The theory that is illustrated of this study is innovation theory. This approach of study, will be the analytical framework that will be based to explain the innovation of how sustainable transitions are from one fossil fuel society towards a low-emission society.
Low emission society, is a term that is used to define of how a sustainable Norway will look in the future. For this study, this term is important as low emission society, is not only a political aim but also an adaptation for the population towards the environment and new policies. It also includes a change in their behavior and lifestyle. As the Norwegian lifestyle, has been impacted by the fossil fuel, for a long time, there is a great work to do with the population in the society. For that it is not only need for scientists to convince the population, but also a Government that promotes the initiatives and actions that can lead and move the society towards the green transition, in a mission to become a low emission society.
Sometimes, even if the Government is strongly concern about the green transition there is not only enough to come up with new solutions, and expect the population to follow and understand. There is anyways, required a high amount of commitment and innovation by the Government by itself.
To actualize the theory of this study, the Paris agreement will be a short part of the framework, to give recommendations. The Paris agreement is perhaps the most comprehensive international climate agreement that is signed by almost all the states. This agreement has also met opposition, especially from development countries, because the agreement has been in the way to come out from the poverty. The agreement on the other side, represents major step towards the low-emission society and is a necessary part of the green transition. Since, the major part of this study is focusing on the Governance of Norway, green political party, and the hydropower industry, the framework consist a study of them.
Technologies that can shape the green transition demands a high degree of innovation. Therefore relevant theories to green transition that will be used in this framework is theories that are linked with innovative technology. The theories that have been selected for this framework is mainly the Schumpeter theories of innovation, with a mention of other central authors.
There are different reasons of why innovation is important in the society and business world. According to research professor Olav R. Spilling, at the Nordic institute for studies in innovation, research and education, innovation has been considered as the key of evolution for the industrial and business world’s competitiveness. There are underlined objective and strategies attached to innovation in the industrialized world. Brand awareness of innovation is therefore one of the reasons of the emergence of the knowledge in the society. The cognitive knowledge has therefore with years gained an importance and are therefore considered as one of the driving force for business development.
In the research of Spilling in 2006, there are described five stages from brainstorming and start-up to stagnation from decline. Restructuring and renewal are important to companies, for their growth and development. Companies that are non-renewable, will with time weaken competitiveness and be outperformed by companies with new innovative efficient solutions and products. However, stagnation does not necessarily means, that it is closure for the company. The companies, can make a reorganization which can lead the company towards a new growth with subsequent maturation and stagnation.
Taking this into consideration, the development of the company is a succession of an innovative occasion. In this way, there is a cycle which the companies, who manage to innovate and restructuring, will have a stronger compact on competitiveness and stronger ability to survive in the market. It means that desirable economical growth, will benefit the society in terms of employment and income. In the data accession process, it will be relevant for the study to understand how the government are focusing on innovation in the society.
The term innovation generally means to make something new or do something new, it has roots from the Latin verb ”innovate”. The economist, Joseph Schumpeter, is often quoted, when innovation is discussed. According to Schumpeter, the definition of the term innovation is defined in five points:
- Introduction of a new product or service
- Introduction of a new production method
- Debt intrusion into one new market
- Debt utilization of a new type of commodity or semi-finished product
- New organization in or out of nutrition
- The first point, relates to a new product or quality, the consumers has not knowledge about from before.
- The second point relates to an existing product with a new production method the market has not tested before.
- The third point concerns the debt intrusion. The product or service is introduced in a market that exists already, but the product has been unknown.
- The fourth point is similar to the third point, but some of the products or raw material is already known.
- The fifth point forms a monopoly situation or break up an existing one.
Schumpeter, underlines that it is about to innovate a combination of different methods by thinking about how to do things differently with new techniques, to contribute with something new. Furter, Schumpeter also, argue with that this new thinking can be combined with existing capacity. This statement can directly be related to the renewable sector, as the hydropower energy, that is the main area of the study. Existing renewable energy can create or break up a ”monopoly situation.” As this will generate a new value creation.
On the other hand, Spilling has defined innovation in economical sense. With this means to increase the added value creation. This definition is different than Schumpeter, as according to Spilling, the inventory is not necessary an innovation, before it has created profits or economical growth.
Carlota Perez and her mentor Christopher Freeman (1989) has their own version of stages in innovation. Perez and Freeman separate the two levels of innovation, which include changes in technology systems and changes in techno – economical paradigm.
On the other hand, Selstad distinct that gradual innovations also called as incremental innovations happen continuously and are small and a step-by-step process. These kinds of innovations can often offer a good deal of process and product improvement and are often known as refinements in the production system. The more dramatic innovations are known as radical innovations and these offers often a targeted research or development work. These often create a break in the economic history and have major impacts for more industries. Climate technology, that is developed today, be looked as a pattern in innovation. Changes in techno – economic paradigm, or technological revolution that have an important impact on the whole economy. Schumpeter’s belief in meta paradigm, can be related to climate technology today as they are take-over in technology, economy organization, and management. The climate technology is also radical and incremental innovation that has a technology combinations that trigger the companies and government to manage differently.
