Nationalisations of the oil industry have been a common occurrence in oil-producing countries. The governments of such countries have typically pursued nationalisation to (re)gain control over domestic oil reserves and to secure a fairer share of the industry’s profits. Somewhat counterintuitively, some import-dependent countries without domestic oil reserves of their own have also sought to nationalise their oil sectors – including Sweden. Jens Millkrantz’s doctoral thesis sheds light on the phenomenon of ‘import-country nationalisations’ by examining the case of Sweden’s attempted oil industry nationalisation during the first half of the twentieth century.
What challenges do you focus on in your research?
“The thesis focuses on how key political, economic and social actors sought to secure Sweden’s access to oil through political intervention. Through an analysis of parliamentary debates, official inquiries and public discourse, the thesis reveals why some actors came to advocate a nationalisation of Sweden’s oil industry – and what ultimately became of their proposals.”
“At the time, actors confronted three main challenges. First, Sweden’s growing dependence on imported oil – and on a handful of powerful international oil companies (IOCs) – posed economic, military and social risks, especially as oil became essential to the emerging welfare state, national defence and continued economic growth. Second, the IOCs operated as a cartel that fixed prices and restricted competition, leading critics to argue that oil products were artificially scarce and expensive. Third, each IOC built its own import, distribution and retail infrastructures, which critics viewed as a wasteful use of capital and resources.”
“The proposal to nationalise the Swedish oil industry emerged as a possible solution to these three problems. Its proponents argued that a state-owned national oil company (NOC) could lower the costs of the industry by ending the cartel, and centralise and rationalise the IOCs’ parallel infrastructures. The lower costs were supposed to translate into lower prices for Swedish oil consumers. The proponents of nationalisation also argued that a NOC would be able to import petroleum products at lower prices than the cartelised IOCs, by importing oil from their independent competitors.”
How do you address the problem?
“Oil dependence and energy security remain vital problems to this day. As does the question of what role the state should have in relation to the market – particularly in the context of the necessary transition away from fossil fuels. Some scholars have argued that nationalisation of fossil fuel companies could be a way of forcibly phasing out fossil fuels. My thesis provides examples of the kinds of organised resistance that such a policy could be expected to encounter. It also demonstrates the challenges involved with advocating for a nationalisation – particularly relating to the difficulties involved with predicting the (economic, trade, and other) consequences of such a policy. These historical lessons are relevant both to advocates of nationalisation and to those seeking to avoid it.”
What are the main findings?
“The study shows that even in oil-poor countries, energy policy can become a stage for broader ideological and social conflicts. The Swedish Social Democrats (SAP) were the main proponents of oil nationalisation. Their motivations evolved over time. They initially framed nationalisation as a pragmatic, non-ideological solution to practical problems (related to fuel taxation and ethanol blending). Over time, however, they began presenting it as a tool to finance welfare reforms and ensure a fair distribution of oil at uniform prices across Sweden. As public debate intensified, the issue became increasingly politicised.”
“Opposition came primarily from organised business interests, right-wing parties and parts of the cooperative movement. Ultimately, the nationalisation proposal was shelved due to strong opposition, a 1947 currency crisis and internal dissent within the broader workers’ movement.”
“The study develops a multidirectional model of politicisation, arguing that political controversies (over energy, for example) often evolve in non-linear and unexpected ways that require historical study to be adequately comprehended.”
What do you hope your research will lead to?
“I hope it will encourage scholars and policymakers to see energy not only as a technical or economic issue, but as a deeply political and historical one. By understanding how societies have grappled with dependence, ownership and control of energy resources in the past, we can better navigate today’s transition toward renewable energy and more democratic energy governance. I also hope that the thesis will lead to a renewed debate about nationalisation as a strategy for steering energy markets towards renewable alternatives – and the positive and negative aspects of nationalisation.”
Read the thesis: Politicising Petroleum: The Political Conflict over the Meaning, Ownership and Operation of the Swedish Oil Industry, 1914–1947
Public defence: 28 November 2025 at 13.15, see link above.
- Senior Researcher, Science, Technology and Society, Technology Management and Economics