Disaster social work in Sweden: context,practice and challenges in an international
perspective
By Carin Björngren Cuadra
University of Malmö

The Nordic Welfare Watch – in Response to Crisis
Working Paper No 1:2015
ISSN 2298-7436

Disaster social work in Sweden:
Context, practice and challenges in an international perspective
Carin Björngren Cuadra
Introduction

Over the past several decades, the frequency and magnitude of natural disasters have significantly
increased (Duyne Barbestein & Leemann, 2013) and the numbers of disasters affecting humanity is still
increasing, as is the number of disaster victims (Gillespie & Danso, 2010). The growing burden of
disaster includes those events that in part occur due to human activities, so called social-natural
hazards (UNISDR 2009) as well as technological hazards (ibid.). Disaster is defined by the United
Nations as “a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread
human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of theaffected community or society to cope with its own resources” (UNISDR, 2009). In the management ofdisasters, regardless of cause, social work been recognized as an important resource both before(mitigation/preparedness) and after (response/recovery) the occurrence (Gillespie & Danso, 2010).
Generally, the main focus of social work is the local scene (municipal and community level). It involves
support to the individual and his or her family and their ability to recover after a critical situation. However,there are also endeavours involving the distribution of emergency aid, identification of the most
exposed, providing a channel for information and working as mediator between individuals, communities
and organizations, in reconstruction of social functions as well as in preventive interventions. Disastersocial work has been increasingly topical internationally during the last few decades, not least in thewake of earthquakes (in India, Gujarate 2001 and China, Wenchuan 2008) and, hurricanes affecting
many countries in the Americas such as Mitch (1998) and Katrina (2005) as well as of the India Ocean
tsunami (2004). These disasters have had an impact on research as well as on education and praxis ofsocial work in the United States (Gillespie & Danso, 2010), Latin America and Asia, especially in China(ex. Javadian, 2007; Tang & Cheung, 2007; Han, 2013).
In regard to the management of disasters, Sweden has extensive experience both nationally andinternationally with a long-standing tradition of preventive policies and has a continued presence insupporting international management of disasters. However, despite an increasing topicality
internationally, social work in Sweden can be said to have a relatively undeveloped role and function in
the context of disasters as well as in serious events and crises. This is true both concerning social work
as an academic multidisciplinary field and as a praxis field. As disaster social work has not beendeveloped as a domain of knowledge, disaster management is not a field of research and is notincluded in the curricula for neither undergraduate nor graduate programs. In summary, there is a lackof a social work perspective in relation to disasters and crises in Sweden. This lack implies that social
work does not contribute in the contingency system in Sweden to the extent it can be assumed thatsocial work has a potential to do, based on its unique position to interpret and approach a social context
both before, during and after crises and disasters have occurred.
In the future, an increasing burden of disasters that also involves new risks and vulnerabilities insocial life will increase demands on contingency systems. This implies intensification of theestablishment of legitimacy in terms of trust between institutional systems and citizens. Legitimacy andability to act depend on the individual's trust in the individual staff member as well as on enjoyed2

confidence at the institutional level (Bjorngren Cuadra, 2012). Research on trust has demonstrated thatsocial categories (i.e. gender, age and ethnicity) affect the emergence of such qualities (ibid.; Hallin etal., 2010), which consequentially implies demands to handle such issues with consideration andsensitivity.
Based on these initial observations the aim of this article is to explore the Swedish context as wellas outline a possible development of the role of social work based on an examination of practice andliterature. It is hypothesized that the Swedish approach regarding social work in the context of disasteris a result of the structure and function of current civil protections and security systems as well as a pathdependency in relation to a specific historically developed tradition of social work. Generally, social workis thought of as having dual foci; the individual and the social environment (Yan, 1998). Accordingly, in
the Swedish case, a certain emphasis on one focus, the individual, at the expense of an orientation
towards the environment, is assumed to have a repercussion on the role of social work in the context ofdisaster management.
Further, it is hypothesized that the prevailing role of civil society in the Swedish context
contributes to the formation of the role of social work in the context of disaster management. In thisregard it is assumed that the welfare state regime and ideology in regard to the role of civil society
organizations, (Casey, 2004) are relevant factors that bear upon the degree of ‘horizontal subsidiarity’(i.e. degree of involvement of civil and private actors) (Kazepov, 2008).
It is further hypothesized that social work has the potential to play a key role in future disastermanagement and the development of community resilience, not least from a legitimacy perspective.
This is based on an appreciation of the general knowledge domain of social work as well as the fact thatorientation towards social risks and vulnerability has always been part of the field of knowledge of social
work (Soliman & Rogge, 2002). As social work manages consideration and sensibility in regard toconstructs such as class, gender, ethnicity as well as disability and age, it has the potential to play a keyrole in future disaster management from a legitimacy perspective.
The next section will present Sweden’s case in terms of experience, the specific national context
and its conditions (legal, structural, organizational) in order to give the reader an overview. This is
expected to provide a basis for the discussion regarding the role of social work and its challenges andpossibilities to take on a more explicit role within the civil contingency system.

