Summary
This thesis examines how governments experience and manage turbulence when scaling green industries under the European Green Deal (EGD). Focusing on Denmark and Norway, it compares how turbulence manifests and assesses the role of network governance and EU affiliation in shaping robust governance across three sectors: wind, hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The qualitative comparative case study draws on scholarships relating to turbulence theory, network governance, and multi-level governance. Findings show turbulence is inherent in green industrial governance, but also that its intensity and character vary across the turbulence dimensions of shifting parameters, intercurrence, and temporal complexity. Denmark’s institutionalized public–private networks and EU membership enabled recalibration and adaptation, though risks of administrative overload persist. Norway’s fragmented, market-oriented governance amplified turbulence, with robustness emerging mainly in the state-led Longship CCS project. EU membership enhanced Denmark’s anticipatory and scale capacity, while Norway’s EEA-based affiliation generated turbulence through regulatory uncertainty and legislative delays. The study highlights turbulence as dimension-specific and robustness as an imperfect practice as European countries aim to scale their green industries. This thesis examines how governments experience and manage turbulence when scaling green industries under the European Green Deal (EGD). Focusing on Denmark and Norway, it compares how turbulence manifests and assesses the role of network governance and EU affiliation in shaping robust governance across three sectors: wind, hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The qualitative comparative case study draws on scholarships relating to turbulence theory, network governance, and multi-level governance. Findings show turbulence is inherent in green industrial governance, but also that its intensity and character vary across the turbulence dimensions of shifting parameters, intercurrence, and temporal complexity. Denmark’s institutionalized public–private networks and EU membership enabled recalibration and adaptation, though risks of administrative overload persist. Norway’s fragmented, market-oriented governance amplified turbulence, with robustness emerging mainly in the state-led Longship CCS project. EU membership enhanced Denmark’s anticipatory and scale capacity, while Norway’s EEA-based affiliation generated turbulence through regulatory uncertainty and legislative delays. The study highlights turbulence as dimension-specific and robustness as an imperfect practice as European countries aim to scale their green industries.
Read the Report
Governing green industry in turbulent times
Mille Marie Isaksen Lillemoen
January 2026