This presentation offers an in-depth analysis of Denmark, Finland, and Iceland as empirical cases to understand the OECD’s role as a knowledge broker in the region (see Dovemark et al. 2018, 125; Ydesen 2019). The objective of the chapter is to analyze policy flows between the OECD and the three case countries and analyze the political capital created by the OECD and its use in the national contexts. More specifically, it aims to investigate the gearing, entry points, and interactions in the links between the OECD and national institutions in infusing policy change. The methodological approach takes a starting point Foucault’s (1971) idea about bringing knowledge and power into one analytical field, assuming that these two are connected and in interrelation molding each other (Popkewitz & Brennan, 1998). The analysis treats institutions and experts as agents who are positioned in a privileged way that allows them to be the providers of seemingly objective knowledge underpinning education reforms while at the same time exerting and institutionalizing power relations and power discourses in the political field of education reforms. Understanding the workings of this mechanism is vital for understanding the nexus between the OECD and the Nordic region. This is accomplished by offering a typology of the central policy instruments connecting the OECD with each national context and identifying the central institutions associated with these policy instruments (e.g. universities, sector research institutions, and consortia). The analysis is drawn on descriptive statistics of bibliometric data analysis and content analysis of national and Nordic policy documents. Conclusions from the analysis argue that bibliometric reference signals commitment to a policy and that the references are shaped by power relations and in the sense of political capital. There is also support for a hypothesis that the power networks that have been formed transnationally are manifest in the use of references in the documents analyzed. While the OECD role in the references seemed small, the further analysis identified an appreciation of knowledge and an increased importance of national institutions through links to the OECD. This observation raises questions for bibliometric analysis and complex questions for further analysis and conclusions. These findings correspond well with Grek’s (2020) argument about the OECD taking up a position as a boundary organization in the Nordic region. Further studies should now move to unravel the configurations and workings of the nexus or assemblage that creates the basis for this power.

Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. Foucault, M. (1971). Orders of discourse. Social science information, 10(2), 7-30. Grek, S. (2020). Facing “a tipping point”? The role of the OECD as a boundary organisation in governing education in Sweden. Education Inquiry, 11(3), 175–195. Popkewitz, T. S., & Brennan, M. (Eds.). (1998). Foucault’s challenge: Discourse, knowledge, and power in education. Teachers College Press. Ydesen, C. (Ed.). (2019) The OECD’s historical rise in education: The formation of a global governing complex, Global Histories of Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.