2 Frameworks and policy instruments

2.1 General information about the use of policy instruments in Svalbard

The frameworks for the administration of Svalbard differ in certain areas from those of the mainland. For example, the Immigration Act does not apply to Svalbard, and no visa or residence permit is required there. This is related to the Svalbard Treaty and the provision stipulating that nationals of contracting parties shall have equal liberty of access to Svalbard. Svalbard is outside the Schengen Area and is otherwise characterised by vast distances, with often challenging weather and climatic conditions. There are no roads connecting the local communities, which in turn are structured and administered differently from communities on the mainland.

The distinctive frameworks are also reflected in the use of policy instruments. In the administration of Svalbard, continuous assessments are made of which measures are necessary to ensure positive social development at all times, in line with the overriding objectives of Svalbard policy. The comprehensive white papers and the Storting’s considerations thereof provide the overall frameworks and instructions for administration, and lay the foundation for a long-term approach and predictability. Another distinctive feature of Svalbard is the special coordination of Svalbard issues in the central government administration via the Interministerial Committee on the Polar Regions.

In Report Storting No. 9 (2022–2023) National control and cyber resilience to safeguard national security, the Government shows how changes to the security policy situation necessitate measures to safeguard national security. The white paper provides a review of the challenges facing Norway as a whole. It also contains a separate section on the Government’s most important policy instruments in the administration of Svalbard.

Maintaining peace and stability is a key objective of Svalbard policy, and there have always been strong national interests related to the management of the archipelago. State ownership of property, companies and infrastructure is key. For example, the State currently owns 98.75 per cent of the land in Svalbard, including all the land in Longyearbyen that is managed by the Svalbard office of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. The State also has direct ownership of the companies Store Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani AS, Kings Bay AS, Bjørnøen AS and the University Centre in Svalbard, all of which aim to support the overriding objectives of Svalbard policy.

Legislation is a fundamental policy instrument in all administration, including that of Svalbard. Developments in recent years have necessitated new acts and regulations in several domains. Economic policy instruments in the form of tax policy, the presentation of the annual Svalbard budget and the acquisition of e.g., property and housing are examples of other important policy instruments in the administration of Svalbard.

Local administration at various levels is also an important policy instrument. The Governor of Svalbard, the Government’s highest representative on the archipelago, is the chief of police and has the same authority as a county governor. Longyearbyen Community Council manages basic social functions within the Longyearbyen planning area and shall, according to the Svalbard Act, ensure “rational and effective administration of common interests within the framework of Norwegian Svalbard policy”.

2.2 International legal framework

2.2.1 Norwegian sovereignty

Norway’s sovereignty over Svalbard is undisputed. Sovereignty means that a state has supreme authority within its territory and the exclusive right to exercise authority there, including the right to enact and enforce laws and other regulations. Norway’s sovereignty is confirmed in the Svalbard Treaty and, in accordance with public international law, by the tacit acceptance of the other states. Therefore, all states have a duty to respect Norwegian sovereignty over Svalbard in the same manner as Norwegian sovereignty over other parts of Norwegian territory.

Sovereignty over Svalbard encompasses not only the land territory, but also the territorial waters around the archipelago, i.e., the internal waters and territorial sea extending 12 nautical miles seaward from the baselines, as well as the airspace above.

As a result of its sovereignty, Norway has the exclusive right to exercise authority over all nationals and companies – Norwegian and foreign – throughout its territory. No other states may exercise public authority in Svalbard. Such an exercise would infringe on Norwegian sovereignty.

All private legal entities in Svalbard, both individuals and companies, must comply with Norwegian legislation and administration in the same manner as on the mainland. International agreements to which Norway is a party also apply to Svalbard, unless specific exceptions have been made. Such an exception has, for example, been made for the EEA Agreement. Chapter 2.2.2 discusses the Svalbard Treaty and certain other international agreements of particular significance to Svalbard.

2.2.2 The Svalbard Treaty

Introduction

The Svalbard Treaty was signed on 9 February 1920 and entered into force on 14 August 1925. From that day on, Svalbard became an indivisible and inalienable part of the Kingdom of Norway via a separate act, the Svalbard Act of 17 July 1925 No. 11 (the Svalbard Act). The Svalbard Treaty is open for accession and currently has more than 40 States Parties.

The Treaty contains a number of provisions on the treatment of nationals and companies from States Parties. Through the Treaty, Norway has assumed a limited international legal obligation to treat nationals and companies from the parties to the treaty equally. This obligation applies within certain domains enumerated in the Treaty. In addition, the Treaty contains provisions on restrictions on taxation and military activity on the archipelago. Since the Treaty is an agreement under international law, only States Parties may demand equal treatment from Norway on behalf of their nationals and companies.

The following is a review of the history of the Svalbard Treaty and a discussion of some of its provisions. A general description of the Svalbard Treaty has also been provided in previous white papers on Svalbard. Reference is made to Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 39 (1974–75), Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 40 (1985–86), Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 9 (1999–2000), Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 22 (2008–2009) and Report Storting (white paper) No. 32 (2015–2016).

One of the key objectives of the Treaty was to achieve a final clarification of all outstanding issues of international law, through the recognition of Norwegian sovereignty. This ensures predictability and clarity, including for other treaty parties.

History of the negotiations

The Svalbard Treaty came about as a result of negotiations during the Paris Peace Conference after the First World War in 1919. The increasingly extensive economic activity in Svalbard in the early 1900s made it necessary to clarify the status of the archipelago. Before the First World War, Norway organised three international conferences (the Kristiania Conferences) to discuss the possibility of establishing international joint governance of the archipelago, with a view to addressing the growing need for regulation and control of coal mining operations. The proposals put forward at the Kristiania Conferences were met with resistance and considered unfeasible. The First World War put an end to further discussions.

Norway then brought the matter into the peace negotiations in 1919, noting that the only “satisfactory and lasting solution would be to return the archipelago to Norway”. At the same time, Norway indicated that it would not object to granting certain rights to foreign nationals.

The matter was included on the conference agenda even though the archipelago had not been affected by military operations during the war. A key reason was the losses Norway had suffered during the war despite its neutrality. A significant part of its merchant fleet was sunk, resulting in considerable loss of life and tonnage, while Norway had secured uninterrupted communication and supply lines by sea throughout the war. The great powers felt they owed Norway a debt of gratitude, while at the same time expressing an understanding for the Norwegian arguments presented to the Peace Conference. US Secretary of State Lansing had previously indicated that a final clarification of sovereignty over Svalbard, in Norway’s favour, would be one of the prerequisites for lasting peace in Europe. In 1919, Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ihlen assured that Norway would not create any difficulties with regard to Denmark’s claim to Greenland. Part of the mutual understanding with the Danes was that Denmark would also refrain from creating any difficulties with regard to Norway’s claim to Svalbard.

Various proposals for solutions were discussed. The commission tasked with considering the matter rejected a proposal that Norway should only administer the archipelago on behalf of the international community. Instead, the commission unanimously decided to recognise full Norwegian sovereignty over Svalbard, subject to certain conditions. In doing so, the Conference rejected any notion that the territory should be administered by Norway on behalf of other states. The Treaty was also opened for accession by any state through a simple notification procedure. This provided a means of quickly gaining broad support for this final clarification of the issue of sovereignty. This is essential for both the understanding and interpretation of the Svalbard Treaty.

The outcome of the negotiations is reflected in Article 1 of the Svalbard Treaty, which recognises Norway’s “full and absolute sovereignty” over Svalbard. Norway has full jurisdiction over Svalbard in accordance with the general rules of international law. The Svalbard Treaty stipulates certain limitations imposed by international law on Norway’s right to exercise authority. This is discussed below.

