ABSTRACT
This contribution reassesses the evolution of the Swedish model since the 1970s across different institutional spheres. It addresses two questions. Firstly, why did a system that was based on strong complementarities undergo such extensive changes? Secondly, what explains Sweden's recent return to strong social and economic performance? The decline of the Swedish model is explained by the endogenous nature of change, which was sparked off by ‘normative dissonances’ that led actors to ‘defect’ from crucial institutions, leading to knock-on effects on other spheres through changing political strategies and macro-level political coalitions. It is further argued that the new complementarities that have emerged after 1995, while providing new sectors with institutional advantages, also contain sources of normative dissonances, which make the long-term viability of the ‘new model’ doubtful.
