För att den gröna industrialiseringen i Sverige ska lyckas behöver över 100 000 personer flytta till berörda kommuner för att arbeta inom de nya branscher som etableras samt stötta upp inom välfärdssektorn. Denna studie undersöker hur Luleå kommun kan motivera fler att vilja leva i Luleå genom att skapa en omgivning med hög livskvalitet för nuvarande befolkning och för kompetens i andra städer. Studien använder kapabilitetsteori för att utreda vilka faktorer som är viktiga för att öka viljan för nuvarande befolkning att stanna samt stärka kompetensförsörjningen inom välfärdssektorn. Studien använder sig av triangulering av blandad metodik där data samlades in genom en enkät, en fokusgrupp, och ett dataunderlag angående faktorer för trivsel. Studien belyser att befolkningen inte upplever sig hörda i sin oro inför industrialiseringens potentiella baksidor och understryker behovet av fungerande välfärd och förbättrad tillgänglighet. Genom att undersöka specifika yrkesgrupper bidrar studien med att belysa skillnader mellan professioners motivation att flytta och gemensamma tendenser. Slutligen finner studien att det är utmanande att motivera inflyttning till en tidigare ej familjär plats, vilket understryker betydelsen av att fokusera på att tilltala de som redan har en koppling till Luleå / It is estimated that for the green industrialization in Sweden to succeed, over 100 000 individuals need to relocate to municipalities in question to contribute with competence to the emerging industries. Consequently, there is a need to balance the growth of industrialization with adequate growth within the welfare sector. The study examines how Luleå municipality can motivate residency by cultivating an environment that encourages a high quality of life for both current residents and welfare professionals residing in other cities. Further the study uses capability theory to investigate which quality of life factors are of importance to retain current residents and attract people with necessary competence within the healthcare and educational sector. Triangulation of mixed research methods was used to gain multiple perspectives of wanting to live in a place collected from a questionnaire, a focus group, and a data set on which factors promoted a desire to stay in Luleå Municipality. The study reveals that current residents feel a lack of representation of their concerns about the downsides of industrialization, highlighting the importance of functioning welfare institutions, as well as improved connectivity. In looking into specific occupational groups, the thesis contributes with revealing the differences in motivations for migration, while also highlighting similarities. Finally, the study finds that motivating migration to a previously unfamiliar location is difficult, highlighting the importance of instead targeting people with familiarity to Luleå municipality.

The primary goal of this work is to answer this question: if Artificial Intelligences (AI) are proper subjects of moral consideration, then should we develop such AI – that is, AI worthy of moral consideration of its own accord? To answer the above question, it is necessary to provide a systematic overview of whether AI are, or could be, subjects of moral consideration. By combining P. Wang’s definition of AI with AK.M. Andersson’s “The Relevant Similarity Theory”, I aim to identify conditions under which an AI could be demarcated as a proper subject of moral consideration. As a comparison, I also combine Wang’s definition with M.C. Nussbaum’s “Capability Theory”. The proposed theories have two strengths in common – namely that they each are good and contemporary examples of two influential families of views in ethics, and that they, together, represent a fairly wide spectrum of ethical theory. Using the insights gained I first develop an argument showing that beings classifiable as AI under Wang’s definition of intelligence would be correctly demarcated as proper subjects of moral consideration, regardless of preference of the two moral theories. I then develop an argument answering my primary question as such: if AI are proper subjects of moral consideration, then we should not develop AI further. / <p>HT 2021</p>