Blog name (IN WEEKLY ORDER)	Criteria: 3-4 well-written paragraphs	Criteria: Spelled-checked and proofread	Criteria: Work Cited + In-text citations	Points(30) 30 divided by 12 blogs= 2.5 points each
Not So Subtle Adventure	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Life in The Kingdoms: Natural Landscapes, Economy, and Quality of Life	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
The Birth of Nations: A Geo-historical Approach to Understanding Norway and Thailand	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Nation-States Welfare Tales: A Comparative Study of Norway and Thailand	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Norway and Thailand: The Epitome of Democracy and the Complexity of the Political Landscape	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Little Half-time Notes	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Cultural Identity: More Than Just Culture	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Economic Tales of: The Lands of Smiles and Midnight Sun	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
To Be or Not to Be Civic: A Comparative Study of Two Kingdoms	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
A Simple Compare and Contrast: Political Socialization	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
How Much Violence Is Needed For Peace? A Comparative Analysis of Historical Violence in Thailand and Norway	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Compilatory Case Study	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Final Blog post (reflection + review and points earned)	+	+	+	2.5/2.5
Adventures
				Points
You are Now On Governmental Payroll (10 minute blog post)	+	+	+	10 /10
Final Slide	+	+	+	5 /5
Final Blog post (related to the final Slide)	+	+	+	10/10
Midterm Exam				16.08 /20.01
Final Exam				17.25 /20.25
Weekly Meetings				8.5 /10
Introduction Slide		+	+	5 /5
Translate a week of slides	+	+	+	7 /7

There is a lot to say about the Comparative Politics class. From the beginning, the professor hinted this class would challenge us in a way most classes do not. Yet, seeing my progress and the skills I was able to acquire along the way, pleasantly surprises me. In the following lines, let’s reminisce about how eventful this semester was from the perspective of a student and aspiring lawyer. 

As a student majoring in Political Sciences, writing is a prerequisite for my curriculum. However, early on, I realized most professors would not take the time to challenge and guide me into developing strong writing skills. Thus, with my lacunes from high school, I often found myself penalized for written communicative levels. With the Comparative Politics class, not only did I have a chance to hone in my existing academic abilities, I was guided throughout the semester in the form of syllabus and office hours by the professor as she created an environment where it felt okay to progress and learn as I go. As a result of the thoughtfulness on my instructor’s end, I became willing to take accountability for both my right doings and wrongdoings. While I enjoyed the assignments, I am aware there were situations I could have prepared better for to avoid falling behind in class. 

Nonetheless, once I applied myself, I noticed tremendous improvement in my research and critical analysis abilities. Throughout my college experience, I doubted myself more than a few times as a law school applicant. However, through the time and efforts spent educating other classmates about comparative politics’s topics, I was able to strengthen my weakness and developed an incredible amount of confidence. Although the time has come for this adventure to end, I will be sure to continue learning and bettering myself so that I can continue to grow both personally, as a student and as a professional. 

Considering my life-learner mindset, this class was an eye opener for me. At the stage I am in my career, I clearly see the importance of being methodical and organized to improve my performance. These are things I wish I had prepared better coming in this course. However, I am thankful for having participated in such an experience because I know more than when I started. Lastly, I would like to take the time to say thank you to our professor, Ms. Shawna Brandle, for her support, her creativity, her guidance and most importantly for making the weekly classes fun, educative and interactive. I can only hope that your other students see how much effort and care you display in our betterment.

Comparative politics is a discipline in political sciences that encompasses internal political structures (institutions like parliaments and executives), individuals and collective actors (voters, parties, social movements, interest groups), and processes (policy-making, communication & socialization processes, and political cultures). Essentially, comparative politics aims to accurately analyze the political and institutional structures of sovereign countries through empirical shreds of evidence by observing their cultural identity and patrimoine, considering current economic wealth statistics to determine the sustainability of the existing social welfare systems. Taking Thailand and Norway as case studies allow an insightful opportunity to compare and classify the different political phenomena. This academic essay is divided into three sections: initially, it will familiarize readers with the current economic data about Thailand and Norway, then continue delving into their cultural identity and history. Finally, the last section will continue the conversation around the effects of homogenization of the nation-states and what it entails regarding the sustainability of the current social welfare systems. 

Part One: Economic & Wealth Statistics

  Norway and Thailand have a history of high quality of life for their citizens and are among the top nations due to their steady economic growth indicated by their GDP data. Although Norway has a  higher GDP per capita (89,154.28 USD) compared to Thailand (7,066.19 USD), has a lower cost of living and likelihood of living below the poverty line, according to the World Bank national accounts, Norway has lower unemployment rates. Considering the lower GINI coefficient which signals unemployment rates, the state’s wealth and income redistributions are more egalitarian compared to its counterpart. 

Additionally, diplomacy plays a significant role in shaping the economies of both Thailand and Norway, particularly in their natural resources, trade, and commerce. In the case of Thailand, diplomatic efforts foster international trade agreements and partnerships have been instrumental in promoting the nation’s economic growth. Notably, the state’s belonging to ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries aids its trade diplomacy allowing for Thai exports of electronics, agriculture, and textiles while giving foreign companies the flexibility to access competitive business services and goods at the best price. These political alliances have facilitated market access and strengthened trade opportunities for Thai businesses during the past 30 years. Likewise, abundant natural resources, particularly oil, and gas, heavily influence Norway’s economy. Because the country is the third largest global exporter of natural gas behind Russia and Qatar, it achieved a freedom score of 76.9 in 2023. Moreover, its stable economy benefits from its status as a co-founder and steadfast strategic ally in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), its membership in OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), and cooperation accords with neighboring countries. As a result of having an economic system of free-market activity and government interventions, Norway utilizes money and wealth acquired through selling oil to sustain and invest in renewable energy technologies. 

Diplomacy is instrumental in establishing a favorable climate for trade and commerce in Thailand and Norway. Between diplomatic ties and natural resources, both countries strategically promote and negotiate trade agreements to expand their market access and diversify their economic sector. As globalization persists, its impact on the two countries’ cultural identity will become more apparent. 