Disasters in the Swedish context

In an international comparative perspective, the serious events that Sweden faces are fairly limited inscope. Sweden is geologically and geographically situated in a region that is struck by neither
earthquakes nor tsunamis. Sweden’s geopolitical position has not resulted in major terrorist attacks but
a few minor assaults resulting in a comparatively low number of casualties. There was a severe
incidence in Stockholm in 2010 (only the “suicide bomber” himself was killed) (Lindberg & Sundelius,
2012). In terms of emergencies Sweden has most been struck by flooding, winter storms, landslides,
forest fires and ice floes (European Commission, 2013). There have also been emergencies due tomajor fires (for example 1998 in a discotheque and a major forest fire 2014) as well as shipping
disasters with many dead and injured (counted in hundreds).

The management of disaster and crisis in Sweden

It should first be noted that the concept ‘disaster’ is not commonly in use in the Swedish discourse, butrather concepts such as crisis, serious event, emergency and accidents. This approach give primacy to3situations that have not yet exceeded the ability and resources to cope, but still involves a serious strain
in regard to resources. Management in this area, most often referred to as involving ‘crises’ or‘emergencies’, follows the national administrative structure of public responsibilities. Thus the
responsibility for what is called civil emergency planning (CEP) is handled by three different levels ofgovernment; national (government, ministry, national authorities), regional (county councils and county
administrative boards), and local (municipalities). The levels correspond to responsibility of a geographic
area under the law (see below). The objective is to minimize the risk and consequences of
emergencies, enhance and support societal preparedness for emergencies and coordinate across andbetween various sectors and areas of responsibility. The system is primarily based on the principles of
responsibility, similarity and proximity. Responsibility means that agents responsible for an activity undernormal conditions maintain the corresponding responsibility and initiate cross- sector cooperation during
emergencies. Similarity implies equal organization during emergencies as under normal conditions while
proximity denotes the handling of emergencies to be at the lowest possible level in terms of structure.
The following section provides a basic structural overview based on official information (i.e. European
Commission and Swedish authorities).

Legislation

In terms of legislation and from a social work perspective is the Ordinance (SFS 2006:942) on crisis
preparedness and heightened alert relevant. It regulates the demands on government authorities atnational and regional (i.e. county administrative board) levels. Under this ordinance, all Swedish
authorities are obliged to carry out risk and vulnerability analyses in their own areas as a measure tostrengthen their own and Sweden's overall emergency management capacity. At regional (i.e. county
councils) and local levels, the Act (SFS 2006:544) on measures to be taken by municipalities andcounty council in preparedness for and during extraordinary incidents during peacetime and periods ofheightened alert outlines that municipalities and county councils should attain a fundamental capacity
for engaging in civil defence activities. The act regulates planning of and preparation for the handling ofcomplex, extraordinary events that demand coordinated management between various societal
activities at local and regional levels. Under this law are the municipalities tasks to perform risk andvulnerability analysis, develop contingency plans and prepare for crisis, organize a crisis management
committee as well as training and education for staff and politicians, be responsibility for theirgeographic area (to coordinate all local actors) as well as report to national authorities. It is of a certain
interest that the performance of risk and vulnerability analysis are further regulated (MSBFS 2015:5).
There is a corresponding Ordinance (SFS 2006:637) addressing the municipalities key role (i.e. tocoordinate local actors). The municipalities are also responsible under the Civil Protection Act (SFS
2003:778) which regulates the Rescue service as well as a responsibility to prevent accidents and limit
injury to individuals, and damage to property and the environment. Thus has the legal framework fromthe municipalities perspective two related strands, one for accidents and one for unexpected highconsequence events (crisis and disasters) (Sparf, 2014). There is no specific legal regulation especiallytargeting volunteers and nongovernmental organization.

