Abstract   At the present time no one is oblivious of Covid-19:s widely-spread effect on our society. States and governments all over the world were forced to take drastic decisions which in turn have had impacts on our democracy, freedom, lives and livelihood. The purpose of this study is to contribute to knowledge regarding the challenges democracy faces in the midst of a pandemic where restrictive measurements are enforced. Sweden and Finland had contrasting outcomes in their enforcement of measures during the crisis – despite the striking similarities between the two countries systems, democratic standards and values. What kind of democratic challenges do both countries face in the midst of a pandemic where restrictive measurements are enforced? And how do respective countries go about balancing their democratic values with certain undemocratic measurements?  Both countries’ crisis management and measurements will be analyzed to see if their democratic challenges differ from a crisis management perspective. Furthermore, both countries’ approach regarding crisis management will be analyzed to see it there is a clear discrepancy. The material used was Finland’s memorandum regarding their state of emergency and Sweden’s memorandum regarding extension of the Covid-19-law along with the social committee report on a temporary Covid-19-law. By using Carol Bacchi’s WPR-approach both countries documents were analyzed, the study found similarities but mostly differences in which separate and similar problem’s were represented, which might explain why Sweden and Finland had contrasting outcomes on their decision-making and measures. Proposals for further studies is to research the long-term effects on the measures that were taken, expand to different levels of society for instance regions as well as municipalities, and lastly to study the potential long-term effects on the democratic standard that laws and restrictive measures might have.

Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka Jämställdhetsmyndighetens styrdokument. Undersökningen görs på två sätt, och de svarar mot var sin frågeställning: det ena är en diskursanalys, som utgår från Ernesto Laclau och Chantal Mouffes diskursteori och begrepp. Den ska svara på frågan om vilka diskursiva begrepp som används i styrdokumentet. Det andra är Carol Bacchi’s sex frågor, som används för att analysera policydokument. Metoden kallas What’s the problem represented to be, WPR-metoden. WPR-metoden svarar på frågan om vad styrdokumentets problembeskrivning leder till. En kort sammanfattning av resultaten kan vara: de viktigaste diskursiva begreppen som används av Jämställdhetsmyndighetens styrdokument, är ”jämställdhet”, ”mäns våld mot kvinnor”, könen ”kvinna” och ”man”. Och styrdokumentets problembeskrivning leder till ett jämställdhetsarbete i myndigheter som kallas för jämställdhetsintegrering.

I takt med att det säkerhetspolitiska omvärldsläget förändrats har frågor kring statens förmåga att möta kriser och rena krigshandlingar accentuerats. En statlig utredning har därför föreslagit att på sikt skapa ett samlat sjöförsvar genom att integrera Kustbevakningen och Marinen i en gemensam myndighet. Riktningen på de politiska besluten har dock gått åt en fördjupad samverkan i stället trots att samverkan mellan Försvarsmakten och Kustbevakningen varit behäftad med svårigheter. Denna studie syftar till att analysera varför man i Sverige valt att utöka samverkan mellan Försvarsmakten och Kustbevakningen. Studien är en kvalitativ fallstudie där WPR-metoden används för att analysera SOU 2012:48 kompletterad med en samtalsintervju av en informant vid Försvarsdepartementet. Teoretisk utgångspunkt utgörs av Sundelius m.fl. forskning kring svensk nationell krishantering. Sammanfattningsvis kan konstateras att det inte finns någon politisk vilja till en sammanslagning. Detta grundar sig på en generell ovilja att blanda civila och militära uppgifter samt att man fram tills nyligen inte låtit statens förmåga att hantera kriser och ytterst ett väpnat angrepp vara dimensionerande. Vår slutsats är för att uppnå bästa möjliga operativa förmåga för staten att kunna hantera framtida kriser, och ytterst ett väpnat angrepp, så är en integrering av Kustbevakningen och Marinen i en och samma myndighet den bästa lösningen. / Along the changes in the security situation in the world, questions about the government's ability to face crisis and acts of war have risen. An official report of the Swedish Government has suggested that an integration of the Coast Guard and the Navy into a consolidated maritime defence force is needed in the future. The aim of governmental policy has despite this been on focusing on cooperation despite difficulties regarding the relationship between the Navy and the Coast Guard in cooperating. This study aims to analyze why Sweden has chosen to increase cooperation between the two authorities. The study is a qualitative case study in which WPR-approach is used to analyze the official government report supplemented by an interview with a ministry of defence official. The theoretical basis is the research of Sundelius et al consisting of theories regarding Swedish national crisis management. In summary - no political will exists regarding consolidation. It stems from a general unwillingness in mixing civilian and military tasks and that up until recently the government's ability to handle crisis, and ultimately war, was not the dimensioning aim. The conclusion is that in order to achieve the optimal ability for the government in handling future crisis and full war, an integration of the Coast Guard and Navy into one authority is the best solution.

This study is a qualitative text analysis of the state's public inquiry (SOU 2018:57) according to Carol Bacchi's (2009) Foucault-influenced analysis tool: "What's the Problem Represented to be?" (WPR) which is based in poststructuralist theory. The policy's incentives are the international measurements of fourth-grade and 15-year-olds' reading comprehension, PIRLS and PISA respectively. Quantitative measurements in large population groups are generally stated as motives for initiating policies in contemporary welfare states. The starting point in this study is class as class aspects tend to be toned down in today's society despite the fact that parents' level of education has an approximately as strong connection with basic reading skills and in the long run school results as with the variables gender and Swedish/foreign background together. Based on class the purpose of the study is to investigate how the state's public inquiry, which addresses all children's and young people's reading, assumes that the spread of reading comprehension has increased for decades between socioeconomic groups of children and young people in Sweden alongside with school segregation. The conclusion is that the policy's represented "problem" is a decreasing reading interest in all student groups including the middle class which can affect personal finances and Sweden's position in competition between OECD-countries. The "problem" is furthermore that not all parents have similar resources or attitudes to their children's reading comprehension and reading habits, basically culture and education, as the ideal middle class parent. According to the WPR method "problem" representations within policies result in effects for people, and thus a large share of the population: the group of children, young people and their parents who are highlighted in the study tend, from the position from which the policy is produced, "the bourgeois gaze", to disappear and at the same time to be singled out through the neoliberal and neo-philantrophic discourses that underpins it.

By using a poststructural discourse analysis, this study aims to investigate how the Swedish Armed Forces formulates the preventive work against discrimination due to sexual orientation and transgender identity or expression. The aim is to also bring knowledge of how the preventive work affect the work environment and the possible consequences for LGBTQ-people within the organisation.  The method “What’s the problem represented to be” by Carol Bacchi is used to analyse the chosen material of policies and qualitative interviews to find out what shapes the preventive work, how it has come about and the effects on different groups in the organisation. Theoretical concepts as hegemonic masculinity, queer, heteronormativity, peripheral inclusion and homonationalism is used as theoretical frame and applied throughout the method. This study shows preventive work tend to focus on Pride and attitudes, rather than questioning structures within the organisation. As result, the heteronormativity and hegemonic masculinity within the organisation is not disrupted and LGB-people in the organisation still perceive homophobic tendencies as part of the work environment.