Sweden became an outlier among the Nordic countries in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. While the Nordic countries have historically shared a social democratic welfare state regime, with strong cooperation and harmonization of social policies, their responses to the pandemic showcased fundamental differences to that of Sweden. In particular, Sweden’s prioritization of individual civil liberties over social rights diverged from the more coercive approaches of Finland and Norway, which placed greater emphasis on public health and social welfare. This study examines the media framing surrounding the contrasting Swedish approach and highlights the dichotomy between statist individualism/autonomy and welfare paternalism/interdependence that has been an inherent part of the Swedish welfare state framing. Employing interpretive policy analysis, the study explores the media narratives used by policy actors to frame their pandemic response in terms of individual autonomy and governmental paternalism. We identified two contrasting perspectives on governance regarding the COVID-19 policy strategy. One framing perspective backed the strategy, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding individual autonomy and minimizing central control. The other viewpoint demanded a lockdown and criticized the Swedish response as too lenient. This deviated from usual Swedish political alignments and created a polarized and lively debate around the core values of individual autonomy, agency, and central governmental paternalism. 

Formal social citizenship is limited in how it enables us to think about informal social citizenship and informal welfare. This informal perspective is important in all contexts where access to social rights is negotiated through local and transnational spaces, and where the state is a relatively minor player. By drawing on work on moral economy (Scott, 1976) and informal welfare (Gough and Wood, 2006) the article aims to propose a new theoretical model to understand the nature and social practice of both informal citizenship and welfare. This model departs from a western-centric understanding of nation-state-based citizenship and national welfare states, adopting instead the perspective that informal social citizenship and welfare have existed independently of the nation state as long as there have been human communities. Formal citizenship together with formal welfare rights represent just one particular crystallization of such informal practice. Our proposed model highlights the interdependent (rather than evolutionary) relationship between formal welfare at national level and informal welfare practices at local and transnational levels.

This policy report outlines the group research on advocacy, decision-making, and EU policy change towards green energy transition and climate neutrality, focusing on resource- and energy-efficient buildings, as well as energy efficiency more broadly within the EU's Fit for 55 legislative packages. The research also includes analyses of advocacy and decision-making related to EU policy change for decarbonizing maritime shipping. The project explores how stakeholder coalitions shape policies for sustainable environments since decision-making is influenced by stakeholders and conflicts of interest. By providing better insight into EU policy change dynamics, this report offers valuable knowledge that can enhance policymakers' understanding of how to influence future EU policies on energy efficiency and building energy performance, as well as a clean energy transition more broadly, promoting Swedish interests. It highlights the complexity of decision-making in energy efficiency and climate impact reduction within the EU while also underscoring the influence of stakeholders and conflicts of interest. As a result, actors with inadequate grasp of political dynamics can hinder effective energy policy design and implementation, posing challenges to achieving climate goals and sustainable development. Similarly, since negotiations are key to advance regulation, it is found that less politicization and polarization facilitate deliberative negotiations and policy-oriented learning, among other things. Thus, strategic advocacy is crucial for Swedish policymakers aiming to successfully influence future EU energy and climate policies.

Här sammanfattas vår forskning om påverkansarbete, beslutsfattande och förändring av EU:s politik för grön energiomställning och klimatneutralitet. Fokus ligger på resurs- och energieffektiva byggnader, men även energieffektivisering mer generellt och andra områden inom EU:s lagstiftningspaket Fit for 55. Beslutsfattandet kring energieffektivitet och minskad klimatpåverkan är komplext och påverkas av olika faktorer, inklusive intressenter, intressekonflikter och strategier. Bristande förståelse för politiska dynamiker kan hindra effektiv utformning och genomförande av energipolitik, vilket i sin tur kan försvåra arbetet med att uppnå klimatmål och främja hållbar utveckling. I våra projekt lämnas kunskap om processerna kring beslutsfattande och förändring av EU-politiken. Här presenteras ett kunskapsunderlag att dels påverka framtida EU-direktiv om energieffektivitet och byggnaders energiprestanda, dels främja svensk innovation och förbättra implementering av energieffektiviserande åtgärder i byggd miljö i Sverige såväl som EU och globalt. Resultaten visar att en djupare förståelse för sociala, politiska och institutionella faktorer är avgörande för att effektivt driva hållbar energipolitik. Vi betonar även behovet av ökad transparens för lobbyister för att säkerställa en rättvis och öppen politisk process.