations were to:
  • fund fewer but bigger projects,
  • spend less of the Secretariat’s resources on project and programme administration (and more on serving ministerial councils and committees of officials),
  • adjust programme funding so as to extend it according to more streamlined criteria,
  • streamline the contracting, follow-up, and reporting of funding,
  • create guidelines for evaluating programme funding, and
  • develop an Open Access-compliant project portal for the projects and programmes of the Nordic Council of Ministers.
The suggested recommendations can furthermore be seen as interlinked with the remainder of the report’s recommendations, which revolved around focusing more on strategy and politics, creating a new Nordic budget, building a more efficient Secretariat, and ensuring the better management of the institutions under the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nyt Norden,” app. 6.
 It was argued that it was important to “secure good nordisk nytte from the resources used in the Nordic institutions on everything from research and culture to the management of common genetic resources,” and that the management of the institutions should be simplified and made more transparent “so that the owners can secure the nordiske nytte.” As has been discussed in Chapter 3 of this report, this marked the introduction of the Nordic added value concept in many of the institutions under the Nordic Council of Ministers, as their contributions to Nordic added value/​nordisk nytta became central criteria in grant letters and annual reports.
Somewhat tellingly, the need for efficiency and simplification was linked to 2014 budget cuts for Nordic co-operation almost in the same breath, making it evident that twenty years after its first appearance, the invocation of the concept of nordisk nytta was still closely tied to cost-cutting measures.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 10–11.
In February 2016, the Ministers for Nordic Co-operation tasked the Secretary General with further reforming Nordic co-operation with the stated aim of making it more flexible, relevant, and driven by political demand.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nordens tid er nu,” 9.
 Among other things, the report positioned Nordic co-operation and its need for flexibility and demand-driven results in the context of the 2015 refugee crisis, the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change, the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea, the EU’s legitimacy crisis, as well as the growing international interest in the Nordic region.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 7–8.
While not directly framed as part of the desired outcomes of reform efforts as in the 2014 report, nordisk nytta made appearances throughout the 2016 report as well. Interestingly, it was presented as having constituted the overall principle for deciding on which areas to focus the efforts of Nordic co-operation since the establishment of the Nordic Council of Ministers in 1971, namely “the areas where the countries obtain greater advantages by working together than by working separately.” What constituted those areas, it was argued, changed with shifting global circumstances and with the Nordic government’s shifting priorities and positions – for example in relation to the European Union.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 27.
 In this interpretation, then, nordisk nytta appears as a core prioritisation principle, adaptable to different circumstances and particularly well-suited as a guiding principle for a flexible and demand-driven organisation.
Moreover, nordisk nytta was imbued with a specific international dimension also in the 2016 report. One focus point cited efforts to obtain “more nordisk nytte in the EU and other international arenas,” including the commissioning of an inter-sectorial EU working group in the Secretariat as part of an initiative to qualify the Secretariat in respect of EU matters, and to further Nordic co-ordination, visibility, and influence in the EU to “achieve more nordisk nytte in relation to the EU.” Other international organisations were deemed relevant arenas for such Nordic promotion and co-ordination as well.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 57–58.
The “concept of nordisk nytte” was also addressed in the Nordic Council of Ministers’ handbook for projects from 2018. Here, it was argued that in order for projects to have nordisk nytta, they must align with the Nordic Council of Ministers’ prevailing strategies, while being “able to contribute either to a borderless Norden, an innovative Norden, a visible Norden or an outward-oriented Norden,” with reference to the four main pillars of the Together we are stronger vision from 2014.
Nordic Council of Ministers’ Analytical Unit, “Internal Working Document: Nordisk Nytta Text I.” Italics in original.

Current use of Nordic added value

Today, the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers describes its purpose as helping to “achieve results that add value and raise the profile of the Nordic Region at home and abroad,”
“About the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Secretariat | Nordic Cooperation.”
 a formulation that was first implemented following vision discussions with the Ministers for Nordic Co-operation in 2013.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nyt Norden,” 59.
Likewise, the Nordic Council of Ministers describes the projects’ provision of “added value to the Nordic countries, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland” as being its “most important criterion” for project funding. While the projects funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers transcend many policy areas, funded projects are supposed to share two commonalities: that they possess Nordic added value and that they relate to Vision 2030.
“How to Apply for Funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed March 25, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/information/how-apply-funding-nordic-council-ministers.
 This is also reflected in the conditions that projects funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers must fulfil, namely:
  • Connecting to the strategic platforms of the Nordic Council of Ministers, first and foremost Vision 2030.
  • Including three Nordic countries, or alternatively two Nordic countries and one or more countries from outside the region.
  • Help to add Nordic value, defined as:
    • the project is a collaborative effort between the Nordic countries, and
    • the outcomes benefit the Nordic countries.
  • Having a policy for cross-sectorial perspectives, namely sustainable development, gender equality, and a children’s right and youth perspective.
    “How to Apply for Funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers | Nordic Cooperation.”
As with earlier definitions, geographical breadth is included as a foundational feature in the definition of Nordic added value in the current project funding guidelines, further concretised here in the conditions as requiring participants from three Nordic countries (or two Nordic countries and at least one non-Nordic country). Still, the overall definition of Nordic added value is rather broad, allowing for a wide range of possible interpretations, depending on what outcomes are deemed to “benefit” the Nordic countries. The conditions in their entirety suggest that what is deemed beneficial to the Nordic countries is closely related to Vision 2030 as well as other strategic priorities outlined politically through the ministerial councils and the inter-sectoral strategies on sustainability, gender equality, and children and young people.
The central role of Nordic added value (nordisk nytta in the Scandinavian-language versions) in the project guidelines is mirrored in its prominence in most of the grant letters outlining the relationship between the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers and the Nordic institutions under its umbrella. Here, the institutions are typically required to outline the nordisk nytta of their overall operations, as well as for the individual activities they are facilitating.
For examples, see, e.g., “Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio”; The Nordic Council of Ministers, “Beviljningsbrev 2023 Nordens hus i Reykjavík (NOREY)” (The Nordic Council of Ministers, 2023).
Like the project guidelines, the most current presidency programme for the Nordic Council of Ministers, outlining the priorities for the Swedish presidency in 2024, links Nordic added value and Vision 2030. Using “Nordic synergy” as the English-language equivalent to nordisk nytta, it is stated in the introduction of the programme that the Swedish presidency will work towards drawing up an “action plan” that contains “clear objectives and priorities, effective working methods and measures that generate clear Nordic synergy and help realise the vision” as they work on a joint overall action plan for 2025 to 2030 to be tabled for adoption by the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2024.
“The Nordic Region – Safer, Greener, Freer”; Nordic Council of Ministers, “Ett säkrare, grönare, friare Norden: Program för Sveriges ordförandeskap i Nordiska ministerrådet 2024” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2023), 5.
 Likewise, the presidency programme describes co-operation efforts relating to the bio-economy and sustainable food systems as “a strategically important area and one in which Nordic co-operation can provide significant added value” (mervärde in the Swedish version).
“The Nordic Region – Safer, Greener, Freer,” 12; Nordic Council of Ministers, “Ett säkrare, grönare, friare Norden,” 12.

Meanings of Nordic added value

It is worth noting that the 2024 presidency programme links Nordic added value and sustainability under the section heading “a competitive Nordic region.” This section heading has appeared along with “a green Nordic region” and “a socially sustainable Nordic region” in all presidency programmes since 2020 in direct reference to the strategic priorities of Vision 2030. In these programmes, notions of “benefit” (usually nytta/​nytte in the Scandinavian language versions) and “value” (värde/​værdi in the Scandinavian-language versions) mostly figure in the sections outlining visions for a competitive region, although quite often, as in the example cited above, in reference to sustainability and so-called “green growth,” where it is suggested that the Nordic region either possesses or should aim to develop a competitive edge. Hence, while sustainability has clearly emerged as a central theme in relation to Nordic added value in the presidential programmes not just since the launch of the vision but over the last decade or so, it has often been from a clearly economic perspective. This would seem to suggest that notions related to Nordic added value, nordisk nytta, nordiskt mervärde, and other variations of the concept in both Scandinavian and English today carry largely economic connotations when used to outline visions for inter-ministerial Nordic co-operation at the political level.
Moreover, the organisation of the presidential programmes to align them with the strategic priorities of Vision 2030 reflects the importance attached to aligning the Nordic Council of Ministers’ efforts to those priorities. This is also evident in the Nordic Council of Ministers’ self-description, which holds that the organisation’s efforts should seek to serve the priorities outlined in the prime ministers’ vision for 2030.
“About the Nordic Council of Ministers | Nordic Cooperation.”
While the vision makes no specific mention of Nordic added value, it is evidently envisioned to play a central role in the pursuit of the strategic priorities outlined in Vision 2030. Indeed, one official at the Secretariat stated in an interview conducted for this report that, after the emergence of the vision in 2019, focus in the Nordic Council of Ministers shifted from what they termed “Nordic identity” towards nordisk nytta – stressing that while identity-building still had an important role to play in the Nordic Council of Ministers, there was now a desire for a keener focus on delivering results, with nordisk nytta playing a key role as a prioritisation tool.
Interview with official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, July 4, 2023.
 A former employee also highlighted the definition of nordisk nytta as embodying a discussion in the organisation between perspectives emphasising the role of Nordic co-operation in Nordic identity building vis-á-vis societal development in the Nordic countries that took place around the time the vision was adopted.
Interview with former official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers’ analytical unit.
As we have seen above, the process towards creating a tool for the prioritisation of projects in the Nordic portfolio and for leveraging political relevance out of Nordic added value was already initiated during the reforms of the mid-2010s. This process seems to have intensified with the adoption of Vision 2030. As such, Nordic added value and nordisk nytta are, practically speaking, used as prioritisation tools in regard to very different policy areas and sectors of Nordic co-operation. Moreover, the Secretariat official argued that a greater focus on nordisk nytta would help bolster the legitimacy of Nordic co-operation vis-á-vis politicians, and ultimately taxpayers, while enabling the Secretariat to pursue the agenda on issues relating to Vision 2030 rather than just facilitating meetings or keeping existing projects running.
Interview with official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers.
 It seems, then, that Nordic added value is being envisioned as a tool for pursuing politically defined strategic priorities rather than as a vision or ideal for Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation on its own.
Yet, it is clear from the interviews conducted for this report that what Nordic added value means beyond its potential as an operationalizable tool is still felt to be relatively vague, even among former and current employees who have been thinking actively about how to define or operationalise it.
Interview with former official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers’ analytical unit; Interview with official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers.
 On the one hand, added value was described in line with the definition in the current project guidelines cited above as “what it adds to the Nordic countries – on many, many criteria – to solve a task together instead of separately,” for example when it comes to issues relating to mobility or to issues where the individual countries are too small to address specific challenges on their own. In addition, the role that the Nordic countries could play in the world by acting together was described in the same manner.
Interview with Dagfinn Høybråten.
Yet, on the other hand an official in the secretariat noted that the criteria for Nordic added value had to be further specified if it were to be useful in prioritising which projects have relevance for Nordic co-operation and create real value from a Nordic perspective.
Interview with official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Moreover, there is little standardisation in regard to the terms used in the organisation or how they relate to each other – including how they are translated and used in English vis-á-vis the Scandinavian languages. In the current project guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers quoted in the previous section, the English-language text could seem to reflect a distinction or hierarchy between Nordic added value (mervärde) and Nordic benefit (nytta), where the benefit for the Nordic countries constitutes a sub-component of the added value of a project. Yet this distinction does not appear in the Scandinavian-language translations, where nordisk nytta is used equivalently with Nordic added value, while mervärde is not used in the description of conditions at all.
“Så söker du stöd från Nordiska ministerrådet | Nordiskt samarbete,” accessed March 25, 2024, https://www.norden.org/sv/omstod.
 Indeed, the former Secretary General argued that added value or mervärde is perhaps more exact and operationalizable whereas nytta is more vague, but that no attention was paid to this semantic difference in the actual reform efforts.
Interview with Dagfinn Høybråten.
In general, nordisk nytta and nordiskt mervärde seem to be used almost interchangeably within the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers and in its documents. One former employer noted in an interview that “nordisk nytta was a term that we used 50% of the time and the other 50% of the time we talked about nordiskt mervärde. Both were used to an equal extent, and it was, what to say, equally unclear what they actually meant.”
Interview with former official in the Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers’ analytical unit.

Offices and cultural institutions

This sub-chapter addresses the questions of the history of Nordic added value, the current use of Nordic added value, and the meanings attached to Nordic added value in selected Nordic offices and institutions that facilitate cultural exchange or that represent the Nordic Council of Ministers in the autonomous Nordic territories as well as outside of the Nordic region. The sectors and institutions addressed in this sub-chapter are:

The Nordic House in Reykjavik

Essi Turva
The Nordic House in Reykjavik is a culture centre located just outside the city centre of the capital, nowadays accompanied by several university buildings. Its library and art exhibitions are central to its operations, and it also hosts events and rents out premises for external events. It engages in social debates through various programmes and collaborates with several other organisations. The Nordic House has many activities aimed at children and young people including a library for children. It runs the secretariat for some of the prizes of the Nordic Council: the Literature Prize, the Children and Young People’s Literature Prize, and the Environment Prize. The employees come from across and outside the Nordic region.

History of the Nordic House in Reykjavik

The Nordic House in Reykjavik was the first of the Nordic cultural institutions. Its history dates back to the 1960s, making the institution older than its current overseeing body, the Nordic Council of Ministers. In the early years, there was some uncertainty as to how exactly the Nordic House would be used.
Lars-Åke Engblom, “Nordens Hus i Reykjavík – Viktig Länke Och Mötesplats,” in Norden Sett Inifrån: Det Fjärde Spårbytet, eds. Bengt Sundelius and Claes Wiklund (Stockholm: Santérus Förlag, 2017), 290.
 The architecture provided the framework for its operations and the premises, which included a library, a café, and meeting rooms.
Engblom, 290.
 However, the overall mission was clearer and has remained unchanged.
Engblom, “Nordens Hus i Reykjavík.”
 Iceland had been under a heavy American influence since the Second World War and the purpose of the Nordic House was to act as a bridge between Icelandic and Nordic culture.
Sabina Westerholm, ed., “Kulturen Som Utgångspunkt För Nordiskt Samarbete,” in 30 Röster Om Norden, by Nils Erik Forsgård (Magma, 2022), 307–12.
 The symbolic role of the institution is significant and extends to the house itself.
Westerholm.
 The building was designed by a famous Finnish architect, Alvar Aalto, and the architectural history and design has remained important for the institution. The physical building is an essential part of the institution’s identity: the Nordic House in Reykjavik is both the house itself and the cultural institution.
Malin Barkelind, “De Nordiska Biblioteken: En Undersökning Av Nordisk Kulturkontakts Och Nordens Hus Biblioteks Identitetsskapande” (Master’s thesis, Uppsala University, 2019).
The Nordic House has reinvented and reinterpreted its role and maintained its relevance in Iceland’s culture scene,
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, October 20, 2023; Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 30, 2023.
 and has been described as a catalyst for Nordic co-operation and exchange between the Nordic countries and Iceland.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Virksomhedsrapport 2018,” Annual Report (Reykjavik: Nordens Hus, 2018).
 Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the Nordic House welcomed more than 100,000 visitors a year.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik.
 Although the number of visitors declined during the pandemic, it has been increasing again.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Verksamhetsrapport 2020,” Annual Report (Reykjavik: The Nordic House in Reykjavik, 2020); The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2021,” Annual Report (Reykjavik: The Nordic House in Reykjavik, 2021).

Institutional history of Nordic added value

The Nordic House was evaluated in the Nordisk nytte report in 1995,
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995.
 which described it as a link between Iceland and the Nordic region. The report concluded that the level of nordisk nytte of the Nordic House in Reykjavik was medium to high.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, 50.
 According to the report, the Nordic House was a well-known institution in Iceland and beyond. However, it questioned the necessity of the Nordic House being under the Nordic Council of Ministers and called for alternative funding options. According to the report, the funds of the Nordic Council of Ministers should only be spent on projects that had a “high [proportion of] Nordic content or a clear Nordic profile.”
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, 50.
 The report compared the Nordic House in Reykjavik with the other Nordic houses and urged co-ordination to reduce costs. Consequently, the report implied that the Nordic House would possibly lose funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers despite being a well-established culture institution in Iceland, unless it was able to prove the significance of its Nordic dimension or to modify its activities accordingly.
The report had a significant impact, forcing the Nordic House put a considerable amount of effort into the concept of nordisk nytte in the late 1990s.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 30, 2023.
 In practice, this meant quantifying all work at the Nordic House in order to measure the nytte created, for which the staff compiled a wealth of statistics.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik.
 In the end, the Nordic House in Reykjavik maintained its funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Although nordisk nytta has remained in the vocabulary of the Nordic House, its use has changed since the 1990s, while the term Nordic added value was also later introduced. Its origins as an evaluation criterion by the Nordic Council of Ministers are still evident, as nordisk nytta appears in texts describing the overall operations at the Nordic House or in the context of programmes initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers.
In 2018, the Nordic House in Reykjavik celebrated its 50th anniversary. In the annual report for that year, nordisk nytte appeared in quotation marks and was said to be a recurring theme in all celebratory speeches.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Virksomhedsrapport 2018.”
 In the same context, the annual report mentions the ability of the Nordic House to reinterpret its role and to remain relevant.
It has been pointed out that each of the Nordic cultural institutions has its own identity and there is no uniform discourse for them.
Barkelind, “De Nordiska Biblioteken.”
 The programmes must nonetheless follow the official cultural strategy, and Nordic added value has been adapted from these strategies. In the Strategy for Nordic cultural co-operation 2013-2020, Nordic added value was described as a “principle” according to which “the co-operation involves areas where the Nordic countries have common interests and face common challenges.”
Nordic Council of Ministers, Strategy for Nordic Cultural Co-Operation 2013-2020, 3.
 In the 2021-2024 strategy, it is described as a prerequisite for Nordic co-operation on culture.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Kulturpolitiskt Samararbetsprogram 2021-2024 (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2021), 4.
 According to the strategy, Nordic added value forms part of the overall goals but should also describe activities in general.

