Like many resource-rich countries, Norway faced a dilemma upon discovering oil in the North Sea during 1969: Would black gold bring long-term prosperity or lead to the infamous resource curse which has plagued other economies?
Over five decades later, Norway stands as a global outlier. The country not only avoided the worst effects of oil dependency; he transformed it into a springboard for world-class industries, a sovereign wealth fund exceeding $1.6 trillion, and one of the most resilient and inclusive economies on Earth.
That success came from deliberate non-linear policy decisions, bold experimentation accompanied by planning alongside unique Norwegian pragmatism. Today, as other nations seek harnessing their natural resources towards sustainable development, that model remains vital.
FROM FISHING NETS TO OFFSHORE RIGS
Norway was first known for cod rather than crude which put its economy at a staggering modest state with limited industrial depth supplemented by a welfare state. Regardless of this, Norway had several preconditions while almost every other country was facility-lacking. The shipbuilding industry and maritime traditions of the country had ensured there was already a skilled workforce available. Additionally, good public administration, strong legal systems, and a democratic political society allowed for governance that was not only decentralized, but also participated.
Thus far, Norway did not allow international companies unfettered access to its resources. Rather Norway ensured that oil would be administered on Norwegian terms.
LOCAL CONTENT AS A NATIONAL NECESSITY
Ensuring “local content,” which aims for oil to benefit businesses and workers, both regarded its government and domestic private sector businesses incorporated fully within the blueprint of Norway’s petroleum policy.
From day one, it was made clear by the government that there wouldn’t be voluntary absence of participation from bulk employing local institutions alongside actionable efforts from employed domestic oil companies. Licenses while exploring and producing oil had prerequisites that foreign firms had to enter joint ventures with local companies, purchase materials needed for the operations from local suppliers and facilitate learning stepwise processes towards operating in their own countries service firms.
This move was not protectionist. It strengthened facilities that drive economies centrally located to these downstream benefits would be receiving representative investments
Its time-based revisions were seen throughout history:
• 1970s–1990s: There were very aggressive rules regarding procurement in oil field licensing alongside harsh provisions targeting local content framework implementation based on licensing strategies.
• 1990s–2000s: More focus was placed on domestically adaptable features while placing fewer restrictions overtaken into increased attention paid towards fuels competitiveness during this era on performance unbundling.
• Today: Domestic acceptance of contracted services enabled the removal of barriers, allowing Norwegian companies to complete revelatory market expansions. Their explosive growth in supplying previously untapped markets was facilitated by globalization and strategic investment, turning primary localities into dynamic host regions. These regions housed underground exploration ventures supported by hosting contracts, even as some operating agreements failed. Nevertheless, the deepening of reserve bases, once inaccessible, became possible through advanced integration and strategic planning—unlocking endless opportunities for multilevel business leveraging and sustainable profit generation.
The early success story is Statoil, now known as Equinor. Created in 1972, it allowed Norwegian engineers and managers to gain direct experience from foreign firms by getting a stake in every oil license. This embedded expertise within the country instead of merely extracting profits from it.
GOVERNANCE
Norway's governance strategy is one of the major reasons for its successful growth.
Instead of fostering corrupt or bloated systems, Norway focused on building capable lean institutions to manage oil:
• The Ministry of Petroleum and Energy set overall policy.
• The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) regulated operations with technical precision.
• Petoro managed the state's direct financial interest in oil fields.
These institutions were all marked by unique professionalism that differentiated them from politically meddled resource-rich nations guided by non-expert decisions.
One of the most known innovations would be Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global - eventually dubbed ‘Oil fund’. It collects excess oil revenues and invests them overseas to prevent stimulating too much economic activity or over reliance on ores for federal budgets.
Now the fund sustains investments in over 9000 companies globally while helping finance pensions, infrastructure and public services for generations to come.
INDUSTRIAL GOALS
Norway's recent attempts to increase local content have proven to be quite problematic.
Several domestic projects designed to stimulate the oil and gas markets completely failed. The expansion of the Mongstad refinery in the 1980s turned into a financially overblown national scandal. Petrochemical plants put up with hopes of igniting a petrochemical were unable to compete on an international level.
These failures tell us some stories: not every local content is good content and ambitious industrial planning can result in significant waste if they are not based on realistic demand assessments.
Still, there is hope for Norway as they appear willing to change their approach. There was learning from failed projects which guided more determined niche markets, like technology for offshore engineering services.
AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSES
Many exporting countries go through a period where their manufacturing sectors decline while their currencies rapidly gain value – "Dutch Disease." This has not happened to Norway, who seems able to lessen the effects.
The country has benefitted from these approaches:
• The Oil Fund retains surplus revenue which prevents inflation and plunges currency value.
• Growth in wages is managed at the national level with tripartite deals involving employers, unions, and government, making it more stable.
• Education along with research and infrastructure funding diversified the economy.
However, Norway was also affected. The oil industry contributed to a high wage culture which made competing for talent difficult in sectors outside of it. Norway was affected just like everyone else.
Contrary to other petro-states, Norway focused on ensuring that oil supported other industries instead of crushing them using funds derived from oil.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTRADICTIONS
Ironically enough, this is where the story of energy in Norway gets even more interesting. As mentioned earlier, there are some of the cleanest credentials such as being powered by hydroelectricity and an early adopter of EVs along with introducing carbon tax in 1991.
Continuing to produce fossil fuels alongside controversial exploration in the Arctic is under fire as well. Norwegian politicians claim their oil production holds environmental standards significantly higher than others.
This love/hate relationship helps outline ongoing issues regarding the so-called “green transition”.
CLEAN ENERGY PIONEER?
Norway's route to supposed leadership starts here - with uncontrolled demand coupled with ever-growing global pressure on oil usage. Focus areas include:
• Offshore wind: Using its expertise from oil platforms to develop floating turbines
• Carbon capture and storage (CCS): Projects like Longship aim to sequester CO₂ emissions long-term
• Clean fuels from green hydrogen: Utilizing low-cost hydroelectric power.
• Electric ferries and ships: Moving into the electrification of maritime transport, a crucial domestic industry.
However, there are still problems to solve. Oil finances a significant portion of public spending, and while the green sectors are expanding, they don’t (yet) come close to oil in terms of employment or exports.
There’s little doubt that few countries are better positioned than Norway to spearhead the energy transition.
LESSONS FOR THE WORLD
Norway provides valuable lessons as the energy market evolves:
1. Prioritize strong institutions: Governance by technocrats outweighs political control.
2. Treat local content strategically: Nurture self-sufficiency rather than create dependence.
3. Active investment in education: Human capital is society's ultimate resource.
4. Build fiscal buffers as sovereign wealth funds to reduce volatility risk.
5. Understand when to let go with industries that no longer make sense spanning long-term horizons.
6. Embrace proactive sustainability transitions funded by current prosperity.
The above lessons are valid beyond just oil-exporting countries; any country attempting to transform a limited economic boom driven by oil into enduring prosperity would benefit from these insights.
THE ROAD AHEAD
Norway is not yet done with its newfound oil accelerator, but it increasingly has one foot in a post-oil future.
Regardless of whether innovation, wind, or hydrogen fuels that future, it is clear the country didn’t just drill wells—they deep drilled into governance, long-term, and equity considerations.
This allowed Norway to transform oil into more than a mere commodity. They transformed it into a catalyst.
Amidst the re-alignment of global energy sources and an imperative shift towards climate friendly policies, perhaps that is the greatest local value.
Oman Observer is now on the WhatsApp channel. Click here