Part Two: Cultural Identity and History

Despite their cultural and historical differences, Norway and Thailand have overlapping circumstances related to cultural identity and social improvement processes. Located in Southeast Asia, Thailand is reputable for its diverse population of over 70 ethnic groups and various religions, with Buddhism as the most popular. Contrary to its booming economy, for over a century, in the Southern regions of Thailand, there has been a surge in strifes and insurgents deriving from ethno religious differences, inadequate intrastate policies, and socio-economic disparities. In the past 50 years, Norway and Thailand have experienced periods of violence and political upheaval. Their attempts at strengthening the nation’s united front of “Thainess” embodiment by protecting the Thai language, supporting the Buddhist religion, and venerating the monarchy (Porter, 2023) do not justify the active cultural identity erasure agenda. Norway, known for its homogeneity, has dealt with cultural identity issues, particularly concerning Indigenous groups like the Sami and the Kven. Portrayed as a civilizing task, the process of Norwegianization single-handedly is responsible for its contribution to the cultural erasure of its ethnic minority groups, notably the indigenous Sami and minority groups, such as the Kven and the Norwegian Finns aiming to turn them into ‘true’ Norwegians (Cesaire, 2023). Although the Norwegian and Thai governments have taken steps to acknowledge past wrongdoings and pose action in the name of reconciliation, the consequences on both countries’ welfare systems are significant. 

Part 3: Effects of Homogenization on Social Welfare System and Policies

Norway and Thailand noticeably diverge in their social welfare systems and policies. While globalization rendered it possible for these states to make leaps economically and with their foreign affairs, it brought forth several challenges regarding maintaining and forecasting their social welfare systems. Norway’s social welfare system is one of the most comprehensive and egalitarian, focusing on universalism and reducing socioeconomic disparities. The country emphasizes universal healthcare, social security, and free education, highlighting wealth redistribution, social consumption, and taxation for funding. Despite the high cost of living, the Norwegian system focuses on ensuring a high standard of living for all citizens by encouraging a decent standard of living as a fundamental right. The state’s high taxation and wealth redistribution creates an equitable opportunity for social benefits and services. These efforts mend the disparities between the social classes. Likewise, since experiencing remarkable economic growth, Thailand seized the opportunity to develop various areas by focusing on universal healthcare coverage, implementing Conditional Cash Transfer Programs, and Informal Welfare Networks to regulate the social poverty levels, particularly in marginalized communities.  Political socialization also impacts the two nations’ social welfare systems and policies. In Norway and Thailand, political socialization occurs through various historical, cultural, and media aspects. With education being a political socialization method, both countries have continued to instill in their citizens a strong sense of nationalism, civic duties, and democracy. Regarding sustainability, focusing on preventative measures, quality care, and wealth redistribution contributes to Norwegian citizens’ high and healthy lifespan. Meanwhile, for Thailand, though the country’s welfare system aims to provide access to healthcare and fund programs to alleviate poverty, pension coverage and education quality remain a pillar obstacle. 

Conclusion

Overall, using the comparative politics framework to analyze Thailand and Norway through the examination of economic wealth indicators, historical backgrounds, and consequences of homogenization, provided valuable insights into opportunities and disparities for their political landscapes. It encourages nations to reflect on the effectiveness and longevity of current social institutions and policies by incorporating inclusive, and equitable practices in their pursuit of social well-being. 

Work Cited 

Caramani, Daniele, editor. Comparative Politics. Oxford University Press, 2020. 

Wolfe, Robert. (1997). A Strategy for Thailand’s Trade Diplomacy A report prepared for the Thailand Development Research Institute project on Restructuring the Thai Ministry of Commerce. 

Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), inss.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/stratperspective/inss/Strategic-Perspectives-11.pdf. 

Saunes, Ingrid S., et al. “Norway: health system summary.” European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies https://eurohealthobservatory.who.int/publications/i/norway-health-system 

Tikkanen, Roosa, et al. “Norway | International Health Care System Profiles.” Commonwealth Fund 

Brochmann, Grete, and Anne Skevik Grødem. “Migration and welfare sustainability: The case of Norway.” Europe’s immigration challenge: Reconciling work, welfare, and mobility (2013): 59-76.

Botten, Grete, Kari Tove Elvbakken, and Nanna Kildal. “The Norwegian welfare state on the threshold of a new century.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 31.2 (2003): 81-84.

Matthew Clarke, Sardar M.N. Islam, Diminishing and negative welfare returns of economic growth: an index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for Thailand, Ecological Economics

“Thailand Overview: Development news, research, data.” World Bank, https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/thailand/overview#1

“Thailand – World Directory of Minorities & Indigenous Peoples.” Minority Rights Group, 08 2017, https://minorityrights.org/country/thailand 

Chambers, Paul, et al. “Introduction: Conflict in the Deep South of Thailand: Never-ending Stalemate?” 2-1. Introduction, Conflict in the Deep South of Thailand Never-ending Stalemate.hwp, 24 April 2019, https://peaceresourcecollaborative.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Introduction-Conflict-in-the-Deep-South-of-Thailand-Neverending-Stal.pdf

Porter, Tom. ““The Thailand You Don’t Know.”” Bowdoin College, 25 January 2023, https://www.bowdoin.edu/news/2023/01/giving-voice-to-a-neglected-minority.html.

Skaar, Elin. When Truth Commission Models Travel: Explaining the Norwegian Case, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Volume 17, Issue 1, March 2023, Pages 123–140, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijtj/ijac027

“Countries – Norway.” Prague Process, https://www.pragueprocess.eu/en/countries/559-norway.

At the core of democracy lies every nation’s fundamental need to be sovereign. However, as seen in humankind’s relentless pursuit of self-sovereignty, violence is nearly always the chosen method to achieve such goals. Such a decision is especially true for developed and emerging countries, of which Norway and Thailand perfectly illustrate this. Historically, these two countries have been caught in the crossfires of international wars (the World Wars), intrastate (civil) wars, coups, and terrorist attacks. The question of how much violence is needed for peace is crucial- considering how nation-states have used war as a tool within nations over the last 50 years. This comparative analysis aims to contribute to the debate by delving into Thailand and Norway’s political state policies and investigating the impact the latter has from a diplomatic standpoint. These two points, juxtaposed, will provide a multidisciplinary perspective on Thailand and Norway’s political progression. 

