Internationella infrastrukturprojekt är globala och offentliga processer. Globala kan de anses vara för att flera länder är involverade, och offentliga är de för att allmänheten måste vara deltagande part under processens gång. Bosnien och Hercegovina är det enda landet i Europa som inte byggt en motorväg. Landet är ett efterkrigsland som har haft svårigheter med uppbyggnaden av infrastrukturen. Det största problemet var bristen på statliga finanser. 1997 blev BiH medlem i PETrN (Pan European Transport Net), varefter planerna för ett motorvägsbygge återinfördes och denna gång blev allvarligt studerade. Projektet fick namnet “5c”, ett vägnät som skulle integrera landet med resten av Europa. Under de senaste 5 åren har motorvägen varit aktuell. Problemen uppstod när finansieringsfrågan framträdde. Staten hade svårigheter med budgeten och privata investerare söktes. Ett stort bolag ställde upp på att finansiera hela projektet men motstånd fanns hos de politiska partierna. I samband med det här projektet har jag beskrivit ett annat, lyckat projekt, nämligen Öresundsbron. Öresundsprojektet har blivit lyckat eftersom resultaten visat sig positiva och framgångsrika. Frågan blir, vilka svårigheter måste BiH bemöta för att lyckas lika bra som Sverige gjorde. Infrastrukturprojekt har alltid haft anhängare och motståndare. Orsaken har att göra med projektets betydelse och vad det kommer att medföra. Allteftersom projektet är allmänt och berör alla så medför det eventuell kritik. De olika deltagande strävar efter olika mål och kräver olika lösningar. En beslutsprocess tar tid. Deltagare träffas vid särskilda sammanträden och förhandlar. Fördröjningar blir vanliga pga. deltagarnas olika intressen. Målet blir att åstadkomma kompromiss och finna lösningar på problemen. Men blir alla parter verkligen nöjda i slutändan?

<p> <p>&nbsp / </p> </p> <p align="left">Whilst policy formulation has been extensively studied and theorised in the literature, far less attention has been paid until fairly recently to the issue of policy implementation. For a long time it was more or less assumed that once policy was formulated, implementation was a relatively straightforward administrative matter. In the past twenty or thirty years, however, public administration scholars (such as Pressman and Wildavsky and, in the South African context, Brynard and de Coning) have devoted more attention to unravelling the complexities of policy implementation. The current study intends to apply these more theoretical approaches to an analysis of the implementation of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare with particular respect to children in conflict with the law, focusing specifically on the One Stop Child Justice Centre in Mangaung, Bloemfontein. Welfare Service in South Africa before 1994 had a racial bias with services mostly unavailable to the majority of the citizens of the country. The 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare, based on a developmental approach to social welfare, was designed to take the country in a new and inclusive direction. In line with South Africa&rsquo / s 1996 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international instruments, Section 4 of Chapter 8 of the White Paper focuses on crime prevention through development and restorative justice, and recommends diversion wherever possible in the case of juveniles. With respect to Juvenile justice, this section of the White Paper makes provision for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres, where a variety of services, from Social Development, the Department of Justice, the South African Police Services, Correctional Services, and the NPA, would be available to clients under one roof. All of these role players, it was envisaged, would operate as a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the objectives of the White Paper with respect to developmental and restorative forms of justice. The Centre at Mangaung is one of only a few centres to have been established as yet in South Africa. Although focusing in particular on the implementation of the 1997 White Paper, the study is also informed by other policy and legislative measures with respect to juvenile justice, in particular the Child Justice Bill of 2002 (now the Child Justice Act of 2008) and the Probation Services Amendment Act of 2002. It is generally accepted by the Government and its critics alike that the policy scene in South Africa in the period since 1994 has been characterized by good policies but poor execution. This is, however, a relatively untested hypothesis and needs further investigation. In the light of this, it is anticipated, that the present study will make a contribution to the literature on policy implementation in South Africa, as well as providing useful insights and lessons that can inform general government policy in this regard, and policy with respect to juvenile justice in particular. Within the general context of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare and the Department of Social Development&rsquo / s Integrated Service Delivery Model, and the specific context of the Mangaung One Stop Child Justice Centre, the overall purpose of the study is to scrutinize the apparent discontinuity between policy design on the one hand and policy implementation on the other. More specifically, though, the objectives of the study are: (i) to examine the content of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare in general and more specifically the section on children in conflict