Lost Between Innovation, Climate and EU Demands
The Green Party claims to have secured progress on the green transition, yet the Labour government intends to further develop Norway’s oil industry. At the same time, Norwegian industry is losing ground as the EU’s enormous demand for raw materials grows. Moreover, the EU’s major trade challenges have led to repeated reductions in environmental standards.
December 5, 2025 | NORWEGIAN POLITICS
Image by AI/S&P
The Green Party achieved far less in the national budget than they suggest, but they did secure a pledge for a commission to examine the transition from oil production to a renewable economy.
During parliamentary questioning on Wednesday, Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store all but erased the significance of the transition commission by stating clearly that Norway will not only continue oil production but also “further develop” it.
In a commentary today, Hans Petter Sjoeli, commentator and debate editor at VG, argues that The Green Party is correct and notes that Norway ranks at the bottom in terms of transition within the Nordic region. However, Norway is the only country that must transition away from a lucrative oil industry, meaning the comparison is not 1:1. Sjoeli writes that Sweden innovates while Norway preserves. This is a reasonable observation, as Norwegian industry and innovation are strongly tied to natural resources. Our Scandinavian neighbors are forced to develop other industries because they lack natural resources on the scale Norway possesses, but that does not necessarily mean that either he or The Green Party is right about where Norway’s future lies.
After Norwegian politics in the last century was driven by grand national visions — the last of them being the oil industry — no clear long-term vision for the country has emerged since, read more here.
A country without direction ends up exactly in the situation we see today. The Labour Party–led government effectively has only one overarching goal for Norway: EU membership. This provides some trade opportunities, but it does not make Norway more innovative, and it limits the country’s ability to pursue trade agreements with partners outside the EU. The EU is treated as the only viable path, while alternative options are not explored. The United Kingdom, for example, has fared relatively well after Brexit: it maintains a solid agreement with the EU while also being free to negotiate bilateral trade deals that better suit its needs. The UK now spreads its trade risk across several continents, giving it multiple pillars of support. Becoming dependent on the EU in a future where the union faces increasing commercial and internal challenges appears unwise. Not least because the EU cannot defend Norway against Russia; the EU is projected to run out of critical minerals needed for weapons production within months in a conflict scenario — more on this will be published here at Samfunn og Politikk in a separate article.
Norway possesses vast natural resources that are increasingly in demand, and these are precisely what the country should continue to build on. The concern is that The Labour Party government is not outlining the future of Norwegian value creation; instead, it is pointing toward the EU. Among the industries that should have been developed under Norwegian state leadership — with Norwegian investment and ownership — is mineral extraction, both on land and on the seabed. The budget agreement has imposed a moratorium on seabed minerals for the next four-year parliamentary term, despite minerals being among the world’s most sought-after resources. This is directly unwise, as developing the necessary technology takes considerable time. As for minerals on land, The Labour Party intends to hand authority over Norwegian mineral resources to the EU through a regulation known as CRMA, read more here.
The fisheries industry should also be developed with stricter environmental standards, and investment is needed in technology to resolve existing challenges. With significant access to rare minerals, Norway should invest heavily in technological development for green energy. Norway should also play an active role in the development of artificial intelligence, as the country is well suited for large-scale data processing due to its climate and renewable energy. Furthermore, Norway must establish a long-term strategy for its waterways, as clean water is becoming increasingly scarce. More frequent wildfires in southern Europe mean seawater is often used for firefighting, damaging both soil and groundwater. Large parts of southern Spain are expected to become desert by 2050.
Although our neighboring countries must innovate in fields not tied to natural resources, there is no reason Norway must follow the same path. We must develop the “gold” we already possess and build innovation environments linked to extraction, processing, and the development of new products enabled by our raw materials. In this context, it must be acknowledged that the EU depends on Norwegian raw materials to sustain its own industry — a reality that directly conflicts with developing Norway’s own industrial capacity.
Returning to The Green Party: the party supports EU membership, yet it is difficult to see how this aligns with its environmental profile. The Green Party also supports the EU’s mineral regulation CRMA, which, as noted above, will lead to aggressive mine development on Norwegian land and the environmental consequences that follow, including risks to Norwegian waterways. The EU’s severe trade challenges have led to repeated reductions in environmental targets and standards over the past year, see the source list below. We will likely see more of this as global competition intensifies. When it comes to the commentary by debate editor Sjoeli in VG, we must take into account that VG is often influenced by an EU bias in its articles, commentary and analyses — despite its claims of being a responsibly editor-led news outlet.
SOURCES
Stortinget (The Norwegian Parliament)
Question Time, Wednesday 3 DecemberThe Guardian
EU delays environmental requirements for car manufacturersThe Guardian
EU lowers standards for protecting wildlifeThe Guardian
EU cuts funding for environmental initiativesWorld Wildlife Organisation
EU omnibus regulation weakens earlier environmental standards
Content on Society and Politics is based on reliable sources and actual events, providing a news-oriented perspective intented for further debate. To access the article’s author and the related debate, membership on Hudd is required.