Current use of Nordic added value

Today, although nordisk nytta has a more implicit function than in the 1990s, there are similarities to its initial use. The concrete use of nordisk nytta is established as part of the institution’s strategy and the reporting of its outcomes. Although there is still no single definition for the concept, some accounts exist. The grant letter, for example, describes the nordisk nytta of the Nordic House in Reykjavik in the following way:
NOREY is an arena where knowledge, creativity, and experiences from across the Nordic region converge, contributing to increased Nordic exchange, competence, and the manifestation of Nordic solidarity.
The Nordic Council of Ministers, “Beviljningsbrev 2023,” 4.
Since 2019, nordisk nytta has had its own, albeit brief, section in the institution’s annual reports.
Also, the Director of the Nordic House in Reykjavik changed in 2019.
 The section describes the history of the institution and its role as a symbol for the Nordic region and Nordic co-operation.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Verksamhetsrapport 2019,” Annual Report (Reykjavik: The Nordic House in Reykjavik, 2019); The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Verksamhetsrapport 2020”; The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2021”; The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2022,” Annual Report (Reykjavik: The Nordic House in Reykjavik, 2022).
 Nordisk nytta is mentioned as a goal:
As an institution, the Nordic House is familiar with its mission and strategically works to achieve the broadest nordisk nytta possible through its diverse program.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Verksamhetsrapport 2019”; The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Verksamhetsrapport 2020”; The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2021”; The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2022.”
Although nordisk nytta appears as a goal, explicit evaluations of how or to what extent the goal has been achieved are limited in the official documents. The 2021 annual report has a short mention: “We believe that despite periods of uncertainty in 2021, we have been able to fulfil the nordiska nyttan.”
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Årsrapport 2021,” 55.
 Given that COVID-19 affected the whole of society, business, and culture alike, it is notable that the Nordic House still considered nordisk nytta and referred to it in its reflections for the year.
Nordisk nytta is cited most explicitly in the Norden i Fokus (The Nordic Region in Focus) programme. Norden i Fokus is a programme in which the Nordic House aims to contribute to social debates by providing a Nordic perspective through information campaigns and events. The programme has been initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers and has partners from five Nordic capitals. Norden i Fokus is described as creating nordisk nytte by raising awareness of Nordic co-operation and thus increasing interest in it.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Virksomhedsrapport 2018,” 26.
 Nordisk nytte is said to have an individual dimension as well when individuals and organisations learn what added value Nordic co-operation can bring for them.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, 26.
 The target groups include politicians, officials, collaboration partners, organisations, businesses, and media. To this end, nordisk nytte operates at different levels in Norden i Fokus: individual, local community, and national.
The Nordic House in Reykjavik, “Virksomhedsrapport 2018.”
Today, the mission of the Nordic House builds on Vision 2030, which employees at the institution think is, to an extent, related to nordisk nytta.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, October 20, 2023.
 In interviews, mentions of nordisk nytta are accompanied with a reference to Vision 2030 and its goals. On the other hand, other interviewees argue that Vision 2030 has replaced the 1990s version of nordisk nytta, having become a tool for the same purpose.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 30, 2023.
 Vision 2030, too, has been associated with funding cuts in the culture sector. The Nordic House has lost a quarter of its funding in the contemporary budget period.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, October 20, 2023.
 However, this is not understood as being due to Vision 2030 itself, in which culture is generally thought to have a place. While there is now a keener focus on Vision 2030, Nordic added value has remained a funding criterion for projects.
When reporting on its activities, the institution must clarify how it has created nordisk nytta. Yet, nordisk nytta is considered to be a vague concept, even “lofty” as one interviewee put it.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 30, 2023.
 This underlines that while Nordic added value is used in strategy, the substance of the concept is vague and subject to interpretation. In practice today, Nordic added value is operationalised so that if the goals set out in the funding documents are reached, Nordic added value is fulfilled.

Meanings of Nordic added value

At the Nordic House, Nordic added value (most commonly referred to as the Scandinavian-language equivalent nordisk nytta) carries two different meanings, which have emerged over the course of almost thirty years. These relate firstly to how it is and has been used, particularly in regard to the Nordic Council of Ministers, and secondly to what the concept is thought to entail in relation to the Nordic House.
The first approach regards nordisk nytta as a tool by and for the Nordic Council of Ministers. The background of this approach is rooted in the 1990s reforms and the Nordisk nytte report from 1995. This understanding has relatively negative connotations and is associated with cuts and institutional reforms rather than budget increases. Here, Nordic added value is understood as an economic concept related to productivity, efficiency, and measurements, which in practice can be difficult to apply to cultural institutions. Indeed, an evaluation report of the Nordic houses and institutions from 2014 concluded that quantitative measures are not suitable for evaluating culture and tend to neglect the importance of quality in the long run.
Forss, Nordens Hus Och Institut: En Utvärdering Av Mål, Verksamhet Och Resultat.
 One employee pointed out that nordisk nytta is a contradictory concept since it presumes clear results while being difficult to measure as a goal and target.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, October 20, 2023.
 However, employees stress that the extensive reporting to the Nordic Council of Ministers born out of the emphasis on nordisk nytta has also provided useful information for the institution itself.
The ability to apply the principle of nordisk nytta/​Nordic added value means that the Nordic House has been able to adapt to the reforms in the Nordic Council of Ministers. In this way, Nordic added value has legitimised the institution. In addition, the adaptation to thinking in terms of Nordic added value can be seen in a broader context. It has been argued that the recent institutional developments of Nordic libraries such as the Nordic House can be understood in the context of new public management – the idea that publicly funded institutions should resemble for-profit corporations especially in terms of funding and competitiveness.
Barkelind, “De Nordiska Biblioteken,” 16–17.
 Therefore, the adaptation to Nordic added value and later Vision 2030 can be related to the adoption of the new public management style, signified by competitive thinking and the quantification of results.
Barkelind, 57.
The second approach is to understand Nordic added value more broadly and apply it so that it better fits the institution. The more recent descriptions of nordisk nytta imply that it is closely connected to what the Nordic House is and what it does even when the concept is not explicitly defined. One interviewee expressed the view that nordisk nytta permeates the work of the Nordic House at all levels.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, October 20, 2023.
 This approach allows for the interpretation that, as long as Nordic cultural co-operation takes place, it creates Nordic added value while also being something to strive for. Here, nordisk nytta is regarded as something intrinsic in cultural co-operation and something that refers more generally to the relevance of Nordic co-operation. This approach emphasises the fact that culture has long been at the core of Nordic co-operation. The Nordic House sits above the local level and provides a Nordic perspective.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik.
 This applies not only to culture but also to social debates.
The emphasis on the Nordic dimension does not mean exclusivity. According to employees, diversity and accessibility are important values at the Nordic House. It is acknowledged that the Nordic House is an international institution.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik.
 The audience is not merely Icelandic. The institution collaborates with various international communities in Iceland, such as Baltic and Ukrainian communities. In the Nordic House, the aims of the Nordic Council of Ministers to make the Nordic brand known to international audiences has been expanded from imposing the Nordic idea on others to also integrating and actively involving non-Nordic actors.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand.”
 In this way, Nordic added value has an external dimension at the Nordic House, and one that relies on encounters and networks.
Although it has been acknowledged that there are multiple meanings of Nordic added value and the actors were able to discuss them fluently, the relationship between the Scandinavian terms and the English translations was a more difficult topic. The preferred Scandinavian term at the Nordic House is nordisk nytta/nytte. Mervärde/merverdi was not as familiar and reflections on its meaning were speculative, just as it does not appear with any frequency in official documents regarding the institution. One interviewee brought up that in the 1990s, nytta used to refer to the absolutely necessary aspects of Nordic co-operation so that it was not referring to anything extra as mervärde or added value suggest.
Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 30, 2023; Likewise, another interviewee expressed that mervärde implies an extra element. Interview with official from the Nordic House in Reykjavik, November 8, 2023.

Nordic Culture Point

Essi Turva
Nordic Culture Point is a cultural institution located in Helsinki city centre with a mission to promote, strengthen, and inform about Nordic cultural co-operation. Nordic Culture Point has a special library with books in several Nordic languages, and also organises events and manages Nordic funding programmes for art and culture. The office and the library are located in the city centre and there is another venue on the Suomenlinna fortress island. Nordic Culture Point also promotes opportunities in and results of Nordic cultural co-operation.

History of Nordic Culture Point

Although the history of official Nordic cultural co-operation in Helsinki can be dated to the late 1970s, the institutional make-up has gone through several organisational changes. The predecessors of Nordic Culture Point underwent closures and mergers. The first institution was the Nordic Culture Centre, which operated from 1978 to 1996 on the Suomenlinna fortress island. The Nordic Culture Centre was evaluated in the 1995 Nordisk nytte report. According to the report, the institution had a low level of Nordic added value. The Nordic dimension at the Nordic Culture Centre was said to be insufficient. The organisation was not cost-effective, and the location on an island was considered a problem. The assessment recommended that the Nordic Council of Ministers stop funding the Nordic Culture Centre. The ministers for culture opposed the idea of abolishing the Nordic Culture Centre but supported reforms to downsize and streamline the institution.
Marianne Möller, Konst, kultur och kullerstenar: Kort historik över nordiskt kultursamarbete och institutionerna på Sveaborg sedan 1978 (Nordisk kulturkontakt, 2021).
 The Nordic Institute for Contemporary Art (NIFCA) replaced the Nordic Culture Centre on Suomenlinna in 1997. The Nordic Institute in Finland (NIFIN) was founded in Helsinki city centre in the same year. Nordic Culture Point was founded in 2007, replacing NIFCA and taking over the administration of the funding programmes. Nordic Culture Point and NIFIN merged in 2012 and the institution has since remained in its current form.
From 2007 to 2017, Nordic Culture Point was known as Kulturkontakt Nord in Swedish. In 2017, the Swedish name was changed to Nordisk kulturkontakt.

Institutional history of Nordic added value

When established in 2012, Nordic Culture Point acquired a vision and a mission.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2012,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2012).
 The mission was to “create space for cultural encounters in the Nordic region and beyond.”
Nordic Culture Point, 4.
 The vision highlighted the unique position of the institution, which it described as an “indispensable partner for our target groups and other key actors in Nordic cultural cooperation.”
Nordic Culture Point, 4.
 The high quality in the culture sector and new collaboration opportunities were also mentioned. Although the vision cited a dedication to Nordic added value – referred to as nordisk nytte – the more precise function of Nordic added value or its meaning were not further elaborated upon.
From 2013 to 2020, the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Strategy for Culture Co-Operation served as a governing document for Nordic Culture Point.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Strategy for Nordic Cultural Co-Operation 2013-2020.
 In the strategy, Nordic added value was a principle according to which common interests and challenges should drive co-operation.
Nordic Council of Ministers, 3.
 Nordic added value also appeared in Nordic Culture Point’s own strategy. A status report in 2014 stated that Nordic Culture Point “focuses on opportunities and promotes collaboration that can contribute to developing and showcasing Nordic culture, the Nordic region, and creating nordisk nytte.”
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2014,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2014), 33.
 A reference to nordisk nytte was provided in all areas of the strategy: Nordic Culture Point as a hub, as a programme administrator, as a creator of a profile for Nordic cultural co-operation in the Nordic region and internationally, and in the development of Nordic Culture Point as an institution.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2014.”
 The annual report from 2014 stated that annual qualitative reporting would serve as a starting point for the effects of and political discussion about nordisk nytte.
Nordic Culture Point, 32–33.
 In its programme administration, Nordic Culture Point should demonstrate the nordisk nytte of the grants and gather the experiences of applicants and those who received funding. This information was said to be useful for the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordisk nytte was said to be demonstrated when the results of the funding programmes were promoted.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2015,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2015), 9.

Current use of Nordic added value

Nordic added value plays a role in the institution’s mission. The section on nordisk nytte in the annual report from 2021 describes the history of the institution and states that the Nordic Culture Point is familiar with its mission to create nordisk nytte. Since 2018, nordisk nytte has been incorporated into recurring themes in the annual reports instead of constituting a novel topic of its own. The sections titled “We create nordisk nytte” highlight the institution’s mission to create encounters, not just between people but also between ideas and cultures.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2018,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2018), 3; Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2019,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2019), 4.
 These encounters are said to create new insights, experiences, knowledge, progress, social community, and sustainability.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2018,” 3; Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2019,” 4.
 Mobility is described as a precondition for development and learning and as being essential for both Nordic and Baltic funding programmes. The same section highlights the successes of Nordic Culture Point as an appreciated collaboration partner and its increasing number of visitors.
According to the 2022 annual report, creating nordisk nytte means generating knowledge and creating networks in a Nordic, Baltic, and international framework.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2022,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2022), 9.
 Nordisk nytte is related to the goal of Nordic cultural co-operation being inclusive and diverse. The encounters created through Nordic Culture Point are universal, regardless of language, age, occupation, or ethnic background.
Nordic Culture Point, 14.
The Nordic Council of Ministers’ programme Norden i Fokus is also mentioned under the section on nordisk nytta.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2018,” 3.
 The programme’s administration by Nordic Culture Point is said to provide synergies in the institution’s outward-facing work. Norden i Fokus is said to improve Nordic Culture Point’s opportunities to participate in social debates.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2021,” Annual Report (Helsinki: Nordic Culture Point, 2021).
Nordic Culture Point acknowledges that it is challenging to demonstrate the direct connection between Nordic added value and the institution itself because individual projects are the key in the funding programmes.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2022.”
 Instead, the role of Nordic added value is more explicit in the funding programmes.
Nordic added value or a “Nordic dimension” or “Nordic-Baltic dimension” are criteria in all of the funding programmes. Funding is prioritised for genuinely inter-Nordic collaboration and content, and Nordic added value [nordisk nytta] is contrasted with local added value [den lokala nyttan].
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2019,” 28.
 In other words, projects that are not eligible for local funding are more likely to receive Nordic funding.
The funding applicants must explain how their project will contribute to Nordic added value. Nordic added value is described in the application instructions. For example, the instructions regarding Nordic added value in projects under the Demos programme explain that:
[t]he projects should contribute to the participating organisations and individual participants to forge a wider Nordic network of contacts in which they can learn from each other and gain greater knowledge of other Nordic countries and areas and their cultures and languages.
“Demos Network,” Nordic Culture Point, accessed February 9, 2024, https://www.nordiskkulturkontakt.org/en/demos/.
The Norden 0-30 funding programme mentions Nordic added benefits as a criterion in addition to the involvement and influence of children and young people. The instructions for Nordic added benefits are the following:
The project seeks to promote outstanding Nordic meetings and collaborations. It is considered beneficial if the project contributes to new partnerships, long-term results, or greater interaction between young people in the Nordic countries, which they themselves consider relevant and which has a positive impact on their role in Nordic culture, politics, or society.
“Norden 0–30,” Nordic Culture Point, accessed February 9, 2024, https://www.nordiskkulturkontakt.org/en/norden-0-30-grant-programme/.
The interpretation can be creative. In one example of a project that received funding, nordisk nytta was seen in a societal context, and trust was emphasised as a cornerstone for co-operation and society. Trust was said to have “trickled down through generations, organisations and people.”
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2019,” 30.
 In a report about Volt, a programme focusing on culture and language for children, the effects of the programme and nordisk nytte are discussed together.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2018,” 53.
 The projects in the Volt programme are described as having young participants from all over the Nordic region, being of high quality, and addressing important themes for children and young people.
Nordic Culture Point, 53.
The common value system is considered useful in deciding which projects receive funding.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point, December 1, 2023.
 Since Nordic added value is part of the funding criteria, it opens up possibilities for the applicants.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 The production of Nordic added value becomes a precondition for the projects once they enter the domain of Nordic Culture Point. This means that the final results are expected to demonstrate Nordic added value by default as well.

Meanings of Nordic added value

At Nordic Culture Point, Nordic added value is described as being achieved when cultural actors get to know other actors in the Nordic countries, get to exchange experiences, and get to learn from each other.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2022.”
Individual employees at Nordic Culture Point recognise that Nordic added value can have different meanings. For example, Nordic added value can have a broader meaning when understood as a principle of solidarity or as describing the presence of a Nordic perspective.
Interview 1 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 The use of Nordic added value can also be associated with Nordic identity, which can make the Nordic perspective easier to comprehend.
Interview 1 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 Nordic added value can even serve as a personal motivation when it is perceived as something that is created when people meet and work together.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
Nordic Culture Point uses Finnish, English, and Swedish on its website. Mervärde is the preferred term on the website while nytta/​nytte appears in official documents. In one instance, Nordic Culture Point has also used “nordiske nytteværdi” as a term.
Nordic Culture Point, “Årsrapport 2022,” 9.
 The English terms used are Nordic added value or Nordic added benefits. All concepts are very familiar to employees, but the difference between them is not thought to be entirely clear. Nytta and mervärde are mostly used interchangeably. Their meanings overlap to an extent, and the interpretations are personal. The biggest difference seems to be the context in which they appear. This is not necessarily considered problematic because it is argued that the content matters more.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
Nordisk nytta is perceived to carry a slightly more economic tone. Although it is understood in terms of learning, an essential component of it is how to recognise the benefits of collaboration and in that way creates growth.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 Mervärde has a more cultural connotation.
Interview 1 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 When understood in this way, nordiskt mervärde is said to describe the work at Nordic Culture Point better than nordisk nytta.
Interview 1 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
Vision 2030 and Nordic added value are seen as connected. Nordic added value is said to be implicit in everything in Vision 2030 and as a principle that helps Nordic Culture Point implement it.
Interview 1 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
 Vision 2030 has brought about a keen focus on sustainability whereas previously diversity, accessibility, and equality were more important.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
Some challenges in the use of Nordic added value arise from the fact that the funding programmes at Nordic Culture Point have a clear Baltic dimension. Formulating Nordic added value can be difficult for Baltic applicants who may struggle with receiving funding in the first place.
Interview 2 with official from Nordic Culture Point.
Nordic added value has mostly a social and cultural dimension at Nordic Culture Point. Although the framework is culture and art, the sharing of experiences and the creation of networks with and learning from different Nordic and Baltic actors is also seen as fundamental. Nordic Culture Point facilitates the process by administering the funding programmes for culture. At the same time, Nordic Culture Point serves as a physical hub where Nordic culture and language can be promoted through the library and various events.

The Nordic offices in the Nordic autonomous territories

Hasan Akintug
The three instances of territorial autonomy within the Nordic region – the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland – have also been incorporated into Nordic co-operation, albeit on a somewhat unequal basis with Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The Faroe Islands and Åland have been formally involved with the Nordic Council since 1970, and Greenland since 1984. The three self-governing territories have the option to “opt into” those binding decisions in the Nordic Council of Ministers that pertain to their competences.
As three sub-state entities in Nordic co-operation, the Nordic offices in these three island communities are tasked with connecting the local culture to the broader cultural field in the Nordic region and vice versa. The office in the Faroe Islands carries the label “house,” while the offices in Greenland and Åland are defined as “institutes.” In contrast to the two institutes, the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands has a large physical presence, hosting up to 400 events per year and maintaining a large presence within the local cultural scene.

History of the Nordic offices in the autonomous territories

The Nordic Council of Ministers maintains the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands (Nordens Hus på Färöärna). The house’s existence is credited to the efforts of the Faroese politician Erlendur Patursson who expressed his desire for a “Nordic cultural house” in the Faroese parliament during the 1960s. In 1977, the Nordic Council of Ministers and the Faroese government agreed to the establishment of such a house, which was opened on 8 May 1983. Although it is primarily funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers, it has some income from the Faroese government and from renting out its premises.
The Nordic House in the Faroe Islands, “Årsrapport 2022,” Annual Report (Torshavn: The Nordic House in the Faroe Islands, 2022).
The Nordic Institute in Greenland (NAPA) was established in 1987. It is hosted in the cultural centre Katuaq, which was a joint project between the Nordic Council of Ministers, Nuuk Municipality, and the Greenlandic government.
Katuaq, “Architecture,” Katuaq, accessed March 26, 2024, https://katuaq.gl/en/about-katuaq/architecture.
 The Nordic Institute in Greenland has a very clear emphasis on Arctic-related issues and stresses the fact that it administers funding to support activities relating to Greenland.
Åland has participated in official Nordic co-operation since 1970. The Nordic Institute on Åland (NIPÅ) was established in 1985 after the Ålandic government struggled to convince the Nordic Council of Ministers to agree to the project. Culture is an essential component of its function. However, unlike the Greenlandic office, it does not manage any funds directly, and instead steers individuals and groups to seek funding from other Nordic funds.
“Nordens institut på Åland,” Nordens institut på Åland, accessed May 2, 2024, https://www.nipa.ax/sv/fondinfo/nordens-institut-pa-aland-0.