with the law, (ii) to provide a historical overview of the delivery of services to youth in conflict with the law prior to the first democratic elections (1994) in South Africa, (iii) to examine what the concept of &lsquo / integrated service delivery&rsquo / means to the different role-players at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (iv) to examine the existing resources (human, financial and other) for successful implementation of the policy,(v) to examine whether there are procedures in place to encourage co-operation among stakeholders at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (vi) to examine the successes, challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of this policy at the One Stop Child Justice Centre and, (vii) to identify gaps between policy and implementation and make recommendations towards more successful implementation. Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Centre Manager and senior representatives of all the services involved (Social Development, the SAPS, Magistrates, the Probation Service, and Prosecutors). The interview questions focus mainly on implementation issues and challenges, but also gather information on the knowledge of the interviewees on the content of the policy. In addition, in order to validate and compare the data collected from these respondents, semi-structured interviews were held with six parents/guardians of children in conflict with the law who had been serviced by the centre. Official documents of the centre, such as annual reports, were also consulted for purposes of triangulation. Detailed transcripts will be made of all the interviews. In analysing the data, use was made in particular of the 5C Protocol advocated by Brynard and De Coning (2006) in their study of policy implementation in South Africa. The five C&rsquo / s include the Content of the policy, the Context in which the policy is implemented, Commitment from those implementing the policy, the role of Clients and Coalitions, and the Capacity of those tasked with implementing the policy. In addition other C&rsquo / s which have an impact on policy implementation (such as communication, co-ordination, and change management) will also be considered. Confidentiality of data gathered and anonymity of respondents were ensured by not requiring any personal details from the survey instruments. The sole purpose of using the data gathered for research was communicated to the respondents on the front page of the survey instruments. The choice of also not answering questions raised was respected.</p>

<p>&nbsp / </p> <p>&nbsp / </p> <p>&nbsp / </p> <p align="left">Whilst policy formulation has been extensively studied and theorised in the literature, far less attention has been paid until fairly recently to the issue of policy implementation. For a long time it was more or less assumed that once policy was formulated, implementation was a relatively straightforward administrative matter. In the past twenty or thirty years, however, public administration scholars (such as Pressman and Wildavsky and, in the South African context, Brynard and de Coning) have devoted more attention to unravelling the complexities of policy implementation. The current study intends to apply these more theoretical approaches to an analysis of the implementation of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare with particular respect to children in conflict with the law, focusing specifically on the One Stop Child Justice Centre in Mangaung, Bloemfontein. Welfare Service in South Africa before 1994 had a racial bias with services mostly unavailable to the majority of the citizens of the country. The 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare, based on a developmental approach to social welfare, was designed to take the country in a new and inclusive direction. In line with South Africa&rsquo / s 1996 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international instruments, Section 4 of Chapter 8 of the White Paper focuses on crime prevention through development and restorative justice, and recommends diversion wherever possible in the case of juveniles. With respect to Juvenile justice, this section of the White Paper makes provision for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres, where a variety of services, from Social Development, the Department of Justice, the South African Police Services, Correctional Services, and the NPA, would be available to clients under one roof. All of these role players, it was envisaged, would operate as a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the objectives of the White Paper with respect to developmental and restorative forms of justice. The Centre at Mangaung is one of only a few centres to have been established as yet in South Africa. Although focusing in particular on the implementation of the 1997 White Paper, the study is also informed by other policy and legislative measures with respect to juvenile justice, in particular the Child Justice Bill of 2002 (now the Child Justice Act of 2008) and the Probation Services Amendment Act of 2002. It is generally accepted by the Government and its critics alike that the policy scene in South Africa in the period since 1994 has been characterized by good policies but poor execution. This is, however, a relatively untested hypothesis and needs further investigation. In the light of this, it is anticipated, that the present study will make a contribution to the literature on policy implementation in South Africa, as well