In the last decade, all enterprises have had a greater emphasis on the systematic nature of innovation, and are part of a system consisting of competitors, suppliers, and political authorities. In the global world today, the international global innovation systems consist transparency. It means that it is possible to look at the innovations systems internationally. According to Lundvall, a system is a combination of several performers, who interact in-between. Further Lundvall, claims that an innovation system includes the relationship between the performers, which affect the distribution, production and use of new economically profitable knowledge. To look closely on national innovation system, Rosenberg and Spilling have conducted a model, where they give an overview over the important performers in a national innovation system. The aim of this model is to present the political opportunity to influence the relations in-between the performers.
The production of high innovation, is found in the industrial system, who also include the performers who are contributing in value creation of the nation. Most of the innovation activity happens in this area and this contribute in national economy. In the model, the hydropower electricity’s important power providers in the renewable energy area, can be related to this category.
In this part of the study the political opportunity will be discussed, as hydropower energy can be a bigger provider for the value creation of Norway, and the Government can influence the population. The group of research and education has the responsibility to produce and spread the knowledge in the society. In-between there are groups related to the corporate world. The next and last big group in this national innovation system is the political system, that can facilitate innovation ( in terms of condition ), design of education and research and be used for better infrastructure. This will be reviewed, as the political sectors needs to renew their policies, accordingly to the innovation and new ideas. In the green transition, it is important to have an understanding of whether the political parties are moving towards new plans, and remaking old policies into new ones. As there are continuously new researches that are taking place in the society there is important for a broad change in the already existing policies that can be in contradiction with the studies and researches. This further has an impact on the corporate world and businesses, on how they can innovate and how the performer’s in-between can influence each other in the same direction. In this study, there is an overlook over how the policies today, can enhance or prevent the innovation.
Figure 4 the national innovation system
The studies in innovation system theories, shows that the governance has a vital role in the interaction to promote innovation. The Governance itself has to innovate, to stay as a good partner in the innovation process. If the Governance keeps renewing itself it will be in line with society so that the partnership works all the time effectively and can handle the challenges the society poses.
Håvard Teigen, economist and professor in region economics and politics, have been a central person for the development of the innovation theories for the Governance. Teigen, has divided innovation for Governance in three main subject :
- Production of equipments and supplies
- Organize the sector
- Policy of the management system for the management
The first subject involves that the public sector is one of the major manufacturers of the equipments, supplies and infrastructure. The public sector is also one of the major owners of the industrial production. The Governance has the major responsibility to develop products and services that are compatible for social services and education.
This is equipment and supplies for greatest importance. The funding and production of scholarships, higher education and incentives for the private sector, infrastructure development and support to people who are encouraging education and knowledge and change management.
The second subject involves the management of the duties. The main aim is to find, new ways to organize and manage. This may lead to divide the Governance, or assess how many small offices will be needed, it is a way process innovations. In this way, it is effective to promote innovation into the private sector. An example of this is organizing the agencies and department in the Governments.
The third subject is the policy regarding the main management system. This is the role of the public sector and politics, has the same function for the public sector and the market of the public sector. It determines and cuts the strong regulatory power the private businesses has under the public sector. The public sectors are the vital innovators for the private sector.
The public sector has its policy function towards the private sector. There is an overall policy design and Governance policy instrument performers. This third subject, evolves this study because it includes the Governance and the renewable sectors respecting policies and the Norwegian economy.
As mentioned earlier, in the study of green transition there is important to take into account the green economy, as green economy theory link the important conflicts in the debate about the environment and policies regarding the climate. The green transition also aim to create opportunities for businesses, to create growth and new value creation for the country. The condition is as long as the businesses take into account the climate and environment. 
The first concept of green economy was introduced by David Pearce in 1989, in a report called, Blueprint for a green economy. In the creation of the field of environmental policy in 1989, the ideas of green economy can be traced. Pearce, report display how economic and ecology are mutually dependent on each other. The theory involves topics as economy and ecology and has often been used into political debates, to firm any possible solution or a middle way and nowadays the term is increasing its popularity among the politicians, who is convinced that this theory have an ability, to increase the economic growth while avoiding exhaustion of ecological resources.  The United Nations has defined the green economy, in correspondence of Rio+20 conferences, where the green economy seeks to reconcile the entire range of economic policies and relevant models of economic analysis, along with sustainable development. 
According to Pearce, the ecosystem’s, are affected by the side effects of the economy such as greenhouse gas emissions and resource exploitation, while the economy is affected by the local community itself and is the basis for the economic success. There are weaknesses related to economic system that has limitations as it is not acquired to ecological resources as water, clean air, and the global climate, and human made capital. It is necessary that ecological resources are given equal value as financial resources, so the natural capital has to be able to compete with human capital in both private sector and policy area. 