In the past 50 years, Thailand has faced several instances of wars. The vietnam war was fought back from November 1955 to April 1975, between North Vietnam and South Vietnam. The United States at the time was supporting South Vietnam and had offered military and financial assistance for almost twenty years. During the war, the communist were destroying Buddhist temples in their quest to control Cambodia. Because of the insecurity and the economical reasons related to the insurgency, the Kingdom decided to assist the United States and drafted approximately 40,000 soldiers into battle to fight alongside americans. They granted them access to supplies and weapons in an effort to win the war. Through a New York Times article, we learn that the Thai soldiers took great pride in defeating the communists and restoring safety and peace to their country. It says, “They repeatedly stressed the experiential and material gains the war had given them. They talked about how their service had successfully blocked the spread of communism to Thailand. They marveled at how much Thailand had changed during the war years. And while they acknowledged the war’s terrible toll on people throughout Southeast Asia, including some of their fellow soldiers, they mostly talked about how the war had helped them and their nation.”Continuously, the Cambodian vietnamese war was fought between Cambodia and Vietnam. Although through research it is said primarily that the Thai government only offered aid and did not want to participate in the affairs of the war, the US military used trucks from the Thai state enterprise, Express Transport Organization while being on the country’s soil. The Thai government was furious and demanded for the US military to leave the premises. Furthermore, the United States presence provided support and safety for the Thai people but the fear of war and the communist insurgency was very close due to the plethora of issues happening with Cambodia which led to the government not being entirely sure of their decision to part ways with them. In Dr. Puangthong Rungswasdisab article, he mentions, “The Thai Army Commander General Kris Sivara expressed strong opposition to the calls for immediate withdrawal of the U.S. troops. Kris pointed out that “the situation in Cambodia was most critical. The danger is very close to Thailand. We would rather see a war in foreign countries than fighting in our own land.” He wanted the U.S. troops’ presence as a deterrent against communist attacks in neighboring countries.” 

In 2004, Thailand experienced the South Thailand Insurgency, which was a war centered in South Thailand. Although the conflict was mainly domestic, there were allegations and rumors that external groups had taken a part of what was happening. In 2005, the Prime minister made emergency plans in order to stop the spread of the violent insurgency but the situation was worsening. Moreover, the United States went through military resistance and was unable to do more for the Kingdom when they sought international support. 

While this country has suffered from considerable life loss and social disruption, it continued experiencing instability through the October 6, 1976, Massacre, the Communist Insurgency and the red shirts protests that took place in 2010. The article says, “a violent crackdown by Thai police and lynching by right-wing paramilitaries and bystanders against leftist protesters who had occupied Bangkok’s Thammasat University and the adjacent Sanam Luang, on 6 October 1976.” Five thousand students were on campus protesting against the return of an ousted government official. Without any weapons or means to fight, they were bombarded and shot at by police officers. This chapter certainly marked a dark chapter in Thailand’s history. Many students were not allowed to receive medical aid. The massacre in every aspect symbolizes the suppression of citizens’ voices. Later on in the article, it says, “I still do not understand why they do not let the injured out. Even in war movies, the injured are allowed medical care. But somehow, when it comes to conflicting political views, opponents are no longer human and can be slaughtered.” The protests were a series of political ones against the democratic led government. The UDD supported the ousted Abhisit Vejjajiva and wanted the government to stand down and hold elections earlier in the year. Because of failure to comply, these protests quickly turned into violent interaction between the protesters and the military resulting in a lot of citizens injured and many deaths. 

Furthermore, in 1991, a staged military coup took place against the government of General Chatichai. The alleged reasons were the rampant corruption, dictatorship. These reasons were also established to end democracy in 2006, during another coup against the sitting government. The coup triggered an incredible amount of instability and division within Thai society for years. Thailand’s history and patterns for the past 50 years has been an uproar of various civil conflicts and political upheavals that often kept the country from essentially leaning onto its natural resources, reaching its economic goals and creating a safe and high quality environment for the population (both men, women and children.) 

Norway has been renowned for its commitment to diplomacy and peaceful coexistence, but just as much as Thailand, this country has experienced its series of conflicts for the last 50 years. 

In the early years of the 1990’s, the dissolution of Yugoslavia led to a series of conflicts that ravaged the Balkan region. Although Norway did not participate directly in the armed conflict, as a part of the United Nations Protection Force, it drafted troops to alleviate the pain and suffering of civilians and to protect basic human rights that were being denied. Following the terrorist attacks that happened in New York in 2001, Norway joined the United States to help combat rampant terrorism in Afghanistan. In order to assist, the Kingdom deployed troops to help with the training of Afghan soldiers as a part of the Nato led international security. This greatly contributed to the reconstruction efforts and restoring stability into a country where war was the only thing left. In the article, it states, “NATO Allies went into Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, to ensure that the country would not again become a safe haven for international terrorists to attack NATO member countries. Over the last two decades, there have been no terrorist attacks on Allied soil from Afghanistan.” While Norway has not particularly been involved in International wars, it has played important roles in and actively participated in peacekeeping functions on an international level and has provided humanitarian interventions as well. Additionally, the Alta conflict is a notable civil war that occurred between the years of 1979 and 1981. It was about the construction of a hydroelectric power plant in Alta. There were massive protests from the indigenous groups, local residents that voiced their strong opposition to the project. A large controversy was at bay because of the concerns that the project would disrupt their environment and hurt the Sami Heritage. There were tensions between the Activists and law enforcement. There were a plethora of issues between the Government’s development policies and the basic human rights of the indigenous communities, and because of the government’s response to the protest, the issue gained national momentum. The truth is, the Alta conflict was meant to escalate further but because of the prime minister at the time, the escalation was avoided. In this article, it asserts, “Documents that have since been declassified, show that the government planned to use military forces as logistical support for police authorities in their efforts to stop the protest.” These conflicts opened the dialogue of respect for minorities rights and triggered an effort to promote healthy social inclusion into the nation’s.

How much is violence needed for peace? Both Norways and Thailand went through their unique sets of fear, pain and war. Although the commitment to provide a better future to their citizens, while respecting diversity and implementing policies to ensure the well-being of their population has not always been the best, these countries fought their way to freedom. Through the political divisions and the calls for democratization, they made incredible efforts towards stability and peace. The fifty years of violence seemed to have called for harmony. 