Institutional history of Nordic added value

The concept of nordisk nytte was used during the 1990s to evaluate the use of Nordic institutions. The three offices from Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Åland were included in the Nordisk nytte report from 1995.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995.
 All three were deemed to produce a “medium” level of nordisk nytte according to the report. The logic behind the utilisation of this concept was to evaluate whether or not the common Nordic foundation for these institutions furthered their cost efficiency.
The role of the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands was defined as serving “the cultural life of the Faroe Islands and to mutually link the cultural life on the islands to the rest of the Nordic region.”
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, 58.
 The report notes that the office has substantial ties with other Nordic institutions and to some extent the Baltic countries.
The Nordic Institute in Greenland’s role was defined as connecting “Greenland with the rest of the Nordic Region in the fields of culture, education, and research.” The report also notes that the Nordic Institute in Greenland is not well known outside of Greenland and is primarily a tool for the Nordic region to gain visibility.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, 59.
The Nordic Institute on Åland’s purposes was stated to be “to strengthen the Ålandic cultural life and to establish and maintain ties with other Nordic countries and autonomous regions.” The report notes that the office has substation ties with other Nordic institutions and to some extent the Baltic countries. However, it also states that its visibility in relation to the Nordic region as a whole is quite modest.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, 60.
It was recommended that all three institutions continue to receive basic funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers, but that they also be asked to seek funding from external institutions. In this sense, they “survived” the conclusions of the report amid budget cuts within the reform efforts of official Nordic co-operation in the 1990s.

Current use of Nordic added value

In an interview conducted for this report, an official at the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands stressed the important role that the house has in the islands’ cultural scene, and that it practically functions as a media house.
Interview with an official from the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands., October 23, 2023.
In the latest (2022) annual report on the activities of the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands, the concept nordisk nytte is used as the heading of one subsection. This subsection cites the role of the house in “connect[ing] Norden to the Faroe Islands and the Faroe Islands to Norden and the rest of the world through culture, language, debate, information, and its physical building in Torshavn, which also reflects Nordic culture.”
The Nordic House in the Faroe Islands, “Årsrapport 2022,” 17.
One official at the Nordic Institute in Greenland stressed the cultural element of the institution and its efforts to “be a part of the local cultural life, with a focus on linking the local cultures to the other Nordic cultures.” When it comes to Nordic values, the official stressed the importance of the idea of trust and how mistrust characterises the relationship between Greenland and Denmark, this being a legacy of colonialism. The interviewee also stressed an understanding of Nordic added value as being primarily linked to cultural values and not economic ones. For example, they stated that roughly 10 to 15 years ago, when anything labelled “Nordic” such as “New Nordic Cuisine” – which would be seen as inherently positive in Denmark – would automatically be a negatively charged term in Greenland due to its association with colonialism.
Interview with an official from the Nordic Institute in Greenland., October 17, 2023.
Although neither Nordic added value nor nordisk nytte is used in the institute’s 2022 annual report, the report defines its own function as “bringing Nordic culture to Greenland and Greenlandic culture to the Nordic region” with a special focus on the Arctic region and young people.
The Nordic Institute in Greenland, “Årsrapport 2022,” Annual Report (Nuuk: The Nordic Institute in Greenland, 2022), 7.
The last publicly available report at the time of writing from the Nordic Institute on Åland dates from 2021. The term “nordisk nytte” features as a heading of a subsection in which the concept is defined as being related to efforts “to inspire, develop, and unite civil society during necessary processes of change.”
The Nordic Institute on Åland, “Årsrapport 2021,” Annual Report (Mariehamn: The Nordic Institute on Åland, 2021), 16.
 More specifically, the institute states that democratic values such as “self-government, equality and sustainable lifestyles” characterise the Nordic region, and that Åland could help promote such values.

Meanings of Nordic added value

The official from the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands elaborated that, for them and their function, the concept of Nordic added value reflected issues of social inclusion (such as LGBT rights) and, especially in the later years, the green transition and other issues related to Vision 2030. The official linked Nordic added value to the Scandinavian concept of nordisk nytta on the grounds that it was “more concrete” whereas nordiskt mervärde was an “add-on.”
Interview with an official from the Nordic House in the Faroe Islands.
The emphasis on LGBT rights must be understood in reference to the previous Faroese election in 2022, when the then Minster of Foreign Affairs and Culture expressed scepticism towards having a homosexual prime minister in Denmark and caused the collapse of the government. The other dimension of Nordic added value was the green transition, which also features prominently on the house’s website. The “Nordic” is constructed as a progressive and climate-conscious force against more socially conservative elements within Faroese society. In this way, the Nordic House serves both as an artistic platform and beacon for the values that the Nordic Council of Ministers wants to promote.
The official at the Nordic Institute in Greenland stated that, for them, Nordic added value is an interplay of two contradictory ideas of difference and sameness. On the one hand, the Nordic region is constructed as a relatively homogenous region, and on the other, as a region encompassing cultural diversity and interchange between cultures. The interviewee noted that while everything “Nordic” was considered universally positive in Denmark, the reception and discourse about the “Nordic” was much more negative and even regarded as inauthentic in Greenland due to the legacy of colonialism.
Interview with an official from the Nordic Institute in Greenland.
Greenland is an exceptional case when it comes to Nordic co-operation as the historical weight of colonialism clearly affects the work of the office and the interpretation of Nordic added value, a fact also conceded in the interview with the official at the Nordic Institute in Greenland and in the institution’s annual report from 2022.
The Nordic Institute in Greenland, “Årsrapport 2022,” 11.
 Greenland is not an unambiguous part of the Nordic region and has a North American draw through its Inuit culture and the importance of Greenland to the American continental defence system.
The official on Åland stressed that the concept of Nordic added value was based on identity. This, the official argued, was built on two points: a sense of togetherness and shared values on the one hand, and the possibility to “open doors, to inspire and create debates” based on internal differences within the region on the other.
Interview with official from the Nordic Institute on Åland, November 16, 2023.
 The role of culture, and cultural activity’s crucial role in Nordic co-operation at large, was strongly emphasised. 

The Nordic offices in the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russia

Frederik Forrai Ørskov
The Nordic Council of Ministers currently has three offices in Estonia (Tallinn, Tartu, and Narva), one in Latvia (Riga), and one in Lithuania (Vilnius). Formerly, the Nordic Council of Ministers ran two offices in Northwestern Russia as well (Saint Petersburg and Kaliningrad). The offices in the Nordic neighbourhood areas are tasked with facilitating and developing co-operation between Nordic and local actors, including NGOs, businesses, cultural actors, and public administrators. They advise on funding opportunities, administer grants, facilitate events and activities, and are meant to be “exponents of everything ‘Nordic’.”
“The Nordic Council of Ministers’ Activities in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania | Nordic Cooperation,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.norden.org/en/information/nordic-council-ministers-activities-estonia-latvia-and-lithuania.
The changing geopolitical realities around the Baltic Sea over the last decade have impacted the offices directly and indirectly. This has most notably been the case in relation to Russia following the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the Russian government’s designation of the offices as “foreign agents,” and the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, developments that led the Nordic Council of Ministers to terminate its activities in Kaliningrad and Saint Petersburg.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg, July 5, 2023.
 Simultaneously, the Baltic offices have adapted to increasingly include Ukrainian partners when relevant.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia, July 11, 2023; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania, June 28, 2023.
 Moreover, the Nordic Council of Ministers has been involved in projects aimed at the development of democracy and civic society in Belarus since the mid-2000s.
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Det internationale Norden: Nordisk Ministerråds internationale samarbejde” (Nordisk ministerråd, 2013); “Activities in Belarus,” Šiaurės ministrų tarybos biuras Lietuvoje, accessed January 8, 2024, https://www.norden.lt/en/activities-in-belarus/;  These activities fall under the domain of the Lithuanian office, at one time constituting a larger part of the office’s budget than its activities in Lithuania, but also these activities have changed character following the clampdown on the 2020-2021 protests. Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.

History of the Nordic Council of Ministers’ offices in the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russia

The Nordic Council of Ministers opened information offices in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in early 1991 as the culmination of a keen interest in the Baltic countries among the institutions of Nordic co-operation during the final years of the Soviet Union, and the Nordic countries’ early support of Baltic independence.
Andrén, “Säkerhetspolitikens återkomst”; Henrik Hagemann, “Hvor er det godt at det gik som det fik,” in Norden sett inifrån: Det fjärde spårbytet, eds. Bengt Sundelius and Claes Wiklund (Stockholm: Santérus Förlag, 2017), 89–108; Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 83; The Nordic Council, Nordiska rådet. 3:e extra session. 1989. Mariehamn., eds. Ingegerd Wahrgren and Viveca Wiklund (Stockholm: Norstedts Tryckeri, 1989), 51–101; Svenolof Karlsson, Guðrún Dager Garðarsdóttir, and Viveca Wiklund, eds., Nordisk Råd. 39. session. 1991, København. (Stockholm: Norstedts Tryckeri, 1991), 44, 418–76, 1818; In Estonia, a second office opened in Otepää in autumn 1991, relocating to Tartu the following year, while a third office was opened in Narva in 2016. Norden.ee, “30 Years,” accessed January 8, 2024, https://www.norden.ee/en/about-us/30-years.
 The opening of the information offices in the Baltic capitals came in the wake of the 39th Session of the Nordic Council, where it was presented as part of the presidium’s programme for Nordic-Baltic co-operation – with a rather modest Nordic budget to go with it, featuring mostly as a symbolic addition to funding from national governments.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 85–86; Karlsson, Garðarsdóttir, and Wiklund, Nordisk Råd. 39. session. 1991, København., 1805–8, 2818–22.
The Nordic Council’s information offices in the Baltic countries were initially designed to facilitate cultural co-operation and provide information about the Nordic countries, but while cultural co-operation retained a significant role in Nordic-Baltic co-operation, its initial primacy gradually gave way to emphases first on Nordic values (and societal features), then in the 2000s and into the early 2010s on economic co-operation and cultivation of the Nordic brand.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 94, 111.
Following a major restructuring of the Nordic Council in 1995, “Norden and its neighbourhood areas,” meaning the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russia, was instituted as one of the institution’s three central focus areas.
Tønnesson, “Tvil Om Nytten,” 2002, 137; Nordic Council of Ministers and Nordic Council, “Nordiskt samarbete i en ny tid: det nordiska samarbetet i ljuset av folkomröstningarna om EU-medlemskap för Finland, Norge och Sverige: förslag till mål, innehåll och former för nordiskt samarbete i en föränderlig tid” (Nordic Council, Nordic Council of Ministers, 1995); Larsen, “Reformering av Nordisk Råd,” 209.
 In this context, the first joint co-operation programme with the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russia emerged in 1994, leading to the opening of an information office in Saint Petersburg in 1995 along with a number of other co-operation initiatives in Northwestern Russia.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 81; Svenolof Karlsson, Guðrún Dager Garðarsdóttir, and Viveca Wiklund, eds., Nordisk Råd. 46. session. 1995. Reykjavik (Stockholm: Norstedts Tryckeri, 1995), 851–52; Initially, the Saint Petersburg office was mainly concerned with individual exchanges in research and education, before becoming more institutionalised in the Nordic grant scheme around 2002. Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
 In 2005, a new office was opened in Kaliningrad, and from around 2007, the offices in Russia engaged more actively with local partners, facilitating activities that were deemed beneficial to Nordic interests or which aimed to connect Russian and Nordic institutions and individuals in a range of spheres.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
After the Baltic countries’ accession to the EU in 2004, the guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ co-operation with the Baltic countries for 2006 to 2008 addressed a shift over time from Nordic support and aid to “co-operation between eight states on an equal basis,” with the result being an introduction of joint financing for Nordic-Baltic co-operation projects.
The Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Minister’s Cooperation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2006-2008” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2004).
Strengthening the EU’s Northern Dimension partnership and the EU’s Baltic Sea strategy became central priorities in Nordic-Russian and Nordic-Baltic co-operation programmes in the late 2000s and in the 2010s, while EU projects within the Nordic-Baltic framework of co-operation came to constitute a larger part of the offices’ work. Yet, the in-house administration of such projects was scaled down towards the end of the decade.
The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Co-Operation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2009-2013” (The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 2010); The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ co-operation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania from 2014” (The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 2014); Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg; Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 110.

Institutional history of Nordic added value

Notably, the mid-1990s reform process that made “Norden and its neighbourhood areas” one of three central pillars of the Nordic Council’s work also introduced the concept of Nordic added value (initially quite exclusively as nordisk nytta) as a key yardstick for Nordic co-operation. When, as part of the reform process, the institutions of Nordic co-operation were evaluated by a joint-Nordic working group in the 1995 Nordisk nytte report, more than half of all institutions stated that they were occupied with the neighbourhood areas, especially the Baltic countries. According to the report’s authors, this was most likely the result of the contemporary political prioritisation of the Baltic countries, but also a cause for concern, since it implied that many organisations had moved away from their original purpose.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995, 23–24.
 The information offices themselves were not evaluated in the report, however.
Nordisk nytta nonetheless soon came to frame Nordic-Baltic and Nordic-Russian co-operation, obtaining a status as the leading principle to be followed at the information offices in the Baltic countries as well as in Saint Petersburg.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 96.
 It retained this status into the 2000s. In the Framework Programme for Co-operation with the Areas Adjacent to the Nordic Region for 2000-2002, it was stated that “the concept of Nordic advantage is an overarching goal for all co-operation activities,” referring to “shared Nordic values [, …] politically relevant measures where joint implementation can yield a tangible advantage,” and the promotion of the Nordic countries at a higher international level.
Cited from Kharkina, 96–97.
 Likewise, the contractual agreements between the Nordic Council of Ministers and individual information offices stipulated “Nordic benefit” as the central operating principle under which aims to strengthen security and stability in the region, promote, disseminate, and strengthen Nordic culture, values, and visibility as well as the market economy could all be pursued.
Kharkina, 102–3.
As Nordic-Baltic co-operation was reconceptualised as co-operation on an equal footing in the mid-2000s, the concept of Nordic benefit was expanded to reflect this. Hence, the Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Co-Operation with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania for 2006-2008 made it clear that the new financing principles, including the termination of development aid projects, ensured that “co-operation is of mutual Nordic-Baltic benefit.” The co-operation itself was seen to contain “strong intrinsic value” as it would enable further mutually beneficial future co-operation, with cultural co-operation shaping the foundations by offering the “connective tissue” of Nordic-Baltic co-operation. “Through joint Nordic-Baltic co-operation,” it was argued, “the countries will achieve more than they are in a position to do separately.” The environmental state of the Baltic Sea was one area where joint Nordic-Baltic responsibility was highlighted. Moreover, it was stressed that co-operation should only be pursued when representing “added value and additional worth by comparison to bilateral co-operation, regular EU/EEA co-operation and co-operation with EFTA.”
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Minister’s Cooperation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2006-2008.”
 Likewise, the guidelines for 2009 to 2013 stated that “first and foremost, the co-operation between the NCM and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania should be a political co-operation that generates Nordic–Baltic benefit.” The co-operation should strive to accomplish shared goals and build on “common values such as democracy, good governance, equality, freedom of speech and tolerance and allowing cultural co-operation, amongst other things, to serve as a link in Nordic-Baltic relationships,” while allowing the Nordic and Baltic states to jointly address “the opportunities and challenges of globalisation.”
The Nordic Council of Ministers’ Secretariat, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Co-Operation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2009-2013.”

Current use of Nordic added value

In the most recent and currently valid guidelines for Nordic co-operation with the Baltic countries from 2014, the expanded concept of Nordic-Baltic benefit has again given way to the concept of nordisk nytta, although now translated as “Nordic synergies” in the English-language version. That is, according to the guidelines, the Nordic Council of Ministers has its remit in the Baltic in “areas where Nordic synergies [nordisk nytte in the Scandinavian version] provide greater benefit than a bilateral approach,” while its offices are tasked with playing “a key co-ordinating role in the implementation of joint initiatives that generate Nordic synergies [nordisk nytte in the Scandinavian version].”
The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ co-operation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania from 2014”; The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, “Retningslinjer for Nordisk Ministerråds samarbejde med Estland, Letland og Litauen fra 2014” (The Secretariat to the Nordic Council of Ministers, 2014).
 Since the guidelines for Nordic-Baltic co-operation have not been changed since 2014, having been evaluated as working satisfactorily, the offices are still tasked with acting as catalysts in initiatives that create nordisk nytta.
“Tailwind Propels Nordic-Baltic Co-Operation,” Norden.org, September 5, 2017, https://www.norden.org/en/news/tailwind-propels-nordic-baltic-co-operation.
 It should be noted, however, that a very recent NordForsk workshop with the participation of the Nordic organisations in the Baltic countries revolved around the question of added value in Baltic-Nordic research co-operation.
In interviews conducted for this report, officials from the offices expressed a high degree of familiarity and identification with the concept of Nordic added value.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
 One official emphasised that Nordic added value is “the overarching idea behind everything we do” and a question of “being stronger together” as well as speaking with one voice politically and economically on the many aspects where the Nordics agree among themselves.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia; see also Norden.ee, “About Us. Intro,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.norden.ee/en/about-us/about-us.
 Another official framed the concept as a starting point for asking both what the Nordics can contribute to and gain from specific projects, while specifying that both contributions and outcomes can be measured in different ways – money, influence, branding, policy outcomes, to mention a few – meaning that clear indicators are needed if Nordic added value is to be measured.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
In more concrete terms, officials from Baltic and Russian offices alike mentioned the participation of two or more Nordic countries in the projects they facilitated as an important condition for creating Nordic added value. This “golden rule” is important, they argued, because it allowed for comparisons of best practices in the Nordic countries that are instructive for Baltic/Russian and Nordic partners alike.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
 One official described a modus operandi where the Nordic office added value by “Nordicising” local events and projects by facilitating – generally well-received and appreciated – Nordic contributions rather than initiating such projects themselves.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
While rarely referred to by the term Nordic added value, concepts articulating the desired outcome of joint Nordic co-operation are frequently cited in relation to the grant programmes administered by the Baltic offices. The most used terms in this regard are Nordic benefit and Nordic synergy, while objectives are often outlined that are often seen in relation to the concept of Nordic added value. The objectives of the Nordic-Baltic Mobility Program for Public Administration, for example, include: “promotion of knowledge transfer for mutual benefit”; “joint Nordic-Baltic utilisation of different EU funds and project financing”; “increase the global competitive power of the region”; and the participation of participants from three or more countries.
“Grant Guidelines - NB8-Grants,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.nb8grants.org/guidelines.
 Moreover, grants recipients are asked to qualitatively evaluate how the project benefited Nordic-Baltic co-operation.
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Grant Report Example. NB8 Grants” (Nordic Council of Ministers), accessed February 1, 2024, https://www.nb8grants.org/images/stories/files/ap_examples/2023/nb8-grants-report-example-2023.pdf.
 Applicants for the Grant Programme for Nordic-Baltic NGO Cooperation, in turn, are asked to outline whether the prospective project will “generate any Nordic benefits, utilise any specific Nordic competence or alternatively transfer knowledge from or to the Nordic countries” or whether there are “other arguments in support of the project being run under the auspices under this programme and with Nordic Council of Ministers’ funding.”
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nordic Council of Ministers’ Grant Programme for Nordic-Baltic Non-Governmental Organisations’ (NGO) Cooperation 2022 Estonia. Application Example” (Nordic Council of Ministers, n.d.).
 What such Nordic benefits, competences, or arguments could entail is not specified further in the application guidelines, but the purposes of the programme are outlined as follows:
  • Network cooperation in prioritised areas
  • Knowledge transfer for mutual benefit within different sector areas
  • Experience exchange on best practices
  • Capacity building within civil society.
    “Grant Guidelines - NB8-Grants.”
Nordic added value, then, primarily functions as an overarching goal rather than as an operationalizable principle, although a goal that is tied to concrete practices of knowledge transfer, networking, comparisons and exchange of best practices, and similar practices of mutuality, along with branding of Nordic cultural and societal features and general representation of Nordic interests, perspectives, and values in the Baltic (and previously Northwest Russian) context.