Pearce’s report Blueprint for a Green economy, has not acknowledged the importance of the limitations, of the explicitly of ecological resources. In the report the barrier does almost not exist. 
The green transition and green economy has been linked in 2015, by the Government of Norway. Through the climate report from 2015, it has been recognized from the Conservative Party that, if the activities to reduce the global greenhouse gas emissions get extended, then the cost of global climate change will increase the cost of necessary operations. The Conservative Party, claims that if the price is predictable and high on CO2 emission, the market will automatically, choose technology and solutions that are environmental friendly and energy-efficient. and environmentally friendly. 
This is an example from the Government, where the green transition and green economy is inter-linked. As the issue addresses the climate challenge, it is important in green economy to acknowledge both ecology and economy. In this case, this has been taken into account, as the statement and the operation consist a political pressure, which offer a production method and a environmental friendly technology. The green transition prerequisite that the politics inter-links with economics, and offer something for the society and businesses. Or else, if there is only a green policy without any economic incentive, the aim of the policy would seem not realistic.
There has, been some different definitions on low emission countries. The one Norway has acknowledged is the one from Norwegian Environmental Agency , which defines that, a low emission society is a society, that has a greenhouse gas emission that stays in line with the United Nations two-degree target, which was formed in 2010. The history behind this target started already in 1994, when Angela Merkel, now Chancellor of Germany, was the environment minister, raised a question of how much warmer could the world be, before it is too late?  The researchers back at that time, presented with time the 2-degree Celsius target. The target is to keep the global temperature below 2-degree Celsius than it was in 1850, by the year of 2100. The researchers, argues that the nature can not tolerate more than 2 degree Celsius. By this target, the worst climate changes can be prevented. 
UN researchers has estimated that the world average of CO2 emissions per habitant has to be in-between 1,5 to 3,1 ton of CO2 equivalent, to adhere to the aim, of two degree target.
Norway also has to follow these rules to imply the low emission country by reducing the emission to 10,2- 20,4 million ton CO2 equivalent, from 52,7 million ton CO2- equivalent.
According to the Conservative Party, representantive for climate and environment minister, Vidar Helgesen, Norway will be switch to a low emission country. Helgesen has signed the international climate agreement which commits 170 countries to act towards the common policy to reduce CO2 emissions, also known as the Paris-agreement, which was signed in New York. After signing Helgesen and Solberg have given different statements on how Norway will reach the goal. Helgesen, have therefore started to lead some operations that will help Norway, to cut CO2 emission. For Conservative party, Helgesen has said, that he is ready to rely and invest more on the collective transport and has increased the climate technology fund and also expanded the innovation Norway environmental technological order.
If Helgesen, allign with the policy of 40 percent cut from 1990, in CO2 emission by 2030, there has been predicted from Norwegian Environmental Agency, that the goal to stay under the two degree target, by 2050 will be possible. The Norwegian Environmental Agency also deduct that by 2050 the CO2 emissions has to be reduced to 7-12 million ton, and Norway therefore can be low emission country, if the other predictions as the population rate is around 6,6 million by 2050 with a emission reduction of 60-80 percent.
Whether Norway will be restructured or not is difficult has been difficult to predict for Norwegian Environmental Agency, as they claim that this is important if Norway wants to be a low emission country. There has therefore been agreed on, that Norway invest in technologies which can make Carbon capture and storage ( CCS ) on a global level, which can further reduce the emission from the industry in Norway. The projected equivalent will then be around 2-3 million ton CO2 equivalent. The Norwegian Environmental Agency underlines, that this is a good case scenario, but still very uncertain with the lifestyle and policies today.
The fossil fuel sector has set the uncertainties in their plans, as they cannot predict yet, how the industry will look by 2050. According to the Norwegian Environmental Agency, the cost of electricity of existing oil and gas sector will matter more than technology development.
Further, the collective transport and personal transport sector will have great impact on the CO2 emissions. The Agency also explained the necessity of not letting the cars increase in quantity and hope for a betterment in the el-car industry and hydrogen car industry. Therefore, it means an increase in the innovation of hydrogen industry, as well as other collective options. 
To follow up with the Paris agreement, a great amount of the Norwegian society has to invest in electricity. This also means a great innovation in electricity.  For the electricity sector it means that most of the electricity has to be renewable. Apart from the hydroelectric power Norway has the access to other renewable energies as solar power energy and wind power energy, which can be used to produce more electricity.  How the politicians in Norway are following up with the renewable energy, to respect the Paris agreement will be discussed in the presentation of the result part.
In Europe the growth of the green parties and their success in the continent, has varied a lot.
However, Norway has had a proportional election system without a green party represented in the parliament before 2013. There is interesting for this study to show how the green parties has entered the political sphere, as it will be discussed how the Green Party, had its success in Norway, and what they are contributing with in Norway and whether the party has any interests in the Arctic.