WORK CITED

1. Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), inss.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/stratperspective/inss/Strategic-Perspectives-11.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2023. 
2. “South Thailand Insurgency.” Wikipedia, 25 May 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Thailand_insurgency. 
3. “Yale University.” Thailand’s Response to the Cambodian Genocide | Genocide Studies Program, gsp.yale.edu/thailands-response-cambodian-genocide#:~:text=Although%20the%20atrocities%20committed%20by,various%20political%20groups%20in%20Thailand. Accessed 13 June 2023. 
4. Ruth, Richard A. “Why Thailand Takes Pride in the Vietnam War.” The New York Times, 7 Nov. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/opinion/thailand-vietnam-war.html#:~:text=Thailand%20hosted%20seven%20air%20bases,related%20supplies%20into%20the%20region. 
5. NATO – Topic: NATO and Afghanistan, www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_8189.htm. Accessed 14 June 2023. 

Cultural identity is defined as a sense of belonging to a particular group based on many reasons.  Exploring and analyzing the different cultural identities that exist within both Kingdoms, will broaden but also deepen the appreciation for their diversities as homogenous states. In the past, Little Historical Moments brought forth the importance of ethnic, religious and cultural minorities that exist within Norway and Thailand and how they account for the nations’ global success. For centuries, both nations continuously displayed unwavering pride in their heritage which laid the foundation for strong political and social well-being. Following this, we will highlight the impact of homogenization on cultural identity and erasure and what it entails for the “forgotten” side of their history. 

When talking about nationalism, cultural identity holds a pillar role in its sustainability. However, in the case of Norway, recent development of the Norwegianization Policy has raised important questions about the cultural erasure of Indigenous tribes in the name of globalization and modernization. It is a well-known fact that to preserve a nation’s cultural identity, factoring in their unique languages, traditions, and legacy is non-negotiable. As homogenous of a state Norway appears from the outside, keeping up with the historical data of the altercations of the Sami and Kven tribes points to the policy being more harmful than it lets on. Such a process actively annihilates the minorities’ attempt at preserving an important Patrimoine as they are banned from upholding their practices and are not officially recognized as Indigenous in social cadres. 

The cultural erasure and identity struggles highlight the complex interplay between majority homogenous nations and diverse identity groups within them. While Norwegianization aims to strengthen its True Norwegian identity, it solves a social issue by paving the way for a plethora of issues to arise. Similarly to the latter, in Thailand, there are records of several attempts of the Thai majority at reinforcing the “Thainess” of the country. Not only does this result in incessant bloodbaths and civil wars, every time they allocate funds to resolve these issues they slow down their progress in their economy, education, and social welfare sectors.

Work Cited

1. Cesaire Ann-Dialie, June 12th 2023, Norwegian Policy, Final Slide
2. Cesaire Ann-Dialie, June 12th 2023, Culture Identity: More than Just culture

What identity groups are present in your country? What ethnic/religious/cultural groups are there? Have there been any conflicts with these groups? If so, how have they been addressed? If not, why not?  Are there any similarities between your two countries’ groups?  What are the differences?

Cultural identity is at the epicenter of society. Throughout history, many civilizations that no longer exist nowadays all displayed a strong sense of identity which permitted them to withstand the test of time. Among modern cultures, the same can be said for a handful of countries, however, for reasons that differ from the former. Thailand and Norway, as seen previously in Little Historical Moments, are two countries worth adding to this category for their distinctive sense of nationalism and identity. In the subsequent lines, this essay aims to delve into the cultural identities of Norway, one of the most homogenous states, and Thailand, a reputable fusion of ethnicities to get a deeper understanding of the implications of having ethnic, religious, and cultural minorities within majority homogenous nations. We will highlight conflicts that arise as a result of these groups and examine through comparison how their respective government addressed these conflicts. 

Thailand has a diverse and vibrant cultural heritage of over 70 ethnic groups from which Thai people represent the majority – about 95 percent of the population. Khmer, Malay, Bamar, Karen, Chinese, Hmong, and Indigenous people are among the main minority groups. Additionally, religious diversity is as prevalent as its ethnic counterpart with Buddhism being the predominant faith, followed by Islam, Christianity, Sikhs, and Hinduism. Historically, there have been cases of ethno-religious tensions and conflicts within the state. In the Southern regions of Thailand, for over 100 years, records show strife between a Buddhist Thai nation-state and a minority of Malay Muslims. With constant protests and attacks against the Malay Muslims and retaliation from their end, the impact on security and economic development was in a dire state. In an attempt to make amends and address these issues, on many occasions after the election of 1975, Thai elected government officials took initiatives to direct policies allocating funds to improve infrastructural and educational projects in Muslim-inhabited provinces and promote cultural preservation. Despite their efforts, at strengthening the nation’s united front of “Thainess” embodiment by protecting the Thai language, supporting the Buddhist religion, and venerating the monarchy (Porter, 2023), this did not put an end to the high-level tensions. In fact, there have been several major events in 2004 including Muslim insurgents’ attacks on police stations as well as documented governmental killings of Muslims. This caused many to speculate the origin of these conflicts is rooted in ethnoreligious differences, socio-economic disparities, inadequate state policies, and political factors. 

Correspondingly, similar conclusions can be deduced in the case of Norway. In this equally homogenous nation, home to various Indigenous groups,  the question of identity remains a crucial one. Portrayed as a civilizing task, the process of Norwegianization single-handedly is responsible for its contribution to the cultural erasure of its ethnic minority groups, notably the indigenous Sami and minority groups, such as the Kven and the Norwegian Finns aiming to turn them into ‘true’ Norwegians. As a result of Norwegianization and repressive policies, many individual Sami, Kven, and Norwegian Finns – even entire communities – have lost their language and connection to their cultures (Skaar, 2023). Consequently, this process opened the door to the minorities retaliating in the forms of protest, mobilization, and the fight for political representation. Finally, King Harald on behalf of the state, in 1997 the Samis were granted a public apology and status as Indigenous people. Following this public recognition, elected government officials issued several actions to right their previous wrongdoings. Although impactful, it is clear these actions alone do not suffice in the long term especially given the influx of immigrants in recent decades from countries such as Poland, Lithuania, Sweden, Somalia, and Germany. 

The cultural erasure and identity struggles faced by ethnic, religious, and cultural minority groups in both Norway and Thailand are significant issues that demand attention and reflection. These challenges shed light on the complex interplay between majority homogenous nations and diverse identity groups within them. As the world continues to become more interconnected and diverse, understanding and respecting cultural identities become imperative for sustainable peace and harmony. How can societies strike a balance between preserving cultural heritage and fostering national unity? What policies and initiatives should be implemented to address conflicts arising from diverse identities?

