Clearer role for business in Sweden’s total defense

For a long time, business representatives have highlighted challenges in relation to the development of Sweden’s total defense. They think it is going too slowly and that it is unclear. But we also see that development is moving forward. There is therefore reason to provide a counter-image to the problems that often dominate the discussion, writes Charlotte Petri Gornitzka, national adviso

For a long time, business representatives have highlighted challenges in relation to the development of Sweden’s total defense. They think it is going too slowly and that it is unclear.

I can understand the frustration, and in the mapping that my colleagues and I are conducting, we also see many challenges. But we also see that development is moving forward. The government’s investments in civil defense have yielded results. There is therefore reason to provide a counter-image to the problems that often dominate the discussion. Some examples:

1. Sweden actually has a model for private-public collaboration in total defense.
   Business leaders often point enviously to Finland, where there is an established model with the Finnish Emergency Preparedness Centre (NESA) as the hub. But similar structures are actually being built up in Sweden as well, and one can already speak of a “Swedish model” for collaboration, with private-public collaboration forums in the preparedness sectors and cross-sectoral business collaboration at county level. Nationally, the model is held together by the government’s cross-sectoral business council for total defence and crisis preparedness.
2. New preparedness sectors make the collaboration structure more complete.
   Parts of the Swedish business community have long lacked clear inputs into total defence. With the government’s decision this summer on two new preparedness sectors – Industry, Construction and Trade and Foreign Trade – this problem is about to be addressed. The new preparedness sectors mean that the structure will be more complete from a preparedness perspective and that more companies will have a natural interface with the authorities.
3. The clearer role of the MSB creates the conditions for a comprehensive development.
   The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has been given a clearer task of coordinating supply preparedness. The agency should also be able to act as a point of contact so that even companies that lack other natural contact points within the public sector in these types of issues can receive support and be guided correctly. With clearer support and coordination, the conditions for a comprehensive development of supply preparedness and private-public collaboration are created.
4. The Armed Forces and MSB have clarified what everyone should plan for.
   A recurring demand from the business community is clear expectations and planning conditions. On behalf of the government, the MSB and the Armed Forces have now jointly developed “Starting points for total defence 2025–2030”. The document – ​​which is completely open – is a support for both public and private actors with examples of seven different situations that each individually and together work for both exercises and planning of measures.
5. The government has announced more money.
   The government has announced that the allocations for security of supply will increase in the coming years. This provides an opportunity to take serious measures together with companies, through agreements of various kinds. It is important that funds are not only allocated to the sectors that have made the most progress, but that there is also the opportunity to make investments in areas that are currently less mature.
6. A proposal for a national strategy for security of supply has been submitted to the government.

The above six pieces of the puzzle now need to be supplemented with a sixth piece of the puzzle in the form of more integrated management of the entire security of supply area. As part of my assignment from the government, I have therefore submitted a proposal for a national strategy for security of supply to the government. It proposes, among other things, three goals:

1 There is a good ability to maintain supply flows of goods and services to, from and within the country.

2 There is a good ability to compensate for disruptions and interruptions in supply flows.

3 There is a good ability to prioritize critical flows and needs in shortage situations.

Based on these goals, I propose just over 20 measures that the authorities should work actively on. This involves everything from removing border barriers and improving conditions for trade, to strengthening municipalities and regions, building up stocks and signing security of supply agreements. Most of the measures involve or affect the business community.

Of course, a lot of work remains. Despite this, my conclusion is that it is wrong to say that nothing exists or is being done. On the contrary. There are good conditions for strong development in the coming years, where more companies will also see how they are clearly assigned tasks within total defense.

Charlotte Petri Gornitzka, County Governor and National Advisor for Strengthened Private-Public Collaboration in Total Defense

Source – Dagens Industri (Debate post – Text in Swedish by Charlotte Petri Gornitzka, National Advisor for Strengthened Private-Public Collaboration in Total Defense