The report examines existing education support schemes and their long-term role in promoting social equity. In addition, it evaluates the loan forgiveness schemes offered by the Norwegian State Educational Loan Fund (Lånekassen) and assesses their impact on settlement patterns and the recruitment of students to teacher education programmes.
Main findings part 1 - Social Mobility and Equality of Opportunity
The scope of Norway’s student support system has expanded over time, both in terms of the number of recipients and the total amount of support. Almost all students in higher education receive financial aid, but individuals with highly educated parents and parents with higher incomes receive more support on average than other groups. This is largely because these groups are more likely to enrol in and complete longer study programs, thereby receiving support over a greater number of years. At the same time, substantial socioeconomic differences persist in both participation in and completion of higher education.
The propensity to enter higher education and the level of educational attainment have increased over time for most groups, including those with both highly and less educated parents and those from both high- and low-income families. An important exception is individuals from families with the lowest parental incomes, who have benefited less from the overall expansion in higher education. It is therefore not possible to give an unambiguous answer as to whether educational attainment has
become more equally distributed over time. Individuals with highly educated and high-income parents are more likely to complete long degree programmes, even when analysis is restricted to those who have entered higher education. These individuals also receive more grants and accumulate higher levels of student debt. At the same time, they appear less likely to experience repayment difficulties despite carrying larger debts, and they earn higher incomes after completing their studies.
Student support may have contributed to greater equality of opportunity if it has had a larger impact on the educational decisions of individuals from families with lower levels of education and income. However, the gradual evolution of both educational behaviour and the student support system makes it difficult to determine the extent to which this has been the case. The analyses therefore cannot
provide firm conclusions regarding the overall contribution of the student support system to social mobility. They can, however, shed light on the role of specific support schemes and on long-term trends in educational participation and attainment.
Main findings part 2 - Settlement in the Finnmark and Northern Troms Action Zone
Individuals who live and work in the Finnmark and Northern Troms action zone (Norwegian: innsatssonen) are eligible for partial student loan forgiveness. We examine whether the scheme has encouraged settlement in the action zone by evaluating two policy changes: the increase in the annual loan forgiveness amount in 2005 and the introduction of a dedicated scheme for qualified primary and
lower secondary school teachers in 2017. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compare developments in the action zone with developments in the rest of Troms (excluding Tromsø) and in other rural municipalities, both before and after these policy changes.
We find no clear evidence that the increase in the loan forgiveness amount in 2005 affected settlement patterns. The number of residents with higher education increased somewhat more in the action zone than in the rest of Troms (excluding Tromsø), but the difference is not statistically significant. We also find no effects on the number of working-age residents, the number of children, the in-migration of
recent graduates, or the out-migration of individuals who have fully repaid their student loans.
For the scheme targeting qualified teachers, the number of teachers residing in the action zone has tended to increase relative to the rest of Troms (excluding Tromsø) since 2022. However, this difference is again not statistically significant.
Our findings differ from those of the previous evaluation by Vennemo et al. (2022), which reported a temporary increase in settlement following the 2005 reform. This discrepancy may be explained by differences in how settlement is measured and by our longer observation period. The new loan forgiveness scheme for rural municipalities introduced in 2025 reduces the relative economic advantage of the action zone compared with other rural municipalities. Based on our findings, we do not expect the reform to have substantial effects on settlement in the action zone.
Main findings part 3 - Recruitment to Teacher Education Programmes and the Teaching Profession
Beginning in 2017, graduates of the primary and lower secondary teacher education programmes (GLU 1–7 and GLU 5–10) and the integrated master’s programme for upper secondary education (grades 8–13) became eligible for student loan forgiveness. The scheme provides partial student loan forgiveness to graduates who complete these five-year programmes within the prescribed period and work as teachers for at least three of the first six years after graduation.
We find no evidence that recruitment to the GLU and integrated master’s teacher education programmes increased after the scheme’s introduction in 2017. Compared with a synthetic control group, our estimates indicate a negative effect on recruitment. We do not interpret this as evidence that the loan forgiveness scheme itself reduced recruitment. Rather, the incentive appears insufficient to offset the broader decline in applications to teacher education programmes.
Teacher education programmes not covered by loan forgiveness schemes, such as the childcare teacher education programme, have also experienced declining enrollment since 2020. While recruitment to both affected and unaffected teacher education programmes fell, recruitment to higher education more generally increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Restricting the analysis to the years before 2020 yields an estimated effect on recruitment to the GLU and integrated master’s teacher education programmes close to zero.
Regarding recruitment into the teaching profession, only a limited number of post-reform cohorts are currently available for analysis. Evaluating the scheme’s longer-term effects on entry into the teaching profession will require additional post-reform cohorts and longer follow-up periods after graduation.
Although we find no evidence that the loan forgiveness scheme increased enrolment in GLU and the integrated master’s teacher education program, it may nevertheless increase the proportion of graduates who choose teaching as a profession. Greater entry into teaching among newly qualified teachers is important for mitigating long-term teacher shortages. However, it is still too early to assess
whether the loan forgiveness scheme represents an effective policy instrument for achieving this objective.