While Norway have had a proportional election system, other countries have struggled to represent a green party in their Parliament. ”New politics”, was the political platform that was formed in 1960, in New Zealand and because of the lack of votes, the country’s election system did not allow any from this party to represent in the parliament.
In France, the green party ”Les Verts”, developed in the 1970, but had not enough votes till 1979 where the green party got 4.4 percent by the end of the elections. In United Kingdom, the trend to firm a green political party was a reality in 1973, called, British Ecologic Party, who had the same struggle with seats in the Parliament. However, the party had a minor success in 1977, in local elections.
Dick and Richardson believes that institutional arrangements are crucial for their political success. The barrier boundary, as well as the electoral system in which the country operates, is of particular importance according to him. Countries as Germany, Finland, Belgium and Sweden have had support and have been represented in the national assembly since 1980 . In Belgium, the system of ratio has helped the growth of the political parties as Ecolo in Wallonia and Agalev in Flandern.
In 1983 the German green party, Die Grünen took into the Parliament, while Sweden had their Sveriges Miljöpartiet de Gröna in 1988. Die Grünen has been considered as the strongest environmental party in the Western Europe .
On the national level there has been a strong interest for the environment in Norway but the lack of any visible political party in the Parliament is almost in contradiction to the national interest in environment .
Richardson, opinion on the election system, consist that a proportional electoral system has a low barrier limit, which also implies to greater chances that environmental parties can hit politically. According to Richardson and Müller – Rommel, there are cases in environmental parties, where the green parties has been dependent on institutional access for the political opportunity to open. Müller-Rommel believes that the exposure of the environmental parties has been due to the lack of meeting with environmental movements for the well established parties. John McCormick has a different opinion about the environmental parties, and states that there is a correlation between prosperity in a country and the support of the environmental party, in the country. Belgium, Austria, Germany, Switzerland and Finland, have all had a inflated GDP, per capital and therefore strong environmental parties has been exposed due to their political landscape. While countries as Greece, Ireland, Spain and Portugal is among the less prosperous countries on the continent of Europe, in terms og GDP per capital, and therefore the environmental parties have been less powerful. For Hanspeter Kriesi, on the other hand believes that the political context has a decisive role and it is important for the established parties that they relate their position, strategically and adapt to new parties to hold on their political affairs. An example of this can be the already exisiting Government of Norway, that are adopting some of the ideas that the Green Party of Norway, has conducted .
The theory of McCormick does not suit for the Norwegian context as Norway is one of the wealthiest countries in Europe with a relatively low barrier. The statement of McCormick can be related to 2013, when the Green party, MDG, had their break-through, and then it is interesting to look on it, from the comparative context. Müller-Rommel, shows in his study that the transnational trend in Europe was that the environmental parties, had experienced an inadequate national closures, in 1989, when the study and awareness of the environmental issues, were less studies, and therefore the environmental parties were absent from the Parliaments.
In a very short time, the new term ”green transition”, has relatively gained considerable legitimacy, in the Norwegian daily language. The global leaders have been discussing the green transition a lot and according to some scientist the green transition is necessary to combat the climate challenges world community will face in the future. Some business and corporates are moving towards a more environmental friendly policy and changing the management structure to avoid pollution. There are still many uncertainties about what really green transition is and how to limit the emissions. It is also unclear about what actions there are to be done to be environmental friendly.
The Language Council of Norway voted the word ”green transition” as the new word of the year. The title the term has gained, affirm that the green transition contributes to the increase attention around the environment.
According to the energy report 2015-2016, the renewable energy sources that are most important to Norway, is the hydropower energy.
The context of nuclear has played an important role in research and development rather than seen as an energy source in the Norwegian state of affairs. In 1970 however, nuclear power became an important part of economic growth policy and considered as an essential asset for technological development. The Parliament anyways passed a law in 1975 and nuclear power plant development was stopped temporary which led to believe that it was not a source of energy in Norway. Globally, the nuclear context is somehow different and often associated with danger, and met with opposition from environmental activists. Compared to other countries, resistance to nuclear power was not used as mobilization among the environmental activists, in Norway. The protest anyhow aimed more at the hydropower.
A new source of energy was discovered in Norway in 1971, the oil. In the Ekofisk-field, where the oil extraction took place also increased a high debate that dominated the environment policy in the 1980s. From 1975 to 1985 the production in oil and gas increased, and in 1975 became as large as total Norwegian consumption, and total oil production was three times higher than domestic consumption. It was believed among the environmentalists in 1973-75 that the oil production would lead the Norwegian people in a challenging situation, in the future. Therefore, news increased regarding the oil production, and became a major public debate. The environment debate increased rapidly in Norway after the international oil crisis in 1973-74. Norway had a total dependency in oil and high consumption clearly focused on how vulnerable the modern industrial community was. There was a broader comprehension of the crucial importance of energy production for society development and nature. This has become an example of the traditional conflict between growth and protection that has characterized much of the environmental debate.