as providing useful insights and&nbsp / sessons that can inform general government policy in this regard, and policy with respect to juvenile justice in particular. Within the general context of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare and the Department of Social Development&rsquo / s Integrated Service Delivery Model, and the specific context of the Mangaung One Stop Child Justice Centre, the overall purpose of the study is to scrutinize the apparent discontinuity between policy design on the one hand and policy implementation on the other. More specifically, though, the objectives of the study are: (i) to examine the content of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare in general and more specifically the section on children in conflict with the law, (ii) to provide a historical overview of the delivery of services to youth in conflict with the law prior to the first democratic elections (1994) in South Africa, (iii) to examine what the concept of &lsquo / integrated service delivery&rsquo / means to the different role-players at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (iv) to examine the existing resources (human, financial and other) for successful implementation of the policy, (v) to examine whether there are procedures in place to encourage co-operation among stakeholders at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (vi) to examine the successes, challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of this policy at the One Stop Child Justice Centre and, (vii) to identify gaps between policy and implementation and make recommendations towards more successful implementation. Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Centre Manager and senior representatives of all the services involved (Social Development, the SAPS, Magistrates, the Probation Service, and Prosecutors). The interview questions focus mainly on implementation issues and challenges, but also gather information on the knowledge of the interviewees on the content of the policy. In addition, in order to validate and compare the data collected from these respondents, semi-structured interviews were held with six parents/guardians of children in conflict with the law who had been serviced by the centre. Official documents of the centre, such as annual reports, were also consulted for purposes of triangulation. Detailed transcripts will be made of all the interviews. In analysing the data, use was made in particular of the 5C Protocol advocated by Brynard and De Coning (2006) in their study of policy implementation in South Africa. The five C&rsquo / s include the Content of the policy, the Context in which the policy is implemented, Commitment from those implementing the policy, the role of Clients and Coalitions, and the Capacity of those tasked with implementing the policy. In addition other C&rsquo / s which have an impact on policy implementation (such as communication, co-ordination, and change management) will also be considered. Confidentiality of data gathered and anonymity of respondents were ensured by not requiring any personal details from the survey instruments. The sole purpose of using the data gathered for research was communicated to the respondents on the front page of the survey instruments. The choice of also not answering questions raised was respected.</p>

<p> <p>&nbsp / </p> </p> <p align="left">Whilst policy formulation has been extensively studied and theorised in the literature, far less attention has been paid until fairly recently to the issue of policy implementation. For a long time it was more or less assumed that once policy was formulated, implementation was a relatively straightforward administrative matter. In the past twenty or thirty years, however, public administration scholars (such as Pressman and Wildavsky and, in the South African context, Brynard and de Coning) have devoted more attention to unravelling the complexities of policy implementation. The current study intends to apply these more theoretical approaches to an analysis of the implementation of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare with particular respect to children in conflict with the law, focusing specifically on the One Stop Child Justice Centre in Mangaung, Bloemfontein. Welfare Service in South Africa before 1994 had a racial bias with services mostly unavailable to the majority of the citizens of the country. The 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare, based on a developmental approach to social welfare, was designed to take the country in a new and inclusive direction. In line with South Africa&rsquo / s 1996 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international instruments, Section 4 of Chapter 8 of the White Paper focuses on crime prevention through development and restorative justice, and recommends diversion wherever possible in the case of juveniles. With respect to Juvenile justice, this section of the White Paper makes provision for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres, where a variety of services, from Social Development, the Department of Justice, the South African Police Services, Correctional Services, and the NPA, would be available to clients under one roof. All of these role players, it was envisaged, would operate as a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the objectives of the White Paper with respect to developmental and restorative forms of justice. The Centre at Mangaung is one of only a few centres to have been established as yet