The states that signed the Treaty on 9 February 1920 were Norway, the United States, Denmark, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Sweden. Since then, a number of other states have acceded to the Treaty.

The Soviet Union formally recognised Norwegian sovereignty over the archipelago in an exchange of notes with Norway in 1924. The recognition was unconditional, 11 years before the Soviet Union joined the treaty in 1935. As stated in the communication, the recognition entailed that the Soviet Union would not raise any future objections to the Treaty.

Source: Norwegian Polar Institute

Principles of interpretation

Article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties specifies the general rule of interpretation for treaties. The provision states that a treaty must be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose. Norway is not a party to the Vienna Convention, however, the rule of interpretation expresses customary law by which all states are bound.

The principles of international law for treaty interpretation provide a methodical approach based on the wording of the treaty, whereby provisions are read in context and are supported in other objective sources for the parties’ intentions. An expression may be given a special meaning – i.e., a meaning that differs from ordinary usage in international state and treaty practice – only if it can be established that this was the intention of the parties.

Therefore, in line with general principles of international law governing treaty interpretation, the Svalbard Treaty shall primarily be interpreted on the basis of the terms and expressions in the actual text. The original texts of the Treaty are in French and English. It is the wording of these texts that determines the legal content of the Treaty. These texts form the basis for interpreting the rights and obligations set forth in the Treaty, and no interpretative weight may be accorded to translations, including into Norwegian.

The starting point for interpretation is the ordinary, contextual, linguistic understanding of the terms and expressions in the Treaty. The wording of the Treaty expressly states that Norway shall have full sovereignty. The wording and expressions contained in the Treaty also clearly indicate the geographical scope of application for the respective provisions.

Geographical scope

The Svalbard archipelago is geographically defined in the Svalbard Treaty as all the islands, islets and skerries located between the geographical coordinates 10° and 35° E longitude and 74° and 81° N latitude. The wording makes clear that only the actual islands within these coordinates are covered; i.e., the land territory and not the surrounding maritime areas.

It is clear from the wording of certain provisions in the Treaty that they apply to both the land territory and the territorial waters. The latter consists of internal waters and the territorial sea.

When the Treaty entered into force, Norway had territorial sea extending four nautical miles. In 2004, the territorial sea was extended to 12 nautical miles from the baselines. Thereby, the Treaty provisions applicable to the territorial waters also became applicable to the area between four and 12 nautical miles.

The special rules stipulated in the Treaty do not apply to the continental shelf or in zones that were created in accordance with provisions in the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea governing exclusive economic zones. This follows from the wording of the Treaty and is supported by the background of the Treaty and by its development and system.

There is a significant difference between the territorial waters and the maritime zones beyond its outer limits. Unlike the territorial waters, the continental shelf and the 200 nautical mile zones are not part of Norwegian territory. Therein, Norway only has specifically defined rights that follow from the Law of the Sea.

The Supreme Court of Norway has confirmed the understanding that the provisions concerning equal treatment in Articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty do not apply to the continental shelf beyond the territorial waters. This was clarified in a case concerning a ban on the harvesting of snow crab on the Norwegian continental shelf. In a unanimous ruling on 20 March 2023 (HR-2023-491-P), the Supreme Court, sitting in grand chamber, ruled that a Latvian shipping company did not have an equal right to harvest snow crab on the Norwegian continental shelf off Svalbard.

Treaty limitations on the exercise of authority

In Article 1 of the Svalbard Treaty, Norwegian sovereignty is recognised on the terms set forth in the Treaty. Limitations have not been placed on sovereignty as such, but rather on how Norwegian authority may be exercised in certain specifically defined areas. Thus, Norway has an exclusive right to exercise authority in these areas as well.

Norway’s obligations under the Svalbard Treaty are especially linked to three issues. These involve specifically defined requirements concerning equal treatment, collection of taxes and duties, and military matters.

Equal treatment/non-discrimination

Under the Svalbard Treaty, Norway has an obligation to ensure equal rights for nationals and companies from States Parties in areas defined in the Treaty. This is a requirement of non-discrimination based on nationality for persons and on national affiliation for companies. Among the areas covered are hunting and fishing, access to the archipelago, engaging in certain types of commercial and industrial activity, and property rights including mineral rights.

Nationals or companies from States Parties may not be placed at a disadvantage compared to Norwegian nationals or companies in these areas, and no distinction is permitted between nationals or companies from States Parties on the basis of nationality.

Although the Treaty prohibits discrimination based on nationality in specified areas, it does not provide unlimited or unconditional liberty for any party to engage in activities in these areas. The rule concerning equal treatment is not an obstacle to regulating or, if necessary, prohibiting an activity for other reasons. The right to issue such regulations derives from Norway’s sovereignty. The Norwegian authorities are generally concerned with ensuring sound regulation of activities in Svalbard. The regulation of various forms of activities is discussed in the remaining chapters of the white paper.

The Svalbard Treaty presupposes observance of local regulations as a condition for exercising some of the rights specified in the Treaty; e.g., in Article 3 concerning certain types of commercial activity.

The requirement of non-discrimination does not apply to all types of activity in Svalbard, but only to the areas specifically set forth in articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty. Hunting and fishing and maritime, industrial, mining and commercial operations are covered by the requirement for equal treatment. What the requirement for equal treatment covers in each individual case must be determined based on an interpretation of the Treaty, in accordance with the principles on, among other things, wording and context, as mentioned above. Examples of activities that are not covered by the right to equal treatment are research, education and aviation.

The equal right of access to the archipelago does not prevent Norway from inspecting persons travelling to and from the archipelago and requiring such persons to identify themselves. Norway may also refuse entry or expel persons who are nationals of States Parties, provided such measures are not based on nationality. For example, the Svalbard Treaty does not preclude the refusal of entry or expulsion of persons who are unable to financially support themselves.

To the extent the Norwegian authorities stipulate regulations for or practice equal treatment in areas other than those mentioned in the Treaty, it is done so for reasons other than obligations under international law.

Taxes, duties, etc.

Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 8 in the Svalbard Treaty, Norway is obliged to adopt mining regulations. The Mining Code was established by Norway by the Royal Decree of 7 August 1925. The second paragraph of Article 8 of the Svalbard Treaty stipulates that taxes, dues and duties levied shall be devoted exclusively to Svalbard and shall not exceed what is required for the object in view. According to its wording, Article 8 applies specifically to mining activities. Furthermore, such taxes, dues and duties must be used to the exclusive benefit of Svalbard, and may not be used for purposes on the mainland. However, as long as the effect of the use of such revenues occurs in Svalbard, it follows from the wording and intent of the provision that the actual spending of tax revenues may occur elsewhere, such as in the case of purchases of equipment etc. made on the mainland for use in Svalbard.

The purpose of such taxation is to meet needs in Svalbard, and such needs are a discretionary matter. Administration, public services and infrastructure, such as airports and search and rescue services, are needs that warrant such taxation. Previous deficits in the Svalbard budgets may be covered by such taxation, since these are central government expenditures for operations, measures, investments, etc. that have exclusively benefited Svalbard.

The restrictions in the second paragraph of Article 8 do not cover payment for public services where there is legal basis to require such payment. Payment for private services in accordance with an agreement is also not covered by the restrictions.

Pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 8, Norway may levy an export duty on exports of minerals, and instructions have been issued on how much duty is payable.

In practice, Norway has chosen to maintain a generally low level of taxes and duties in Svalbard, including for activities other than mining. This policy has contributed to the development of businesses and communities in Svalbard.