Organizations and actors

The overall political responsibility at ministerial level for civil emergency planning rests since October
2014 with the Ministry of Justice and the Minister of Home Affairs (before that date it was with the
Ministry of Defence). In order to ensure that the Swedish Government Offices possess the coordinated4ability to handle cross-sector emergencies, the Crisis Management Coordination Secretariat at theSwedish Government Offices is responsible for everyday management (operating 24/7). Following theprinciple of responsibility, every government office is responsible for planning and handling crises in its
own area of responsibility (European commission, 2013).
In terms of agents, no single organization has the sole responsibility for the entire country in allcrises. The framework for operations is defined by the actual event that triggers the crisis. The national
authority Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has under its instructions an important role ofcoordinating various sectors and areas of responsibility in what is understood as a “whole-of-society”approach (Lindberg & Sundelius, 2012). There assignment is to build resiliens across sectors and levelsof government. It involves the entire spectrum of threats and risks - from everyday accidents to majordisasters at all level of society as well as in different phases, before, during and after the occurrence ofincidents (ibid.). The principle of responsibility implies that The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency will
not take over the responsibility of other actors (European commission, 2013).
At the regional level, the county administrative boards (appointed by the national government) areresponsible for coordinating civil emergency planning activities, such as exercises, risk and vulnerability
analyses, and acting as a clearing house between public and private partners within their geographic
area (SFS 2006:942). They are also responsible for having contingency plans in place to handle
situations before, during and after an emergency. County administrative boards coordinate the relevantmeasures with relevant actors (including key companies) at local, regional and central levels andprovide support in order to maintain the level of responsibility during the crisis. In addition, the county
administrative board has the overall responsibility for reporting the need for national support in the eventof a major emergency as well as coordinating contact with the media during major emergencies andcrises (European commission, 2013).
At the local level and in accordance with the principle of proximity, Swedish municipalities havehistorically a large degree of autonomy. They play an important role in civil defence, civil emergency
planning and preparedness as well as accident and disaster prevention through safety in land use
planning and accident prevention work in accordance with the Civil Protection Act. As indicated, themunicipalities have responsibility for their geographic area (SFS 2006:544). During a major emergency
the municipal executive board is the highest civilian authority within municipal borders. It enacts
responsibility for all civilian command and crisis management at the local level, including planning andpreparedness. The county board provides continuous support and assistance as well as monitoring thatthe municipalities are complying with laws and ordinances (European commission, 2013).
As the focus of this article is social work in the context of disaster, The National Board of Healthand Welfare (SoS) under the Social Ministry needs to be mentioned as it forms a part of the Swedish
contingency system. This board is highly relevant in the field of social work due to its mandate under thealready mentioned ordinance (2006:942) on crisis preparedness and heightened alert. The board shallsupport and supervise the municipalities as regard their ability to manage crisis, prevent vulnerabilities
and withstand threats and risks. They shall also carry out risk and vulnerability assessments within theirarea of responsibility on a yearly basis. Such analyses consequently involve the social services (SoS,2014). This will be elaborated below.
As regards the involvement of civil society and volunteers, the activities of the Civil Defence
League, which includes several organizations, is highly relevant. This organization focuses on safety forboth everyday life and in times of crisis. They organize training activities such as first aid, risk
awareness, emergency support, voluntary reinforcement resources and tracking. In addition, the Civil
5defence League organizes and educates Voluntary Resource Groups (FRG) in which members of othernon-governmental organizations take part. The aim of Voluntary Resource Groups is to reinforce themunicipality’s resources (such as evacuation, information and other practical activities) in case of
emergencies, when requested by the council of the municipality. In Marsh 2013, the Swedish
Association of local authorities and regions (SALAR) and the Civil Defence League jointly launched arecommendation to municipalities regarding the involvement of non-governmental organizations in crisis
preparedness. The recommendation involves strengthening the role of civil society in crisis
preparedness by setting up Voluntary Resource Groups (if they are not already in place) as well as
formalizing agreements with the FRGs with the aim of clarifying criteria of responsibilities.
In regard to the involvement of civil society in the context of crisis and disasters, the Swedish Red
Cross (SRC) is committed to the provision of emergency and humanitarian relief both nationally andinternationally through its network of volunteers and delegates. Within Sweden, the Red Cross provides
emergency services through first aid teams, mobile emergency units and counselling support groups
managed by specially trained volunteers. The Red Cross endeavours also to increase knowledge on
how to prevent injuries and how to take care of wounded and ill people by offering first aid courses for
the National Home Guard.
The figure below is intended to give an overview over the contingency system. However, in thisofficial chart, civil society is omitted (possibly because they do not operate under the law). In the next
section, I will turn to the local level, that is, the municipalities who are most central in the context ofsocial work.

6

Figure 1. Organisational chart (European Commission 2013)

Social work in the context of crisis

As previously stated, social work in Sweden has a fairly undeveloped role and function in the context ofcrisis management. The role involves the public support schemes at the local level with someinvolvement of the civil sector. Given this coupling to the public sector, interest is geared towards themunicipalities and is most salient towards the Public Social Services that the municipalities organize
under the Social Services Act (SFS 2001:453). The Public Social Services are officially considered to be
critical function of society in a context of crises and disasters (Governmental proposition 2007/08: 92 on
strengthened preparedness) as their failure or severe disruption can (alone or in synergy) lead to anincrease in the seriousness of the crisis. Furthermore, the services are acknowledged as necessary or
essential in managing crisis and disasters.
Responsibilities as defined by the Social services act apply both under ´normal´ situations and in
the context of crisis. They encompass the entire population as well as certain areas (involving
individuals and families, care for persons with disabilities and elderly as well as newly arrived refugees).
Each municipality is responsible for social services and has within their area the ultimate responsibility
for ensuring that individuals receive the support and help they need (2 Ch. § 1) as well as overall
responsibility for individuals residing (2 Ch. § 1) in the municipality. This responsibility includes both
7