in South Africa. Although focusing in particular on the implementation of the 1997 White Paper, the study is also informed by other policy and legislative measures with respect to juvenile justice, in particular the Child Justice Bill of 2002 (now the Child Justice Act of 2008) and the Probation Services Amendment Act of 2002. It is generally accepted by the Government and its critics alike that the policy scene in South Africa in the period since 1994 has been characterized by good policies but poor execution. This is, however, a relatively untested hypothesis and needs further investigation. In the light of this, it is anticipated, that the present study will make a contribution to the literature on policy implementation in South Africa, as well as providing useful insights and lessons that can inform general government policy in this regard, and policy with respect to juvenile justice in particular. Within the general context of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare and the Department of Social Development&rsquo / s Integrated Service Delivery Model, and the specific context of the Mangaung One Stop Child Justice Centre, the overall purpose of the study is to scrutinize the apparent discontinuity between policy design on the one hand and policy implementation on the other. More specifically, though, the objectives of the study are: (i) to examine the content of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare in general and more specifically the section on children in conflict with the law, (ii) to provide a historical overview of the delivery of services to youth in conflict with the law prior to the first democratic elections (1994) in South Africa, (iii) to examine what the concept of &lsquo / integrated service delivery&rsquo / means to the different role-players at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (iv) to examine the existing resources (human, financial and other) for successful implementation of the policy,(v) to examine whether there are procedures in place to encourage co-operation among stakeholders at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (vi) to examine the successes, challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of this policy at the One Stop Child Justice Centre and, (vii) to identify gaps between policy and implementation and make recommendations towards more successful implementation. Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Centre Manager and senior representatives of all the services involved (Social Development, the SAPS, Magistrates, the Probation Service, and Prosecutors). The interview questions focus mainly on implementation issues and challenges, but also gather information on the knowledge of the interviewees on the content of the policy. In addition, in order to validate and compare the data collected from these respondents, semi-structured interviews were held with six parents/guardians of children in conflict with the law who had been serviced by the centre. Official documents of the centre, such as annual reports, were also consulted for purposes of triangulation. Detailed transcripts will be made of all the interviews. In analysing the data, use was made in particular of the 5C Protocol advocated by Brynard and De Coning (2006) in their study of policy implementation in South Africa. The five C&rsquo / s include the Content of the policy, the Context in which the policy is implemented, Commitment from those implementing the policy, the role of Clients and Coalitions, and the Capacity of those tasked with implementing the policy. In addition other C&rsquo / s which have an impact on policy implementation (such as communication, co-ordination, and change management) will also be considered. Confidentiality of data gathered and anonymity of respondents were ensured by not requiring any personal details from the survey instruments. The sole purpose of using the data gathered for research was communicated to the respondents on the front page of the survey instruments. The choice of also not answering questions raised was respected.</p>

<p>&nbsp / </p> <p>&nbsp / </p> <p>&nbsp / </p> <p align="left">Whilst policy formulation has been extensively studied and theorised in the literature, far less attention has been paid until fairly recently to the issue of policy implementation. For a long time it was more or less assumed that once policy was formulated, implementation was a relatively straightforward administrative matter. In the past twenty or thirty years, however, public administration scholars (such as Pressman and Wildavsky and, in the South African context, Brynard and de Coning) have devoted more attention to unravelling the complexities of policy implementation. The current study intends to apply these more theoretical approaches to an analysis of the implementation of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare with particular respect to children in conflict with the law, focusing specifically on the One Stop Child Justice Centre in Mangaung, Bloemfontein. Welfare Service in South Africa before 1994 had a racial bias with services mostly unavailable to the majority of the citizens of the country. The 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare, based on a developmental approach to social welfare, was designed to take the country in a new and inclusive direction. In line with South Africa&rsquo / s 1996 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international instruments, Section 4 of Chapter 8 of the White Paper focuses