Use for warlike purposes, and other military matters

By virtue of its sovereignty, Norway also has full right of control of military and defence matters. However, Article 9 of the Svalbard Treaty sets out limitations with regard to establishing – or permitting the establishment of – naval bases, constructing fortifications, and using Svalbard for warlike purposes. These limitations – and particularly the prohibition against use for warlike purposes – must be viewed in light of the preamble of the Treaty. Therein, the States Parties express that in recognising Norwegian sovereignty they desire for Svalbard to be “provided with an equitable regime” to assure the archipelago’s development and peaceful utilisation.

The prohibition against using Svalbard for warlike purposes is generally applicable and applies to all States Parties. By virtue of its sovereignty, Norway has a special duty to ensure the inviolability of this prohibition.

However, Article 9 is not a blanket ban on all military activity. It only applies to the construction of naval bases or infrastructure that can be classified as fortifications, as well as activities that have warlike purposes. Defensive measures and other military measures are permitted. The archipelago is covered by provisions of the North Atlantic Treaty, including Article 5 concerning collective self-defence. Norway may unilaterally and collectively implement defensive measures in wartime or under the threat of war.

The prohibition against fortification pertains to specific physical structures that are reinforced to withstand attack and that are usually equipped with artillery positions. Therefore, it does not affect all installations or structures of a military nature or significance.

The prohibition against naval bases entails that no permanent military installation may be established for the purpose of stationing and provisioning military vessels with supplies or services normally offered at a naval base. However, the provision poses no obstacle to the Norwegian Coast Guard or other vessels making port calls in Svalbard to receive services and supplies from civilian suppliers, as needed.

Visits by Norwegian naval vessels, Coast Guard vessels, Armed Forces’ aircraft or Norwegian military personnel do not infringe the Treaty and are in keeping with long-standing practice.

Norwegian policy has been designed to ensure proper compliance with the Treaty and a restrictive practice with regard to Norwegian military activities in Svalbard. Aspects such as frequency and duration, the nature of the units and the need to carry out the mission have been given particular weight in the practical handling of issues concerning military visits to the archipelago. For example, frequent calls by Norwegian Coast Guard vessels are deemed natural, given the nature of their duties in the maritime areas surrounding Svalbard.

All foreign military activity in Svalbard without the consent of Norway is prohibited, and would constitute a gross infringement of Norwegian sovereignty. Unless they are involved in innocent passage through the territorial sea, foreign military and civilian government vessels wishing to enter the Norwegian territorial waters around Svalbard must apply for diplomatic clearance well in advance. The same applies to port calls in Svalbard and to aircraft overflights and landings at airports. The requirement for such clearance derives from general international law, but for the sake of clarity it is also laid down in the Regulations of 2 May 1997 concerning access and entry to Norwegian territory in peacetime for foreign military and civilian government vessels.

Norwegian authorities practice a highly restrictive policy with regard to granting diplomatic clearance to foreign military aircraft and vessels. Foreign government craft with military purposes are not granted diplomatic clearance. Dispensation may be granted on certain conditions to foreign aircraft that are registered as military aircraft, but that are being used for civilian purposes. That may be the case, for example, when Norwegian authorities invite high-level representatives of foreign government authorities to Svalbard for civilian purposes and the use of scheduled or other civilian aircraft is impractical or impossible. An additional requirement is that government craft used in such a manner must have a civilian appearance.

In a 1971 declaration to States Parties, Norway stated that the airport in Longyearbyen “is to be reserved exclusively for civil aviation”. This declaration was issued independently of the Svalbard Treaty and is a self-imposed restriction. The purpose of a flight will determine whether or not it is deemed “civil aviation”. Consequently, military aircraft on civilian missions may be granted permission to use the airport. For example, permission is granted to the Norwegian Armed Forces’ aircraft in connection with search and rescue operations, coastguard operations and training flights for such operations.

The prohibition against using Svalbard for warlike purposes has been taken into account in the regulation of ground stations in Svalbard. The Regulation concerning satellite ground stations in Svalbard of 21 April 2017 no. 493, stipulates that it is not permitted to use a ground station to transmit data to or download data from a satellite that performs functions specifically for military purposes, or if the downloaded data in whole or in part is made available for military purposes. This avoids situations where it can be called into question whether ground stations in Svalbard are being used for warlike purposes.

Research

The Svalbard Treaty does not regulate research activities. Nationals of States Parties have neither a right nor equal right to conduct research activities in the archipelago. Since the 1960s, Norwegian authorities have chosen to actively facilitate international polar research in Svalbard by, among other things, developing Ny-Ålesund as a research platform. Research activities in Svalbard must be conducted in accordance with relevant Norwegian legislation, including the Svalbard Environmental Protection Act. This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

Article 5, second paragraph of the Treaty stipulates that conventions shall be concluded laying down the conditions under which scientific investigations may be conducted. The provision says nothing about which conditions must apply; nor was this ever followed up. There has been an increase in the number of international cooperation agreements, projects and networks of significance for scientific research in Svalbard over the past decade. It is no longer relevant to negotiate separate agreements on the conditions for scientific research in the archipelago. It is therefore up to the Norwegian authorities, by virtue of Norway’s sovereignty, to regulate research activity.

Scientific marine research is regulated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Normally, coastal states must consent to foreign scientific research in their maritime areas. However, this does not apply within the territory of a state. Norway is therefore free to refuse or set limitations on research in the territorial waters around Svalbard.

2.2.3 Interrelation with certain international agreements

The EEA Agreement and the Schengen Agreement

When Norway ratified the EEA (European Economic Area) Agreement in 1992, Svalbard was excluded from its scope of application because of the special circumstances ensuing from Norway’s international legal obligations under the Svalbard Treaty. However, the free trade agreements between Norway and the European Economic Community and the EFTA Convention are applicable to Svalbard.

The Schengen Agreement was entered into in 1985. The purpose of the agreement is to abolish border posts and border controls between member states and reinforce external border controls. Norway acceded to the Schengen Agreement in 1996. As a consequence of the provision in Article 3 of the Svalbard Treaty governing access, Svalbard is not covered by the agreement concerning association with the Schengen cooperation.

The WTO Agreement, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

No general reservations concerning Svalbard were made in connection with the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO was established on the basis of the previously concluded General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which entered into force on 1 January 1948. Similarly, GATT contains no reservations for Svalbard. Among GATT’s key objectives are non-discrimination and the reduction and elimination of tariff and trade barriers, and in essence the agreement harmonises with the Svalbard Treaty’s provisions related to non-discrimination.

2.3 Legislation

2.3.1 Introduction

Legislation is a key policy instrument for achieving the objectives of Svalbard policy, and is necessary to manage social development within the framework of these objectives. Important acts and regulations for the implementation of Svalbard policy are also described in more detail in Chapter 3 “Climate and environment”, Chapter 4 “Societal development and commercial activity in Longyearbyen” and Chapter 6 “Civil protection, search and rescue and emergency preparedness”.

Activity in Svalbard is increasing. This situation, in conjunction with rapid climate change and more varied activities in several local communities, contribute to the need for renewing and developing the legislation governing the archipelago.

This chapter reviews the principles of the legislation governing Svalbard. The chapter also discusses various areas of law of particular significance to the development of society, and a description of legislative work in specific areas.

2.3.2 Legislative principles

By virtue of its sovereignty, Norway can make all legislation governing the mainland applicable to Svalbard. The Svalbard Treaty stipulates certain limitations imposed by international law on Norway’s right to exercise authority. See section 2.2 for a more detailed discussion of the international legal frameworks.