structurally oriented ventures as well as services. The former involve being well informed regarding theliving conditions of the entire population and being an active part in planning of society. Services are
general (such as giving information, counselling, out-reaching programs, etc.) as well as specific toindividuals (for example economic support, child protection, treatment for substance abuse, security
alarms for the elderly and caring, cleaning and distributing prepared food).
Neither the Social Services Act nor other legislation governing the Public Social Services(targeting for example substance abuse or disabilities), addresses specifically the responsibility ofmunicipalities for operations in case of crisis and serious incidents (SoS, 2009). Rather, the principle ofsimilarity (during emergencies as well as under normal conditions), guides the contingency system,
determines what is outlined in the Social Services Act regarding ultimate responsibility for thoseindividuals residing in the municipality. Responsibility in case of crises relates to ordinary requirementsof quality, safety, sustainability and planning in order to maintain existing operations and manage thetasks ahead. In addition, the municipalities’ responsibility for Public Social Services in the context ofcrises derives both from Act SFS 2006:544 which governs municipalities’ and county councils’
measures prior to and during extraordinary events in peacetime and high alert and also in thecorresponding Ordinance (SFS 2006:637) which give municipalities a key role (i.e. to coordinate local
actors). The municipalities must therefore plan according to what is deemed necessary to deal with acrisis or serious incident (SoS, 2009) as well as be prepared for changes in terms of priorities (ibid.).
In this context it is interesting to note that in 2012 The National Board of Health and Welfare
identified in their risk and vulnerability assessment, threats, risks and vulnerabilities as well as critical
relationships in relation to crises and disasters within their areas of responsibility (SoS, 2012). The
majority of what they identified as problematic concerned the role and function of Public Social Services
in terms of serious or very serious consequences. This was found critical when taking into account thata serious incident can lead to an increase in needs for services of already known groups as well as newgroups (ibid.). Against this background, the board found it equally critical that evaluations of situations
that have occurred have shown a tendency to focus on activities required for maintenance of normal
functions and comparably less on activities that target those who normally are managing themselves(SoS, 2012). According to my interpretation, therefore, the structurally oriented responsibility (being
informed regarding living conditions of the entire population and being an active part in planning ofsociety) is not entirely being pursued. There is a need for Public Social Service to plan for how to inform,
as well as get in contact with, persons who might need help in case of a crisis (SoS, 2009). Against thebackground of this critical analysis, the National Board of Health and Welfare proposes a series ofmeasures involving management, collaboration and information; information security; robust
infrastructure; backup energy and opportunity for moving services/operations, human resources andcritical dependencies. The analysis is based on 16 municipalities (out of 290), and implies that theoverall ability of the Swedish Public Social Services to withstand crisis and disasters is today not clear.
Moreover, according to my interpretation, the analysis indicates a need for development. This theme will
be elaborated below.
Another important weakness identified by The National Board of Health and Welfare (SoS, 2012)
involves a suboptimal coordination with non-governmental organizations (such as Voluntary Resource
Groups, the Red Cross and other volunteers) (SoS, 2012). In part has this issue been addressed (in2013) by the recommendation (see above) launched by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities
and Regions (SALAR) and the Civil defence League in regard to Voluntary Resource Groups. However,
The National Board of Health and Welfare has further indicated that the competence represented by for8example the Red Cross is not reflected in crisis preparedness in the context of social services (SoS,2007). In concrete terms, the contingency system is not fully taking advantage of the both national andinternational experience of the Red Cross (ibid.).

The role of civil society

In the literature, the role of civil society and its relationship to the public sector has been generally
discussed in terms of being complementary (as opposed to being an alternative or conflicting course(see Börjesson, 2010). Further, the relationship can be understood in terms of the role of civil society
organizations being linked to the welfare state regime and ideology (Casey, 2004). As this logic also
applies to the public social work - civil society nexus, it can contribute to the understanding of the lack of
coordination with non-governmental organizations as identified by The Board of Health and Welfare, as
well as a not very elaborated role of civil society.
As regards the welfare state regime in Sweden, it is based on a strong alliance between the state
and the individual (Scaramuzzino, 2012 with reference to Berggren & Trägårdh, 2009). Comparative
works have characterized the Swedish model using a variety of concepts, all implying it to be a ‘highspender’ model, (Arcanjo, 2011) in terms of social expenditure. Some well-known denominators
corresponding to different typologies are: universal (Sainsbury, 1991), institutional (Titmuss, 1974) andsocial democratic (Esping-Andersen, 1990). It is characterized by a universal model with a striving to begeneral in respect of population coverage, implying emphasis on equal rights for all citizens anduniversal access. The logic of distribution of goods, such as services and social support, within thismodel is, in a Titmussian tradition, understood as being the promotion of integration between themembers of a society (Borevi, 2002). The role of civil society might in this context be expected to be
weak. However, the statist approach that historically resulted in the state taking over a range of welfare
services from voluntary organizations (Scaramuzzino, 2012), has resulted in a still strong civil society
with a complementary role and an orientation towards advocacy rather than to service production (ibid.).
This arrangement has been labelled a Scandinavian model implying a strong centralized civil society
sector organized in service areas (Casey, 2004). In terms of subsidiarity, the model involves a low
degree of ‘horizontal subsidiarity’ as regards the role to actors such as non-governmental and private in
the implementation of policy (Kazepov, 2008). This means that the role in the Swedish case for suchactors is not comprehensive.

Disaster as a knowledge domain

Initially it was hypothesized that social work has the potential to play a key role in future disastermanagement. In order to address this issue, this section will introduce the academic approach todisaster social work internationally as well as in Sweden. Further, I will argue that a certain appraisal ofa social dimension in the understanding of disaster is in line with the knowledge domain of social work.