In 2014, the oil price fell and increased a debate for the society and environmentalists. The Government had more to reconsider the energy usage to benefit other energy sources.
Acid rainfall destroyed fish stocks in watercourses and water, which led to the characterized attention in the 1970s and 1980s. The news was enormous, and prompted international attention, including Germany and United Kingdom to take action to reduce the harmful gases . Even though the problem was not managed, so organizations as Bellona, Natur og Ungdom ( Nature and Youth ) and Norwegian Society for the Conservation of Nature protested against the deficient management of the case and led to a bigger movement against industrial waste and buried poisons in the sea. The Norwegian Environment Agency, met the challenges of industrial pollution, and went on to introduce land deployment as a permanent solution . Other factors to the pollution debate has been on whether human emissions and production has made any changes towards the climate change.
Therefore, a central debate and issue on environment is regarding the pollution and waste management. There is rising pollution level, it is also increasing challenges on how to handle the pollution in future. This issue has been regarded as the most negative consequences of modern growth community, by the environmentalists.
In environmental history, the Brundtland- report has been considered as a very essential report. The World Commission on Environment and developed is appointed by the UN to assess the extent of environment challenges. The committee was appointed by then Prime Minister of Norway, Gro Harlem Brundtland. There are challenged to the global resposbility for safeguarding the planet and to overcome these challenges the issue has to be seen in a global perspective. The environment issue has been addressed in the 1970s but it has proved with time that one nation cannot overcome the challenges alone and therefore demand a huge interest globally. In 1987, the UN commission presented its report ”Our common future” which is mostly known for Brundtland – report, and this covered the solutions for solving the global environment challenges. As a result of this, several countries decided to follow up commissions. Brundtland was back then a representative of the Labor Party, when she was appointed and further decided that Norway will have to make commitments to the environmental issues. The Norwegian commitment led several municipalities to create environmental divisions . The climate threats has also been an important part in the political debates in Norway .
Regarding the reconstruction from the wreck of the war, after the WW2, the debates on developing the energy plants became a part of the process. In Norway it was a broad agreement that more hydropower dam were necessary to stimulate the economic growth in Norway.
In 1970, the gaps between the Socialist side and Conservatives started to become various as the development plans and other industrial operations started to take place. This brought the two parties in massive debates and it started to nourish the environmental and energy affairs as political matters. The two of the massive destruction by nuclear, Chernobyl and Vietnam war, led to more questions on what kind of energy power the Government should rely on, in future, to prevent any of these cases in Norway. Other questions in the debates involved the biological capacity of the planer, and what kind of negative impacts it could be to have an economical growth with the effect of the nature and environment.
Various Parties have placed themselves on the axis between industrial and economic growth and nature and environmental protection. In the late 1980s debate regarding the environment led to division between Norwegian political parties. The oil and gas extraction raised questions and triggered a competition in environmental issues.
In Alta, the controversy that lead to a an another, debate about land of the Sámi, also ended up with a debate regarding the environment as there was a hydropower dam, that was planned to build out. The controversy, had met with opposition from the Norwegian Sámi people, which was not considered as a movement against the environment. Rather, it was the demand of their right on their land. In Norwegian politics, this changed a lot and building plans had to be reconsidered. The Alta hydropower dam was anyhow built out with Sámi participation. Some of the population is South considered Sámi people as they did not want, to have environmental friendly solutions. The political party also thought back then, that the Sámi population is not that concerned about the environmental solutions and therefore, had a major turnover in their policies. This was proved wrong as the Sámi demand was only on the land, and Sámi was also represented as one of the manager for the Alta dam.
In 1992, the United Nations Climate Change Convention, raised the debates again regarding the gas power plans and oil drilling, in central part of Arctic are in Norway. Again, more on the land of Sámi. This was a case, which met opposition from Nature and Youth ( Natur og Ungdom) and in 1996, the Parliament decided to only allow to build two power gas plants. The interest also moved to islands as Senja, Lofoten and Vesterålen. This is still a debate, as the Conservative Party has showed a huge interest for reopening for oil drilling in these cities in the Arctic.
The Labor Party and Conservative Party both wanted power plants without providing any cleaning solutions. This raised a political war in 1997 and the Government which was led by the Center Party had to resign after questions, that followed a failure to follow the pollution act. The Labor Party and Conservative Party demanded to change the pollution act to build out more gas power plants, to increase the value creation for Norway .
In 2013, the election campaign regarding the energy policy pulled a lot attention in both political parties and society. For the first time Green Party resisted for any oil drilling in Arctic areas as Versterålen, Lofoten and Senja. The part had support from Left and SV and later Labor Party in 2016. While the progress party and Conservative party used all the potential to open for drilling in the Arctic.