on crime prevention through development and restorative justice, and recommends diversion wherever possible in the case of juveniles. With respect to Juvenile justice, this section of the White Paper makes provision for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres, where a variety of services, from Social Development, the Department of Justice, the South African Police Services, Correctional Services, and the NPA, would be available to clients under one roof. All of these role players, it was envisaged, would operate as a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the objectives of the White Paper with respect to developmental and restorative forms of justice. The Centre at Mangaung is one of only a few centres to have been established as yet in South Africa. Although focusing in particular on the implementation of the 1997 White Paper, the study is also informed by other policy and legislative measures with respect to juvenile justice, in particular the Child Justice Bill of 2002 (now the Child Justice Act of 2008) and the Probation Services Amendment Act of 2002. It is generally accepted by the Government and its critics alike that the policy scene in South Africa in the period since 1994 has been characterized by good policies but poor execution. This is, however, a relatively untested hypothesis and needs further investigation. In the light of this, it is anticipated, that the present study will make a contribution to the literature on policy implementation in South Africa, as well as providing useful insights and&nbsp / sessons that can inform general government policy in this regard, and policy with respect to juvenile justice in particular. Within the general context of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare and the Department of Social Development&rsquo / s Integrated Service Delivery Model, and the specific context of the Mangaung One Stop Child Justice Centre, the overall purpose of the study is to scrutinize the apparent discontinuity between policy design on the one hand and policy implementation on the other. More specifically, though, the objectives of the study are: (i) to examine the content of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare in general and more specifically the section on children in conflict with the law, (ii) to provide a historical overview of the delivery of services to youth in conflict with the law prior to the first democratic elections (1994) in South Africa, (iii) to examine what the concept of &lsquo / integrated service delivery&rsquo / means to the different role-players at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (iv) to examine the existing resources (human, financial and other) for successful implementation of the policy, (v) to examine whether there are procedures in place to encourage co-operation among stakeholders at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (vi) to examine the successes, challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of this policy at the One Stop Child Justice Centre and, (vii) to identify gaps between policy and implementation and make recommendations towards more successful implementation. Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Centre Manager and senior representatives of all the services involved (Social Development, the SAPS, Magistrates, the Probation Service, and Prosecutors). The interview questions focus mainly on implementation issues and challenges, but also gather information on the knowledge of the interviewees on the content of the policy. In addition, in order to validate and compare the data collected from these respondents, semi-structured interviews were held with six parents/guardians of children in conflict with the law who had been serviced by the centre. Official documents of the centre, such as annual reports, were also consulted for purposes of triangulation. Detailed transcripts will be made of all the interviews. In analysing the data, use was made in particular of the 5C Protocol advocated by Brynard and De Coning (2006) in their study of policy implementation in South Africa. The five C&rsquo / s include the Content of the policy, the Context in which the policy is implemented, Commitment from those implementing the policy, the role of Clients and Coalitions, and the Capacity of those tasked with implementing the policy. In addition other C&rsquo / s which have an impact on policy implementation (such as communication, co-ordination, and change management) will also be considered. Confidentiality of data gathered and anonymity of respondents were ensured by not requiring any personal details from the survey instruments. The sole purpose of using the data gathered for research was communicated to the respondents on the front page of the survey instruments. The choice of also not answering questions raised was respected.</p>