Academic approachThis subject area was, in my interpretation, consolidated internationally as a field within academic
research in the 2000s. However, this is not reflected in the Swedish research that gives an impressionof being limited both in interest and scope. International research is dominated by North America, Asia
and Australia, partly based on other conceptual systems than the Swedish (Cuadra, 2009). In my view,
this impression is confirmed by the latest Joint World Conference of Social Work (Hong Kong, 2010;
Stockholm, 2012) in lectures and presentations.
9The international literature contains studies of operational approaches for development ofmethods related to natural and climate-related disasters such as earthquakes (Tajbakhsh, 2012), floods
and hurricanes (Sanders, Bowie & Bowie, 2003), tsunamis (Tang & Cheung, 2007) and fire (Webber,2013), but also technological incidents and disasters (Des Marais, Bhadra & Dyer, 2012). The interest is
primarily on a local level (Bliss & Meehan 2008) with a focus on community capacity building, service
management, interaction and communication with victims and those affected as well as professionaland organizational collaboration (Pockett, 2006). This does not exclude approaches involving theoreticaldevelopment, for example based on concepts such as vulnerability, resilience, risk and risk perception,
psychosocial preparedness, social capital, capacity and recovery (Gillespie & Danso, 2010). Moreover,there are gender analyses (Enarson, Fothergill & Peek, 2006), human rights-based analysis (Pyle,
2007; Nikku, 2012) and consideration of ethical values (Soliman & Rogge 2002). The literature contains
also some studies of pedagogical interests of education of social workers (Smith, Lees & Clymo, 2003;
Chou, 2003: Tang & Cheung, 2007).
In Sweden, research in the field of social work in relation to crises and disasters appears limited.
Two main psychosocial perspectives with international connections prevail; individual-centered andtask-centered. The former addresses the crises of life and the individual in crisis and dominates what iscalled crisis intervention (Payne, 2008). The starting point is that individuals seeking help are in a formof crisis that is responded to with crisis intervention (or crisis work) (ibid.). This perspective omits
aspects of crises associated with disasters. However, such aspects are addressed in the second, taskcentered perspective, which addresses specific problems. A variant of this is the so-called crisis teams
with a focus on the processing of traumatic process that has been addressed in research (Nieminen
Kristofersson, 2002). Lastly, there is the perspective that in terms of risk and prognosis develops
epidemiological and social-psychological models of childcare for preventive and treatment (Lagerberg &Sundelin, 2000). In terms of publication, some dissertations in other disciplines with relevance for social
work are available (such as Guldåker, 2009 in geography; Sparf 2014 in sociology). In addition, there
are valuable scientific papers and reports (ex. Enander, 2006; FRIVA, 2007; Hallin et al. 2014) and ‘grey
literature’ of high relevance for social work (reports, evaluations of interventions) from authorities andstakeholders with responsibilities in the area (e.g. the series of reports from the Rescue Department andthe National Board of Health and Welfare).

An appraisal of social dimensions

During the last decades, social dimensions, as opposed to the view of crises and disasters as emerging
out of dimensions all ‘given-by-nature’, have been given more attention internationally as being crucial
aspects in understanding and managing disasters (see for ex. Blaikie et al., 1996). ‘Social’ is given a
broad understanding encompassing cultural, political as well as economic dimensions (McEntire, 2001).
This interest is also reflected in the concept ‘socio-natural disasters’ (UNISDR, 2009). Possibly, thisrecognition of social dimensions can be related to the advanced modernity that generates both newrisks and new endeavours to handle them (Beck, 1992; see also Giddens, 1990; Luhmann, 1993). In
theory development there is an interest in how key analytic qualities of social structure and collective
stress reflect patterns that might re-emerge in future disasters (Drabek, 2006). Theories of disaster
vulnerability that contribute to the understanding of the dynamics of disasters with an emphasis on bothsocietal and environmental causes of disasters, are forming a basis for fruitful community interventions
to build resilience in vulnerable populations and communities (Zakour, 2011).

10

From the perspective of social work, the understanding of disaster can be incorporated in themainstream perspective on social problems. ‘Disaster’ is from this perspective understood as a nonroutinely social problem and a manifestation of latent conditions (Drabek, 2006). Such a ‘social
problems perspective’ highlights both objective conditions and social definitions of human harm andsocial disruption as a theoretical framework. In order to capture how objective dimensions interrelatewith the social definitions (involving human interpretation) there is a need to pay attention to what
Drabek call ‘mainstream social problem constructs’ such as power, status, class, gender and ethnicity(ibid.).
Social risks and vulnerability, critical dependencies and threats to vulnerable individuals havealways been part of the field of knowledge of social work (Soliman & Rogge, 2002). It has been argued
that the ‘emphasis on vulnerability brings social work into the heart of disaster work and research’(Gillespie & Danso, 2011). Thus, questions on crises and disasters are of ample relevance to social
work and the distribution of risks as they reflect the underlying pattern of vulnerabilities. Such patterns of
distribution emerge under the strong influence of Drabeck’s mainstream social problem constructs suchas class, gender, ethnicity, age, functioning, immigration status (ibid.), and global distribution of
resources and migration processes (Bjorngren Cuadra et al., 2013). Social differentiation may also havean impact on access to assistance and interventions in crises and disaster situations (Zakour & Harrell,2003). There is a range of international studies of allocation of aid and resources that show that thistends to differ along the lines of power distribution in a society (see for example Duyne Barenstein(2013) on the impact of poverty on post-tsunami relocation; Hartman and Squires (2006) on the impact
of racialized poverty in relation to hurricane Katrina). Illustrative Swedish experiences can be an
identified concern relating to providing information to victims and those affected in multiple languages(Stockholm Fire Department, 2001) as well as a confirmed inertia to include religious communities
outside the Swedish Church as an actor in crisis preparedness (SoS, 2009).

