The purpose of this essay is to examine how administrative officers at the Swedish social insurance agency experience and deal with the goal conflicts they may experience. Furthermore, the purpose is to gain a greater understanding on how they perceive their role in the implementation process, and their position as the link between the citizens and the state. Two potential conflicts are examined; between quantitative goals and performance measures and those more qualitative and hard to measure; between economic values such as cost efficiency and productivity and democratic values such as the rule of law. The other conflict examined is that between implementing and following the laws set forth, take into account the individual needs and interests of the citizen. The theoretical framework consists of Lundquist’s theory on public officers as the guardians of democracy, which means that they should not only implement laws and rules according to political intentions, but also make sure that the democratic values and principles are followed in the relationship between state and citizen. Michael Lipsky’s theory on street-level bureaucrats is also used in the analysis.     The study concludes that in the first conflict, they exercise some amount of discretion in prioritizing between the quantitative and qualitative goals, and see a synthesis between quality and quantity. In the other conflict, their discretion is significantly smaller, which makes it difficult to at the same time implement laws and take into account the sometimes unique and complex individual needs they encounter. Thus, their function in this respect is mainly to implement, as the role of the guardian in this conflict is hampered, while it is more applicable in the first one.

Formålet med arbeidet er å som tubaist finne metoder for et uanstrengt spillende. Jeg vil undersøke hvordan man kan systematisk arbeide mot et spillesett der tekniske utfordinger, og mentale sperrer i minst mulig grad hindrer det musikalske uttrykket. Det har skjedd gjennom studier av relevant litteratur av Peter Ralston og Kenny Werner, i kombinasjon med innstudering og analyse av Torbjörn Iwan Lundquists konsert Landskap for tuba, strykeorkester og piano. Studiens metode består av litteraturstudier og praktiske øvinger. I tillegg vil det bli gjort rede for material som utnyttes i innstuderingen og fremføringen av stykket Landskap. I studien kom jeg frem til at det kan være av stor nytte å systematisk analysere et verk, med fokus på tekniske utfordringer, og mulige løsninger. Jeg kom også frem til at man kan gjøre store forbedringer som musiker, ved å metodisk arbeide for å spille mer uanstrengt. / <p>Landskap, Torbjörn Iwan Lundquist</p><p>Medvirkende: Asuka Nakamura - piano</p><p>Sontatine, Eugène Bozza</p><p>Medvirkende: Tamás Mészáros - trompet</p><p>Adam Skogh - trompet</p><p>Amelia Fridfors - trombone</p><p>Jonas Brodin - trombone</p>

<p>Obemannade flygplan med attackförmåga (UCAV) används i allt större utsträckning i konflikter idag. En av de främsta fördelarna med dessa är att det inte finns någon risk att mista en pilot, då dessa är fjärstyrda. I attacker utförda av amerikanska UCAV:er i framför allt Afghanistan och Pakistan, har collateral damage inträffat vid ett flertal tillfällen. Det innebär att civila oavsiktligt fallit offer för attacker. Enligt krigets lagar kan sådana händelser rättfärdigas av att militär nödvändighet föreligger, men det är tveksamt om det går att hävda det när man inte riskerar egna förluster. Detta innebär i så fall att collateral damage alltid är krigsbrott när det orsakats av UCAV. Då är det viktigt att det går att utkräva ansvar ur obemannade system och det finns farhågor att ansvarsförhållandena blir otydligare när det inte sitter en pilot i flygplanet som ”trycker på knappen”. Men så länge den obemannade farkosten fjärrstyrs och besluten tas av en människa går det inte att se några skillnader i möjligheten till ansvarsutkrävande från bemannade system.</p> / <p>The use of Unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAV) has seen an increasing use in modern conflicts. One of the main advantages of these is the fact that there is no risk of losing a pilot, as the aircraft are remote-controlled. The attacks carried out by U.S. UCAVs in Afghanistan and Pakistan have resultet in a number of incients with collateral damage. According to the laws of war, only military necessity can justify such incidents and it is highly doubtful if you can claim such necessity when you do not risk any loss of life yourself. This would mean that collateral damage caused by UCAVs automatically becomes a war crime. This raises the issue of accountability and wether it is possible to extract such from unmanned systems. There are fears that this would be difficult when no pilot is present in the aircraft to ”pull the trigger”. However, as long as operators remotely control the unmanned aircraft and the decision to release weapons in anger are made by humans, there are no differences to be found in terms of accountability between manned and unmanned systems.</p>