Meanings of Nordic added value

The Nordic Council’s offices in the Baltic countries and the now-defunct offices in Northwestern Russia constitute a special case among the institutions of Nordic co-operation since they are located and operate outside the Nordic region itself. They constitute a Nordic public diplomatic presence in a non-Nordic context with the aim of furthering Nordic interests and promoting supposedly Nordic values and perspectives to foreign audiences, often in close co-operation with the Nordic embassies. At the same time, they encourage and facilitate co-operation that involves local partners.
This context is reflected in the meanings attached to Nordic added value in the Baltic and Russian offices. Officials in the Baltic offices generally linked Nordic added value to the legitimacy of regional co-operation and the Nordic presence in the Baltic countries. According to one interviewee, the pursuit of Nordic added value at the Baltic offices is often tied to a general sense of what is seen to be good for the Nordic countries at an overarching level, while another interviewee stressed that Nordic added value is interlinked with branding – “to be seen, to be heard, to be listened to” – and with the Nordics playing an active role in the world by taking responsibility and living up to their own self-image on issues where they claim to be world-leading.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
At the same time, it was argued in interviews that the basis for co-operation between the Nordic and Baltic countries, as well as between the Nordic countries and Russia, should be mutual benefit, offering an extended understanding of Nordic added value, echoing the earlier concept of Nordic-Baltic Benefit.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
 The role of culture in Nordic-Baltic co-operation has been framed accordingly, with the co-operation guidelines from 2006 to 2008 arguing that a common cultural understanding has also been framed as “a connective tissue of mutual Nordic-Baltic cooperation” that might aid “joint access to the development of democratic societies, respectful of human rights and with open economies.”
The Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Minister’s Cooperation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2006-2008.”
However, it was also noted that it should not be taken for granted that Nordic interests always align with what is beneficial from a Baltic point of view.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.
 This tension is recurring, reflecting the offices’ dual purpose as arbiters of Nordic interests as well as facilitators of Nordic-Baltic co-operation. Consequently, despite the new emphasis on mutuality in Nordic-Baltic relations implemented in the Nordic Council of Ministers’ guidelines in the mid-2000s, the offices were still tasked with serving as “exponents for all that is ‘Nordic’” [emphasis in original].
The Nordic Council of Ministers, “Guidelines for the Nordic Council of Minister’s Cooperation with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 2006-2008.”
 This, among other things, has led critics to argue that the offices represent an asymmetric relationship in Nordic-Baltic co-operation.
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 106–10; Kazimierz Musiał, “Reconceptualizing Nordic Identities after 1989,” in Bordering the Baltic: Scandinavian Boundary-Drawing Processes, 1900-2000, ed. Madeleine Hurd (Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2011), 105–25.
In relation to this, one interviewee noted that it is somewhat challenging to sell Vision 2030 in the Baltic context, for example, even if there might be sympathy for its overall goals, since the Baltic offices, and international co-operation more broadly, is not mentioned in Vision 2030, just like the Baltic countries were not consulted during the development of the vision document.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.
 Still, officials in the Baltic offices express a clear belief that the vision is valid for their work as well, and that they are engaged in pursuing all three of the vision’s strategic priorities.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.
Moreover, as cultural diplomatic institutions operating outside the Nordic region, the offices in the Baltic countries and Northwestern Russian place particular emphasis on cultural and societal values, also in relation to Nordic added value. The distinction between Nordic added value and Nordic values more broadly is seemingly quite blurred. Concepts such as “Nordic benefit” and “Nordic advantage” have been linked to Nordic values in relation to co-operation with geographic areas adjacent to the Nordic region in programme documentation since the early 2000s,
Kharkina, “From Kinship to Global Brand,” 96.
 and this meaning has been adapted in the concept of Nordic added value as well. In other words, Nordic added value is and has been understood as Nordic values being added (promoted or transferred) to Baltic and Russian contexts, including on issues relating to democracy, gender equality and gender roles, innovation, climate, and sustainability. As part of this, the notion that the Nordic countries have a stronger voice if speaking together appears prominently. So too, however, does the fact that some of the supposedly Nordic values are regarded with scepticism in parts of the Baltic societies, such as those relating to gender and migration.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.
On a more practical level, Nordic added value is also linked to cost-sharing benefits – the possibility of having Nordic cultural producers or exhibitions, for example, “tour” all three Baltic countries instead of just visiting one office
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
 – knowledge exchange, sharing of best practices, facilitation of inter-sectoral co-operation, and division of subject areas between the different offices, for example. However, these are often – although not always – framed as practices that create Nordic added value by facilitating the promotion of Nordic values. It was noted in one interview, for example, that Nordic added value could not always be created or described by the office in Saint Petersburg but would depend on exchanges that would allow Russians to observe how different gender roles are reflected in the Nordic societies, for example.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
Officials at the offices generally expressed hesitance towards the feasibility of concretely measuring the Nordic added value of the work done at the offices.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania; Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Saint Petersburg.
 The scepticism about the feasibility – or even desirability – of measuring Nordic added value might be related to Nordic added value particularly often being understood in relation to cultural and societal values in the Baltic and Russian offices. Values and attitudes are generally difficult to quantify, while it is seldom possible to know when and to what extent results for certain parameters in the Baltic countries can be attributed to Nordic efforts, such as in relation to major societal issues like sustainability where Nordic efforts are one of many factors potentially driving change.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.
Finally, officials in the Baltic offices also linked Nordic added value to geopolitics and security issues. Such issues are formally outside the remits of Nordic co-operation but still frame the context in which the offices operate, and which have changed drastically over the course of the last decade. According to one official, Finland joining NATO was perceived as adding value to Nordic-Baltic co-operation in the local context,
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Lithuania.
 while another official highlighted that “co-operation that includes the Baltics is of mervärde or nytta for the Nordics” since the Nordic and Baltic countries are all small countries with an interest in joining forces.
Interview with official from Nordic Council of Ministers’ office in Latvia.

Research and innovation

This sub-chapter addresses the questions of the history of Nordic added value, the current use of Nordic added value, and the meanings attached to Nordic added value in selected Nordic institutions conducting or facilitating research and/or innovation. The institutions addressed in this sub-chapter are:

Nordic Welfare Centre

Emilia Berg
The Nordic Welfare Centre is an official institution under the Nordic Council of Ministers for Social and Health Affairs (MR-S) and serves as a platform for Nordic co-operation in the social affairs and health sector. It is responsible for collaboration on health and social affairs, as well as some cross-sector initiatives. It currently has a total of 27 employees at two offices in Stockholm and Helsinki. While the institution mainly operates in Scandinavian languages, English is also utilized in its day-to-day activities. By gathering and sharing knowledge on welfare issues, the institution aims to offer stronger instruments for policymaking as well as tools for promoting health and well-being. The institution’s focus areas include public health, disability, the integration of refugees and migrants, as well as welfare policy covering children and young people, the elderly, and welfare technology. The aim of the institution is to contribute to the development of welfare initiatives in the Nordic region, and to contribute knowledge that might serve as the foundation for political decisions at the national, regional, and local levels.

History of Nordic Welfare Centre

Although Nordic welfare co-operation has deep historical roots originating in the late 19th century, socio-political co-operation only became integral to the Nordic region in the post-war period.
Pauli Kettunen et al., “The Nordic Model and the Rise and Fall of Nordic Cooperation,” in Nordic Cooperation: A European Region in Transition, 2015, 69–91; Klaus Petersen, “National, Nordic and Trans-Nordic: Transnational Perspectives on the History of the Nordic Welfare States,” in Beyond Welfare State Models, eds. Klaus Petersen and Pauli Kettunen (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011), 41–64.
 Since then, it has been fundamental to the region’s identity as it has been intertwined with the development of extensive welfare states and the Nordic welfare model.
See, e.g., Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism; Christopher S. Browning, “Branding Nordicity: Models, Identity and the Decline of Exceptionalism,” Cooperation and Conflict 42, no. 1 (March 2007): 27–51; Mary Hilson, The Nordic Model: Scandinavia since 1945, Contemporary Worlds (London: Reaktion Books, 2008); Olli Kangas and Joakim Palme, eds., Social Policy and Economic Development in the Nordic Countries (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2005); Mikko Kautto et al., “Introduction: How Distinct Are the Nordic Welfare States?,” in Nordic Welfare States in the European Context, eds. Johan Fritzell et al. (London: Routledge, 2001), 1–17; Pauli Kettunen and Klaus Petersen, eds., “Beyond Welfare State Models: Transnational Historical Perspectives on Social Policy,” in Beyond Welfare State Models (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011); Mikko Kuisma and Mikael Nygård, “The European Union and the Nordic Models of Welfare - Path Dependency or Policy Harmonisation?,” in The Nordic Countries and the European Union: Still the Other European Community?, eds. Caroline Grøn, Peter Nedergaard, and Anders Wivel, 1st ed. (London: Routledge, 2015); An essential part of the co-operation, the concept of the Nordic model, gained prominence in the 1930s and emerged as a global indicator of legitimacy during the Cold War. The Nordic welfare model is often characterised by a comprehensive social welfare system, providing universal access to healthcare, education, and social services. Despite academic debates on variations between the Nordic countries, which challenge the notion of a single, homogenous model, the Nordic welfare model has garnered both praise for its achievements and criticism for potential homogeneity and high taxes.
 The foundations of the Nordic Welfare Centre date back to the period between the 1960s and 1980s, during which various Nordic institutions dedicated to the welfare sector were established.
Brit Denstad, “Vurdering av nordiske institusjoner og samarbeidsorganer på det sosial- og helsepolitiske området,” 2007.
 The Nordic Welfare Centre was formally established in 2009, following a comprehensive reform initiative that involved organisational restructuring and mergers within official Nordic co-operation in the social affairs and health sector.
Since early 2009, NUD (Nordic Staff Training Centre for Deafblind Services) has been part of the Nordic Welfare Centre (NVC) together with three other institutions: NAD (Nordic Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research) in Helsinki; NOPUS (Nordic Training Program for the Development of Social Services) in Malmö; and NSH (Nordic Cooperation on Disability) in Stockholm. Denstad; Nordic Welfare Centre, “Navneændring, Orientering Om NVC.,” 2009.

Institutional history of Nordic added value

Prior to the establishment of the Nordic Welfare Centre, the concept of nordisk nytta was discussed in the framework of assessment processes of the Nordic institutions in the social affairs and health sector. Following the general reform report for official Nordic co-operation by the Nordic Council of Ministers and the Nordic Council in 1995, in 2003 the Nordic Committee of Senior Officials for Health and Social Affairs (EK-S) decided to conduct an analysis of the sector’s institutions, with an emphasis on an administrative-economic perspective.
Bengt Holmblad, “Analys av institutionerna i det nordiska samarbetet på välfärdsområdet - organistoriska och administrativa utgångspunkter” (GW gruppen, 2003).
 The assessment, conducted by an external evaluator, covered the six institutions within the scope of EK-S, as well as two institutions in the labour market and gender equality sectors. The assessment did not so much concern the institutions’ activities in great detail, rather it sought ways to simplify management and administration, and looked at the level of engagement and competence found within the framework of the institutions. The concept nordisk nytta was linked to the co-operation outcomes and was described as the starting point for all Nordic activities. Furthermore, the external evaluator described nordisk nytta as relating to activities that would not be done otherwise, or that would be better done as part of Nordic co-operation.
Holmblad.
The 2003 evaluation was followed by another assessment commissioned by EK-S, this time reviewing and evaluating the substance of the six institutions and the two collaborative bodies that operated in the social affairs and health policy area.
Denstad, “Vurdering av nordiske institusjoner og samarbeidsorganer på det sosial- og helsepolitiske området.”
 Also conducted by an external expert, the review aimed to ensure greater efficiency and more targeted efforts in the priority areas within the policy sector.
Denstad.
 In this context, the concept of nordisk nytta was mentioned among the reform goals. These included an aim to improve the potential of the institutions to serve as a tool for EK-S in achieving politically set goals that deliver nordisk nytta. In practice, the concept was linked to the effective and target-oriented use of Nordic funds, with an increased focus on the needs within social affairs and health policy, as well as nordisk nytta. In addition to the requirements of the concept drawn up in 1995, the external evaluator suggested adding a new dimension to the concept by proposing to connect it more clearly to the international operations of the institutions.
Denstad.
Following the assessments in the early 2000s and the establishment of the Nordic Welfare Centre, terms such as “benefit,” “synergy,” and “added value” have been discernible across numerous steering documents within the Nordic social affairs and health policy sector. For instance, the concept of “synergy” (referred to as “nytta” in Scandinavian-language versions of the same documents) has been a consistent element in the co-operation programmes for health and social affairs since 2009. It has been recognised as a core principle in guiding the sector’s activities, with the aim that participating countries acquire added value when addressing and solving tasks at the Nordic level. Furthermore, it has often been linked with efforts to highlight Nordic interdependence and efforts to elevate competence and competitiveness in the region.
See Nordic co-operation programmes for health and social affairs between 2009 and 2024.

Current use of Nordic added value

The Nordic Welfare Centre has not provided an independent definition of the concept of Nordic added value in the context of Nordic co-operation on health and social affairs. Despite this, the concept frequently features in numerous documents shaping the institution’s framework and is extensively utilised as a tool in project planning, implementation, and evaluation, as well as in the institution’s annual reports and other governing and steering materials.
The current use of Nordic added value has been examined within the framework of Nordic co-operation on social affairs and health policy by Emilia Berg in a master’s thesis in 2023. The thesis investigated and compared the understanding of the concept by individuals working in or with Nordic co-operation within social affairs and health policy at two separate levels of formal Nordic co-operation, including those employed by the Nordic Council of Ministers and involved in the decision-making of the Nordic Welfare Centre, as well as external stakeholders participating in the many networks co-ordinated by the Nordic Welfare Centre.
Berg, “Sharing is Caring.”
From the study, it is evident that Nordic added value is employed in multiple contexts (see Table 2).
In the table, the results from the above-mentioned study have been expanded by way of a historical study of the concept by also examining older co-operation programmes in the sector.
 It is primarily used to outline the purpose and functions of the Nordic Welfare Centre as a whole, as delineated in the 1995 report by the Nordic Council of Ministers and the Nordic Council, as well as the 2007 sector assessment report. Secondly, the concept denotes prerequisites and attributes that form and facilitate co-operation. For example, the existence of similar social systems across the Nordic region features as a condition for meaningful co-operation in the field of social political research. Moreover, the concept serves as a prerequisite for projects carried out at the Nordic Welfare Centre, since it is used as an evaluative criterion for receiving funding for Nordic co-operation between organisations for people with disabilities, for example. Finally, the concept may refer to potential and tangible advantages, outcomes, and achievements stemming from co-operation efforts in the sector.
Table 2 Nordic added value as a tool at the Nordic Welfare Centre.
Usage context
Explanation
Institution’s mandate, development, and activities
  • General purpose of the institution, providing a framework for its goals and objectives.
  • Evaluation criteria for the institution, including what the institution achieves, how its operations and services function, and how they can be developed in the future.
  • A guide for all activities of the institution, going beyond the practical and professional co-operation results whilst taking Vision 2030 into account.
Preconditions and characteristics
  • Similar social systems facilitating co-operation.
  • Assessment criteria for receiving funding.
Benefits, outcomes, results
  • Possible and concrete benefits, outcomes, and results of co-operation, such as increased knowledge, exchange of experiences, development of (new) knowledge, a broader Nordic contact network for participants, and the promotion of organisational and competence development.

Meanings of Nordic added value

Consistent with previous research on the concept of Nordic added value, the findings of Berg’s study confirm that the concept is characterised by a certain degree of elasticity and ambiguity, contingent upon the perspectives of the individuals employing it. Consequently, operationalising and establishing a single definition of the concept has proven challenging. Moreover, different translations and terms such as “benefit,” “synergy,” and “added value” are often used interchangeably. Despite the elasticity and various terms used to describe Nordic added value, the concept of Nordic added value (nordiskt mervärde and nordisk nytta, often used interchangeably) seemed relatively familiar among participants surveyed for the study. Interestingly, the understanding of the concept among those participants who stated that they were not familiar with it was not drastically different from or inconsistent with the understanding among those who were familiar with it. This finding suggests that the concept might be (or seem) self-evident in practice, indicating that individuals involved in or engaged with Nordic co-operation might not actively pursue it or realise that added value is continuously being generated.
Berg, “Sharing is Caring.”
Looking at the deeper meanings of the concept, the results demonstrate that the concept can be understood in both symbolic and pragmatic terms, which can be instrumental in setting and achieving the desired outcomes and objectives of Nordic co-operation efforts.
Berg.
Firstly, the concept is deeply rooted in symbolic and philosophical notions, intertwined with the shared background and values associated with the Nordic welfare state models. According to the findings, these shared values are not only perceived to foster cohesion, trust, and a sense of unity among the Nordic countries, but also to bolster the collective influence of the “Nordic family” in the global arena. Furthermore, it appears that the perception that the Nordic countries share common values and welfare systems facilitates co-operation and contributes to mutual understanding within the welfare sector. This reflects an understanding that Nordic co-operation is interest-driven, meaning that Nordic added value is produced for the common benefit and for every Nordic citizen.
Secondly, the concept can be understood in pragmatic terms, as a common ground that allows for the exchange and sharing of examples, practices, and experiences, whether positive or negative. Participants in both surveys and interviews highlighted that, due to the learning and inspiration that can arise out of the exchange, the Nordic countries may draw useful comparisons that can be utilised and applied in national contexts to help both individual countries and the region as a whole to develop. At the same time, this process may result in positive competition between the Nordic countries and, as a result, more useful co-operation and comparisons, creating a continuous cycle.
Interview with official at Nordic Welfare Centre, February 3, 2023.
The results of the surveys and interviews conducted for Berg’s study suggest that within Nordic co-operation on social affairs and health policy, Nordic added value is perceived more through a (socio-)political lens than an economic one. While resource pooling was mentioned in surveys, its significance stemmed less from benefits derived from economies of scale and more from the rationale that combining resources and expertise is logical given the relatively small size of the Nordic populations. This is demonstrated, for example, in efforts related to individuals with deaf-blindness or other rare conditions and diseases.
The concept of Nordic added value was also criticised among the participants in the study. Firstly, the concept was questioned for its perceived lack of substantive meaning, often being invoked in Nordic rhetoric and speeches without clear practical implications. Secondly, it was noted that its abstract nature makes it challenging to quantify or measure it. At the same time, it was argued that excessive emphasis on measurement and scrutiny of the concept can also potentially restrict the organic and diverse nature of Nordic co-operation, which, according to one of the interviewees, has historically thrived on the principle of “letting all the flowers bloom.”
Interview with member of the Nordic Committee of Senior Officials for Health and Social Affairs, January 27, 2023.