Challenges for social work in Sweden

As social work as a theoretical and practical field involves questions regarding processes that create
and counteract social vulnerability as well as how social work can be organized and implemented toprevent and reduce social vulnerability, it might be surprising that Sweden did not develop disastersocial work. However, coincidentally and as indicated above, the Public Social Services are considered
to be a critical function of society (Governmental proposition 2007/08: 92) implying that the social
services are necessary in managing crises and disasters. In the following section, this somewhat dual
situation will be explored further aiming at addressing the two initial hypothesis concerning the Swedish
approach of regarding social work in the context of disaster as a result of the structure and function ofcurrent civil contingency and protection systems as well as a path dependency in relation to a specifichistorically developed tradition of social work.
A fruitful starting point might be to put the UN definition of disaster (se Introduction above), which
focuses on serious disruptions of the functioning of a community or a society as well as their ability tocope (UNISDR 2009), in a social work perspective. My first observation concerns the fact that social
work has a dual foci; the individual and the social environment (Yan, 1998). The duality embedded insocial work is a historic heritage reflecting on the one hand the Charity Organizations Society and on theother the Settlement Movement (Yan et al., 2012). The former gives priority to interventions at theindividual and family level while the latter is geared towards social change and opens up for community
based services and interventions (ibid.). As disasters are understood to affect communities and their
11ability to cope and recover as recognized by the UN definition (Duyne Barbestein & Leemann, 2013),
the interface between disaster interventions in this context and the very role of social work aredependent on the understanding of social work in terms of what is seen as its main focus.
As presented above, the responsibility for operations in the context of disasters lies primarily withthe municipalities in Sweden and, as also was stated initially, the role of social work is relatively
undeveloped and does not explicitly encompass a knowledge domain. As the municipalities are
responsible for the Public Social Services under the Social Services Act, I argue that an understandingof the relatively weak role might benefit from considering the historical dual foci of social work. In thisvein, it is heuristic to acknowledge that the main tradition within the Swedish Public Social Services isgeared towards individuals and families. It most often involves investigation of conditions regarding
economic support, child protection and substance abuse (Wahlberg, 2013). Approximately 10 percent of
the population is in contact with the Public Social Service on a yearly basis. In most cases this occurs
not as a free choice but rather out of necessity or at the initiative of the authorities themselves. As
regards community work, there is a fairly weak tradition within the Public Social Services even though
the Social Services Act does provide for such opportunities (ibid.).
I argue that the emphasis on individuals and families (case- work tradition) at the expense ofcommunity work can be a part of the explanation of why social work in Sweden is not understood as to
be involved in the context of crises and disasters. The fact that the municipalities tend not to pursue
their structurally oriented responsibility, encompassing the informing of the entire population, and takean active part in the planning of society, including crisis preparation, can be understood to be a concreteconsequence. Given a strengthened structural perspective, I argue that social work has the potential toplay a stronger and more explicit role in future disaster management and can contribute positively indeveloping community resilience. A stronger role would be in line with the principle of proximity.
In addition, social work would, due to its knowledge domain and sensitivity as regards processes
involving social stratification, class, gender, and ethnicity as well as functioning and age, be prepared tocope with increased demands on the creation of legitimacy in terms of trust and confidence between
institutional systems and people in general, as well as of special needs communities. This can beparticularly important in the wake of new forms of social risks and vulnerabilities that will most likely be
added to the existing list of ‘natural’ or ‘man-made’ crises and disasters. Trust and confidence building
processes and creation of legitimacy affect the possibility of institutional cooperation with other agents(to reach ‘emergency consensus’) to have good communication with those affected and to promote
recovery (Soliman & Rogge, 2002) as well as the ability to assess the capability of individuals (children
and adults) to perceive and handle different situations (cf. MSB 2011 p.25). How actors, in their turn,assess the impact of social factors on how individuals perceive risks, will affect their ability to implement
preventative work and make interventions (i.e. evacuation plans) that takes people’s circumstances into
account (Drabek, 2006). Accordingly, trust is a prerequisite for the ability to act adequately. Again, social
work has a potential to have an impact in such processes. An example in this area could be thepredicted global climate changes (IPCC, 2013). For example, in the case of a need to evacuate or evenrelocate a local community due to flooding, social work would have a salient role in the relocation
process as well as mitigating social effects.
Another example in terms of crises that call for a stronger social work approach than today is thesocial unrest, such as ‘youth riots’, in the wake of a restructuring welfare state that Sweden has alreadywitnessed (together with France and UK among other countries). In this context, extremist attacks are
relevant to the approach from the perspective of social work. Other equally possible social
12

consequences of crisis imperative to social work in the future relate to a restructuring of the global
labour market that might give birth to ‘mass unemployment’. In addition, is it advocated to consider
migrants, irregular as well as regular, as a special needs community with increased social vulnerability.
A current concern is the migrating EU citizens who lack or have unclear residence under the freemovement within the EU.

Conclusion

Against this background, social work in Sweden and especially the Public Social Services as a main
actor will need to redefine its rolls and functions and vitalize its interface to the existing contingency
system. A strengthened structural perspective in social work seems to be called upon, and would imply
a vitalization of community work and cooperation with civil society in order to take on a more explicit role
within the system. It appears to me to be essential for social work, both as an academic multidisciplinary
field and as practice field, to develop disaster social work as a knowledge domain. Such a domain
implies deepening the understanding of new additional causes and new forms of expression of the risks
as well as of the logics of these processes, the possible effects, and the actors (public, civil, private) thathave to face the new risks and vulnerabilities. Consequently there is a need to develop concepts(indicators) useful in disaster social work to analyse, for example, preparedness and ability, planning,roles and responsibilities, trust and confidence, identification of the most vulnerable, operations ofvarious kinds as well as monitoring and evaluation. In this venture, an international comparative
perspective would be heuristic and favourable.