Work Cited

1. “Thailand – World Directory of Minorities & Indigenous Peoples.” Minority Rights Group, 08 2017, https://minorityrights.org/country/thailand 

2. Chambers, Paul, et al. “Introduction: Conflict in the Deep South of Thailand: Never-ending Stalemate?” 2-1. Introduction, Conflict in the Deep South of Thailand Never-ending Stalemate.hwp, 24 April 2019, https://peaceresourcecollaborative.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Introduction-Conflict-in-the-Deep-South-of-Thailand-Neverending-Stal.pdf

3. Porter, Tom. ““The Thailand You Don’t Know.”” Bowdoin College, 25 January 2023, https://www.bowdoin.edu/news/2023/01/giving-voice-to-a-neglected-minority.html.

4. Skaar, Elin. When Truth Commission Models Travel: Explaining the Norwegian Case, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Volume 17, Issue 1, March 2023, Pages 123–140, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijtj/ijac027

5. “Countries – Norway.” Prague Process, https://www.pragueprocess.eu/en/countries/559-norway.

Political socialization is defined as the learning process in which people learn to understand their political behavior, opinions as well as their identities. Through parents and peers, the lifelong experiences of political socialization play an important role in developing traits such as patriotism. In both Norway and Thailand, political socialization manifests itself through historical, cultural, media influences and more. Although each country has their unique system, they also have similar ideologies as to paving the way to a more aware and engaged political participation. In the subsequent line, we dive into the Kingdoms political socialization and the public’s opinion facing various common issues.

Thailand’s political socialization is deeply intertwined with both the historical and the cultural. The monarchy and Thailand’s deep respect and loyalty to the institution shaped with no doubt their political attitudes. For a long time, the monarchy represented continuity and a sense of stability. Through being accustomed, the Thai people learned to develop a sense of national identity, a deference towards authority. Although the historical background and the cultural background plays such an important focus into who they are, education plays a crucial role as well. It is through the educational system that Thai students are instilled with a sense of nationalism for their beloved country. They learn the importance of democracy, human rights and social responsibilities. Moreover, higher education institutions serve as platforms for students to engage in critical thinking all while developing many political perspectives. University campuses have constantly witnessed political movements, protesting for a better future all while encouraging active citizenship. Norway’s experience is not too far different from the Kingdom of Thailand as to education playing such an important role in their lives. From a very early age, Norwegians are exposed to a robust civic curriculum. Through social studies, they learn about the essentials such as human rights, the Norwegian political system and how to be a patriot. This education encourages the students to vote and join grassroot activism. In the Norway analysis article, it says, “schools provide common symbols (like Norwegian flag) and history classes to spark interest or affection toward the current political system.” and also mentions that, “Since half of the Council of State must be from the Church of Norway, the Church serves as a medium of exchange for political values.”

Furthermore, in Thailand the media landscape seems to be diverse (newspapers, television, online platforms). Although the internet can be extremely restricted, the diversity of perspectives is accessible to the population. In recent years, it is said that social media platforms have emerged truly powerful tools for political expression. They use it to share their opinions, share information with one another and do their civic duty. Nonetheless, in Norway the media landscape provides a useful amount of diverse viewpoints, helping citizens to stay informed about the current events in their country and internationally. The Kingdom is well known today for its high journalistic standards and objectivity. To analyze further, Norway is also a country where societal norms play a key role in political socialization. They place an emphasis on social justice, collective welfare as well as instilling a sense of social responsibility in their citizens as well as the government. The importance of inclusiveness in the process of decision making reinforces individuals to engage in different dialogues. 

Thailand and Norway also exhibit distinct opinions regarding climate change and environmental protection, as well as their political stability and democracy.

Thailand’s public awareness of the many environmental issues has been rapidly growing. A survey (study) that was conducted by Thailand’s environment institute shows that a majority of Thai do want the government to prioritize environmental protection and climate change. They are concerned about air pollution, deforestation and the impact that this will have as a long term issue on their livelihoods but the country’s economy as it relies on natural resources. However, Norway has been at the forefront of protecting their environment. The public opinion and the data demonstrates a good amount of support in regards to investments in renewable energy and a survey that was conducted by the Norwegian institution also asserts that most Norwegians prioritize environmental conservation. This directly aligns with the goal of Norway being the reduction of carbon emissions. 

Additionally, Thailand’s public opinion data on political stability in recent years has been up and down because there are some people expressing a lack of confidence in the government’s ability to maintain stability while others are confident that they can. Moreover, the erosion of democratic principles seems to also be an issue that not a lot of people agree on and is still up for debate. However, there are ongoing efforts towards strengthening democratic institutions. Norway consistently ranks in global democracy indices. The public opinion is that they trust the government and political institution. The survey that was conducted by the Norwegian centre for research data found that a majority of people expressed their confidence and support towards political parties and overall governance and that this perception is due to the accountability and transparency that they have been accustomed to. In this article it says, “Trust in government in Norway is high compared to OECD and Scandinavian countries, in 2021 trust in government in Norway reached 77% compared to 47% in OECD.”

Analyzing the public opinion about Thailand and Norway on common issues highlight their similarities and once again their disparities. By considering public data and their political socialization, as well as their ideologies, they both truly stand out as to the gaps, but also the progress that they are continuously making. 

Work Cited

1. Khan, H. (2016), “The Linkage Between Political Trust and the Quality of Government: An Analysis”, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 39/9, pp. 665-675, https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2015.1068329.

2. Miller, A. and O. Listhaug (1998), “Policy preferences and political distrust: A comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States”, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 20/3, pp. 357-386.

3. “PoliticalSocialization.”Norway,norwaystructuralanalysis.weebly.com/political-socialization.html. Accessed 12 June 2023. 

4. OECD (2017), Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268920-en.

5. Longley, Robert. “What Is Political Socialization? Definition and Examples.” ThoughtCo, 1 Dec. 2022, www.thoughtco.com/political-socialization-5104843. 