Nordregio

Frederik Forrai Ørskov
Nordregio is an international research centre for regional development and planning under the Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordregio is based in Stockholm and employs more than 45 people.
Nordregio, “Organisation,” accessed March 5, 2024, https://nordregio.org/about/organisation/.
 Its strategic mandate is set out by the Nordic Council of Ministers for Regional Development and Planning (MR-R) and it defines Nordregio’s role as a Nordic institute for research, policy advice, and analysis with a focus on policy-relevant research with significance for sustainable regional development and planning.
“Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio,” 16.
In addition to regional development, the research centre lists its core research areas as regional development, rural development, urban planning, demography, and governance, while its efforts also revolve around the development of mapping tools, GIS analysis, cross-border and comparative statistics, as well as outreach efforts. The bi-annual State of the Nordic Region reports feature prominently among the institution’s efforts to offer knowledge of relevance to Nordic policy makers.
In addition to funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers, Nordregio gets project funding through international funding agencies and from national and regional authorities.
Interview with official from Nordregio, January 19, 2024.
 Nordregio is an official research entity under the European Union’s statistical office, Eurostat, and is involved in research activities on national, Nordic, and European levels.
“About Nordregio,” Nordregio, accessed March 5, 2024, https://nordregio.org/about/; “Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio.”
 It has a significant proportion of non-Nordic researchers among its staff, and its official working language is English.

History of Nordregio

The decision of the Ministers for Nordic Co-operation to establish Nordregio was made in October 1996, and the institution began its operations under the Nordic Council of Ministers on 1 July 1997. Its establishment came in the wake of the 1995 reforms of the Nordic Council of Ministers and was effectively the result of a merger of three other Nordic institutions: the Nordic Institute of Regional Policy Research (NordREFO), the Nordic School of Planning (NORDPLAN), and the Nordic Group for Regional Analysis (NOGRAN). These institutions had existed since 1967, 1968, and 1979 respectively, meaning that many of the core tasks of Nordregio had already been part of the framework of Nordic co-operation for three decades.
Nordregio, “Organisation - Nordregio - Old Website,” accessed March 5, 2024, https://archive.nordregio.se/en/Metameny/About-Nordregio/organisation/index.html; Union of International Associations, “Nordregio - an International Research Centre for Regional Development and Planning,” Global Civil Society Database, accessed March 6, 2024, https://uia.org/s/or/en/1100003992.
The initial statutes for Nordregio defined the institution’s tasks as developing and communicating relevant knowledge to authorities concerned with regional development and planning in the Nordic region.
Nordic Council of Ministers and Nordic Council, Nordisk statutsamling 1990-1999. Del 1-2, 424–27.
 Nordregio’s current statutes were implemented in 2014, while its goals and budget have been outlined on a yearly basis in a grant letter from the Nordic Council of Ministers since 2015.
Nordregio, “Organisation.”

Institutional history of Nordic added value

The notion of nordisk nytta was part of the process that led to the merger that established Nordregio in 1997, as the merger happened in the wake of the 1995 Nordisk nytte reform report which evaluated two of Nordregio’s predecessor institutions, NordREFO and NORDPLAN. Both institutions were evaluated as contributing a “low” amount of nordisk nytta, citing, among other things, a lack of synergies on competencies, a lack of impact, and a lack of a unique profile and skillset compared to similar national institutions. For both institutions, the report recommended that the basic funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers be ceased and that the institutions be financed through project-based funding – including through EU projects – and by payment from the users of their services at the regional and national levels.
Den Fællesnordiske Arbejdsgruppe, “Nordisk nytte,” 1995, 64–65.
In line with the Nordic Council of Ministers’ standard statutes for its subsidiary institutions, Nordregio’s original statutes asserted that Nordregio should “contribute to den nordiska nyttan so that the activities create nordiskt mervärde beyond the purely technical co-operation results,”
Nordic Council of Ministers and Nordic Council, Nordisk statutsamling 1990-1999. Del 1-2, 424–27.
 a formulation that still exists in Nordregio’s current statutes following the latest revision in 2014.
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Stadgar för Nordregio” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2014), 1.
Beyond those standard formulations, Nordregio addressed issues regarding added value in its English-language conceptualisation at a relatively early stage compared to most other branches of Nordic co-operation. For example, ahead of the European Commission’s 2014-2020 programming period for its five Common Strategic Framework funds and the European Regional Development Fund, Nordregio was commissioned in 2012 by the Nordic Committee of Senior Officials for Regional Policy (EK-R) to “facilitate the selection of thematic objectives which may ensure cross-border added value in the coming programming areas involving the Nordic countries.”
Hörnström, Olsen, and Van Well, “Added Value of Cross-Border and Transnational Cooperation in Nordic Regions,” 12.
 The report operationalised “territorial added value” as a way to evaluate and prioritise programmes with Nordic involvement through what they identified as four types of territorial added value, seen as potential outcomes of territorial co-operation:
  1. learning opportunities/organisational and policy learning
  2. solutions to common problems
  3. generating/mobilisation of critical mass
  4. creation of structures for further co-operation
    Hörnström, Olsen, and Van Well, 14–15 and 61; Lisa Hörnström, Aslı Tepecik Diş, and Anna Berlina, “Added Value of Cross-Border Co-Operation,” Nordregio News, no. 1: Cross-border co-operation: Still an undeveloped potential? (2015): 4–5.
Tellingly, and as was the case in NordForsk and in Nordic co-operation more broadly (see Historical outline and NordForsk chapters), the report’s discussion and operationalisation of the concept was with reference to the use of the term in an EU-context, here with regards to the EU’s European territorial cooperation programmes. Similarly, a 2009 Nordregio working paper had already discussed the “added-value” of adopting “a macro-regional approach” to the Baltic Sea Region with reference to a trans-European facilitation of “European added-value” into national and regional development strategies.
Alexandre Dubois et al., “EU Macro-Regions and Macro-Regional Strategies - A Scoping Study” (Stockholm: Nordregio, 2009), 22.
By the mid-2010s, Nordregio had begun to employ the term Nordic added value, such as in the institution’s vision statement, in which the term featured as part of its ambitions for “visibility and outreach,” namely that Nordregio was “committed to promoting Nordic added value by acting as a knowledge broker between practitioners and researchers,” and by making research accessible to target groups and stakeholders.
“About Nordregio - Nordregio, Archived Website,” accessed March 5, 2024, https://archive.nordregio.se/en/Metameny/About-Nordregio/index.html.
 A Nordregio-authored synthesis report disseminating the work of the “Nordic working group for green growth – innovation and entrepreneurship 2013-2016”, established by the Nordic Council of Ministers, discussed the “added value of Nordic cooperation for regional green growth,” including the “added value of cross-border Nordic cooperation” as one of the key elements of a proposed draft vision for Nordic regional growth, allowing for a “diverse but unified and clear Nordic voice.” The notion of Nordic added value was not explicitly defined in the report, but denoted the competitive advantages that might be achieved through Nordic co-operation in the green bioeconomy and the possibility to diminish Nordic weaknesses through co-operation.
Kaisu Annala and Jukka Teräs, “Nordic Working Group for Green Growth – Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2013-2016 Synthesis Report” (Stockholm: Nordregio, 2017), 25, 27.
In Nordregio’s 2020 strategy, approved in 2016, Nordic added value was again related to sustainable development, with Nordregio’s “main goal” being described as the promotion of “sustainable regional development and Nordic added value,” while Nordregio was also cited as contributing to the addressing of global challenges (such as rapid demographic changes, growing societal inequalities, and climate change) and future issues facing the Nordic region by “working closely with national, regional and local stakeholders to find sustainable policy solutions and promote Nordic added value.” The primary methods for achieving this were described as the production of new knowledge, methods, and tools for developing policies tailored to the specificities of the Nordic region and the identification of “growth potential” in rural and urban areas alike.
Nordregio, “Nordregio Strategy 2020” (Nordregio, 2020), 6–8.
 In the same document, Nordic added value was also applied in the context of a so-called milestone project on cohesion and territorial development called RELOCAL, which transposed Nordic case studies and experience in regional development at a European scale. In this context, Nordic added value was construed in the sense of the Nordic countries adding value to the European context.
Nordregio, 26.
 The added value concept, which Nordregio had previously discussed with reference to its usage in the European Commission’s territorial co-operation and cohesion programmes was now used to describe Nordic contributions to exactly those European policy areas.

Current use of Nordic added value

Nordregio’s most recent strategy, covering the years 2021 to 2024, states that the institution “defines the contribution of its activities to the creation of Nordic added value through the facilitation of co-operation between Nordic stakeholders,” while its research is described as a substantial contribution towards “Nordic cooperation and synergies” which furthermore makes Nordic policies, experiences, and competences visible internationally.
Nordregio, “Nordregio Strategy 2021-2024” (Nordregio, 2021), 3, 6.
 In its mission statement, Nordregio presents itself as working towards generating “Nordic synergies” through a number of objectives and principles that structure the institution’s day-to-day operations. These include: the production of high-quality scientific research; the development of Nordic statistics at local, regional, and national levels; critical comparisons and identification of best practices; supporting policy makers; communicating “Nordic solutions” and comparative research within and beyond the region; and facilitating synergies between different policy sectors.
“About Nordregio.”
Nordic synergies, then, is a term that is often cited alongside added value when describing the value of Nordregio’s work in a Nordic perspective, both as an intended overall outcome and as a working principle. It is not clear from the strategy documents that Nordic synergy and Nordic added value are conceptualised as different terms, and one interviewee did indeed report interpreting the two terms as more or less synonymous.
Interview with official from Nordregio.
 Another interviewee defined Nordic added value as the principle that co-operation on a Nordic scale must add something extra that could not be achieved if the Nordic countries worked on their own, and that this something extra should be societally beneficial, whether as part of policy development, the improvement of democratic processes, or something else.
Interview with official from Nordregio, January 24, 2024.
In the most recent of the institution’s grant letters that has been made available online, from 2022, Nordisk nytta is, among other things, stated to be achieved by:
  • facilitating co-operation between Nordic actors towards the goals for regional development related to Vision 2030,
  • highlighting the added value [mervärdet] of Nordic co-operation in different projects and solutions through communication and outreach efforts, creating visibility within and beyond the region,
  • encouraging knowledge exchange between relevant actors,
  • collecting and presenting comparable data and offering an overview of developments on regional and municipal levels across the Nordic countries,
  • meeting and co-operating, increasing intra-Nordic understanding and knowledge, and further developing the Nordic affinity,
  • identifying common Nordic challenges and potential for Nordic co-operation to accelerate the green transition and facilitate a Nordic discussion on the issue,
  • contributing to the strategic ambitions of Vision 2030, such as by providing information about opportunities related to mobility and integration and offering relevant digital services, and
  • sharing knowledge and experiences relevant to the pursuit of the ambitions of Vision 2030 across the Nordic region at the local, regional, and national levels.
    “Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio.”
Knowledge exchange, the identification of best practices, comparative research, and the development of cross-regional spatial data are also aspects that were highlighted as Nordregio’s particular contribution to Nordic added value in an interview with one the institution’s researchers.
Interview with official from Nordregio.
 Likewise, a recent policy brief on Nordic co-operation on remote work and multilocality, to cite one example, highlighted differences in regional policy responses as the aspect containing “the greatest potential for Nordic added value” if subject to strengthened Nordic co-operation and “cross-Nordic learning on issues related to the regional development and planning implications of remote work.”
Louise Ormstrup Vestergård, “Strengthening Nordic Cooperation on Remote Work and Multilocality,” Policy Brief (Stockholm: Nordregio, 2022), 10.
Finally, one interviewee reflected on the difficulties of measuring Nordic added value in practice. Although Nordregio measures specific indicators relating to audience reach and conducts surveys with relevant stakeholders, for example, some of the institution’s most important functions in Nordic co-operation are much more difficult to measure. These include its function as a facilitator of informal discussions and knowledge exchange between Nordic officials working in the relevant policy areas, the creation of non-hierarchical learning environments, and the development of policies in close interaction with relevant social-scientific research. In particular, Nordregio’s ability to bring people together physically for informal exchanges of knowledge and experiences was highlighted as an essential element of not just Nordregio’s work, but of Nordic co-operation more broadly.
Interview with official from Nordregio.

Meanings of Nordic added value

While primarily working in English, the standard Scandinavian term used in the organisation as an equivalent to Nordic added value seems to be nordisk nytta rather than nordiskt mervärde although this does not seem to be based on any conscious distinction.
Interview with official from Nordregio.
 As we have seen above, the 2022 grant letter outlining the relationship between the Nordic Council of Ministers and Nordregio utilises a mixture of Danish and Swedish. It describes the Nordic nytte of the institution’s overall efforts as well as of each of its sub-goals. When it comes to the Nordic added value of Nordregio’s activities as a whole, they are described as:
being based on the assumption that the Nordic countries can learn from each other and create Nordisk nytta [capitalised in original] through research projects, which among other things are based on Nordic comparisons, field work, and quantitative and qualitative inquiries in order to lead to increased knowledge exchange and increased Nordic affinity through project groups with participants from all Nordic countries and regions.
“Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio,” 3.
Simultaneously, nordiskt mervärde appears in one of two overall performance goals outlined for the institution, which stipulates that:
Nordregio must show that the institution’s research, consultancy, and analyses create nordisk merværdi through references to deliverables, reports, publications, projects etc. in academic contexts, and that these are used in the public sector.
“Beviljningsbrev 2022 - Nordregio,” 3.
In this context, nordiskt mervärde quite straightforwardly refers to outcomes from the institution’s research and the ways in which those outcomes are being put to use in academic and public-sector contexts, whereas nytta links the institution’s effort to values, principles, and visions that serve to legitimise Nordic co-operation more broadly. On other occasions, however, nordisk mervärde is used in a very similar way. For example, in the Nordic co-operation programme for regional development and planning, which Nordregio is tasked with implementing, nordisk merverdi is highlighted as a necessary outcome of efforts in this sector of Nordic co-operation. In this context, nordisk merverdi is described as being achieved by “taking up prioritised themes which affect the development of […] Nordic cities and rural areas” and by pursuing practical, cross-border co-operation in those sectors.
Nordic Council of Ministers, “Nordisk Samarbeidsprogram for Regional Utvikling Og Planleggning 2021–24,” PolitikNord 2020 (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2020), 3.
 Moreover, nordisk nytta is not applied in a particularly abstract way in the grant letter. On the contrary, the descriptions of nordisk nytta related to the different sub-ambitions and special projects throughout the grant letter, as outlined above, are quite specific.
Nordregio’s field of expertise – regional planning, and its focus on geographical and territorial comparisons and developments – as well as the integrated European dimension in both the subject and institutional framework of its research (such as through EU-funding or trans-European research partnerships), has arguably prompted Nordregio to engage early on with issues regarding cross-regional additionality. Similarly, it is not surprising that the notion of Nordic added value is quite strongly linked to cross-regional comparisons specifically and geographic/spatial dimensions of Nordic added value more broadly.
Moreover, Nordic added value at Nordregio is very clearly attached to an ambition to be relevant for policy makers and other Nordic stakeholders. Indeed, Nordregio has been highlighted as an example of a successful effort at making Nordic institutions relevant to policy makers during the reforms of the Nordic Council of Ministers and its institutions, spearheaded by the Secretariat during the 2010s.
Interview with Dagfinn Høybråten.
By the same token, Nordregio seems well-positioned to engage Vision 2030’s goal to work towards a sustainable and socially integrated region. Within Nordregio, the experience is that Nordic added value and the vision are closely linked and that the vision has stepped up the focus on creating Nordic added value within the institution.
Interview with official from Nordregio; Interview with official 2 from Nordregio.
 Moreover, sustainability and “green” developments have been linked to the concept of Nordic added value in Nordregio’s strategies, projects, and policy briefs already since the mid-2010s,
Nordregio, “Nordregio Strategy 2020”; Annala and Teräs, “Nordic Working Group for Green Growth – Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2013-2016 Synthesis Report”; Kjell Nilsson, Elin Slätmo, and Eeva Turunen, “Green Infrastructure - Strategic Land Use,” Policy Brief (Stockholm: Nordregio, 2019).
 although the specific relationship between sustainable development and Nordic added value has not been outlined in any detail.

NordForsk

Tuire Liimatainen
NordForsk is an organisation that funds and facilitates cross-sectoral Nordic co-operation on research and research infrastructures under the auspices of the Nordic Council of Ministers and within the responsibility of the Nordic Council of Ministers for Education and Research (MR-U). It supports research in the Nordic region by bringing national research groups together and enhancing the quality, impact, and efficiency of Nordic research co-operation.
NordForsk is funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers and the national research funding organisations in the Nordic countries. NordForsk’s three primary funding instruments are research projects, Nordic Centres of Excellence, and Nordic University Hubs. It has regular calls for funding, averaging six per year. In 2022, NordForsk had a total of eight calls, with funding totalling NOK 396 million.
“NordForsk Årsrapport 2022” (NordForsk, 2023), 4.
 NordForsk is based in Oslo, in the same premises as its sister organisations Nordic Energy Research and Nordic Innovation.

History of NordForsk

While collaboration within the field of research has historical roots in the Nordic region, the formalised research cooperation as seen today has its origins in the mid-2000s. In 2004, the Nordic Research and Innovation Area (NORIA) was established following a joint ministerial declaration by the Nordic Council of Ministers for Education and Research (MR-U) and the ministers for industry. Subsequently, new regional institutions for research co-operation were founded: the Nordic Innovation Centre (NICe) in 2004 and NordForsk in 2005. In addition to these, Nordic Energy Research (NEF) joined this field of collaboration.
Gunnel Gustafsson, “Nordiskt Forskningssamarbete under 2000-talets första femton år,” in Norden sett inifrån: Det fjärde spårbytet, eds. Bengt Sundelius and Claes Wiklund (Stockholm: Santérus Förlag, 2017), 222–25.
 Since 2012, NordForsk has hosted the Nordic e-Infrastructure Collaboration (NeIC), which is a joint Nordic initiative that facilitates the development and operation of high-quality e-infrastructure solutions in areas of joint Nordic interest.
“NeIC,” NeIC, accessed January 4, 2024, https://neic.no/.
In broad terms, the establishment of formal Nordic research collaboration can be attributed to the increasingly influential role of research and knowledge as strategic assets that drive national competitiveness and economic growth in the emerging global knowledge society.
Holmberg, Daniel, “Kontinuitet Och Förnyelse – Forskningspolitiskt Samarbete i Norden 1946–2020.” (Unpublished manuscript, 2022); Tarschys, The Enigma of European Added Value, 4:54.
 More specifically, the acceleration of European integration and the introduction of the European Research Area (ERA) in 2000 can be identified as a key factor in fuelling the formalisation of Nordic research collaboration. The ERA was introduced with the aims to make Europe the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economic area globally by 2010, but as a side effect it also led to a vision of an established Nordic research and innovation area.
Holmberg, “Kontinuitet och förnyelse”.
 Introduced as a regional contribution to the ERA, the Nordic research and innovation area was visioned as a tool to prioritise Nordic co-operation, enhance competitiveness in accessing EU resources, and foster the development of the Nordic region as one of the most appealing destinations worldwide for education, research, and business.
Holmberg; Dan Andrée, The Nordic Research and Innovation Area (NORIA) and Synergies with the European Research Area (ERA), TemaNord, 2008:597 (Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers, 2008).