Obemannade flygplan med attackförmåga (UCAV) används i allt större utsträckning i konflikter idag. En av de främsta fördelarna med dessa är att det inte finns någon risk att mista en pilot, då dessa är fjärstyrda. I attacker utförda av amerikanska UCAV:er i framför allt Afghanistan och Pakistan, har collateral damage inträffat vid ett flertal tillfällen. Det innebär att civila oavsiktligt fallit offer för attacker. Enligt krigets lagar kan sådana händelser rättfärdigas av att militär nödvändighet föreligger, men det är tveksamt om det går att hävda det när man inte riskerar egna förluster. Detta innebär i så fall att collateral damage alltid är krigsbrott när det orsakats av UCAV. Då är det viktigt att det går att utkräva ansvar ur obemannade system och det finns farhågor att ansvarsförhållandena blir otydligare när det inte sitter en pilot i flygplanet som ”trycker på knappen”. Men så länge den obemannade farkosten fjärrstyrs och besluten tas av en människa går det inte att se några skillnader i möjligheten till ansvarsutkrävande från bemannade system. / The use of Unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAV) has seen an increasing use in modern conflicts. One of the main advantages of these is the fact that there is no risk of losing a pilot, as the aircraft are remote-controlled. The attacks carried out by U.S. UCAVs in Afghanistan and Pakistan have resultet in a number of incients with collateral damage. According to the laws of war, only military necessity can justify such incidents and it is highly doubtful if you can claim such necessity when you do not risk any loss of life yourself. This would mean that collateral damage caused by UCAVs automatically becomes a war crime. This raises the issue of accountability and wether it is possible to extract such from unmanned systems. There are fears that this would be difficult when no pilot is present in the aircraft to ”pull the trigger”. However, as long as operators remotely control the unmanned aircraft and the decision to release weapons in anger are made by humans, there are no differences to be found in terms of accountability between manned and unmanned systems.

Syftet med denna studie är att synliggöra intressekonflikter som uppstått mellan kommun och branschorganisation när en kommun ansökt om att få bli leverantör till Arbetsförmedlingen för en tjänst som tidigare endast upphandlats med privata aktörer. Vidare är vårt syfte att undersöka huruvida demokratiska eller ekonomiska incitament ligger till grund för Karlshamns kommun respektive branschorganisationens ställningstagande i denna fråga. Karlshamns kommun har med bakgrund av SOU 2020:41 Kommuner som utförare av tjänster åt arbetsförmedlingen - en analys av de rättsliga förutsättningarna, skickat in en ansökan till arbetsförmedlingen för tjänsten Kundval Rusta och matcha. Karlshamns kommun var den första kommunen i Sverige att skicka in en sådan ansökan. Genom att analysera primärkällor i form av texter från Karlshamns kommun respektive branschorganisationen Almega med hjälp av Bacchis metod WPR analys avser vi att synliggöra hur problemet representeras från respektive part. Genom att koppla dessa representationer till politisk styrning, offentligt etos och makt visar vårt resultat att Karlshamns kommun drivs av både demokratiska och ekonomiska incitament medan å andra sidan branschorganisationen nästan uteslutande drivs av ekonomiska incitament. Vidare är vår slutsats att nuvarande politiska styrning av den Svenska arbetsmarknadspolitiken inte gynnar ett gott samarbete mellan medverkande på den svenska arbetsmarknadspolitiska arenan. Fokus bör vara den arbetssökande och reformer behöver komma till stånd. Det är Arbetsförmedlingen och därmed staten som besitter ansvaret och makten. Närmare bestämt den strukturella makten att fördela vem som ska få tillgång till kunskap och därmed aktörsmarknaden. I våra referensländer har ansvaret för arbetsmarknadspolitiken decentraliserats till lokala kommuner, vilket är ett alternativ som denna studie föreslår att Sverige bör undersöka närmare. / The purpose of this study is to make visible the conflicts of interest that have arisen between a municipality and one of Sweden's Trade associations. These conflicts arose when the municipality applied to become a provider for the Swedish Public Employment Service regarding a service that so far only has been procured with private actors. Furthermore, this study also aims to investigate whether democratic or economic incentives form the basis for Karlshamn's municipality and the Trade association's position regarding the conflict of interest. Based on SOU 2020:41 Municipalities as providers of services to the employment service - an analysis of the legal conditions, Karlshamn municipality has submitted an application to the Swedish Public Employment Service regarding the Kundval Rusta and matcha. The municipality of Karlshamn was the first municipality in Sweden to submit such an application. By analyzing texts from Karlshamn municipality and the Trade association as primary material through Bacchi's method WPR analysis, we intend to make visible how the problem is represented by each party as well as analyzing the incentives behind the representations of what is perceived as a problem. By linking these representations to political governance, public ethos and power, our results show that Karlshamn's municipality is driven by both democratic and economic incentives, while on the other hand the Trade association is almost exclusively driven by economic incentives. We also conclude that the current political governance of Swedish labor market policy does not favor good cooperation between actors on the Swedish labor market policy arena without reforms having to take place. It is the Swedish Public Employment Service and thus the state that possesses the power, responsibility and more specifically, the structural power to distribute who should have access to the player market. In our reference countries, this responsibility has been decentralized to local municipalities. Which we, after this study, consider to be an alternative that Sweden should investigate further.