Civil society is an essential element of any thriving democracy because it provides a platform to citizens so they can engage in shaping and building their nation. Both Thailand and Norway are diverse and dynamic in civil societies. Although Thailand’s a vibrant and strong country which has been working tirelessly to shape its political and social landscapes, it nonetheless faces incredible challenges at times. Norway is known for its commitment to democratic values and often represents a country that plays a significant role in the country’s political fabric. In the subsequent line, we will dive into the major political parties of these countries – as well as their ideologies, historical background and contributions to society. We will also learn more about their civil groups, organizations, various existing limiting factors and their impact on the nation’s governance.

Civil society is often defined as a crucial role that is played into shaping a nation’s political, economic and social landscapes. It serves as a check established on governmental power because it advocates for marginalized groups and it fosters civic engagement. In Thailand civil society has flourished because of a plethora of reasons. There is a long tradition of religious philanthropy, and the creations of many organizations such as NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization) and CBOs (Community based organizations) which address poverty, human rights and gender equality to name a few. The truth is, Thailand civil society is now diverse and coexists with strong political participation, freedom of assembly but it has not always been the case. Because of military coups and governmental oppression, citizens used to have a hard time fighting for their basic rights and receiving basic services. However, over the past few years, it has been indicated in Thailand that the government has been providing opportunities for dialogue, policy reform and overall creating a safer and better place for the population. The change in social dynamic has really brought conversations such as the inequality between urban and rural places and what can be done to alleviate the pressure and ensure that people’s needs are met. Volunteer Service, the Mirror Foundation, women’s organizations, LGBTQ groups and the Human Rights and Development Foundation are all organizations that collaborate with governmental agencies and communities to implement sustainable solutions. For example, the mirror foundation is an organization that was founded in 1991 and has worked over 15 years to promote the rights of hill tribe people. It has helped with issues such as drug abuse, erosion and the trafficking of women and children. The Local Development Institute was founded in 2001, and is a grant making and policy organization that tries to bridge government, grassroot organizations and civil society. It aims to work at policy and community levels. Lastly, the United Nations Inter-Agency Project on Human Trafficking (UNIAP) coordination project is a civil organization that works on preventing and helping dismantle trafficking. Civil society serves as a catalyst for positive change to happen because dedication and resilience contributes largely to progress towards a more just and democratic society and challenges discrimination and creates inclusive spaces. 

Thailand is shaped by a diverse array of parties, each with their unique vision for the nation. The Move Forward party is a social democratic and progressive party. Its ideology opposes militia influence (which has ruled thailand from 2014 – 2019) and supports economic equality as well as same-sex marriage. Thai Civilized Party is also a political party established in March 2018 and have three core policies (anti-corruption, social justice and government reform) and lastly the Palang Pracharath Party that was created after the coup of March 2014 and is a civil military political party. These parties today continue to play an important role in the country’s political discourse. Understanding their dynamics and nuances is essential to comprehending Thailand’s complex nature. Furthermore, Thailand is also influenced by its constitution. The 2017 constitution that was implemented after a military coup grants extensive power to unelected bodies such as the election commission (founded in 1998) to dissolve political parties, disqualify candidates and impose numerous restrictions on political activities. The election commission is  in charge of enforcing national election laws covering: House of Representatives, Senate, Districts, Referendums, Bangkok gubernatorial elections and political parties. These laws and regulations curtail citizens’ ability to express their opinion, have representation and significantly limit the scope for political participation. Additionally, the freedom house article demonstrates “ The internet is severely restricted in Thailand. Authorities responded to youth-led anti government protests—which started in July 2020 and continued throughout the coverage period—by arresting and harassing internet users and pro democracy leaders who criticized the monarchy. In one of the most draconian cases, a former public servant was sentenced to 43 years in prison.” such censorship restricts the flow of information and keeps citizens from making informed political decisions. However, according to the same article, progress is also being made. It is like setbacks and progress all happening at the same time. It states, “According to the Digital 2021 Report, developed by creative agency We Are Social and the social media management platform Hootsuite, as of January 2021 Thailand’s internet penetration rate was at 69.5 percent, and there were 49 million internet users, a 7.4 percent increase from January 2020.”

For instance, the Norwegian Human Rights fund works tirelessly to promote human rights, as well as the Norwegian women’s lobby advocate for gender equality, gender non violence and women’s rights. These organizations provide a platform for marginalized groups that otherwise would have to stay silent and endure. They continuously facilitate among diverse stakeholders and truly promote understanding and empathy.

Political parties are an organized group of people with similar political aims and opinions. In the Kingdom of Norway, they have different types of parties that share different ideologies and point of views. The Arbeiderpartiet (Ap) is the labor party is a social democratic party that is committed to social justice, democracy and liberty. They were founded in 1987 in Norway and are a reformist party. The Høyre (H) is a conservative party that was founded in 1984 and has very conservative progressive ideologies based on christian values. Additionally, the Fremskrittspartiet (FrP) is a libertarian party founded in 1973 and believes in freedom and  lowering taxation. The Senterpartiet (Sp) is Norway centre party founded in 1920. Their motto is, proximity is the answer – not the problem. We live in an elongated country where proximity has played an important role. It has created vibrant local communities in the north, south, east and west and has been a success story for our country.” Norway is known today for being tirelessly committed to their population and the ability to better their environment. Red Cross is an NGO in Norway that provides support and deals with issues such as education, health and disaster preparedness. There is also the The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) which provides emergency relief and long term support and Save the children which is a non governmental organization that helps children living in poverty, conflict and natural disasters. They also have laws that protect freedom of association allowing individuals to form or join various organizations, hence being able to speak of their political affiliations or opinions or simply being part of protest. Although there are restrictions in place to prevent any abuse of this freedom, the Kingdom does encourage its population to be involved when they want to. While civil society organizations can advocate for policy changes and share their perspectives on public debates, there are regulations to prevent any partisan influence (not being able to fund election campaigns is one of the exemples) These limitations have been established simply to ensure a fair and balanced political landscape and avoid corruption. Furthermore, Norway provides opportunities for political parties as well as individuals to participate in the political process. The country has a multi party system However, there is a threshold (4%) that is here to prevent fragmentation. Although it can post a challenger for smaller parties seeking representation, it has to be there to uphold stable governance. 