Institutional history of Nordic added value

At the time of NordForsk’s establishment, Nordic co-operation was increasingly guided by the goal-oriented formulation of nordiskt mervärde.
See, e.g., Gustafsson, “Nordiskt Forskningssamarbete,” 223.
 In the context of Nordic research collaboration, this meant that cooperation could not be prioritised solely because it was Nordic, but it was strongly linked to the aim of enhancing the quality of knowledge produced without incurring substantial costs.
Gustafsson, “Nordiskt Forskningssamarbete”, 223.
In search of a guiding vision to guide the newly established research collaboration, the mid-1990s catchphrase of nordisk nytta was viewed as insufficient. For example, in the 2006 anthology Nordisk styrka – perspektiv till samarbete inom forskningen envisioning the newly established research collaboration, the concept of nordisk nytta was described as “paralysing”, “inward-looking”, and “restrictive”.
Vilhjálmur Lúðvíksson, “‘Nordisk nytta’ eller ‘Nordisk styrka’? Slagord eller vision?,” in Nordisk styrka – perspektiv till samarbete inom forskningen, eds. Liisa Hakamies-Blomqvist, Ellen Knutsen Rydberg, and Marika Muhonen Nilsen (Oslo: NordForsk, 2006), 100.
 Instead, alternative concepts such as ‘Nordic strength’ (nordisk styrka) (and the plural ‘strengths’) were suggested as guiding visions for research collaboration.
Lúðvíksson, “Slagord eller vision?”
 Consequently, these terms were used sporadically in the early years of NordForsk, with the aim of forming a more dynamic and outward-focused vision for Nordic research co-operation.
E.g., Anna Rylander and Sascha Haselmayer, Branding the Nordic Research and Innovation Area: Promoting the Nordic Region as an Attractive Destination for Global Investments in Research and Innovation., NordForsk Policy Briefs 2008–6 (Oslo: NordForsk, 2008), 8.
 Nevertheless, the notion of Nordic strengths was defined by both socio-cultural and economic values, much like the concepts of nordisk nytta and nordiskt mervärde.
Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 19.
In the late 2000s and early 2010s, reports, strategy papers, and call texts concerning Nordic research co-operation began to prominently feature expressions such as ‘added value’, ‘added value by Nordic research co-operation’, or formulations referring to how research co-operation ‘adds value’.
See, e.g., Andrée, The Nordic Research and Innovation Area; NordForsk, NordForsk Strategy 2011–2014 (Oslo: NordForsk, 2011).
 As a concept in its own right, however, “Nordic added value” was introduced for the first time in the 2011 policy brief Rethinking Nordic Added Value in Research. The report, prepared by Erik Arnold from the science consultancy company Technopolis, constituted one in a series of three policy briefs aiming to describe and assess Nordic research collaboration within a European framework across research policy, strategy, and research-performing levels. The report was preceded by the new strategy for Nordic research co-operation presented by MR-U in 2011. Driven by the Nordic Council of Ministers’ new globalisation agenda and the need to address significant societal challenges through research and innovation, the report aimed to enhance research collaboration, as the improvement of research-based knowledge was seen as an important basis both for fostering development and growth through various objectives. These included the further refinement of NORIA and reinforcing the central role of NordForsk.
Gustafsson, “Nordiskt Forskningssamarbete,” 225–231.
In the report, the concept of “Nordic Added Value” (NB capitalised) was analysed in relation to the development of the European Research Area (ERA) and aligned prominently with the corresponding European concept, “European Added Value” (EAV), which also serves as the primary policy justification within ERA. The report thus demonstrates an evident harmonisation of concepts at both the Nordic and European levels instead of utilising previous translations (benefit, synergy) or other alternative terms (strength). The establishment of Nordic added value as a fixed concept is also evident in the report by the capitalisation of each of the concept’s components, mirroring the spelling of the concept of European added value. Furthermore, the novel use of the abbreviation “NAV” was introduced in the report. At the same time, the report did not attempt redefining the principle of Nordic added value but instead brought together the familiar socio-cultural and economic dimensions that were also entwined with nordisk nytta and nordiskt mervärde. The report also somewhat anachronistically used the term “Nordic added value” as a translation for the 1995-term nordisk nytta while other sources have held EAV and nordisk nytta as different types of concepts because they do not contain the same words in their formulations.
See Tarschys, The Enigma of European Added Value, 4:33.
 The report further noted that a key difference between EAV and NAV was the informal dimension that was inherent in NAV, based on trust, shared history, geography and, to some extent, cultural similarity, but which was perceived to be lacking in European-level research collaboration.
Since the publication of the report in the first half of the 2010s, the English-language concept of Nordic added value was hardly touched upon within NordForsk’s operations. Instead, Scandinavian terms such as nytta, mervärde, and styrka continued to be used as standard operational terms. They were often seen as synonymous with each other and as containing natural and self-evident meanings.
Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 20.
In the context of establishing a new, specifically English-language concept, it is worth remembering that NordForsk is one of the few official Nordic institutions which uses English as its official language. Consequently, it has also been noted that the English-language term “Nordic added value” seems to surface for the first time in official Nordic co-operation in the context of the research policy area, making research and innovation an important area for conceptual change.
Liimatainen, 19.

Current use of Nordic added value

The concept of Nordic added value has been notably integrated into NordForsk’s activities since 2015. It has become incorporated in strategy papers and call texts for research programmes laying emphasis on research that has a focus on areas where joint Nordic action adds value to national initiatives.
See, e.g., NordForsk, NordForsk Strategy 2015–2018 (Oslo: NordForsk, 2015).
 Since 2018, the concept has been further integrated into the ways in which Nordic research co-operation is articulated. The same year, MR-U adopted six principles for future Nordic research co-operation, one of which calls for a clearer focus on Nordic added value based on the priorities of the Nordic countries.
Leif H. Jakobsen et al., Evaluation of NordForsk (Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers, 2022), 51.
Today, Nordic added value is used as the key justification and evaluation criteria in Nordic research co-operation, and Nordic added value created through NordForsk is also increasingly communicated. As stated in the most recent strategy for 2019 to 2022, NordForsk’s primary goal is to facilitate effective and trustworthy co-operation in the Nordic region that is of the highest international quality, and to deliver Nordic added value.
NordForsk, NordForsk Strategy 2019–2022 (Oslo: NordForsk, 2019).
 Nordic added value is an integral part of programme preparation, implementation, and monitoring. It has become more comprehensively defined within each programme over the last few years, and illustrated through various examples of activities that generate Nordic added value. While funding decisions prioritise high scientific quality, in cases where applications are equally strong, Nordic added value can be a determining factor.
Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 28.
In order to clarify how NordForsk-funded projects create Nordic added value, NordForsk has devised its own definition of Nordic added value, which is the most comprehensive definition of the concept that can be currently found within official Nordic co-operation.
“How Does Research Co-Operation Lead to Nordic Added Value?,” NordForsk, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.nordforsk.org/how-does-research-co-operation-lead-nordic-added-value.
 NordForsk defines two main categories of Nordic added value, which are
  1. added value generated because the research collaboration is taking place in the Nordic region; and
  2. added value generated because the research can only be carried out in the Nordic region.
Under these two categories, research activities that generate added value are defined as follows:
Table 3 NordForsk definitions of added value in research
Added value generated because the research collaboration is taking place in the Nordic region
Added value generated because the research can only be carried out in the Nordic region
Added value is produced when research activities:
  • help to build critical mass and/or expertise at the Nordic level in important disciplines or research areas;
  • enhance cost-effectiveness by sharing infrastructure or data or harmonising systems for utilising data and other resources in the Nordic region;
  • lead to regional mobility and networking among the Nordic countries;
  • enhance scientific quality and expand the number of high-quality scientific publications through Nordic co-operation;
  • increase the chances of success for Nordic researchers in EU research activities or other international research co-operation;
  • lead to more results and stronger, quality-assured conclusions as a basis for shaping the statutory framework or rationalising and improving the public administration;
  • promote the creation of innovations, patents or other solutions that help to enhance industrial development and co-operation in the Nordic region.
Added value is produced when research activities:
  • build on particular strengths of Nordic researchers, and when the research is carried out by groups with unique expertise;
  • address needs that are unique to the Nordic countries in light of our similar social structures, institutions and institutional culture, and shared cultural heritage;
  • focus on, e.g., geographical, climatic, cultural, linguistic, or social phenomena in the Nordic region;
  • utilise data from uniquely Nordic registries.
As part of its monitoring activities of research impact, NordForsk tracks the results and effects of NordForsk-funded research including Nordic added value. NordForsk defines research impact as both academic impact and societal impact. Academic impact refers to the enhancement of scientific quality and the building of critical expertise, among others. Societal impact refers to the contribution of research to society and the economy, benefitting individuals, organisations, and individual nations. In addition, as part of project monitoring and reporting activities, NordForsk assesses how the research projects have created Nordic added value.
NordForsk currently gathers data about research impact from the reporting system Researchfish, through which NordForsk-funded projects are expected to report annually. The Nordic added value that the NordForsk-funded projects create is currently evaluated quantitatively based on the research activities presented above. NordForsk’s 2023 impact report reveals that the top five contributions of Nordic added value in NordForsk-funded projects were: 1) building on particular strengths of Nordic researchers, 2) enhancing scientific quality, 3) fostering regional mobility and networking, 4) building critical mass and/or expertise, and 5) increasing chances of EU/international success.
NordForsk, NordForsk Impact Report 2023 (Oslo: NordForsk, 2023), 6–7.
 In line with this, other studies have previously also highlighted that researchers traditionally consider the primary benefit/Nordic added value of Nordic research collaboration to be centred on the establishment and maintenance of networks among researchers and research institutions, as well as the pooling of critical mass and expertise.
See, e.g., Aadne Aasland, Going Nordic – A Survey among Participants in NordForsk and NorFA Networks and Research Training Courses 1999-2005. (Oslo: NordForsk, 2006), 21–24; Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 47.

Meanings of Nordic added value

Despite the extensive definition, the use of Nordic added value in Nordic research collaboration has faced criticism, prompting active efforts to further define the concept. For instance, the 2022 evaluation of NordForsk, commissioned by the Nordic Council of Ministers and conducted by the Danish Technological Institute, notes that the concept lacks an established definition, rendering it somewhat unclear and anecdotal.
Jakobsen et al., Evaluation of NordForsk, 7.
 The evaluation further states that the concept is not widely known among researchers, making it less easy to address the Nordic added value of research projects in both applications and reports. Consequently, the evaluation suggests redefining the concept to clearly distinguish between preconditions, and results, outcomes and benefits. As a precondition, Nordic added value would refer, for example, to the research team or the topics to be addressed, while results, outcomes and benefits would refer to the highest international quality and the development of the Nordic research environment and the Nordic countries.
Jakobsen et al., 51–53.
To address the need for a deeper understanding of the concept, NordForsk commissioned a research report on the Nordic added value in Nordic research co-operation from the University of Helsinki’s Centre for Nordic Studies (CENS) and the ReNEW university consortium. Published in 2023 and authored by Tuire Liimatainen, the report Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-operation: Concept and Practice examines the historical evolution of the concept within Nordic research collaboration and its present-day uses. The report is based on document analysis, interviews conducted among science advisors working in national research institutions, and a survey of NordForsk-funded researchers. The report concluded that both science experts and researchers widely perceived the concept as clear and established. At the same time, however, it stated that the term was subject to diverse interpretations and meanings, influenced by individual, disciplinary, and other contextual factors. The report identified four ways to conceptualise Nordic added value. These were:
  1. Nordic added value as a relative concept: The perceived added value of Nordic research co-operation depends on individual and disciplinary differences, and on whether the added value is expected to be generated for the academic or societal level. Activities that generate Nordic added value can be understood as both concrete/material and abstract/immaterial.
  2. Nordic added value as a multidimensional concept: Nordic added value refers to both a set of characteristics/preconditions that contribute to research and the contributions of research for the Nordic societies and the Nordic scientific community.
  3. Nordic added value as a relational concept: The benefit of joint Nordic effort is defined in relation to both national and European/global levels. These different levels are not mutually exclusive, but complementary.
  4. Nordic added value as a contested concept: Nordic added value may convey essentialising and prescriptive connotations of Nordic similarities, uniqueness, and exceptionalism.
    Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 57.
Interviews conducted among science experts highlighted a particular dilemma in combining Nordic added value with high-quality science, given that science is rarely limited to regional borders. Thus, success was seen to hinge on both addressing Nordic needs and continuing collaboration beyond the Nordic countries. Furthermore, the interviews underscored the significance of a common language and culture in terms of efficiency, yet they also acknowledged the risks of perpetuating stereotypical notions of Nordic similarities, uniqueness, and exceptionalism. Among researchers, there was a notable emphasis on the relative nature of the concept, offering various justifications for collaboration needs, from practical benefits to societal contributions. Overall, the report demonstrates that the concept of Nordic added value is flexible, evolving, and adaptive. Consequently, the report asserted that “Nordic added value” cannot be rigidly applied as a normative standard within Nordic research co-operation or broader Nordic co-operation.

Nordic Energy Research

Tuire Liimatainen
Nordic Energy Research is the platform for co-operative energy research and analysis under the auspices of the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Nordic Energy Research, “Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2022-2024” (Nordic Energy Research, 2022).
 Its mission revolves around funding co-operative energy research and facilitating inter-governmental co-operation within the energy sector. Additionally, Nordic Energy Research plays a role in transforming research findings into innovations, aiding the commercialisation of technologies and contributing to policy development. This is primarily achieved by funding research projects and researcher mobility, along with gathering data and conducting analyses used in conjunction with strategy and policy development in the Nordic countries. In addition, Nordic Energy Research provides secretarial support to numerous working groups operating under the Nordic Council of Ministers, which serve as forums for national representatives to engage in discussions, co-ordination, and collaboration.
Nordic Energy Research’s activities have a prominent European dimension as it co-ordinates Nordic co-operation within EU research programmes and energy legislation. Its primary focus lies in amplifying the Nordic voice in legislative processes, research programmes, influencing, and administration.
“About Us,” Nordic Energy Research, accessed January 4, 2024, https://www.nordicenergy.org/about-us/; Nordic Energy Research, Nordic Energy Research Brandbook (Nordic Energy Research, 2021).
 Furthermore, collaboration with the Baltic countries is an integral part of Nordic Energy Research’s activities, both through knowledge exchange and due to the geographical location of the Baltic region, which expands the possibilities for extending energy connections to Europe beyond the current Nordic pathways.
Interview with official at Nordic Energy Research, February 21, 2024.
The board of Nordic Energy Research comprises authorities and ministerial representatives responsible for energy research funding from all the Nordic countries. Its funding primarily originates from national sources. Today, Nordic Energy Research’s key objectives build on the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Vision 2030 by supporting the development of the Nordic region into the most sustainable and integrated region in the world, with a particular emphasis on supporting the Nordic countries at the forefront of the green transition.
Nordic Energy Research, “Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2022-2024.”
 Nordic-level energy collaboration and infrastructures have gained increased importance due to the recent geopolitical turmoil.
Interview with official at Nordic Energy Research.

History of Nordic Energy Research

Collaboration between the Nordic countries in the field of energy research can be traced back to the increasing demand for knowledge and expertise in the energy sector in the aftermath of the oil crises of the 1970s. At the time, the Nordic countries had already made substantial investments in energy research on a national scale. However, there was a perceived necessity for additional investment and the vision was to attain this through increased collaboration at the Nordic level.
Nordic Energy Research, Nordisk Energiforskning 25 år. Historien, menneskene, forskningen (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, 2010), 7.
 This initiative culminated in the establishment of the Nordic Energy Research Programme in 1985. In addition to being a response to energy security challenges, the new funding programme sought to strengthen Nordic co-operation and elevate the region’s international profile in energy research.
Nordic Energy Research, 1; “About Us.”
In 1999, the programme became an independent institution under the Nordic Council of Ministers following the growing prominence of the environmental dimension in both energy policy in the Nordic countries and the Nordic Energy Research Programme. At the same time, the institution was renamed Nordic Energy Research (Nordisk Energiforskning).
Nordic Energy Research, Nordisk Energiforskning 25 år, 8.

Institutional history of Nordic added value

Based on an analysis of official Nordic Energy Research documents from the 1990s to the present day, it is evident that the principle of Nordic added value has had a clear role in the institution’s operations. However, different terms and translations have been used at different times, reflecting the broader development of the concepts of Nordic co-operation.
At the turn of the millennium, the Scandinavian term nordisk nytte was still regularly present in Nordic Energy Research documents, and Nordic benefit as its common English-language equivalent.
See, e.g., Nordic Energy Research, “Sluttrapport. Nordisk Energiforskning 1999-2002” (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, 2002); Nordic Energy Research, “Research and Development Activities 2003-2006” (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, 2006).
 In the 2000s, references to the “added value” of Nordic co-operation began to appear in the documents. The use of this formulation is particularly prominent in the 2008 report titled Nordic Energy Research – an evaluation of its activities, prepared by the science consultancy company Technopolis.
Erik Arnold et al., Nordic Energy Research - an Evaluation of Its Activities, 1st ed. (Technopolis Group, 2008)
 For example, the consistent use of expressions such as “added value”, “the added value of the Nordic level”, or “added value to national programmes and initiatives” can be observed throughout the report. Conceptually, however, the report employs the term “Nordic Benefit” (NB capitalisation) and indicates “Nordisk Nytte” (NB capitalisation) as its Scandinavian origin. Based on the evaluation of Nordic Energy Research, which was also included in the report, the report further states that “acting at the Nordic level should probably be seen as a complement rather than an alternative to action at the national and EU levels.”
Arnold et al., 55.
In the 2010s, both the Scandinavian concept of nordisk merværdi and the concept of “Nordic added value” became more common and established operational terms within the Nordic Energy Research. For example, the Nordic Energy Research Action Plan for 2010 to 2013 mentions the term nordisk merværdi in reference to the need to focus on those areas of research where added value can be created on a Nordic level, promoting the development of critical mass and enhancing the impact and visibility in knowledge development and dissemination.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Handlingsprogram for Det Nordiske Energipolitiske Samarbejde 2010–2013, ANP 2009:776 (Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers, 2010), 20; see also Nordic Energy Research, Nordisk Energiforskning 25 År.
 The action plan also mentions the need to build co-operation on “Nordic strengths” (nordiske styrker) in specific fields of energy research.
Nordic Council of Ministers, Handlingsprogram, 20.
The Nordic Energy Research strategy for 2011 to 2014, however, does not use the concept of Nordic added value nor any other similar concepts. Instead, the strategy emphasises the grand challenges of climate change as a defining factor for joint action.
Nordic Energy Research, Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2011-2014 (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, 2011).
 In contrast, the 2015-2018 strategy features the concept prominently as the first of the three core principles that guide all of Nordic Energy Research’s activities and serve as the basis for the evaluation criteria for project selection (the other two principles are system perspective, i.e. actions that address system-level challenges, and policy-relevant research results). The principle of Nordic added value is explained in the strategy in a way that largely follows the mid-1990s definition of nordisk nytta:
  • Activities should provide clear and explicit additionality to activities already supported by national or EU funding.
  • Limited Nordic resources should be focused where they can make a difference.
  • Activities should address uniquely Nordic challenges common to at least three countries in the region.
  • Activities should enhance Nordic integration and facilitate network-building and the exchange of information.
    Nordic Energy Research, Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2015-2018 (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, n.d.), 4.
In addition to these documents, in 2014, Nordic Energy Research also published a magazine called “Nordic Added Value” in which the concept features prominently even at the title level. The magazine presents eight cases that exemplify how Nordic research collaboration in the field of energy can generate impactful outcomes. In the magazine’s preface, Hans Jørgen Koch, the former executive director of Nordic Energy Research, dissects the concept of “Nordic Added Value” (NB capitalisation) within the realm of energy co-operation. The notion of ‘Nordic’ is defined in regional terms, but also as a well-known regional forerunner and a benchmark for well-functioning liberalised energy markets. ‘Added’ is defined in reference to scale, but instead of referring to co-operation as a means of providing added value at the national level, it refers to more than the sum of its parts (thus the added value is created in co-operation itself). The term ‘Value’ is defined in progressive terms as research-based, new, or improved knowledge for decision-makers in business and society, as well as through the creation of unique networks among research, policymaking, and industry.
Nordic Energy Research, Nordic Added Value. Results through Research & Network (Oslo: Nordic Energy Research, 2014), 4.