From the 1970s, the Norwegian Labor Party and Conservative Party has both perceived as growth parties, while the environmental policies and issues were to discuss, by Socialist – Left – and Center Party. These last mentioned, parties had not developed much environmental programs back then, but have now stated clearly in their political programs what their position is in the climate and environmental issues. This is also believed that the development in the environmental programs in competition of getting more votes, as this has not been their issue before . The Labour Party started to take their part and actions in environmental issues, before any other political party in Norway.
In 2010, the Labour Party also met an opposition from their co-operators Socialist – and Left Party, in the Parliament as they disagreed with the Government plans to build power plants in Kårstø and Mongstad. The Labour Party had also conducted the ”Moon landing project” which was criticised by the organization Zero, which has developed to be a very central organization in debates regarding zero emission. The project of Stoltenberg, was regarded as environmental disaster by the Nature and Youth (Natur og Ungdom) and led to a cancellation of the project in 2013.
Finally, the Green Party started to make strong resistance to the other parties, which they considered as two – faced, when they wanted to continue drilling in the Arctic, and started to make actions and policies that led the population to believe that the real environmentalists were finally visible. In light of the Green Party’s position in Norwegian politics, there has also been debate about which parties have had the strongest credibility for the environmental issues in recent decades. The discussion of the case-law on climate and the environment has been important in this context.
Zero acknowledges climate friendly solutions and cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are not realistic if the corporate world and politicians are not involved in this process, to save the environment. As there is a kind of attachment for economic growth in the West, also called capitalism, there should be proposals with reducing the greenhouse gas emissions to corporate world and political teams to avoid conflicts and rather increase partnerships that will improve the partnership. If there is not any ”middle way” there will be huge protests from the corportate world and political parties. Therefore, according to Zero there is important that both needs will be met.
The green transition is a term, that is still very new, and introduced during the annual conference of the Zero Environmental Protection Organization in 2013. Zero, defines the green transition as the changes that occur in society when politics, economics and technology are progressing in the same climate friendly direction .
According to Anders Bjartnes green transition is an ongoing, unstoppable, and unavoidable continuous process that involves reduced climate emissions which improve the resource productivity in all sectors of the society while offering new opportunities for value creation. Technology development and market forces drive the green transition. The green transition is optimistic if the transformational transition, is progressing and new attitudes are moving towards solving the climate problems . I will add to it that the Governance influence differs also much in a green transition.
There is not much doubt that are related to that the world needs more climate friendly technologies that must be used and a large share of production should come from renewable sources, if a prevention of global warming is a goal, respecting the two degree, target. The politicians either force the green technologies forward by using regulations and injunctions to ensure that new technologies are put into use and the greenhouse gas emission go down or either there can be development of businesses that choose more environmental solutions. There is more likely a combination that is needed in a green transition where the Government imposes strict demands on corporate world to reduce the negativity impact on environment and climate, while they also support innovations, schemes, and framework conditions to make it worthwhile to choose environmentally friendly technology solutions. There is therefore needed an interaction between the Governance and corporate world that can trigger a green transition in Norway.
The Norwegian Government has underlined that land based emissions have passed down in recent years, but in order to reduce emissions to a greater value, the Government has to make sure that new climate friendly technology for industrial utilization is being developed.
In a green transition the technology development is important. The green transition is dependent on the development of technology and it have to understand that more technological advances are needed to make the green technology significantly cheaper than it is today. The aim of the technology development is to make renewable energy less expensive than fossil energy.
There is therefore a need for operations, that can improve the technological advances to reduce the Norwegian greenhouse gas emissions. There has been discussed in the energy report that a pure and clean production of technology and commitment to technology development to reduce emission from cement and mineral fertilizers. The Government has emphasized the need to continue research and development to create pilot facilities if the operations wants to succeed .
The green transition has other factor as that corporate world start choosing environmental friendly solutions for value creation for the society. This is linked to what was discussed in previous chapter. At the moment, technology development is linked to finding solutions that are cheap. Therefore, the technology that contributes with environmental solutions that are less expensive will become more attractive for the corporate world. A trend is that more corporate are becoming more aware of the environment and climate issue. Some corporate has choose to seek opportunities in a green transition, while other businesses are more concerned with reputation and positive publicity. Corporate Social Responsibility also called CSR has been important for many corporate worldwide. Mostly this has been linked to give away their profit to charity programs, or giving some of the fund away to non-profit organizations. This trend has become increasingly widespread, and practiced by big corporate to show their contribution to the society. There is an understanding of this term, but still does not have a precise definition. The idea is that more corporate, contribute with help to any good purposes in the society. The corporate operates above the society as a whole, and that is taken general environmental considerations.
In the study of green transition this has become vital, as many corporate has now contributed with help to environmental programs. Therefore CSR, has become a part of the green transition studies. Whether the corporate really wants to contribute in the society is independent, but more of the corporate believes that CSR, makes them more attractive as it creates business opportunities and new way to get attention and marketing in the society. Norway has also been known as the country that gives away most charity. Therefore, for the corporate to not to be a part of CSR, is seen as odd in the business society and therefore some corporate has seen a lower interest to do business, if the corporate is not contributing.