Work Cited

1. “The Mirror Foundation.” Wikipedia, 28 Mar. 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mirror_Foundation. 
2. Government–Civil Society Relations, www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/29149/csb-tha.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2023. 
3. “Thailand: Freedom on the Net 2021 Country Report.” Freedom House, freedomhouse.org/country/thailand/freedom-net/2021. Accessed 12 June 2023. 
4. “Norwegian Women’s Lobby.” Wikipedia, 9 June 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Women%27s_Lobby. 

“Elections in Norway.” Wikipedia, 8 Oct. 2022, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Norway#:~:text=A%20party%20must%20earn%20more,be%20entitled%20to%20levelling%20seats.

The Kingdoms of Norway and Thailand possess great geographical and cultural distinctions. Although research reveals it to be true, they also exhibit particular economic similarities that can be explored. Understanding them will surely contribute to a broader comprehension of comparative politics and these Kingdoms commonalities. Notably, natural resources, global trade, social welfare, and their challenges will be a few of the sub-topics that will be highlighted throughout these texts to bring awareness in regards to their diverse paths to economic success or failure. In the subsequent lines, this blog post will further analyze the systems and trajectories taken by these countries to provide insights into the political and social choices made by each. 

The Midnight Sun (Norway) is well renowned for its reserve of oil and gas and is a co-founder and steadfast strategic Ally in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). For years, they have played a huge role in shaping its economy and maintaining its wealth. Because the country is the third largest exporter of natural gas in the world, behind Russia and Qatar, it managed to further establish itself and reach a freedom score of 76.9 in 2023. The heritage foundation article says, ““Norway’s economic freedom score is 76.9, making its economy the 12th freest in 2023.” This further establishes that Norway has been robust and benefiting society as a whole (both national and on a global level.) To ensure a safe and stable country, the establishment of the government’s Pension Fund Global was created. The reliance of the Norwegian economy leaves it vulnerable to fluctuations in the global oil prices which can easily impact revenue as well as other sectors.  In wikipedia, it asserts, “The purpose of the fund is to invest parts of the large surplus generated by the Norwegian petroleum sector, mainly from taxes of companies but also payment for licenses to explore for oil as well as the State’s Direct Financial Interest and dividends from the partly state-owned Equinor.”  However, to fix this issue, Norway needs to find a long and more sustainable solution. 

Because Norway has a mixed economic system with a combination of free-market activity and government intervention, it invests in renewable energy technologies – such as significant amounts of wind power. Norway utilized the money and wealth obtained by the profit gained by the oil. In the business Norway article, it states, “In Norway, approximately 96 per cent of all electricity is generated by renewable hydropower.” Still, today because of its high production, hydropower remains the backbone of its power system (more than 90%). “Hydropower has been the basis for the development of a welfare society since we started utilizing the energy in rivers and waterfalls to produce energy in the late 1800s.” Because of this, the country’s trade volume has been high, with total exports and imports accounting for a substantial portion of its GDP highlighting the significance in international trade. Moreover, Norway has actively engaged in free trade agreements, both independently and as a member of the EFTA, which has facilitated trade relations with countries outside the European Union.

Norway has created policies aiming to reduce income inequality and guarantee a high standard of living for its citizens. The high standard of living equals a high cost of living (it is seen through high wages, high taxes) and affects mostly businesses and investments. The local newspaper asserts, “ There’s hard competition in the Norwegian retail market, and all our shops compete daily. We can’t pass on all the price rises to our customers – that’s why you can see our profitability going down.” It directly impacts and decreases entrepreneurship and innovation for the young adults. Nevertheless, these policies help create an environment for universal healthcare, free education and generous social benefits, but the aging population and the declining birth rate has placed a strain on public finances. Life in Norway written by Davil Nikel asserts, “In 2022, there were a total of 51,480 newborns in Norway. That might sound a lot, but it actually marks a drastic drop in the fertility rate within the country.” In the previous blog post, called Norway and Thailand: The Epitome of Democracy and the Complexity of the Political Landscape. It further elaborates on the good social welfare established by Norway’s government. 

Norway’s fund has been largely contributing to its citizens’ standard living, their economic stability and their extensive welfare system. Thanks to its progressive taxation and labor regulations, the income inequality is low. The facts and research proves that while the country did undergo a process of industrialization in the early 20th centuries, Norway can arguably be primarily revolving around modernization (education, democratic governance, sustainability)

However, unlike Norway, The Land of Smiles (Thailand) benefits from its strategic location. Given where it is situated, the labor force and the support accorded for foreign investment brings a diverse economy. Despite the economic growth spur, Thailand is grappling with issues such as poverty and unequal access to services. The Kingdom has a mixed economic system in which there is a variety of private freedom, combined with centralized economic planning and government regulation which demonstrates why it relies on natural resources as much as the Kingdom of Norway, nonetheless a significant wealth disparity exists between the rural and the urban areas. The gap between the rich and the poor has only widened and hampers sustainable development and undermines social cohesion. 

Thailand is a member of ASEAN, which was established in 1967. ASEAN comprises ten members, including Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Moreover, natural gas and rubber, rice have all contributed plenty to the economic growth of the country. Thailand is the biggest exporter of Natural rubber and second largest exporter of rice and has a 33.3% share of global export that is worth $13 billion annually, as well as their rice export being worth $25 billion annually. Although these natural resources have greatly benefited the country throughout the past several decades into supporting a livelihood for its citizens, watersheds, forests and mineral resources – to say the least have been instrumental in supporting Thailand’s manufacturing and tourism industries. Thailand has free trade agreements with countries such as China, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. These agreements have facilitated market access, and the reduction of tariffs. In spite of that, the country has been struggling with environmental issues. Water scarcity and pollution have been challenges that impact public health but also pose a risk to agriculture (their natural resources as a whole.)

In the Thailand development article, it demonstrates that In Thailand, it has been estimated that applying green growth policies that understand these trade-offs, may be worth US$2.06 billion to the national economy in terms of the potential to enhance the net present value of ecosystem services supplied by forests, wetlands, mangroves and coral reefs. This represents a 7.8% increase in economic growth when compared to a ‘business as usual’ scenario.” 