Masters in Public Administration - MPA / Whilst policy formulation has been extensively studied and theorised in the literature, far less attention has been paid until fairly recently to the issue of policy implementation. For a long time it was more or less assumed that once policy was formulated, implementation was a relatively straightforward administrative matter. In the past twenty or thirty years, however, public administration scholars (such as Pressman and Wildavsky and, in the South African context, Brynard and de Coning) have devoted more attention to unravelling the complexities of policy implementation. The current study intends to apply these more theoretical approaches to an analysis of the implementation of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare with particular respect to children in conflict with the law, focusing specifically on the One Stop Child Justice Centre in Mangaung, Bloemfontein. Welfare Service in South Africa before 1994 had a racial bias with services mostly unavailable to the majority of the citizens of the country. The 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare, based on a developmental approach to social welfare, was designed to take the country in a new and inclusive direction. In line with South Africa’s 1996 ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other international instruments, Section 4 of Chapter 8 of the White Paper focuses on crime prevention through development and restorative justice, and recommends diversion wherever possible in the case of juveniles. With respect to Juvenile justice, this section of the White Paper makes provision for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres, where a variety of services, from Social Development, the Department of Justice, the South African Police Services, Correctional Services, and the NPA, would be available to clients under one roof. All of these role players, it was envisaged, would operate as a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the objectives of the White Paper with respect to developmental and restorative forms of justice. The Centre at Mangaung is one of only a few centres to have been established as yet in South Africa. Although focusing in particular on the implementation of the 1997 White Paper, the study is also informed by other policy and legislative measures with respect to juvenile justice, in particular the Child Justice Bill of 2002 (now the Child Justice Act of 2008) and the Probation Services Amendment Act of 2002. It is generally accepted by the Government and its critics alike that the policy scene in South Africa in the period since 1994 has been characterized by good policies but poor execution. This is, however, a relatively untested hypothesis and needs further investigation. In the light of this, it is anticipated, that the present study will make a contribution to the literature on policy implementation in South Africa, as well as providing useful insights and lessons that can inform general government policy in this regard, and policy with respect to juvenile justice in particular. Within the general context of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare and the Department of Social Development’s Integrated Service Delivery Model, and the specific context of the Mangaung One Stop Child Justice Centre, the overall purpose of the study is to scrutinize the apparent discontinuity between policy design on the one hand and policy implementation on the other. More specifically, though, the objectives of the study are: (i) to examine the content of the 1997 White Paper for Social Welfare in general and more specifically the section on children in conflict with the law, (ii) to provide a historical overview of the delivery of services to youth in conflict with the law prior to the first democratic elections (1994) in South Africa, (iii) to examine what the concept of ‘integrated service delivery’ means to the different role-players at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (iv) to examine the existing resources (human, financial and other) for successful implementation of the policy,(v) to examine whether there are procedures in place to encourage co-operation among stakeholders at the One Stop Child Justice Centre, (vi) to examine the successes, challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of this policy at the One Stop Child Justice Centre and, (vii) to identify gaps between policy and implementation and make recommendations towards more successful implementation. Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Centre Manager and senior representatives of all the services involved (Social Development, the SAPS, Magistrates, the Probation Service, and Prosecutors). The interview questions focus mainly on implementation issues and challenges, but also gather information on the knowledge of the interviewees on the content of the policy. In addition, in order to validate and compare the data collected from these respondents, semi-structured interviews were held with six parents/guardians of children in conflict with the law who had been serviced by the centre. Official documents of the centre, such as annual reports, were also consulted for purposes of triangulation. Detailed transcripts will be made of all the interviews. In analysing the data, use was made in particular of the 5C Protocol advocated by Brynard and De Coning (2006) in their study of policy implementation in South Africa. The five C’s include the Content of the policy, the Context in which the policy is implemented, Commitment from those implementing the policy, the role of Clients and Coalitions, and the Capacity of those tasked with implementing the policy. In addition other C’s which have an impact on policy implementation (such as communication, co-ordination, and change management) will also be considered. Confidentiality of data gathered and anonymity of respondents were ensured by not requiring any personal details from the survey instruments. The sole purpose of using the data gathered for research was communicated to the respondents on the front page of the survey instruments. The choice of also not answering questions raised was respected.

