Market, commodity, resource, and strength: Logics of Norwegian rurality

Abstract

Rurality as a distinct category and rural identity grew out of a widespread mobilization of rural issues in the 1960s and 1970s. However, the idea that Norway can be split into two categories in a meaningful way, i.e. rural and not rural, is no longer hegemonic. Today, researchers and politicians conceptualize rural issues such that the rural as a category seems to dissolve. Through programme notes published by the Research Council of Norway since the early 1990s, we have tracked some of these new ways of conceptualizing the rural. Most evident in the underlying structure of reasoning is the logic of market, which is said to spring up in every Western economy in the neoliberal era. From this, rurality is understood in the context of globalization – again being linked to cultural complexity and innovation. Further, in this global context, rurality is being subordinated to the category region. The logic of market has also rendered possible a turn in the rural category from having a value of its own to being a commodity. All these changes have ultimately made it possible to use the structural metaphor of resource on rurality.

Keywords:

• metaphors
• Norwegian rurality
• politics
• space

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the two reviewers, Professor Emeritus Jens Christian Hansen and Dr Keith Halfacree, for their valuable comments on an earlier version of this article. We also thank Hans Kjetil Lysgård and colleagues at the Centre for Rural Research and Agder Research for their discussions and comments upon earlier versions of this article. The study was funded by The Research Council of Norway.

Notes

1. This article is part of a three-year programme at Agder Research, financed by the Research Council of Norway. The programme is analysing ideas about rurality and how these ideas influence Norwegian national policies towards rural questions (Agder Research 2005).

2. See ‘Om distriktsplanlegging 1967’, ‘Om mål og midler i distriktspolitikken 1973’, ‘Regional utvikling og distriktspolitikk 1981’, ‘Regional planlegging og distriktspolitikk 1985’, ‘Politikk for regional utvikling 1989’, ‘By og land hand i hand 1993’, ‘Om distrikts- og regionalpolitikk 1997’, ‘Om distrikts- og regionalpolitikk 2001’, ‘Vekst i hele landet 2002’, ‘Om regionalpolitikken 2005’ and the metaphor distriktsløftet, all referred to in the Soria Moria declaration in 2005 (Soria Moria 2005).

3. The programme notes referred to in this and the following sections are: ‘Employment market and regional research 1991–1996’ (Arbeidsmarkeds- og regionalforskning 1991–1996); ‘Rural development programme/The Future for rural areas 1990–1994’ (Bygdeutviklingsprogrammet 1990–1994); ‘Coast and rural development 1995–1999’ (Kyst- og bygdeutvikling 1995–1999); ‘Regional development 1998–2003’ (Regional utvikling 1998–2003); and ‘Democracy, government and regionality 2005–2010’ (Demokrati, styring og regionalitet 2005–2010).