Furthermore, the Kingdom realized the importance of transitioning towards cleaner energy and like Norway, has embarked on renewable energy initiatives in order to continuously improve their electricity by 50 percent. Although in the article written by Danielle Fallin, Karen Lee and Gregory Pollin “Thailand has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2050 and reach net-zero GHG emissions by 2065. The 2022 National Energy Plan aims to generate 50 percent of the country’s electricity from clean energy by 2040,” the country continues to promote solar power and has set ambitious targets in regards to agricultural products and automotive industry, but the corruption erodes the public’s trust and diverts the resources available away from productive sectors. Thailand is a country that has experienced a significant amount of industrial transformation in the later half of the 20th century, the growth of its industries contributed to increased employment opportunities, urbanization, and improved infrastructure. Although industrialization is a big part of Thailand’s development, its political and cultural changes have slowly reconstructed the country into modernization. 

Both countries today are benefiting from international trade because of the relationships constructed and nurtured with many countries worldwide. Nonetheless, they continue to require reform of governmental policies, international support and cooperation as well as private sector innovation. 

Work cited

1. “The Norwegian Economy and Business Sector.” Norgesportalen, www.norway.no/en/central-content/en/values-priorities/the-norwegian-economy-and-business-sector/#:~:text=Oil%2C%20gas%2C%20seafood%2C%20and,and%2070%20%25%20of%20our%20exports. Accessed 11 June 2023. 

2. “Norway.” Norway Economy: Population, GDP, Inflation, Business, Trade, FDI, Corruption, www.heritage.org/index/country/norway#:~:text=Norway%20is%20one%20of%20the,world%27s%20largest%20sovereign%20wealth%20fund. Accessed 11 June 2023. 

3. Pines, Lawrence. “Thailand’s Economy: Learn How It Benefits from Rubber and Rice Exports.” Commodity.Com, 5 Mar. 2021, commodity.com/data/thailand/. 

4. “Environment and Natural Resources.” Open Development Thailand, 19 Dec. 2017, thailand.opendevelopmentmekong.net/topics/environment-and-natural-resources/#:~:text=Thailand%20is%20a%20country%20rich,%2C%20export%2C%20and%20tourism%20industries. 

Compared to my first post, I noticed a big improvement on how I go about sourcing my information along with performing intricate research. Because of this improvement, I am able to formulate my argument better using concise and empirical evidence. Additionally, from a personal level, I noticed I revisit my grammatical knowledge more often to avoid making writing mistakes like run-ons and repetitiveness. 

One of my favorite things however about this class so far is the flexibility you allowed us to have. Although it was challenging because I am used to my professors making the schedule for me, it allowed me to clearly spot the areas I need to work on to become a better student. I found myself being more comfortable with relying on my knowledge but also taking accountability for missed deadlines and/or unexpected circumstances. 

All and all, I am looking forward to the improvements I will make comes the end of this semester and would love the opportunity to collaborate again with you in the future. 

Previously on Little Historical Moments – we discussed how the Kingdoms of Norway and Thailand, the Land of the Free became nation-states. While both states are renowned for their citizens’ standard of living and their policies, a closer look at their welfare system is essential to understand the mechanisms behind their high rankings.

Norway and Thailand are nations that center the well-being of their citizens at the core of their initiatives. With both countries ranking high on the welfare echelon, their approaches and methodologies involving welfare consider the cultural, economic, and political aspects. This blog will describe the social welfare systems that exist in Norway and Thailand while discussing their similarities and divergent points. 

Norwegians have a higher and healthier lifespan than most Europeans credited to the nation’s welfare efforts to emphasize effective and quality preventative measures and care. Norway’s social welfare system is modeled on the National Insurance Scheme which came about shortly after the Second World War. Widely regarded as one of the most comprehensive and egalitarian in the world, the state’s welfare main policy mission is centered around universalism. The policy focuses to reduce socioeconomic disparities and ensure a high standard of living for its citizens as part of national integration project initiatives to center an extensive range of social rights that honors its citizens’ right to a decent standard of living. Consequently, it primarily focuses on universal healthcare, social security, and free education and relies significantly on wealth redistribution, social consumption, and taxation for funding. Hence permitting structural social welfare to remain accessible to the population regardless of socioeconomic background. Although the homogenous state functions based on a system that is both universalistic and residence-based, there are eligibility criteria that allow access to benefits for newcomers (Brochmann, 2013). 

 In contrast, Thailand has experienced one of the world’s highest and most constant rates of economic growth. Its social welfare system distinguishes itself tremendously from its counterpart Norway due to cultural and economic factors. Since 1975, Thailand has been on a steady yet remarkable economic growth which has played a pillar role in reducing poverty levels from nearly one-third to presently less than 10% (Warr, 2001). Although development infrastructure standards in health, education, housing, and other public facilities differ from Western countries, they are well established (Furuto, 2013). Aside from universal healthcare coverage, both countries have in common, the main two notable aspects of the Thais’ welfare are the implementation of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs and the Informal Welfare Networks. Such programs aim to alleviate poverty among low-income and working-class citizens, especially in marginalized communities with contingents ensuring that the state’s high education levels remain intact. However, the pension systems only cover one-third of the working-age population. Additionally, while Thailand is known for its universal health care program (UHC), many believe the quality of education to be in dire need of reassessment and a weak point for “the country’s human development”. 

To conclude, the social welfare systems in Norway and Thailand are prime examples of what the behind-the-scenes implementation entails for developed and emerging countries. While they both center on the well-being of their citizens and incorporate policies to support this end goal, the two nations have a long way to go individually with systemic biases that may constitute a challenge to their comprehensive approach. Though Norway is able to fund its welfare system, the same cannot be said for people a part of the marginalized ethnic groups. Meanwhile, Thailand’s approach is more targeted at federal and communal levels. 

Work Cited

1. Saunes, Ingrid S., et al. “Norway: health system summary.” European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies https://eurohealthobservatory.who.int/publications/i/norway-health-system 

2. Tikkanen, Roosa, et al. “Norway | International Health Care System Profiles.” Commonwealth Fund 

3. Brochmann, Grete, and Anne Skevik Grødem. “Migration and welfare sustainability: The case of Norway.” Europe’s immigration challenge: Reconciling work, welfare, and mobility (2013): 59-76.

4. Botten, Grete, Kari Tove Elvbakken, and Nanna Kildal. “The Norwegian welfare state on the threshold of a new century.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 31.2 (2003): 81-84.

5. Matthew Clarke, Sardar M.N. Islam, Diminishing and negative welfare returns of economic growth: an index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for Thailand, Ecological Economics

6. “Thailand Overview: Development news, research, data.” World Bank, https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/thailand/overview#1