In previous white papers on Svalbard, it has been established that the legal framework for Svalbard should be as similar as possible to that of the mainland and that new legislation governing the mainland should as, a general rule, be applied to Svalbard unless special circumstances indicate otherwise or there is a need for exceptions or adaptations. Another important point of departure is that, in general, all legislation applicable to Svalbard should be applied and enforced equally throughout the entire archipelago. This forms the basis for the Government’s legislative work for Svalbard.

However, not all legislation is automatically made applicable to Svalbard. Section 2 of the Svalbard Act sets out the methodological basis for the applied regulatory technique. The first paragraph states that Norwegian civil and penal law and the Norwegian legislation relating to the administration of justice apply to Svalbard, where nothing to the contrary has been provided. The Svalbard Act contains no definition of the term “civil law”, but it is generally considered to be a generic term for all regulation of the relationship between private parties.

Section 2, second paragraph states that other statutory provisions do not apply to Svalbard unless specifically provided. This means that other legislation, which in practice is referred to as public law, only applies where this is specifically provided.

The requirement that it must be “specifically provided” that legislation applies to Svalbard is understood to require a reasonably clear basis for applicability to the archipelago in legislation or the preparatory works, cf. the Supreme Court of Norway’s ruling in Rt. 2007 p. 801 Nordpol Telecom. In the ruling, it was stated that it would be particularly important to state that the issue of application to Svalbard has been specifically considered.

New legislation cannot always be applied to Svalbard without adaptations being made. Particularly in the case of public law, it must be decided whether the legislation in question is suitable for Svalbard and whether there is a need for local adaptations. For instance, there may be a need for transitional arrangements or for the legislation to enter into force for Svalbard at a later date. Other forms of phasing-in may also be necessary, e.g., because of local businesses’ needs for restructuring. Adaptations may be necessary due to, e.g., international legal obligations or administrative, climatic or geographical conditions. Regarding administrative conditions, adaptations may be necessary due to the fact that there are no administrative bodies in Svalbard equivalent to those on the mainland. In recent years, there has been a trend towards expert bodies and other authorities with supervisory responsibility on the mainland also being responsible for supervision in Svalbard. The Governor of Svalbard assists in the implementation of such supervision. It is not desirable to develop expert roles with the Governor of Svalbard that can be managed by expert bodies and authorities on the mainland. The Government believes this is an appropriate way to structure supervision and will continue this practice.

Previous white papers on Svalbard have discussed whether the principle in Section 2 of the Svalbard Act should be amended so that the starting point would be that all legislation applies to Svalbard unless otherwise expressly stated. However, such an amendment has not been deemed necessary. The Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence has supported this position in its consideration of the white papers. The Government sees no reason to amend the principle in Section 2 of the Svalbard Act, and refers to what has been written on this topic in previous white papers.

Section 3 of the Svalbard Act stipulates that certain legislation applies to Svalbard, with the amendments laid down by the King out of regard for the local conditions. This applies, among other things, to the Civil Servants Act, the Working Environment Act, the Postal Act and the Electronic Communications Act.

Furthermore, Section 4 of the Svalbard Act grants the King the authority to issue general regulations concerning the matters mentioned in the provision. Currently, the application of legislation to Svalbard is often regulated in the individual acts, meaning that the authority to issue separate regulations concerning the matters enumerated in Section 4 is used to a lesser extent than before.

Chapter 5 of the Svalbard Act contains rules that apply to Longyearbyen Community Council. Certain provisions that are specifically adapted to Longyearbyen Community Council are provided in the Svalbard Act. Furthermore, the rules of the Local Government Act largely apply correspondingly to Longyearbyen Community Council. Regulations governing the right to vote and eligibility to stand for election are provided in the Regulations relating to elections to Longyearbyen Community Council. In 2022, new regulations were issued on the right to vote and eligibility to stand for election. Persons who are not Norwegian nationals have the right to vote if they have been registered in the National Population Register as residents in a Norwegian municipality for the last three years before they were entered in the Population Register of Svalbard as resident in Longyearbyen. This is due to the fact that a significant proportion of the population moves to Svalbard directly from abroad. It must be ensured that those who manage the local community, and thereby also contribute to the implementation of Norwegian Svalbard policy, have good knowledge and understanding of the frameworks that apply to the administration of Svalbard.

The Svalbard Act was passed in 1925 and has subsequently been amended several times. Many of the Act’s provisions have been repealed. The Government now sees a need to review the Svalbard Act with a view to updating and modernising it, and hereby announces that it will initiate a review of the Act.

2.3.3 EEA rules and Svalbard

The EEA Agreement does not apply to Svalbard. This pertains to the special circumstances ensuing from Norway’s international legal obligations under the Svalbard Treaty. Nevertheless, Norway may choose to apply acts and regulations that implement EEA obligations to Svalbard on a purely national basis. However, the possibility of doing so must be specifically assessed. Rules that presuppose a mutual international legal obligation between states, such as binding cooperation between authorities in the various EEA states, cannot be applied on a purely national basis. Furthermore, specific assessments must be made to determine if it is appropriate to apply the legislation to Svalbard and whether it will affect Norwegian obligations under the Svalbard Treaty. The need for local adaptations should also be considered.

2.3.4 Tax legislation

Svalbard has its own taxation regulations. The Svalbard Taxation Act makes Svalbard a separate area for tax purposes. In Svalbard, salary and pension are taxed at a rate of 8 per cent up to 12 B.a. (B.a. = National Insurance basic amount) and at a rate of 22 per cent for income exceeding 12 G. Other income such as investment income and income from self-employment are taxed at a rate of 16 per cent. The Government will continue the low tax rates for Svalbard. In addition, there are national insurance contributions for employees who are insured under the Norwegian National Insurance Scheme.

It is important that the taxation system in Svalbard is adapted to the conditions in the archipelago and that it is based on solutions that ensure competitive conditions. A basic starting point is that persons resident in Svalbard are subject to global tax liability to Svalbard. However, persons resident abroad who move directly to Svalbard without having previously lived in Svalbard are subject to limited tax liability for the first five years. Furthermore, companies or individuals that conduct commercial activity in Svalbard for at least 30 consecutive days will be liable to pay tax to Svalbard on profits from the commercial activity conducted in Svalbard. The tax liability to Svalbard ceases to apply from and including the income year in which the person has stayed outside Svalbard for more than 183 days in a 12-month period.

Since the last white paper on Svalbard was presented, it has become more common to work from home or engage in other forms of remote work. This is enabled by digital solutions. These circumstances raise questions related to, among other things, where the taxable activity is carried out. The Government will assess whether the Svalbard Taxation Act is adapted to the times and whether there is a need to update the Act. The Government has noted that the Longyearbyen Youth Council is requesting that amendments be made to the Svalbard Taxation Act to make it possible to take odd jobs without having to pay income tax. The Government will investigate a scheme that makes it possible for young people in Svalbard to earn smaller amounts without having to pay income tax.

2.3.5 Regulations relating to the Population Register of Svalbard

Social developments in Svalbard and generally greater mobility than 10–15 years ago make it more challenging to obtain a complete overview of the population, both in Longyearbyen and in the other local communities. Increasing mobility and population growth in Longyearbyen impact, among other things, emergency preparedness and regional planning, including the scaling of services and infrastructure such as housing, energy and water. Therefore, it is important to have an overview of the number of inhabitants.

The Regulations relating to the Population Register of Svalbard were adopted in 1994, and the legislation has since remained largely unchanged. The Government believes there is a need to review the Regulations relating to the Population Register of Svalbard.