Current use of Nordic added value

Today, Nordic added value appears as an established principle that guides the activities of Nordic Energy Research. In the institution’s current strategy for the period 2022 to 2024, Nordic Energy Research outlines its vision as “The Nordics as the world’s most sustainable and integrated energy region.”
Nordic Energy Research, “Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2022-2024,” 2.
 Concurrently, the institution articulates its mission as fostering “sustainability, integration, and progress through Nordic cooperation.”
Nordic Energy Research, 2.
 “Nordic Added Value” (NB capitalisation) is defined in the strategy paper as one of the nine funding and research principles that guide the institution’s choices and priorities. Within the framework of these principles, Nordic added value is presented interchangeably with the expression “highest impacts” at the heading level. In the description, Nordic added value is similarly defined as the impact of joint activities, but also more notably as an evaluation tool for impact assessment. The precondition for energy research, on the other hand, is expressed through the notion of national and/or Nordic strengths:
Our research calls should build on our national/​Nordic strengths and needs to ensure effectiveness and highest impact. The call procedures should be transparent, the research focuses should be timely, at the right level of focus, and aiming at high impact. Stakeholder involvement in the procedure may enforce the engagement of the relevant applicators. Impact assessment (Nordic added value) should be given relevant priority in the evaluation of research proposals for our calls as well as in project reporting.
Nordic Energy Research, 6.
While the Nordic Energy Research strategy explicitly denotes Nordic added value as a distinct principle, it is noteworthy that several other principles outlined in the strategy align with concepts previously defined as Nordic added value by other organisations, such as NordForsk. For instance, Nordic Energy Research’s principle concerning “researcher mobility, exchange, and networking” parallels NordForsk’s characterisation of regional mobility and networking among the Nordic countries as an activity that generates Nordic added value. Furthermore, Nordic Energy Research’s principle of “applied research and collaboration with the industry” identifies societal impact directly as “Nordic added value”. Additionally, the principle of “outreach”, emphasising engagement with the Nordic countries and other regions to translate research outcomes into impact, gains significance from the perspective of scale in light of Nordic Energy Research’s objective to foster a “Nordic voice” in international forums.
Nordic Energy Research, 4–6.
In current research funding calls, Nordic Energy Research utilises similar categories and examples of Nordic added value as NordForsk (e.g., building critical mass, establishing networks, sharing data etc.). Moreover, Nordic Energy Research’s calls for proposals emphasise the promotion of green growth in the Nordic countries, aligning with the Nordic Council of Ministers’ objective of making the Nordic region a sustainable and competitive region.
See, e.g., Web portal for calls and project reporting for NordForsk, Nordic Energy Research and Nordic Innovation, “Call for Proposals: Nordic Maritime Transport and Energy Research Programme (NMTEP),” 2024, https://funding.nordforsk.org/portal/#call/3245/details.
 Additionally, within Nordic Energy Research’s mobility funding call texts, there is a distinct emphasis on advancing and fostering mobility and long-term networks as a means to bring added Nordic value to national research.
See, e.g., Web portal for calls and project reporting for NordForsk, Nordic Energy Research and Nordic Innovation, “Call for Proposals:  The Nordic Energy Research Mobility Programme 2024”, 2024, https://funding.nordforsk.org/portal/#call/3125/details.
Based on an interview with a representative of Nordic Energy Research, the Nordic added value principle serves self-evidently to guide co-operative efforts alongside the Vision 2030 programme. Nordic added value is prominently defined in the field of energy co-operation through the additionality principle, whereby Nordic-level collaboration should provide something extra at the national level. The nature of this added value, however, is diverse, ranging from societal impacts that benefit every Nordic taxpayer to expediting processes. Consequently, evaluating which projects or activities generate the highest impact poses its own challenges as there is often no singular definition for Nordic added value. Instead, the meaning of this principle is acknowledged as varying across different sectors, activities, and stakeholders. Measuring impact is also experienced as challenging because effects of co-operation may only become apparent later on. Moreover, the weight assigned to different impacts may change over time, making comparison difficult.
Interview with official at Nordic Energy Research.
The pressure to assess and measure the added value generated by Nordic collaboration has been acknowledged in Nordic Energy Research for years, with the interviewee noting an increasing top-down emphasis on evaluating the impacts of collaboration. In other words, the focus of evaluation is not merely on what is being done but on understanding why it is being done. Although Nordic Energy Research has conducted surveys to assess and inquire about impact, comparing and evaluating the results has proven challenging due to the diversity of measurable and assessable factors. The representative holds that surveys have not been conducted too frequently and this is an area where the institution is open to improvement and development.
Interview with official at Nordic Energy Research.
When asked about the added value of Nordic collaboration in relation to European-level co-operation, added value emerges as relatively easy to identify. Based on the interview, it covers, for example, reduced administrative workload, a similar communication culture, and increased effectiveness when compared to European-level co-operation initiatives. Furthermore, Nordic collaboration is perceived as serving as a stepping stone for broader EU-level collaboration.
Interview with official at Nordic Energy Research.

Meanings of Nordic added value

Based on document analysis and the interview, there have been no active debates or attempts to define the concept of Nordic added value in the field of Nordic energy research. Furthermore, the concept appears semiotically somewhat unstable within the sector, exemplified by the varying ways of spelling the term even within a single document, such as in the current strategy paper for 2022 to 2024. Concurrently, however, the concept is acknowledged as serving as a self-evident guiding principle alongside the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Vision 2030 programme.
Within Nordic Energy Research, Nordic added value is primarily conceptualised as an impact that contributes value at the national level. As a consequence, the concept appears as somewhat synonymous with impact assessment and evaluation, which represents a rather narrow conceptualisation of the notion of Nordic added value. Within Nordic energy research, outcomes and results are defined in terms of highest impact, effectiveness, and societal impact. In Nordic Energy Research’s own communication, particular emphasis is also placed on economic implications of collaboration and the global competitiveness of the Nordic countries by showcasing how they collectively constitute one of the world’s largest economic zones.
See, e.g., Nordic Energy Research, “Nordic Energy Research Strategy 2022-2024.”
Within the field of Nordic energy research, the conceptualisation of Nordic added value is primarily understood as outcomes that arise from collaborating at a Nordic level, rather than, for instance, a precondition for action. Simultaneously, challenges related to the definition, assessment, and measurement of Nordic added value are associated with the varying meanings of the concept across different activities, sectors, and stakeholders, as well as contingent upon evolving perspectives on what constitutes desired impacts in different times.

Nordic Innovation

Tuire Liimatainen
Nordic Innovation is an institution under the Nordic Council of Ministers that promotes entrepreneurship, innovation, and competitiveness in Nordic businesses. Through these activities, Nordic Innovation aims to make the Nordic region a pioneer in sustainable growth. Nordic Innovation’s main activity is providing funding and support for projects and programmes that stimulate innovation. Furthermore, the institution works to improve framework conditions for Nordic markets and exports.
“What We Support,” Nordic Innovation, accessed January 11, 2024, https://www.nordicinnovation.org/nordic-added-value.
In the period 2021 to 2024, Nordic Innovation has been promoting eight initiatives launched by the five Nordic ministers of trade and industry to support sustainable solutions, the circular economy, digitalisation, and innovation. These initiatives are: Sustainable construction; AI and data; Green mobility; Smart connectivity; Life sciences and health tech; Circular business models; Sustainable minerals; and Sustainable ocean economy.
Nordic Innovation, Nordic Innovation Annual Report 2022 (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2023).
 In recent years, Nordic Innovation has also endorsed four special initiatives: Nordic Innovation Houses, Nordic Scalers 2.0, Tourism in the Nordics, and Diversity and inclusion.
There are currently five Nordic Innovation Houses, which are located in Silicon Valley, New York, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Tokyo. Operated by the Nordic Trade Promotion Organisations and co-funded by Nordic Innovation, they aim at providing Nordic companies with the expertise and networks needed to help them go global.
 
Nordic Innovation supports the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Vision 2030 and contributes to achieving it through three innovation missions: 1) a waste-free Nordic region, 2) a pioneering region for green mobility, and 3) leading within smart and sustainable growth. Nordic Innovation is headquartered in Oslo and has an annual budget of approximately NOK 100 million.

History of Nordic Innovation

The roots of Nordic Innovation are in the Nordic Industrial Fund (Nordisk Industrifond), which was established in 1973 on the initiative of the Nordic Council of Ministers with the purpose of promoting the more efficient use of Nordic resources for technology and industrial development. In 2004, Nordic Industrial Fund was merged with Nordtest, forming the Nordic Innovation Centre (Nordiskt innovationscenter, NICe).
Nordtest was an organisation focused on facilitating co-operation in technical research and development in the Nordic countries, working primarily on testing and standardisation within the region.
 In 2011, the institution changed its name to Nordic Innovation.
“Nordic Innovation 1973-2023. 50th Anniversary,” Nordic Innovation, accessed January 4, 2024, https://www.nordicinnovation.org/50-years-anniversary.
The priorities and operational methods of Nordic Innovation have evolved throughout its history. According to some publications exploring the 50-year history of the institution in 2023, the initial focus from the 1970s to the mid-1980s was on utilising enabling technologies in various ways. In the subsequent period leading up to the 2000s, the primary emphasis was research-based innovation projects. Since 2015, Nordic Innovation’s priorities have shifted towards projects focusing on sustainability and systemic innovation.
Nordic Innovation, Nordic Innovation Annual Report 2023. 50 Years and Onward. (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2023); “Nordic Innovation 50th Anniversary.”

Institutional history of Nordic added value

The emergence and establishment of the concept of Nordic added value within Nordic Innovation follow a similar trajectory to those discussed earlier concerning NordForsk and Nordic Energy Research. The solidification of the English-language term in its current form within the operations of Nordic Innovation began around the mid-2010s onwards. The term or any related terms were not used at all in the 2000s and, even in the early 2010s, the lack of terminological stability is evident. For example, between 2012 and 2015, various documents featured terms and phrases such as “Nordic add-on”, “Nordic advantages”, and “added value through Nordic co-operation”.
See Nordic Innovation, Towards a New Innovation Policy for Green Growth and Welfare in the Nordic Region, Nordic Innovation Publication, 2012:02 (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2012), 13–14; Nordic Innovation & Nordic Built Cities, Nordic Urban Strengths and Challenges - How Do We Perceive Ourselves When It Comes to Developing Sustainable, Smart and Liveable Cities? (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2015), 2.
 These expressions seem to be associated with both the results of co-operation and the idea of shared Nordic benefits, especially those mediated through the formulation “Nordic advantage”.
Nordic Innovation, Towards a New Innovation Policy, 13–14.
From the late 2010s onwards, the contemporary formulation of the principle of Nordic added value became integrated into the operational terminology of Nordic Innovation. Notably, and in comparison with Nordic Energy Research, for example, the appearance of the term remains consistent, with no variation in capitalisation, and without any alternative terms presented alongside it. While there is limited material available in the Scandinavian languages, in the available material, nordiskt merverdi seems to be used as the general Scandinavian translation of the concept.
See, e.g., Nordic Innovation’s Annual Report for 2022, published in both English and Norwegian.
In Nordic Innovation’s Mini-evaluation of the Nordic Scalers Programme report, published in 2019, the concept of Nordic added value is discussed in particular detail. The report evaluates the two-year pilot project Nordic Scalers that was conducted between 2017 and 2019. It highlights how the added value that was generated through the programme was created through the sharing of experiences, competences, skills, and networks, which brought together the various strengths and weaknesses of different Nordic countries.
Vesa Salminen et al., Minievaluation of the Nordic Scalers Programme. Final Report (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2019), 14.
 According to the report, Nordic Innovation defined Nordic added value as follows:
  • Gaining critical mass (volume, higher quality)
  • Enhancing peer learning and creating healthy competition between the Nordic scale-ups
  • Exploiting Nordic brand value (visibility, attractiveness)
  • Sharing competencies, skills, and funding possibilities
  • Strengthening community building around scale-ups at the Nordic level
    Salminen et al., 14.
The report defines Nordic added value as primarily emerging through the Nordic-level approach, bringing added value to national-level activities.
Salminen et al., 21.
 It is defined in particular through the perspective of complementarity, where different partners are brought together due to their complementary advantages.
Alongside the concept of Nordic added value, the report also briefly discusses the concept of “Nordic brand value”, which can be viewed as a concept related to Nordic added value with some overlapping meanings related to efforts to create a competitive and distinctive Nordic profile in the global arena. According to the report, stakeholders and companies participating in the Nordic Scalers programme saw Nordic brand value as particularly relevant and advantageous, such as in attracting talents and investors. The Nordic brand was perceived as esteemed and highly valued, especially among potential customers and investors outside the Nordic region, where the Nordic countries were typically seen as one unified region.
Salminen et al., 21.
Another definition of Nordic added value can be found in Nordic Innovation’s annual report from 2021. In it, the concept is defined as follows:
Through our diverse activities, we bring actors from the Nordic countries together, with the explicit goal of generating added value. We believe that our region can achieve more through co-creation and partnerships across borders and sectors; we call this Nordic added value.
Nordic Innovation, Nordic Innovation Annual Report 2021 (Oslo: Nordic Innovation, 2022), 62.
This definition also emphasises the significance of Nordic co-operation as something that specifically generates added value in comparison to operating only at the national level. Nordic added value is further highlighted as a result of actions rather than preconditions that characterise Nordic countries or Nordic actors.

Current use of Nordic added value

At present, the notion of Nordic added value remains an important aspect in evaluating the operations of Nordic Innovation. Within Nordic Innovation, the concept of Nordic added value is prominently defined as something that adds value compared to operating at the national level. However, although the concept seems to be well-established, neither it nor activities that generate Nordic added value are detailed extensively. This applies, for example, to Nordic Innovation’s call texts, where Nordic added value is referred to generally by highlighting the added value of conducting projects at the Nordic level compared to the national level.
See, e.g., Nordic Innovation, “Ocean Mission: Co-Locate for Economy and Sustainability,” 2024, 3.
 Furthermore, some calls especially cite the sought-after project proposals as those that maximise the impact of Nordic co-operation.
Nordic Innovation, “Ocean Mission.”
An interview with a representative from Nordic Innovation confirms that the idea of bringing together complementary competencies at the Nordic level continues to be a crucial element in conceptualising Nordic added value at Nordic Innovation. Furthermore, it remains important that Nordic co-operation creates added value at the national level and that funded projects achieve results that cannot be attained otherwise. Additionally, conceptualising Nordic added value primarily involves stepping up competencies and learning from each other. This means that merely bringing together different stakeholders is not deemed as sufficient, rather that the activities must also lead to the dissemination and application of acquired knowledge resulting in societal impact and systemic change. Central to this is the concept of economy of scale, which in this context refers to benefiting the entire region instead of just one country. This is linked with notions of achieving results more efficiently and exporting them to the rest of the region.
Interview with official at Nordic Innovation, February 22, 2024.
When asked about the relationship between the Nordic and European levels in the context of Nordic Innovation, Nordic co-operation appears relevant and to add value, especially when the results of co-operation can also be further expanded within the European system. In other words, besides being something sensible to do at the Nordic level, Nordic added value can also be something that is relevant in the bigger, international picture.
Interview with official at Nordic Innovation.
When evaluating the Nordic added value generated by the projects, quantitative analyses, such as statistical analyses, have not been conducted due to the relatively small size of Nordic Innovation’s portfolio compared to national organisations, for example. Conducting such assessments after the projects have ended also requires a longer waiting time, as changes take time. Instead of focusing on tracking and evaluating the results of projects, the interviewee emphasised the importance of applying a “theory of change,” which here refers to a thorough evaluation of the potential outcomes and societal impacts of the projects before funding decisions are made. This requires comprehensive expertise in the evaluation process and also a sufficient national representation in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of what is prioritised at the national level. Furthermore, this enables the Nordic countries to be brought together to jointly determine where it makes sense to work at the Nordic level.
Interview with official at Nordic Innovation.
The interview highlighted that, rather than solely focusing on the concept of Nordic added value, Nordic Innovation’s current operations are substantially guided by the Nordic Council of Ministers’ Vision 2030. It is seen as a cross-cutting vision for everything that happens within the framework of Nordic co-operation and thus deemed as a common denominator for all activities that are conducted under the auspices of the Nordic Council of Ministers. Vision 2030 is primarily seen as something to be achieved at the societal level. For Nordic Innovation, this means that just conducting a research project or developing a new product in collaboration with a group of companies, for example, is not enough. Instead, the emphasis lies primarily on initiating processes that help to steer Nordic societies in a certain direction, as outlined by the Vision 2030 programme. This emphasis plays a key role in the implementation of programmes, how funding decisions are made, and how the added value of co-operation is assessed and conceptualised.
Interview with official at Nordic Innovation.

Meanings of Nordic added value

The examination of the use of the principle of Nordic added value within Nordic Innovation showed that there have not been any specific initiatives to define the concept within this field of co-operation, nor have there been any particularly active debates surrounding it or its use. However, compared to Nordic Energy Research, for example, the concept appears to have been established relatively quickly in the operational terminology, with no variation in spelling or parallel usage with other similar terms. Additionally, there has not reportedly been any specific challenges related to the evaluation of Nordic added value.
Within Nordic Innovation, the concept of Nordic added value primarily manifests as the outcome of collaborative efforts – as added value of joint activities. There is a strong discourse of additionality present, whereby collaboration at the Nordic level is seen as something that cannot be achieved or carried out otherwise. The concept of Nordic added value is defined primarily in relation to the national level, but it does not merely refer to co-operation between countries, rather it involves bringing together different competencies and expertise in a unique way that adds value compared to operating at the national level alone.
The interview findings highlight the key role ascribed to the ambition of societal impact in guiding Nordic Innovation’s activities in close alignment with the Vision 2030 programme and its similar societal change-focused goals. Therefore, Vision 2030 seems to constitute a more significant guiding framework for Nordic Innovation’s present-day activities than the principle of Nordic added value, although they remain interconnected.

