Careful observation · evidence · constructive criticism
New series · Institutions
What do we encounter when we seek knowledge, need help or ask to be treated fairly? This series examines the institutions meant to meet such needs over time: what they make possible in people’s lives, who makes the decisions, and who can put failures right.
The series began with a question about the history of a word: what do we actually preserve when we preserve an institution? We follow how societies make knowledge, legal safeguards, governance and criticism durable — without making institutions untouchable.
· The introduction now connects institutions’ tasks more clearly with people’s needs. The history of the word is retained.
From word to social function
The word “institution” can refer to an arrangement, an organisation and a physical place. The series examines what happens when these no longer coincide: when the structure remains but the function weakens — or when the function continues in a new form.
Power and boundaries
For each body, we go beyond phrases such as “can set frameworks” and “can set objectives”. We examine which frameworks, which objectives, who can set them, what is protected, where the grey zones lie, and who controls the boundaries.
What problem was it created to address, and how has its role changed?
Which laws, rules and decisions define what the institution may do — and where its authority stops?
Who makes the decisions, how is authority used, and what do people actually encounter?
Who can scrutinise, correct or stop the institution when its boundaries are crossed?
Public universities are part of the state, yet parts of their academic activity are legally protected from instruction. The series examines which frameworks the state can actually set, and which forms of power universities exercise through knowledge, degrees, professions and academic authority.
The courts, the Office of the Auditor General, the Parliamentary Ombud, Statistics Norway, Norges Bank and the Norwegian National Human Rights Institution have very different forms of independence. We examine those differences rather than hiding them under one label.
Who decides what monetary policy should seek to achieve, and who decides the instruments? Historical shifts, legal authority and contemporary debates provide a concrete test case.
Autonomy is not an end in itself. The series examines how institutions can be free enough to correct power while keeping their own power open to scrutiny and correction.
We examine the quality of public instructions, priorities and governance in relation to society’s needs. Who gets to define those needs, and what happens to them in practice? Read about the foundation of our inquiry.