Such a review should, among other things, scrutinise the requirement of a period of residence in Svalbard in order to be registered as a permanent resident. Questions that need to be considered are whether documentation of the basis for the stay should be required, and whether a requirement should be introduced that settlement can only be registered in dwellings that are designated for residential purposes. Measures should also be considered that can lead to improved compliance with the obligation to report relocation to, within and from Svalbard.

2.3.6 Immigration legislation, control of border and movement of goods and citizenship legislation

Article 3 of the Svalbard Treaty imposes an international legal obligation on Norway to treat nationals of States Parties equally in certain areas. This applies to access to the archipelago, among other things. In practice, Norway has not discriminated between nationals of States Parties and nationals of non-States Parties. The legislation regulating foreign nationals’ access and entry to the realm is not suitable in Svalbard. Therefore, the Immigration Act and Regulations issued pursuant to the Act have not been made applicable to Svalbard.

No work permit, residence permit or visa is required for travel to Svalbard. Furthermore, Svalbard is not included in the Schengen cooperation. The rules governing entry and exit control across the external Schengen border therefore apply to travel between the Norwegian mainland and Svalbard. When crossing the Schengen external border, all persons are required to submit to entry and exit checks, cf. Section 13, second paragraph of the Border Act and Section 1-3 of the Border Regulations. Foreign nationals staying in Svalbard must, in the same manner as other foreign nationals, comply with the rules in the Border Act and Immigration Act when traveling between the mainland and Svalbard. Foreign nationals subject to visa requirements must have a visa when travelling to the mainland. Currently, the Governor of Svalbard issues such visas upon application, in accordance with Section 13 of the Immigration Act.

In 2022, rules regarding identity checks were introduced in the Regulations relating to the control of travellers to and from Svalbard. The Regulations apply to checks carried out in Svalbard. The purpose of such checks is, among other things, to prevent cross-border crime and maintain public order. Travellers to and from Svalbard must submit to checks when requested by the Governor of Svalbard. Checks may be carried out upon arrival in and departure from Svalbard, where the traveller reports or is encountered, and in the territorial sea aboard vessels travelling to or from port or internal waters. The Svalbard Treaty’s provision concerning access in Article 3 does not preclude such checks.

Svalbard is not part of the customs territory, which consists of the mainland and adjacent territorial waters. Svalbard is established as a separate customs area in the Regulations relating to the control of movement of goods in Svalbard. The Regulations are issued pursuant to Section 1-2, sixth paragraph of the Movement of Goods Act. The Svalbard customs area includes Svalbard and its adjacent territorial waters. The Regulations contain rules on the tasks of the customs authorities and provisions on the control of movement of goods. See section 6.4.2 for a more detailed discussion of the topic of control of travellers and the movement of goods.

The Government has decided to carry out a review of the Citizenship Act. One question in this regard is whether the Citizenship Act should apply to Svalbard, and to what extent it should be possible to accumulate a period of residence in Svalbard. The Integration Act regulates introduction programs and other regulatory measures for newly arrived immigrants. The Act is not suitable for Svalbard and is therefore not applicable to the archipelago.

2.3.7 Legislation governing refusal of entry or stay and expulsion

There is no unconditional right to stay in Svalbard even if a visa is not required. The Governor of Svalbard may, among other things, refuse entry to or expel persons who lack sufficient entails to remain in Svalbard or who are unable to adequately care for themselves. Persons suspected or convicted of having contravened laws that apply to Svalbard may also be refused entry or expelled under certain conditions. This follows from the Regulations relating to the refusal of entry or stay and to the expulsion of persons from Svalbard. These Regulations were issued pursuant to Section 4 of the Svalbard Act. The Regulations also contain provisions concerning expulsion.

The Regulations also stipulate that persons arriving in Svalbard shall be refused entry or stay by the Governor of Svalbard upon entry or subsequently when necessary to implement binding decisions issued by the UN Security Council or when the person is subject to international restrictive measures that contain travel restrictions that Norway has aligned itself with and which have been implemented for the rest of the country. The Immigration Act is a key component of the system that implements travel restrictions on the mainland. Therefore, it is appropriate to regulate the implementation of entry restrictions in the Regulations relating to refusal of entry or stay.

2.3.8 Social Insurance legislation and general health legislation

In order for a person to be entitled to receive benefits from the National Insurance Scheme, it is a prerequisite that they are or have been insured under the National Insurance Scheme, or that they have derived rights from someone who is or has been insured under the National Insurance Scheme. Section 2-3 of the National Insurance Act contains a special provision on insurance under the National Insurance Scheme for persons living in Svalbard.

Persons who are insured under the National Insurance Scheme upon arrival in Svalbard retain their insurance if they settle or take up residence in Svalbard, cf. Section 2-3, first paragraph. Pursuant to Section 2-3, second paragraph, persons who are not insured under the Norwegian National Insurance Scheme prior to their stay in Svalbard will become compulsory insured under the National Insurance Scheme if they are employed by a Norwegian employer that operates in Svalbard. The compulsory insurance is maintained as long as the person is employed by a Norwegian employer, and for up to one month after the end of the employment, if the person remains in Svalbard during this period. Only employees may become members. Freelancers, owners of sole proprietorships and self-employed persons are not covered.

Insurance under Section 2-3, second paragraph of the National Insurance Act does not in itself entail a right to all benefits regulated in the National Insurance Act. Furthermore, the specific conditions for the benefits in question must be met. For example, a prerequisite for entitlement to unemployment benefits is that the person is considered a genuine job seeker. For third-country nationals, this entails that they must first have a residence permit in mainland Norway. Secondly, the residence permit must grant the holder the right to engage in any type of work in Norway, which migrant workers normally do not have. Therefore, third-country nationals will not be entitled to unemployment benefits in Svalbard.

The Child Benefit Act and the Cash Benefit Act apply to children staying in Svalbard who are insured under the National Insurance Scheme pursuant to Section 2-3 of the National Insurance Act, cf. Section 3 of the Child Benefit Act and Section 2, third paragraph of the Cash Benefit Act. The Government will assess whether the arrangements for Svalbard are appropriate or whether they should be adapted in line with the objective of maintaining Norwegian communities on the archipelago. See a further discussion in section 4.2.

In 2015, a number of health acts and regulations were made wholly or partially applicable to Svalbard, cf. the Regulations relating to the application of health acts and regulations for Svalbard and Jan Mayen. Among other things, the acts relating to health personnel, health supervision, the specialist health service and control of communicable diseases have been applied in whole or in part. Neither the Health and Care Services Act nor the Patient and User Rights Act are applicable, as the provision of services on the archipelago is intended to be limited.

The County Governor of Troms and Finnmark oversees health personnel and the health service in Svalbard. The structuring of health services in Svalbard is discussed in more detail in section 4.3.2.

2.3.9 General overview of economic and social rights in the kindergarten and education sectors, and the principle of the best interests of the child

The human rights provisions enshrined in the Constitution of Norway are applicable to Svalbard. However, the unique circumstances and framework conditions in Svalbard have consequences for the requirements set for the fulfilment of rights in the area of education. Article 109 of the Constitution on the right to education and Article 98 on equality under the law are particularly relevant for education. According to Section 2 of the Human Rights Act, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) have the force of Norwegian law. The Human Rights Act applies to Svalbard, cf. Section 5. Article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Article 13 of the ICESCR concern the right to education. Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on the right of persons with disabilities to education is also relevant in this context.

