Flera kriser har testat Sveriges krishanteringssystem, exempelvis Tsunamin i Indonesien2004, stormen Gudrun 2005 och evakueringen från Libanon 2006. Det har visat sig attkriskommunikationen brister mellan de många olika aktörer som är och måste varainvolverade vid en kris. På lokal nivå är kommunen, enligt lag (SFS 2006:544), ansvarig förkrishanteringen. För att kommunen ska kunna hantera en kris är en väl fungerandekriskommunikation avgörande. Samverkan och tekniska informationssystem är två verktyg för att utvecklakriskommunikationen. Hur skapas samverkan och hur väljer kommuner tekniskainformationssystem inom krisberedskap? Frågeställningarna besvaras genom kvalitativa fallstudier på kommunal nivå. Två fall harstuderats, ett om skapande av samverkan och ett om val av tekniska informationssystem inomkrisberedskap. Fallstudierna analyseras med stöd av teorier om policynätverk,implementeringsteori och styrningsstrukturerna government och governance. För att inter-kommunal samverkan ska skapas inom krisberedskap visade studien att delningav resurser är viktigt. Kommunerna fick kostandseffektivt en krisberedskap med god kvalité.Samtidigt blev de beroende av varandra. Det som försvårade samverkan var geografiskahinder, kommunstorlek, avsaknad av tradition och ömsesidig förståelse, samt ovilja att ge uppsin självständighet. Vid kommunernas val av tekniska system var det betydelsefullt med sociala relationer,kommunstorlek, teknikens komplexitet och hur arbetet leddes med att välja system – om detfanns en drivande nyckelperson. Generellt valde mindre kommuner ett statligt teknisktinformationssystem som var gratis medan större kommuner var mer intresserade av system påden privata marknaden med fler funktioner och högre komplexitet. Hur kommuner valdetekniska informationssystem varierade således. Kort sagt, det som visade sig ha betydelse i båda fallstudierna var kompetensen hos dekommunala tjänstemännen och deras sociala relationer, styrningsstrukturen från statligt håll(där mer mjuka än hårda instrument användes), samt kommunstorlek (det fanns en skillnadmellan små och stora kommuner). / <p>I avhandlingen är ISBN 978-91-7393-263-0 felaktigt. ISBN korrigerat i denna post.</p>

<p>This thesis will look into what kind of solutions a company or a private person can use if they want to create a dynamic website using only free software. To do this we divided our work in two parts. In the first part, we developed a dynamic website for a Swedish company. On the server side we used exclusively free software with open source code. There are different meanings in how the term “free” should be used when referring to software, which we will explain in the thesis. We have also chosen to work with the XMLtechnology to see if it lives up to its expectations and to see if we could benefit from the technology. Alongside with the development of our site, another company developed a site for the same company as us, by using non-free software. We have described both implementations and compared them to see if it is possible to do the same thing with both free and non-free software. </p><p>The investigating part of our work consisted of getting information about what other people think about the free software phenomenon. To do so we created an online questionnaire where we randomly picked 100 Swedish web agencies and asked them to answer 8 questions about what kind of software they used in their company, and what they thought about free software. To get some more opinions we also interviewed two persons involved in these kinds of topics. Jan Sandred, who is a well known expert advisor in topics concerning the Information Technology area and Richard Stallman, the founder of GNU and the Free Software Movement. </p><p>The reason for dividing the thesis in two parts was to get an overall picture on the subject. We did not only want to base our results on other people’s thoughts. We wanted to make our own conclusions based on the implementation we did. This approach showed out to be very good. We got to try working with free software ourselves to see its pros and cons and build our own opinions about it. We could then proceed to compare our impressions to other people’s impressions about free software.</p>

This thesis will look into what kind of solutions a company or a private person can use if they want to create a dynamic website using only free software. To do this we divided our work in two parts. In the first part, we developed a dynamic website for a Swedish company. On the server side we used exclusively free software with open source code. There are different meanings in how the term “free” should be used when referring to software, which we will explain in the thesis. We have also chosen to work with the XMLtechnology to see if it lives up to its expectations and to see if we could benefit from the technology. Alongside with the development of our site, another company developed a site for the same company as us, by using non-free software. We have described both implementations and compared them to see if it is possible to do the same thing with both free and non-free software. The investigating part of our work consisted of getting information about what other people think about the free software phenomenon. To do so we created an online questionnaire where we randomly picked 100 Swedish web agencies and asked them to answer 8 questions about what kind of software they used in their company, and what they thought about free software. To get some more opinions we also interviewed two persons involved in these kinds of topics. Jan Sandred, who is a well known expert advisor in topics concerning the Information Technology area and Richard Stallman, the founder of GNU and the Free Software Movement. The reason for dividing the thesis in two parts was to get an overall picture on the subject. We did not only want to base our results on other people’s thoughts. We wanted to make our own conclusions based on the implementation we did. This approach showed out to be very good. We got to try working with free software ourselves to see its pros and cons and build our own opinions about it. We could then proceed to compare our impressions to other people’s impressions about free software.