The new business trend has been changing and this can be one of the elements that can help the society towards a green transition.
An another, important part of the study of the green transition is the Governance and politics that are prioritizing their overall principle of that one who pollutes should pay. This principle is in the energy report and it implies to one who is causing damage to environment and people by polluting, should pay for the damages. The purpose of this principle is to promote environmentally friendly behavior. This is considered as cost effective operation, for reaching environmental goals .
To reach the Paris agreement emission target over the next few years, it is expected that the global energy demand will increase and then this increase in energy productions cannot come from fossil fuel sources of energy that large parts of the world today is utilizing.
The population in the world is dependent on the production enough energy to meet the needs to an ever-increasing population. An energy policy is a challenge for the population as well as the 80 percent of the world’s energy use is covered by fossil fuel and therefore there is an increase in the demand of the energy and it is constantly increasing. Some states are balancing an optimistic economic growth while the greenhouse gas emission is being reduced . The two degree, target has set other desirable target, taking the 2 degrees Celsius to 1.5 degree Celsius. This means that they do not wish to increase more than 1.5 Celsius degrees in average temperature for the Earth. Today, this has been a dilemma as today’s energy production does not match the political goal. By this it means that there are worst consequences to be awaited, in shape of a climate change.
The renewable energy production has increased in last decade, especially in Europe, and not the big question is whether renewable energy can deliver the demand for the energy? Today, the energy production has two thirds of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, and if it is assumed that the world population will increase by two billion people by 2050, it is utterly clear that the world more environmentally friendly energy sector in the coming future to stay in line with this population increase. There is therefore a demand from countries outside the OECD .
Some of the causes of the environmental problems is that there is around 1,2 billion people, about 17 percent of the world’s population that are without any access to energy services and electricity . According to Brundtland report the first priority is that the poverty needs to be combat by sustainable development in the world, it should therefore be a focus on that the states gives the poor access to energy than to create more renewable energy for themselves .
This point has been discussed a lot in the Norwegian media. There has been added some solutions to it, that has been discussed much by the previous Government of Norway. A possibility to transfer the knowledge from rich countries to develop countries has been debated on. Whether industries are interested in sharing their knowledge is still not clear. The idea is to make the industrialized countries use their knowledge for renewable energy and invest in the possibilities in developing countries. In this way the developing countries can cover the energy needs from renewable sources, such as wind – and solar power.
Norway has increased the energy consumption in the recent years, cf. Chart 3.3 , which has resulted in growth of economy in private utilization. Since the 1990s the transport sector has a stable rise in energy consumption, this can be related with transportation of persons and supplies. There is a raise from 31 percent in 1990 to 2014, and according to the energy report, the usage of diesel cars in the transport sector combined with technology development have improved the energy usage .
Nordic countries has been pointed out as one of the world’s most ambitious climate policies, by the report of energy situation in the Nordic by International Energy Agency ( IEA ). According to this report the energy supply is almost without emissions . The background of this statement lies in the Nordic incentives to coperate with emissions. There is further a recommendation for the Government that it should strengten the encouragement in the corporate world to invest in technologies such as energy saving. The carbon capture and energy saving has been considered as an interesting area for the co-operation with the Nordic countries. This is to draw the potential in the Nordic areas . The IEA, mention that in the Nordic countries the solar power is a limited energy , and this has to be take into consideration while there is a co-operation.
The combination of the Norwegian energy mix is unique compared to the rest of the world. Norway is self-sufficient with renewable energy, from windpower and hydropower . The fundamental resource is dependent on rainfall, and the largest part of power comes from hydropower. In the rest of Europe there is a different situation as fossil fuels power stations are placed and therefore this energy can be purchased on the market. As discussed earlier, Norway is not a low emission country yet, the EEA country Norway is affiliated with the EU’s quota market and 47 percent of the greenhouse emission are included in the quota market, these emissions are projected to gradually decrease with the new emission regulations .
The largest sources for greenhouse gas emissions in Norway are:
- Industry : 22 %
- Petroleum production : 27 %
- Transport : 33%
The power system in Norway has the ability to storage energy in water reservoir, which designate that when there is a oversupply of resource of rainwater, this can be stored in reservoir and utilized when the resource base is lower .
The dissimilarity of energy situation between EU countries and Norway are remarkable. While the EU’s energy policy is based on a large amount of energy imports, cf. figure 3.4 and large amount of greenhouse has emissions that are associated to their energy production. In Norway, the energy exports about 10 times as much energy that are utilized by the Norwegian population itself, including oil and gas, while the EU countries rely on importing energy.
Norway is significally influenced by the EU climate policy, although it the situation differs much in between Norway and EU – countries. Norwegian 80 percent of greenhouse gas emissions are neither in the quota system or subjected to fees and regulations. This leads to a comprehensive co-operation with EU policy, through Norwegian membership in EEA, as EU has an impact on Norwegian energy policy through instructions that Norway implements by being a member of EEA.