The abovementioned human rights provisions are general in nature. Norway complies with its human rights obligations in relation to all persons staying in Svalbard. However, the unique circumstances and framework conditions that apply to staying in the archipelago entail that not all rights can be fulfilled in the same manner on Svalbard as on the mainland. The unique conditions in Svalbard may also entail that any differential treatment is objective and proportionate, and thereby not contrary to the various anti-discrimination provisions in human rights law.

It follows from Article 104 of the Constitution of Norway and Article 3(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child that the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration for all actions and decisions that affect children. What is in the best interests of the child must be decided specifically. When deciding whether to settle in Svalbard, a strong consideration should be the fact that the provision of public services, including schooling, is limited. Parents have the primary responsibility for ensuring that the interests of children staying in Svalbard are preserved. It is particularly important that parents familiarise themselves with the structuring of public services in Svalbard prior to settling there. Because the provision of public services is limited, it may not always be in the best interests of the child to live in Svalbard. This may especially apply to foreign nationals who, for various reasons, are unable to make use of the services offered on the mainland. However, Norwegian nationals must also take into account that public services are not fully developed in Svalbard.

If individuals require services beyond those available in Longyearbyen, they will have to contact their municipality or county authority on the mainland, or their home country if this is not Norway. This also applies to areas other than kindergarten and school.

2.3.10 The Education Act and the Kindergarten Act etc.

As announced in the previous white paper, a more detailed review and clarification of Longyearbyen Community Council’s obligations under the Education Act and the Kindergarten Act has been carried out. By the Royal Decree of 17 June 2022, the Government issued new Regulations relating to primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education in Longyearbyen and new Regulations relating to kindergarten activities in Longyearbyen. The regulations entered into force on 1 August 2022 and apply within the Longyearbyen planning area.

Only Longyearbyen Community Council is permitted to operate primary, lower secondary and kindergarten activities in Longyearbyen. The Community Council is not required to provide upper secondary education, but may choose to provide this service. The right to an individually adapted kindergarten service does not apply in Longyearbyen.

The objective is for children and young people in Longyearbyen to receive high-quality kindergarten and school services that form the basis for their continuing education and working life. The special framework conditions for Longyearbyen restrict the scale of kindergarten and school services and thereby guide residents’ expectations in this regard. Certain rules in the Education Act and the Kindergarten Act that apply in Longyearbyen have been adapted to the local conditions in Svalbard. Among other things, more detailed rules have been issued on the right and obligation to attend primary and lower secondary education and a limited right to special education in the primary and lower secondary school. The legislation sets the frameworks for the available educational provisions in Longyearbyen. This includes instructions that the provision of services is not to be expanded. Longyearbyen Community Council is not required to offer a homework help service, after-school care, school camp or school of music and performing arts.

Parents have an independent responsibility to ensure that their children’s needs are met in Longyearbyen. Various rules in the Education Act and the Kindergarten Act affecting children and young people with special needs for adaptation are partially applied or not applied in Longyearbyen. The educational and kindergarten provisions are not to compensate for services that are not available in Longyearbyen. This may entail that children and young people whose needs cannot be met in Longyearbyen will have to travel to the mainland or their home country for their special needs to be accommodated.

The new Education Act was adopted by the Storting on 5 June 2023 and is scheduled to enter into force on 1 August 2024. The Government will issue new regulations relating to primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education in Longyearbyen, to ensure that the regulations are adapted to the new Education Act. The substantive content of the current Regulations will be retained, entailing a continuation of the limited provision of services.

The 2017 Equality and Anti-Discrimination Act is applicable to Svalbard, however, Chapter 3 on universal design and individual adaptation, as well as sections 24, 25 and 26 on active equality efforts with regard to disabilities, do not apply to Svalbard. This represents a continuation of the state of the law under the Anti-Discrimination and Accessibility Act.

The new Child Welfare Act entered into force on 1 January 2023, and applies to Svalbard with the special rules issued in regulations. Foster homes cannot be established or approved in Svalbard. Longyearbyen Community Council does not have the capacity to accommodate children with special needs and problems. Exceptions may be made with the consent of the Office of the Governor of Svalbard or its delegated authority, which will cover the costs of the measures.

2.3.11 On the implementation of international sanctions and export control legislation

The UN Security Council can impose sanctions that are binding as a matter of international law on states, persons or entities. Norway has an obligation to implement such sanctions, an obligation that takes precedence over other obligations under international law. Such obligations apply as much to Svalbard as to the rest of Norway.

The EU adopts sanctions, known as restrictive measures, as part of its common foreign and security policy. Norway has aligned itself with the EU’s restrictive measures with a few exceptions. EU sanctions implemented by Norway apply to Svalbard, unless otherwise stated in the relevant regulations.

The sanctions against Russia are of particular relevance to Svalbard, and these are implemented in the Regulations of 15 August 2014 No. 1076 relating to restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty, independence and stability of Ukraine. The Regulations apply to Svalbard, unless otherwise stated in the individual provision.

In 2021, the Export Control Act was made applicable to Svalbard. The Government has decided to establish a new agency for export control and sanctions by 1 January 2025. The agency will be placed under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

2.3.12 Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping rules

There is currently no clear regulation of accounting, bookkeeping and auditing obligations in Svalbard. Rules governing accounting, bookkeeping and auditing have an important function. Financial statements make it possible to assess the financial development and situation of the reporting entity. A number of stakeholders are dependent on the information that good accounting can provide. Good accounting rules contribute to ensuring that financial statements provide accurate information and ensure that the interests of the various user groups are safeguarded. The Government is of the opinion that accounting, bookkeeping and auditing obligations in Svalbard should be subject to clearer regulation and will prioritise efforts in this regard.

2.3.13 Company and registry legislation in Svalbard

The Private Limited Liability Companies Act, the Public Limited Liability Companies Act, the Partnership Act, the Act relating to the Central Coordinating Register of Legal Entities and the Act relating to the Register of Business Enterprises contain provisions authorising the King to issue regulations on the application of each act to Svalbard. These authorisations have not yet been used. The Government will consider issuing more detailed provisions on the application of company and registry legislation in Svalbard.

2.3.14 The Mining Code for Svalbard

The rules on land claims (mining rights) are regulated in more detail in the 1925 Mining Code for Svalbard, and they regulate the relationship between claim holders, the relationship with the landowner, the obligation to work a claim, etc. Possession of a claim does not confer the right to encroach on Svalbard’s natural environment. Establishing mining activities in Svalbard requires a permit under the Svalbard Environmental Protection Act and Regulations issued pursuant to the Act.

Only persons from or companies resident in States Parties to the Svalbard Treaty have the right to acquire mining rights in Svalbard. The Mining Code is based on the principle of first finder’s right. Whoever first discovers a mineral deposit has first right to the find and to demand a land claim (mining rights). The owner of land where a claim has been awarded has a right to participate in the operation at a level of up to 25 per cent. The Mining Code sets minimum requirements for the effort that must be expended to retain a claim. However, the obligation to work a claim is not absolute. On specified terms set forth in the Mining Code, dispensation may be granted from the work obligation. Upon application by the claim holder and recommendation by the Directorate of Mining, a dispensation from the work obligation is granted by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries for five years, which constitutes a work obligation period. If a claim holder has neither fulfilled the work obligation nor applied for and been granted dispensation, the claim lapses at the end of the following calendar year. Others may then apply for new claims in the freed-up area.

Mineral deposits in the territorial waters around Svalbard are covered by the Seabed Minerals Act. When the Act was passed, it was assumed that this area would not be opened for exploration and explotation.