13References

Arcanjo, M., 2011. Welfare State Regimes and Reforms: A Classification of Ten European Countries
between 1990 and 2006. Social Policy & Society, 10 (2), 139-150.
Ulrich Beck, 1992, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. New Delhi: Sage.
Björngren Cuadra, C. (2012). Sjuksköterskors tillitsarbete – om professionsetik och patienter som
revisorer. [Nurses’ trust work – on professional ethics and patients as auditors]. In Björngren Cuadra, C& Fransson, O. (Eds.). Tillit eller förtroende. [Trust and confidence]. Malmö: Gleerups.
Björngren Cuadra, C., Lalander, P. & Righard, E. (2013). Socialt arbete i Malmö. Perspektiv ochutmaningar. [Social work in Malmö. Perspective and challenges]. Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift, 20 (1), 412.
Blaikie, P., Cannon T., David, I. & Wisner, B. (1996). At Risk, Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability
and Disasters. Routledge, New YorkBliss, D.L. & Meehan; J. (2008). Blueprint for Creating a Social Work-Centered Disaster Relief Initiative.
Journal of Social Service Research, 34 (3), 73-85.
Borevi, K. (2002). Välfärdsstaten i det mångkulturella samhället. [The welfare state in the multiculturalsociety]. Doctoral Thesis. Department of Political Science, University of Uppsala.
Börjesson. B. (2010). Att förstå social arbete. [Understanding social work]. Malmö: Liber
Casey, J. (2004]. Third sector participation in the policy process: A framework for comparative analysis.
Policy and Politics, 32 (2), 239-256.
Chou, Y-C. [2003]. Social workers involvement in Taiwan’s 1999 earthquake disaster aid: Implications
for social work education. Social Work & Society, 1 (1), 14-36.
Cuadra B. S. (2009). Chaos, Catastrophes and Crisis: Prevention and Management from a Social Work
Perspective. Conference paper, Habana University, Cuba.
Des Marais, Bhadra, S & Dyer, A.R. (2012). In the Wake of Japan’s Triple Disaster: Rebuilding
Capacity through International Collaboration. Advances in Social Work, 13 (2), 340-357.
Drabek, T.E. (2006). Social Problems Perspectives, Disaster Research and Emergency Management.
Revised lecture at American Sociological Association, New York.
Duyne Barenstein, J.E. (2013). Post-Tsunami Relocation Outcomes in Sri Lanka: Communities’
Perspective in Ampara and Hambantota. In Duyne Barenstein, J.E. and Leemann, E. (Eds.). PostDisaster Reconstruction and Change. Communities’ Perspectives. Boca Raton/London/New York: CPC
Press.
Duyne Barenstein, J.E. & Leemann, E. (2013). (Eds.). Post-Disaster Reconstruction and Change.
Communities’ Perspectives. Boca Raton/London/New York: CPC Press
14

Enarson, E. Fothergill A. & Peek, L. (2006). Gender and Disaster: Foundations and Directions. i
Rodríguez, Quarantelli & Dynes (Eds.). Handbook of Disaster Research. New York: Springer.
Enander, A. (2006). Människors behov och agerande vid olyckor och samhällskriser: en
kunskapsöversikt. [People’s needs and acting in the context of accidents and societal crises: an
overview]. In L. Fredholm & A-L. Göransson (Eds.). Ledning av räddningsinsatser i det komplexa
samhället. [Management of rescue in the complex society]. Räddningsverket, Karlstad.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Polity Press. Cambridge.
European Commission (2013). Humanitarian aid and civil protection. County profiles, Sweden. On line.
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/civil_protection/civil/vademecum/se/2-se.html (Accessed 2 January 2014).
Framework Programme for Risks and Vulnerability Analysis (FRIVA 2007). Risk- ochsårbarhetsanalyser: Utgångspunkter för praktiskt arbete. [Risk- and vulnerability analysis. Point of
departure for practice]. LUCRAM, Lunds universitet.
Förordning, 2009:1243. med instruktion för Socialstyrelsen. [Ordinance with instruction for The Board of
Health and Welfare].
Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Gillespie, D.F. & Danso, K. (2010). (Eds.). Disaster concepts and issues: A guide for social work
education and practice. Alexandria, VA: CSWE Press.
Governments proposition 2007/08:92. Stärkt krisberedskap: för säkerhets skull [Strengthened crisis
preparedness: for the sake of security].
Guldåker, N. (2009). Krishantering, hushåll och Stormen Gudrun. Att analysera hushålls
krishanteringsförmåga och sårbarheter. [Crisis management, households and the storm Gudrun.
Analyzing households’ crisis management ability and vulnerability]. Doctoral Thesis, Lund University.
Dept. of Geography.
Hallin, P-O, Jashari, A., Listerborn, C. and Popoola, M. (2010). Det är inte stenarna som gör ont. [It is
not the stones that hurt]. Malmö högskola, Urbana studier.
Han, Y. (2013). Book review: Disaster social work: practice and reflection in China’s case. China Journalof Social work, 5 (2), 184-186.
Hartman, C. and Squires G.D. (2006). (Eds). There Is No Such Thing As a Natural Disaster: Race,
Class, and Hurricane Katrina. New York and London: Routledge.
International Panel On Climate Changes.( 2013). Climate Change. The Physical Science Basis.
Summary for policymakers. Online: Available at:15http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGI_AR5_SPM_brochure.pdf (Accessed 14
January 2014).
Javadian, R. (2007). Social work responses to earthquake disasters: A social work intervention in Bam,Iran, International Social Work, 50(3), 334–346
Kazepov, Y. (2008). The subsidiarization of social policies: actors, processes and impacts. European
Societies. 10 (2), 247-273.
Tang, K.L. and Cheung, C.K. (2007). The competence of Hong Kong social work students in working
with victims of the 2004 tsunami disaster. International Social Work, 50(3), 405–418.
Lindberg, H. and Sundelius, B. (2012). Whole-of-society disaster resilience: The Swedish way. In
Kamien, D.G. (Eds.). Homeland security. Handbook. New York: The McGraw-Hill.
Luhmann, N. (1993). Risk: a sociological theory. New York: A. de Gruyter.
Myndigheten för samhällsskydd och krisberedskap [The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency) (2011).
Forskning för ett säkrare samhälle. Forskningsprogram för MSB 2011-2013. [Research for a safer
society. Research program 2011-2013].
Nieminen Kristofersson, T. (2002). Krisgrupper och spontant stöd. Om insatser efter branden i Göteborg
1998. [Crisis groups and spontaneous support. On actions after the fire in Gothenburg in 1998].Doctoral
Thesis, Lund University. Dept. of Social Work.
Nikku B.R. (2012). Children’s rights in disasters: Concerns for social work – Insights from South Asiaand possible lessons for Africa. International Social Work 56(1), 51– 66.
Payne, M. (2008). Modern teoribildning i socialt arbete. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur.
Pockett, R. (2006). Learning from Each Other. Social Work in Health Care, 43 (2-3), 131-149.
Pyles, L. (2007). Towards a Post-Katrina Framework: Social Work as Human Rights and Capabilities.
Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, 22 (1), 79-99.
Sainsbury, D. (1991). Analysing Welfare State Variations: The Merits and Limitations of Models basedon the Residual-Institutional Distinction. Scandinavian Political Studies, 14 (1), 1-30.
Sanders, S., Bowie, S. L., and Bowie, Y. D. (2003). Lessons learned on forced relocation of older adults.
Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 40(4), 23-35.
Scaramuzzino, R. (2012). Equal opportunities? A Cross-national Comparison of Immigrant
Organisations in Sweden and Italy. Doctoral Thesis, Malmö University. Dept. of Social Work
Smith, M., Lees, D. and Clymo, K. (2003). The readiness is all. Planning and training for post-disastersupport work, Social Work Education: The International Journal, 22 (5) 517-528.
16