Bellona foundation has developed a new report regarding the Arctic, which was launched in the climate summit in Paris, COP 21. The report involves the potential for Norwegian and Russian side of the polar circle, where there is new shape of energy, industry- and new business opportunities.
There are opportunities for the conversion of the green energy, on the Norwegian islands of the Arctic, Svalbard. Other islands facilitate from their power supply and diesel aggregates.
According the report from Bellona, for islands like, Bjørnøya, Hopen and Jan Mayen, there are opportunities for the Government to develop concepts for renewable energy. Further, the reports argue, that Svalbard could be an Arctic example for renewable energy, where there are possibilities to test green technologies in the field of energy production and energy saving. The leader of Bellona Fredric Hauge, also suggest that the opportunities in Svalbard, should be availed as there are possibilities on the land to provide the electricity to the transport sector as the boats can also be charged by the port, to avoid usage of the fossil fuel motor.
An example of this, according to the report is the potential of wind power energy, which can be used for hydrogen production. This can lead to employment and income to the Northern areas, especially when this technology can be a trigger for the development of road and boat traffic that is based on electricity.
 Internet: About Olav R. Spilling: http://www.nifu.no/en/employees/olav-r-spilling/
 page 14, 2010 Spilling
 Spilling og Rosenberg 2007
 Teigen 2007 p.15
 Bjartnes, 2015: 115).
 Fiorino, 2016: 2).
 (Fiorino,2016: 1-2).
 (Brand, 2012: 28).
 (Fiorino, 2016: 3).
 Fiorino, 2016: 3).
 Det Kongelige Klima- og Miljødepartement, 2015: 26).
 (FN-Sambandet, 2015b
 (Helgesen, 2016a).
 Miljødirektoratet, 2014: 10).
 Bjartnes, 2015: 33).
 (Bjartnes, 2015: 35).
 (Müller-Rommel 1989, 12-13)
 Müller-Rommel 1989, 12-13, 18
 Kitschelt 1993, 93; Richardson 1995, 7-8; Müller-Rommel 1989, 12-13).
 Richardson 1995, 18, 241; Rihoux 1995, 105
 Müller-Rommel 1989, 11; Richardson 1995, 18-19).
 Aardal 1993, 434).
 Müller-Rommel 1989, 6-7; McCormick 1995, 173; Carter 2007, 123; Aardal 1993, 12; Müller-Rommel 1985, 484
 McCormick 1995, 223).
 (Kriesi 2008, 36-51; Grande 2008, 331).
 Dagbladet, 2015
 (Berntsen 1994, 210; Aardal 1993, 11-12).
 Hansen, Holt- Jensen 1982, 227).
 Aardal 1993, 4).
 (Helle 1987, 15, 20; Aardal 1993, 10-11). 21
 Berntsen 2015, 19; Julsrud 2012, 117).
 Berntsen 2015, 19).
 Berntsen 2015, 19; Store Norske Leksikon 2015).
 Berntsen 2015, 19, Stor Norske Leksikon 2015
 Carter 2007, 1; Aardal 1993, 3-4).
 Berntsen 2015, 24-25
 Aardal 1993, 5-6; Eide, Elgesem, Gloppen, Rakner 2014, 26-27).
 (Berntsen 2015, 25).
 Zero, 2013).
 Anders Bjartnes’s book The Green Shift (2015),p. 23
 Holm, 2015).
Kongelige Klima- og Miljødepartement, 2015: 24).
 (Blowfield & Murray, 2014: 6-7).
 (Det Kongelige Miljøverndepartement, 2012: 85).
 Det Kongelige Olje- og Energidepartement, 2016: 104
 (NHO, 2014: 10).
 Det Kongelige Olje- og Energidepartement, 2016: 104).
 (World Commission on Environment and
Development, 1987: 43
 (Nordic Energy Research & International Energy Agency, 2016: 53).
 (Nordic Energy Research & International Energy Agency, 2016: 33).
 (Nordic Energy Research & International Energy Agency, 2016: 53).
 NHO, 2014: 13).
 NHO, 2014: 13).
 (Det Kongelige Olje- og Energidepartement, 2016: 29)
 Det Kongelige Olje- og Energidepartement, 2016: 83).
 Det Kongelige Olje- og Energidepartement, 2016: 60).
 Internet: http://bellona.no/nyheter/internasjonalt/arktis/2015-12-store-muligheter-nord-for-polarsirkelen
 TW⋅h – The energy production is identical to a sustain power of 114 megawatts for an interval for one year. Major energy consumption for a specific calendar year, explanation available on: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62498205
 Enge S (2015): Report from Bellona: http://network.bellona.org/content/uploads/sites/2/2015/12/Arktis-rapport-2015_lav.pdf