Comparative analysis and findings

Frederik Forrai Ørskov and Tuire Liimatainen
This chapter has examined the historical and contemporary meanings and understandings of Nordic added value within the Nordic Council of Ministers and its subsidiary institutions across the various sectors of official Nordic co-operation. In this sub-chapter, an analytical overview is provided of the chapter’s main findings. The aim is to expand upon and add detail to the different dimensions contained in a definition of the contemporary meaning of Nordic added value at the policy level, as given in Tuire Liimatainen’s 2023 report Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-operation:
The positive effects of joint Nordic efforts that strengthen the Nordic region as a cultural and historical community, and as a locally and globally competitive and sustainable welfare society.
Liimatainen, “Nordic Added Value in Nordic Research Co-Operation,” 5.
A closer look at the Nordic Council of Ministers over the past three decades has shown that the Nordic added value principle has been central to the various reforms that have defined co-operation since the mid-1990s. Through these reforms, Nordic added value has increasingly become a more operationalised concept, used to streamline efforts and organisational processes across and within the institutions of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. The in-depth analysis conducted in this chapter regarding the various sectors of official inter-ministerial Nordic co-operation affirms that this top-down demand resonates at a practical level. Entering the 2020s, the notion of Nordic added value has entrenched itself quite prominently in different sectors as a prevalent operational framework for planning, implementing, and monitoring co-operation initiatives. At the same time, this chapter also directs attention to an alternative bottom-up understanding of Nordic added value as a concept denoting the purpose of Nordic co-operation as seen from within its individual sectors and institutions, as well as to the challenges associated with defining and operationalising the concept.

Domains of Nordic added value

This chapter’s empirical analysis has demonstrated that, when applied and operationalised in the Nordic institutions, the multi-dimensional concept of Nordic added value relates in complex ways to the different sectors of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. From this report’s analysis of interviews, documents, and research literature, it is possible to identify at least four domains of Nordic added value in Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. These are, in a non-hierarchical order:
  • Culture and identity
  • Society and welfare
  • Economy and innovation
  • Sustainability and climate
This typology offers one heuristic framework for systematising how Nordic added value is – and has been – understood across the breadth of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. An overview of these four domains of Nordic added value and their different features, including potential contestations and criticisms arising from defining the legitimacy of joint Nordic action according to these specific domains, is provided in Table 4. It is meant to be a descriptive, heuristic, and schematic overview based on the interviews and documents analysed for this report as well as additional research literature.
Table 4 Domains of Nordic added value, an overview of four domains and some dimensions, characteristics, and contestations
Domains of Nordic added value:
Culture and identity
Society and welfare
Economy and innovation
Sustainability and climate
Central discursive elements
Culture, identity, language, creativity, commonality, peace, interactions, tradition
Nordic model, welfare state, demographics, gender equality, social equality, knowledge, innovation, social cohesion
Growth, market solutions, resource allocation, competitiveness, efficiency, innovation
Environment, climate, sustainability, green growth, green transition, sustainable social models, sustainable transitions
Significance of the regional scale (vs. national but also EU-level)
Regional identity, linguistic community, informal networks and interactions 
Comparing and sharing statistics, data, and knowledge, pooled research populations, joint societal infrastructure
Economies of scale, benefits from scale not available at national level, bigger potential market, joint branding efforts
Shared knowledge, transnational and intra-regional problems and issues, shared solutions and investments in transition initiatives
External dimensions
Adding value through a stronger international voice for promoting common values, cultural diplomacy, ‘Norden’ as amplifier of national identities
Adding value to others through e.g. societal model, influence in adjacent regions, cultural diplomacy, ‘Norden’ as amplifier of national models
Economic value through brand value, creating joint trade and marketing opportunities and markets, cultural and trade diplomacy
Adding value through ‘climate diplomacy’, providing an example for others to follow, addressing global issues
Rhetorical characteristics
Often implicitly assumed (“what we do” / “what Nordic co-operation has always been”)
Often visionary, offering consensus view of Nordic societies and politics
Often explicitly stated with reference to specific initiatives
Often explicitly stated with reference to specific initiatives, often visionary and solution-oriented
Envisioned outcomes
Strengthened preconditions for Nordic co-operation, informal ties, network, formulations of Nordic values
Ranking indicators, research results, informal ties, societal change and improvements, formulations of Nordic values and interests
Economic output, cost-efficient solutions, contribution to economic growth
Better environmental solutions, contribution to green transition, contribution to more sustainable Nordic societies
Contestations and redefinitions
Non-Scandinavian and indigenous cultures and languages, increasingly multi-cultural societies, English as language for intra-Nordic communication
Welfare states and the Nordic welfare state model under pressure, demographic changes, border obstacles, changing geo-political circumstances
Continued European integration, part of globalised economy vulnerable to geo-political tensions and other crises
Unsustainable energy production, potentially unequal effects of green transition
 
Criticisms
Instrumentalization of culture for political ends, risk of essentialising what it means to be ‘Nordic’
Risk of Nordic exceptionalism (on societal model)
 
Risk of too singular focus on measurable results at the expense of less measurable outcomes
Risk of serving to greenwash Nordic image, over-estimation of Nordic climate results
Put schematically, Nordic added value refers to:
  • the sense of shared values and preconditions for trust-based and informal interactions gained from and created through common cultural, linguistic, and value-based exchanges in the “culture and identity” domain;
  • the commonality of societal models, the formal and informal exchange of knowledge, including the common development of solutions, infrastructure, and data on issues relating to welfare and social issues in the “society and welfare” domain;
  • the additional outcomes of joint efforts gained by utilising economies of scale, cost-efficient trans-regional solutions, or the potential benefits of shared markets and brand value in the “economy and innovation” domain; and
  • the necessity and possible advantages of facing common challenges and transnational issues by means of developing and investing in knowledge exchange, shared solutions, and a strong international profile in the “sustainability and climate” domain. 
The different domains are interpretative frameworks available to stakeholders within the Nordic institutions and they are fundamentally linked with the different meanings that Nordic added value attains across and within the sectors of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. They shape the driving forces, objectives, and envisioned outcomes that guide stakeholders and their co-operation efforts. Moreover, they frame the significance of efforts being carried out at the regional (rather than the national or, to some extent, the European level) level are conceptualised. They also reflect different understandings of what is meant by “value,” reflecting the enigmatic nature of value-based concepts.
The outlining of domains of Nordic added value has taken current-day Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation as a starting point. Yet, the typology also relates to the temporal layers of meaning that the concept of Nordic added value has taken on over the course of the more than three decades covered in the report. As listed above, the domains follow a rough chronology, from the ‘culture and identity’ and ‘society and welfare’ domains that have traditionally been central to Nordic co-operation, with historical roots preceding official co-operation, towards domains such as ‘economy and innovation’ and ‘sustainability and climate’ that represent more recent priorities that have emerged with force in the last 40 and 20 years, respectively.
Therefore, the domains of Nordic added value in Nordic co-operation are also related from a more abstract and long-term perspective. Most notably, the more than two-century long history of – for a long time mainly civic society-based – Nordic co-operation in domains related to culture and identity-building has been essential in creating and maintaining the preconditions for successful co-operation in other domains. The same goes for the history of co-operation in the domain of society and welfare over the last century. The informal ties, common ideas about Nordic values and societies, and the strong sense of cultural community that constitute the added value of co-operation in these parts of Nordic co-operation have been seen as having a value on their own merit. At the same time, they are essential preconditions for the creation of Nordic added value in the domains prioritised more recently. In the present as well, activities relating to cultural and social co-operation will be essential for maintaining and strengthening the preconditions for co-operation in other domains, thereby ensuring that Nordic co-operation remains viable in the future and able to create Nordic added value in pursuit of strategic goals deemed politically relevant.
The four domains outlined here overlap to certain degrees and the meanings attached to Nordic added value in individual documents and institutions often relate to more than one domain at the same time. This is especially the case in the practical applications of the principle of Nordic added value. NordForsk offers one of the most pointed examples of an institution that incorporate elements from all four domains in its articulations and operationalisations of Nordic added value. The typology nonetheless offers a tool for mapping and understanding some of the different meanings attached to Nordic added value in different domains. It thereby provides a starting point for furthering cross-sectoral understanding and co-operation, and for resolving persistent tensions regarding the cross-sectoral use of Nordic added value, and thus for outlining how the different sectors of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation can contribute to the strategic goals outlined for Nordic co-operation while maintaining and strengthening the very foundations of these efforts.

Inter-sectoral differences

The analysis presented in this chapter uncovered tensions in defining and operationalising the concept, both within and between sectors. The unacknowledged co-existence of different interpretative domains of Nordic added value, outlined above, provides one potential source for such tensions. Moreover, another fundamental tension in efforts to define Nordic added value arises from the concept’s application at the policy level as a guiding vision versus its practical-level application as both the desired outcome of co-operation and a means for executing co-operation. When the findings are considered collectively, Nordic added value underscores the more symbolic dimensions of Nordic regionality, identity, and values as unique preconditions for joint action on the one hand, and the pragmatic, concrete, and assessable dimensions that give Nordic added value meaning as a tool, objective, and desirable impact of co-operation on the other.
The differences in meaning inherent in the concept also crystalize when the different sectors of Nordic co-operation are viewed in comparison. This reflects the varying significance that the various sectors attach to Nordic co-operation’s contribution to the region’s culture, identity, societal developments, economic growth and, recently more prominently, efforts related to sustainability and climate. As a result, Nordic added value holds different functions across the sectors of Nordic co-operation and depending on the priorities that frame their conduct. These functions range from outlining the preconditions for joint efforts to the objectives of such efforts to functioning as an operationalizable tool for reaching such objectives.
Different regional dynamics also emerge as an important determinant of Nordic added value. Nordic added value differs when viewed from the perspectives of the autonomous regions, Nordic-Baltic co-operation, or in relation to European-level co-operation. This has, notably, led to efforts to expand the concept geographically, such as through references to Nordic-Baltic added value and similar notions. Additionally, it has prompted stakeholders within the Nordic institutions to reflect on the added value of Nordic co-operation from the vantage point of co-operation partners outside the region. Regional dynamics also have an impact on, for example, how the idea of “Nordicness” is interpreted. As the Greenlandic example shows, in some cases this is not unreservedly positive. Still, Nordic co-operation remains prominently defined in relation to the national level, as its value is still collectively defined by the capacity to deliver something more than what can be achieved through national-level actions alone.
The different institutional memories of Nordic added value within the Nordic institutions are another factor that drives the sectors’ divergent interpretations of Nordic added value. The histories of some of the institutions analysed in this chapter were shaped by the mid-1990s reforms of Nordic co-operation and the associated financial cutbacks, meaning that an enduring link exists between the principle of Nordic added value and cost-cutting considerations. This is particularly pronounced within the cultural sector, while many of the institutions currently operating within the research and innovation sectors, for example, have only been introduced or become more pronounced in the institutional framework of Nordic co-operation in the last 20 years or so. The concept of Nordic added value thus reflects the histories of the various institutions in different ways, ranging from what might be characterised as more “traditional” ways of thinking Nordic co-operation, where Nordic ties and affinities are seen as a value in themselves, to more direct operationalisations of Nordic added value as a steering principle. As a result, there is a certain skew in relation to which sectors have influenced the ongoing conceptualisation of Nordic added value, as the principle has been actively operationalised and articulated in some sectors, while it has been more implicitly assumed in others. For the same reason, some sectors find it easier to adapt their tasks to the understandings of Nordic added value that are currently inscribed and institutionalised as steering principles throughout the Nordic Council of Ministers and its subsidiary institutions.
Altogether, these inter-sectoral differences point towards the co-existence of two central understandings of the function of the principle of Nordic added value within the institutions of Nordic co-operation:
  1. Nordic added value as an internal driving force:
    In one understanding, Nordic added value functions as an internal driving force within the individual institutions and Nordic co-operation more broadly, including in inter-parliamentary and civic society-based co-operation. As such, it serves an identity-creating function while it might also serve as personal motivation for the employees of the individual institutions. In this understanding, historical, presently existing, or potential future preconditions for close-knit Nordic co-operation are often emphasised, such as identification with a specific Nordic identity, perceived Nordic values, or a sense of belonging to Nordic cultural and linguistic communities, as well as a strong presence of intra-regional informal ties.
  2. Nordic added value as an external steering principle:
    In another understanding, Nordic added value is seen as an externally defined steering principle that structures the work of the individual institutions of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation by offering targets, demands, and a set of common goals. As such, it potentially ties the institutions and their efforts more closely to the overall strategic ambitions and political goals outlined for Nordic co-operation. This understanding often refers to outcomes such as accountability, legitimacy, efficiency, political relevance, and measurability.
Overall, this chapter’s analysis has demonstrated that, at the practical level, Nordic added value regularly exhibits traits of vagueness, interpretability, elasticity, ambiguity, and abstraction. However, this vagueness is not necessarily a weakness because it may simultaneously contribute to the concept’s flexible, evolving, and adaptive nature.
See also Liimatainen 2023, 23.

Terminological instability

Another important issue laid bare in this chapter is the terminological and semantic instability that is present both in the work of the Nordic Council of Ministers and in the institutions under its auspices. While reflecting the temporal layers and evolving linguistic practices of Nordic co-operation, terminological ambiguities also contribute to the enigmatic character of Nordic added value.
As highlighted throughout the analysis, the Nordic terms nordisk nytta and nordiskt mervärde, with their numerous English translations, have been used for several decades now, whereas in the 2010s the English formulation Nordic added value has increasingly become standard in the language of Nordic co-operation. This terminological stabilisation has taken place in reference to European-level co-operation and its conceptual particularities. At the same time, Scandinavian-language terms continue to be used alongside the English-language Nordic added value, with what appears to be varying levels of familiarity among employees in the Nordic institutions. Some view these terms as synonymous with each other, while others draw conceptual hierarchies between them – a distinction that is blurred when the English term Nordic added value is used. In such cases, nordisk nytta is typically defined in terms of values, core activities, identity, and vision, while nordiskt mervärde more often tends to evoke images of tangible results and economic drivers. However, this is far from always the case, and this chapter has shown that the terms are also open to reverse interpretations. This observation underscores the importance of paying attention both to individual and sector-specific differences.
Terminological instability is also indicated by the different spellings and variation in application of leading capitals for the English term Nordic added value (Nordic value-added being a relatively frequent variant) and the occasional introduction of new terms within individual sectors (such as, for example, nordisk nytteværdi).

Evaluation of Nordic added value

Due to the many ambiguities and dimensions inherent in the Nordic added value concept, the question of defining and evaluating the concept also emerges as a complex issue. The analysis in this chapter reveals both reluctant and positive attitudes towards the development of methods for assessing Nordic added value. Underlying these differing reactions were the different understandings and applications of the concept discussed above.
This is particularly the case in sectors where co-operation is framed by cultural and societal values that are considered abstract and difficult to measure or evaluate, or in institutions where Nordic added value is seen as an overarching raison d’être rather than as a specific measurable outcome. In some sectors, a temporal perspective was also highlighted as a point of consideration, noting that the effects of specific efforts are often only visible over a long period of time. This makes measurement and comparison difficult because the priorities for action also change over time.
Some institutions of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation already use a variety of methods, such as surveys and reporting tools, to assess and measure the impact of the activities they facilitate. The importance of upfront evaluation and careful assessment of potential outcomes and societal impacts beforehand was also stressed. At the same time, however, the challenge of assessing the deeper function and purpose of co-operation efforts persists.

Nordic added value or Vision 2030?

The principle of Nordic added value is not mentioned in the Nordic prime ministers’ Vision 2030 document, which posits that the Nordic region should be most integrated and sustainable region in the world by 2030. Yet, in practice, the findings of this chapter imply that Nordic added value and Vision 2030 are generally – if not always – seen as interlinked visions for present-day Nordic co-operation by actors working within the institutions of inter-ministerial co-operation. Instead of regarding Vision 2030 as a programme that has replaced the principle of Nordic added value, stakeholders in the Nordic institutions generally see both Vision 2030 and Nordic added value as important foundations for outlining the targets for the contribution of Nordic co-operation. The focus varies across different sectors, however. An overall development nonetheless seems to be that Nordic added value is increasingly fulfilling the function of a practical instrument that steers co-operation in various specialised sectors following the implementation of Vision 2030, rather than being an aim that guides formal co-operation in its own right.
Vision 2030 has undeniably shifted the orientation of Nordic co-operation, and therefore also what is commonly perceived to constitute Nordic added value. Traditional efforts in the fields of culture, society, and the economy play into the ambition of creating a more integrated region in different ways. However, Nordic co-operation is now also directed towards efforts in the fields of sustainability and climate (as well as, increasingly, defence and security), which are more recent focus areas in inter-ministerial Nordic co-operation. With the greater emphasis on the societal and environmental impact of the Vision 2030 programme, the meaning of Nordic added value is becoming increasingly associated with evaluations of the outcome or impact of joint action rather than on the preconditions for successful co-operation through cultural, linguistic, and societal regional integration.

Summary

This chapter has delved into the historical and contemporary interpretations of the principle of Nordic added value within the Nordic Council of Ministers and across various sectors of Nordic co-operation. The chapter found that Nordic added value operates across different key domains of Nordic co-operation, typologised here as “culture and identity”, “society and welfare”, “economy and innovation”, and “sustainability and climate”. It suggested that the unacknowledged co-existence of these domains of Nordic added value provides a potential source of tension in the definition and operationalisation of the concept. Such ambiguity is further amplified by a tension between Nordic added value’s symbolic significance as a guiding vision and its practical utility as both a desired outcome of co-operation and a means of executing and steering co-operation efforts. The analysis also exhibited divergent interpretations of Nordic added value across the various institutions, reflecting their varying emphases on cultural, societal, economic, and sustainability aspects of Nordic inter-ministerial co-operation. Institutional histories and regional dynamics were further seen to influence these interpretations, shaping sectoral priorities and operational frameworks. Among other things, the chapter found such different interpretations to have resulted in two different – sometimes overlapping, sometimes contradictory – understandings of Nordic added value as an internal driving force of individual institutions and their employees, and as an external structuring principle tying individual efforts to joint priorities. The multiplicity of meanings attached to Nordic added value gives rise to conceptual ambiguities, while also facilitating high degrees of flexibility within and adaptability to varying and changing sectoral needs and strategic priorities.
The chapter found that other factors contributing to the enigmatic, flexible, and adaptive nature of Nordic added value included the various regional dynamics that characterise Nordic co-operation, as well as terminological instability, with multiple terms and their translations used both interchangeably or hierarchically. Regarding the evaluation of Nordic added value, it remained a complex issue despite the concept’s significance as an organisational steering principle. While some sectors have employed methods such as reporting tools and surveys, assessing abstract value-based concepts as well as long-term effects of joint action was deemed challenging. Overall, while Nordic added value continues to be a guiding principle in Nordic co-operation, its implementation and evaluation remain multifaceted and subject to interpretation, reflecting the evolving nature of regional collaboration and the diverse priorities of participating sectors. Moreover, the Vision 2030 declaration has impacted the aims of Nordic co-operation without explicit reference to the principle of Nordic added value, facilitating a shift towards an understanding of Nordic added value as a tool rather than a vision for Nordic co-operation.
Nordic Council of Ministers I www.norden.org/publications I pub@norden.org