Socialstyrelsen [The national board of health and welfare]. (2007). Risk- och sårbarhetsanalys 2007
enligt förordningen (2006:942) om krisberedskap och höjd beredskap. [Risk and vulnerability analysis
2007 according to the Ordinance (SFS 2006:942) on crisis preparedness and heightened alert].
Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen
Socialstyrelsen [The national board of health and welfare] (2009). Krisberedskap inom socialtjänstensområde. Vägledning. [Crisis management within the field of social services. A guidance]. Stockholm:
Socialstyrelsen
Socialstyrelsen[The national board of health and welfare](2012). Socialstyrelsens risk- ochsårbarhetsanalys 2012. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Soliman, H.H. and Rogge, M.E. (2002). Ethical Considerations in Disaster Services: A Social Work
Perspective. Electronic Journal of Social Work. 1 (1), 1-23.
Sparf, Jörgen (2014). Tillit i samhällsskyddets organisation. Om det sociala gränssnittet mellan
kommuner och funktionshindrade i risk- och krishantering. Doktorsavhandling. Fakulteten för
humanvetenskap. Mittuniversitetet, Östersund.
Stockholms brandförsvar [Stockholm Fire Department]. (2001). Allvarliga störningar i nordvästra
Stockholm i samband med kabelbrand den 11 mars 2001. Serious disturbances i Noth West Stockholm
in connection to glazed tile fire in March 11, 2001].
Tang, K-I and Cheung, C.K. (2013). The competence of Hong Kong social work students in working withvictims of the 2004 tsunami disaster. International Social Work 50(3), 405–418
Tajbakhsh. G.R. (2012). A Study in Services Applications if Social Workers in Earthquake Disasters.
Journal of Basic and Applied Science Research, 2 (11), 11025-11029.
Titmuss, R. (1974). What is social policy? In Leibfried, S.and Mau,S., 2008. (Eds.).Welfare States:
Construction, Deconstruction, Reconstruction. Volume I. Analytical Approaches. Cheltenham Edward
Elgar Publishing Limited.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (2009). UNISDR terminology on
disaster risk reduction. Geneva: UNISDR (available online).
Wahlberg, S. (2013). Samhällsarbete – strategier för social arbete. [Community work – strategies forsocial work]. Stockholm: Nordstedt Juridik
Webber, R. and Jones, K. (2013). Rebuilding Communities After Natural Disasters: The 2009 Bushfires
in Southeastern. Journal of Social Service Research, 39, 253-268.

17

Yan, M.C. (1998). Social functioning discourse in a Chinese context: developing social work in mainland
China. International social work, 41 (2), 53-65.
Yan, M.C., Tsui, M-S., Chu, W.C.K. and Pak, C.M. (2012). A profession with dual foci: is social work
losing the balance? China Journal of Social Work, 5 (2), 163-172.
Zakour, J. and Harrell, E., 2003. Access to Disaster Services. Journal of Social Services Research, 30(2), 27-54.
Zakour, J. (2011). Vulnerability and Risk Assessment: Building Community Resilience. In Duyne
Barenstein, J.E. and Leemann, E. (Eds.). Post-Disaster Reconstruction and Change. Communities’
Perspectives. Boca Raton/London/New York: CPC Press

18