2.3.15 Other legislation

Svalbard has separate Regulations relating to fire protection. In addition, the Act relating to flammable liquids and gases under pressure and the Act relating to explosive goods apply. These acts only apply to Svalbard. In Longyearbyen, the Longyearbyen Community Council manages fire and emergency preparedness in the same manner as the municipalities on the mainland, while the individual enterprises are responsible for this in the other communities. It has been established in Svalbard white papers that legislation governing the mainland generally applies to Svalbard, unless special circumstances indicate otherwise. The Ministry of Justice and Public Security is currently working to make the Fire and Explosion Prevention Act applicable to Svalbard with some adaptations. A draft is scheduled for consultation during 2024.

The Act relating to dog ownership currently does not apply to Svalbard, but the Ministry of Agriculture and Food has begun work on regulations relating to the application of the Act to Svalbard.

The Act relating to veterinarians and other animal health personnel does not apply to Svalbard. The Act contains a regulatory authority that allows for the Act or parts thereof to also apply to Svalbard. This authority has not been used, but the Ministry of Agriculture and Food has begun work on regulations relating to the application of the Act to Svalbard.

The Animal Welfare Act is applicable to Svalbard. The Act also authorises the establishment of special rules for Svalbard, taking into account local conditions, including exemptions from the provisions of the Act. This regulatory authority has not been used.

Photo: Tommy Dahl Markussen

2.4 State ownership as a policy instrument in Svalbard

There is a long tradition of state ownership in Svalbard. State ownership of companies, land, infrastructure, property and housing are and have been important instruments in Svalbard policy.

The Government is keen to ensure Norwegian ownership of important infrastructure and property, among other things, both on Svalbard and on the mainland, cf. Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 9 (2022–2023) National control and digital resistance to safeguard national security.

2.4.1 State ownership of companies in Svalbard

The State directly or indirectly owns several companies that have their main activities in Svalbard. The direct ownership currently consists of the state-owned companies Store Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani AS (Store Norske), Kings Bay AS, Bjørnøen AS and the University Centre in Svalbard. The State indirectly owns Svalbard Airport, via Avinor AS. The State also owns shares in other companies with activities of varying scope in Svalbard. The State owns half of Kongsberg Satellite Services (KSAT) indirectly, via Space Norway (which is wholly owned by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries). The other half is owned by the Kongsberg Group, in which the state has a 50.004 per cent stake. KSAT is subject to the Security Act as the company is of vital importance to fundamental national functions. The State also owns 53.97 per cent of the shares in Telenor ASA, which operates in Svalbard via its subsidiary Telenor Svalbard AS.

State ownership of Store Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani AS

Store Norske engages coal mining in Mine 7, housing and commercial property management, logistics services, renewable energy projects and a visitor mine in Svalbard. In addition, Store Norske is responsible for cleaning up the former coal operations in Svea and Lunckefjell. The company was founded in 1916 and the State became the owner of the company in the 1930s.

The State is the owner of Store Norske in order to contribute to ensuring that the Longyearbyen community is maintained and further developed in a manner that supports the objectives of Svalbard policy, cf. Report to the Storting (white paper) No. 6 (2022–2023) A greener and more active state ownership – The State’s direct ownership of companies (ownership report). The State owns 100 per cent of the shares in the company.

In the ownership report, Store Norske is listed as a category 2 company. This category includes companies where the State’s goal is sustainable and with the most efficient possible attainment of public policy goals. These are companies that do not primarily operate in competition with other companies. The State’s public policy goals vary between companies, and for Store Norske, the State’s goals as owner include cost-effective management and development of housing in Longyearbyen. For commercial buildings, industrial operations and other activities, the State’s goal as owner is the highest possible return over time within a sustainable framework. All the company’s activities shall, as the primary consideration, be conducted in support of the Svalbard policy objectives.

The company’s mining operations have been gradually reduced in recent years, and the remaining operations in Mine 7 are scheduled for closure in the summer of 2025. The closure of mining operations has been announced for some time, and Store Norske is working to continuously develop the business within the framework of Svalbard policy objectives and the State’s objectives as owner. One of Store Norske’s strategic initiatives has been the rental and management of residential and commercial buildings, and in 2021 and 2022 Store Norske acquired Hurtigruten Svalbard’s homes and hotels in Longyearbyen and Huset. Store Norske owns around 40 per cent of the homes in Longyearbyen.

As the owner of Store Norske, the State is keen to understand what role the company can play in the local energy transition and whether there are opportunities for the transition to contribute to synergies for the local community. The Government intends to take greater responsibility for energy supply in Longyearbyen, e.g., through Store Norske, and clarify responsibility for energy supply as soon as possible. The Government has commissioned Store Norske to carry out a concept study of the various alternatives for future power supply in Longyearbyen and a condition assessment of existing infrastructure.

2.4.2 Ownership and management of land

The State is the largest landowner in Svalbard, and directly owns 98.75 per cent of all land via the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. Trust Arktikugol and AS Kulspids own 0.4 per cent and 0.1 per cent of the land, respectively. The State also owns 0.75 per cent of the land in Svalbard through its ownership of Kings Bay AS and Bjørnøen AS.

Since 2020, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries has managed the state-owned land in Svalbard directly, from a local office in Longyearbyen. This includes the areas that make up the Longyearbyen planning area. All use of state-owned land in Svalbard requires the consent of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and the Ministry sets requirements and premises for the use of the land. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries also manages the ownership of a number of buildings constructed on state-owned land. By managing the ownership of the land, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries facilitates activities that support the objectives of Svalbard policy.

Consideration will be given to whether Kings Bay AS and Bjørnøen AS’ ownership rights to the land in Ny-Ålesund and on Bjørnøya should be transferred to the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries in order to consolidate state management of the land on Svalbard.

2.4.3 Ownership of homes

State control of housing is an important tool to contribute to maintaining Norwegian communities on the archipelago. More than 70 per cent of the housing stock in Longyearbyen is owned by public and partly public owners, via Store Norske Boliger AS (a subsidiary of Store Norske), Statsbygg, Telenor, KSAT and Longyearbyen Community Council. The housing supply is a key policy instrument for managing and stabilising development in Longyearbyen in accordance with the objectives of Svalbard policy. See section 4.6.1 on the Government’s housing policy in Longyearbyen.

2.4.4 Ownership of infrastructure

There are significant national interests associated with the archipelago, which indicate a strong government involvement in infrastructure. Furthermore, infrastructure at an appropriate level is a prerequisite for commercial activity and value creation, security and emergency preparedness, as well as good social development. Chapter 4 provides a description of infrastructure, including ports, airports, water, power supply, etc.

State ownership of important infrastructure in Svalbard facilitates long-term planning and development of the archipelago in line with the objectives of Svalbard policy. It is important that the use of state-owned infrastructure supports these objectives.

2.5 Budget and financial policy instruments in Svalbard

2.5.1 The rationale for a separate Svalbard budget

Funds are transferred to Svalbard both via the Svalbard budget itself and via the various government ministries’ chapters in the National Budget.

The Ministry of Justice and Public Security coordinates and presents an annual budget proposition, Proposition to the Storting 1 S (Draft Resolution) Svalbard Budget, to highlight revenues and expenses in Svalbard. The proposition also provides an overview of the Government’s initiatives and priorities pertaining to Svalbard, as well as an annual summary of developments on the archipelago. The arrangement involving a separate Svalbard Budget will be continued.

2.5.2 Developments in the budget

Government expenditure in Svalbard exceeds corresponding government revenue. A subsidy is therefore provided each year in the National Budget to cover the deficit in the Svalbard Budget.