Tidigare studier har identifierat två olika typer av information som kreditgivarna tar del av för att avgöra om kredittagaren är kapabel att betala sina skulder och fullfölja sina förpliktelser, transaktionsorienterad och relationsorienterad information (Rad et al., 2013; Gray et al., 2006). Dessa två huvudgrupper av information delas upp i olika bedömningsgrunder somSvensson (2003) presenterar i en analysmodell som används som grund för denna studies föreställningsram. Kreditbedömningen baseras till stor del på den finansiella informationen som ingår i den transaktionsorienterade informationen och som finns att tillgå i årsredovisningen. Årsredovisningen är dock en statisk presentation av företaget (Svensson, 2003) och bör därför kompletteras med ytterligare information.Kreditvärdighetsbedömningen sker utifrån företagets fortlevnad, företagets säkerheter och dess framtida värde, där säkerheter är tillgångar ställda som garantier under kredittiden. Dessa ställda säkerheter får ett säkrare värde om företaget har revisor. Med lagändringen som trädde i kraft i november 2010, som resulterade i en avreglering för revisionsplikten för mindre bolag i Sverige, har drygt 40 % av dagens ca 400 000 aktiebolag ingen revisor (Spängs, 2014).Syftet med uppsatsen var att utvärdera och beskriva vilken betydelse hård och mjuk information har för institutionella kreditgivare vid kreditbedömning av små och medelstora företag i Sverige. Vidare var syftet att utvärdera av vilken vikt det är att den transaktionsorienterade informationen är kvalitetssäkrad genom revision. För att uppfylla syftet med studien har en kvantitativ metod med deduktiv ansats använts, där primärdatainsamlats med hjälp av en webbaserad enkät riktad till företagsrådgivare inom bankväsendet som ligger till grund för empirin i denna studie. Det empiriska materialet har sedan analyserats mot sekundärdata som insamlats från vetenskapliga artiklar, litteratur och svenska lagar.Resultatet visar att kreditbedömningen av små och medelstora företag utifrån studiens urval styrker tidigare studier inom området och resultatet tyder på att revision för att kvalitetssäkra den finansiella informationen inte har avgörande roll för kreditbedömningen. Relationsorienterad information används vid kreditbedömning, men nyttjas inte i samma utsträckning som den transaktionsorienterade. (Rad et al., 2013; Gómez-Guillamón, 2003) / Previous studies have identified two different types of information that lenders uses to decide if the borrower is able to pay its debts and fulfil their obligations, transaction-oriented and relationship-oriented information (Rad et al., 2013; Gray et al., 2006). These two main groups of information is divided into different assessment bases, Svensson (2003) presents ananalysis model that is used as the base for this study. Credit assessment is based on the financial information included in the transactional information that is available in the annual report. The annual report is, according to Svensson (2003), a static presentation of the company and should therefore be supplemented with additional information.Creditworthiness is based on the chance of going concern, the company's assets and its future value, where the collateral assets are pledged as guarantees during the credit period. These collateral assets get a more curtain value by the company's auditor. With the amendment which came into force in November 2010, which resulted in a settlement of audit requirementfor smaller companies in Sweden, has just over 40% of today's 400 000 incorporated companies no auditor (Spängs, 2014).The purpose of this paper was to evaluate and describe the significance that accountant information and relations has for institutional lenders in credit rating of SME’s in Sweden. A further purpose was to evaluate the importance of the assurance that the auditing of the transactional information provides. To fulfil the purpose of the study a quantitative method of deductive approach was used, where primary data collected through a web-based surveyaimed at business advisers within the banking system as the basis for empirical data in this study. The empirical data were then analyzed against secondary data collected from scientific articles, literature and Swedish laws.The result shows that the credit assessment of SME’s based on the study sample, evidence of previous studies in the subject and the results indicate that the auditing in ensuring the quality of the financial information not is crucial in the credit assessment. Relationship-oriented information is also used in the credit rating, but is not utilized to the extent as the transactionoriented information. (Rad et al., 2013; Gómez-Guillamón, 2003)