Norway rejects proposal to enshrine allemansretten in constitution

A proposal to enshrine the right to access nature, known as “allemannsretten,” in Norway’s constitution was rejected on May 21. Bente Lier, General Secretary of Norway’s Outdoor Life Association, argues that this right should be included in the constitution due to its significance in representing fundamental values and rights. The right has sparked debate; some advocate for its expansion, while others, particularly in the agricultural sector, worry it may impact farming activities. Konrad Kongshaug, a board member of the Farmers’ Union, emphasizes the need to balance outdoor access with the rights of agricultural businesses.

Ola Venås, a sheep farmer in Skei, Gausdal, has noticed increased anxiety among his animals, especially during the summer vacation period, as tourism in the area grows. He highlights the ongoing presence of livestock amidst this tourism surge and mentions that his sheep face stress from loose dogs that chase them, resulting in injuries.

The right to access nature allows individuals in Norway to enjoy the outdoors, regardless of land ownership, but comes with responsibilities. Access is defined in the Outdoor Recreation Act, which stipulates the conditions for both public access to remote areas (utmark) and cultivated lands (innmark).

The proposal for constitutional protection, supported primarily by left-leaning parties, faced rejection from right-leaning political factions. Lier notes that when surveyed, a significant portion of the Norwegian population ranked the right to roam as paramount, surpassing other rights like voting and freedom of expression. However, not all agree that such rights should be enshrined in the constitution.

Kongshaug reassured that the right will not be curtailed but rather emphasized that it should not conflict with farming and grazing rights. Professor Øystein Aas argues that the debate highlights the need for recognizing the dual responsibilities and rights associated with allemansretten, as increased access can adversely affect wildlife and biodiversity.