New publications
Norway's environmental tax has proven to be effective
Last reviewed: 01.07.2025
All iLive content is medically reviewed or fact checked to ensure as much factual accuracy as possible.
We have strict sourcing guidelines and only link to reputable media sites, academic research institutions and, whenever possible, medically peer reviewed studies. Note that the numbers in parentheses ([1], [2], etc.) are clickable links to these studies.
If you feel that any of our content is inaccurate, out-of-date, or otherwise questionable, please select it and press Ctrl + Enter.
Most Norwegians are willing to accept an increase in environmental taxes if the tax rate is reasonable and the proceeds are used for specific environmental purposes. The public wants to know where the taxes are spent and how they help maintain a healthy environment.
Politicians and economists try to avoid determining the purpose of taxes and fees in advance, since this limits the possibility of further budget redistribution in the long term.
"But politicians should still think about targeted taxation, because it will be much easier for them to reach a consensus with the public," says Steffen Kallbekken, director of the International Environment Centre in the Norwegian capital Oslo.
"In a nationwide survey, we found that most Norwegians initially supported a reduction in the fuel tax. But when we told respondents that the fuel tax would be geared towards specific environmental goals, most changed their minds and said they would support an increase in the tax. Politicians would do well to take note of this information."
In addition, the researchers found that Norwegians are less skeptical than residents of other countries about environmental taxes and have more trust in the authorities in this area.
Kallbäcken and his team also found that people need to experience the effects of certain taxes first-hand to develop a positive attitude toward them. For example, in the Swedish capital Stockholm, people initially had a largely negative attitude toward a tax on travel to the city center during rush hour, but after a few months of introducing the tax on an experimental basis, people appreciated the reduction in noise, pollution, and accidents. As a result, in a subsequent referendum, the majority supported making the tax permanent.
Steffen Kallbäcken drew the following key conclusions from his research:
- the target purpose of taxes, the definition of specific purposes for using the proceeds, has a great influence on the acceptance of these taxes by society;
- Often people begin to feel better about individual targeted taxes after experiencing their positive effects first-hand.
[ 1 ]