Since the previous white paper was presented, there has been a steady development in tax revenues in Svalbard. The subsidy to the Svalbard Budget from the National Budget has varied from year to year, with increases allocated for extraordinary situations and needs. Examples include the increase in avalanche protection in Longyearbyen, as well as COVID-19 and subsequent infection control measures.

The trend has been that Government expenditure in Svalbard has increasingly exceeded revenue, and the difference between revenue and expenditure in Svalbard has increased significantly since 2015. The increase in expenditure reflects both the increase in activity in Svalbard during the period and the fact that Svalbard is and has been a priority. In particular, expenses related to emergency preparedness in Svalbard have increased significantly during the period, including expenses for avalanche protection and expenses for the Governor of Svalbard’s transportation resources.

It is not desirable to facilitate further growth in activity and society, thereby contributing to an increase in the gap between expenses and revenues, nor is it desirable to develop in a manner that creates new demands for greater investments in infrastructure or expansion of services.

¹ Expenses for cleanup in Svea and Lunckefjell are excluded

Source: Proposition to the Storting 1 S (Draft Resolution) The Svalbard Budget for the budget years 2015–2022.

2.5.3 Economic policy instruments in Svalbard

The Government will prepare a proposal for regulations on visitor fees for Longyearbyen aimed at ensuring that tourists contribute more to the funding of expenses related to infrastructure and other public services that are essential for tourism. See section 4.5.2 for more information on visitor fees.

The Government will introduce various incentives to encourage more Norwegians to stay in Longyearbyen and increase their length of stay. This relates in particular to measures that will make it more attractive for Norwegian families with children to settle in Longyearbyen.

2.6 Administration as an instrument in Svalbard policy

2.6.1 Central administration

Until the late 1980s, Longyearbyen was a community characterised by one industry and one large business, which was reflected in the administration of Svalbard. Since then, society and the business sector have become more complex.

All the government ministries currently have a role in formulating and following up Svalbard policy, and several government ministries have subordinate agencies with activities in Svalbard. The government ministries’ sectoral responsibilities apply to Svalbard in the same manner as on the mainland. Cabinet ministers are constitutionally responsible for their respective subject areas in Svalbard in the same manner as in the rest of the country. Good administration of Svalbard requires good coordination of Svalbard issues between government ministries and across administrative levels.

The Interministerial Committee on the Polar Regions

The Ministry of Justice and Public Security has the overall responsibility for coordinating government policy that affects Svalbard, across sectors and administrative levels. An important instrument in this work is the Interministerial Committee on the Polar Regions. The Interministerial Committee on the Polar Regions is a coordinating and consultative body for the consideration of polar issues in the central administration, and serves as a special advisory body for the Government in matters concerning the polar regions. The Committee meets around 10 times a year and works according to its own instructions laid down by the Royal Decree of 18 October 2002. The decision-making authority of the competent ministries and the constitutional responsibility of the cabinet ministers remain the same regardless of whether a case is brought before the Interministerial Committee on the Polar Regions.

2.6.2 The Governor of Svalbard

The Governor of Svalbard is the Government’s highest-ranking representative in the archipelago, and acts in the capacities of both chief of police and county governor. The Governor of Svalbard’s main tasks are search and rescue and emergency preparedness work, responsibility for the police and prosecuting authority and responsibility for environmental management. The Governor of Svalbard participates in the formulation, implementation and follow-up of Svalbard policy.

As chief of police, the Governor of Svalbard is in charge of prosecution and other police activities, and has the same responsibilities and authority as the chiefs of police on the mainland. The overall management of the Governor of Svalbard as chief of police is directly overseen by the Ministry of Justice and Public Security. The National Police Directorate has no authority to issue instructions to the Governor of Svalbard, neither in terms of policing nor financially. The Governor of Svalbard’s police work is carried out, to the extent possible, in accordance with the directives and guidelines issued by the Norwegian Police Service. These instructions are also set out in the Ministry of Justice and Public Security’s main instructions to the Governor of Svalbard.

Having the same authority as a county governor, the Governor of Svalbard carries out a number of civilian tasks delegated by various government ministries. The Governor of Svalbard also serves as the regional and state environmental authority in Svalbard, enforcing environmental legislation and overseeing legislative compliance.

Increased and more diverse activity in and around Svalbard generates additional tasks for the local administration and creates different and new conditions for how the Governor of Svalbard fulfils their mission. For this reason, the sailing season for the Governor of Svalbard’s service vessel has been extended to the whole year. Furthermore, a joint contract has been entered into for the operation of the rescue helicopter base in Tromsø and the Governor of Svalbard’s helicopter service, which provides synergies and a more robust solution. The Governor of Svalbard has been strengthened with a police prosecutor, and the allocation has been increased due to the introduction of identity checks in Svalbard.

2.6.3 Longyearbyen Community Council

Longyearbyen Community Council was established in 2002 and represents local democracy in Longyearbyen. The Council’s jurisdiction is limited to the Longyearbyen planning area as stipulated in the Regulations relating to impact assessments and delimitation of planning areas in Svalbard under the Svalbard Environmental Protection Act. Longyearbyen Community Council carries out important functions in Longyearbyen within the framework of Svalbard policy. The tasks are the same as those of the municipalities, but the area of responsibility is narrower, and fewer welfare services are provided compared to the mainland. As is the case for the municipalities, tasks and responsibilities are governed by special legislation. However, the responsibility for infrastructure is assigned to Longyearbyen Community Council directly via the Svalbard Act. The legal framework for Longyearbyen Community Council is set out in Chapter 5 of the Svalbard Act, which directly applies many provisions of the Local Government Act. Chapter 5 of the Svalbard Act was revised with the new Local Government Act in 2018, but some differences between Longyearbyen Community Council and the municipalities were continued and clarified. An important difference is that Longyearbyen Community Council exercises its authority and activities within national frameworks and the framework of Norwegian Svalbard policy.

2.7 Measures

The Government will:

• Maintain the principle that legislation applicable to Svalbard shall be applied and enforced equally throughout the entire archipelago.

• Maintain the practice that expert bodies with supervisory responsibilities on the mainland carry out supervision in Svalbard with the assistance of the Governor of Svalbard.

• Carry out a review of the Svalbard Act.

• Continue the low tax rates for Svalbard.

• Assess whether the Svalbard Taxation Act is adapted to the times and whether there is a need to update the Act.

• Conduct a review of the Regulations relating to the Population Register of Svalbard, including an assessment of the criteria for being registered as a permanent resident.

• Consider the application of the Citizenship Act to Svalbard in connection with the review of the Act.

• Introduce incentives to make it more attractive for Norwegians to move to and remain in Svalbard.

• Investigate a scheme that enables young people in Svalbard to earn smaller amounts without having to pay income tax.

• Consider whether the child benefit and cash-for-care schemes should be adapted in line with the objective of maintaining Norwegian communities on the archipelago.

• Issue new regulations relating to primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education in Longyearbyen, to ensure that the regulations are adapted to the new Education Act.

• Make the Act relating to dog ownership and the Act relating to veterinarians applicable to Svalbard.

• Prioritise the work of clarifying accounting, bookkeeping and auditing obligations in Svalbard.

• Consider issuing more detailed provisions on the application of company and registry legislation in Svalbard.

• Consider whether Kings Bay AS and Bjørnøen AS’s ownership rights to the land in Ny-Ålesund and on Bjørnøya should be transferred to the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries.

• Use housing policy in Longyearbyen as an instrument in Svalbard policy.

• Consider whether registration at an approved place of residence should be a prerequisite for inclusion in the population register.

• Continue the arrangement involving a separate Svalbard Budget.

• Prepare a proposal for regulations relating to visitor fees for travellers to Longyearbyen.