<p>The purpose of this essay is to critically review three different contributions to the agency – structure debate from a political science perspective. My opinon is that the agency – structure debate is one of the main problems within the social science. The theories which I will examine are Lennart Berntsons theory from 1974, Lennart Lundquists from 1984 and Walter Carlsnaes from 1992. These political scientists all have different perspectives to the problem. My aim is to compare three theories that is of importance to the problem. But I also want to show that there are problems with each of these theories. No one really solves the problem. I want to shed some light on the different problems which these theories encounter and I also want to show were the solution to these problems might be found.</p><p>It is obvious that the theories have a similar view on the actor (or agent). Each see the actor as both an individual and a collective, such as a party, state or an organisation. They also see the actor in a constant relation to the society. The two main differences between the theories is when it comes to defining the structures and when it comes to trying to connecting the actor with the structure. Berntson sees the connection as mainly classoriented and this provides valuable knowledge to the debate. However, compared to Berntson, Lundquists theory is more thoroughly worked out when it comes to providing knowledge to how agents are affected by structures. This, I would say, is the biggest advantage with Lundquists theory. Finally, Carlsnaes theory, compared to both Berntson and Lundquist, is the least developed one, at least when it comes to defining both the actor and the structure. Though, I still consider his theory of importance. This is because his contribution to the knowledge on how we might explain structural change.</p>

The aim of this study is to investigate the dossier and delegation selections’ pros and cons and examine how the Swedish Migration Agency, in collaboration with UNHCR, work to ensure impartiality and efficiency. The study is based on two theories: the main one is Lennart Lundquist’s theory of democratic and economic values, which we combine with Michael Lipsky’s theory of “street-level bureaucrats” with the bottom-up perspective. By interviewing six people, differently involved in the selection of quota refugees - experts as well as administrators and managers - we arrive at the result that there are both positive and negative parts of the selections and both methods are needed. Democratic and economic values make the foremost sense and we have found that the Swedish Migration Agency works in a way to find a balance between them. This study provides practical knowledge concerning challenges the people working within this area might meet and how they work to solve them. Hopefully, it will inspire people to do more research within this area of interests for a more effective, democratic and equitable selection of quota refugees in the future.

The purpose of this essay is to critically review three different contributions to the agency – structure debate from a political science perspective. My opinon is that the agency – structure debate is one of the main problems within the social science. The theories which I will examine are Lennart Berntsons theory from 1974, Lennart Lundquists from 1984 and Walter Carlsnaes from 1992. These political scientists all have different perspectives to the problem. My aim is to compare three theories that is of importance to the problem. But I also want to show that there are problems with each of these theories. No one really solves the problem. I want to shed some light on the different problems which these theories encounter and I also want to show were the solution to these problems might be found. It is obvious that the theories have a similar view on the actor (or agent). Each see the actor as both an individual and a collective, such as a party, state or an organisation. They also see the actor in a constant relation to the society. The two main differences between the theories is when it comes to defining the structures and when it comes to trying to connecting the actor with the structure. Berntson sees the connection as mainly classoriented and this provides valuable knowledge to the debate. However, compared to Berntson, Lundquists theory is more thoroughly worked out when it comes to providing knowledge to how agents are affected by structures. This, I would say, is the biggest advantage with Lundquists theory. Finally, Carlsnaes theory, compared to both Berntson and Lundquist, is the least developed one, at least when it comes to defining both the actor and the structure. Though, I still consider his theory of importance. This is because his contribution to the knowledge on how we might explain structural change.

Focusing on Sweden between 1950 and 1980, this doctoral dissertation analyzes and problematizes the process in which a discourse about neurosis and nervous troubles gradually evolved into a discourse about stress. The thesis aims to show how the medical and general discussion about diffuse or vague symptoms transformed and rearticulated ideas and views on society and man, citizenship, gender roles, and medicine. It shows how the discourse on neuroses tended to locate sickness and deviance in the individual, whereas its subsequent transformation into a discourse on stress located the pathological in an external, societal sphere. A particularly prominent issue in the study concerns the role that gender, and in particular female gender, has played in these discourses, and how the place of the feminine can be understood in relation to stress and neuroses. The dissertation shows that female gender was not central to the discourse on neuroses and stress  during the studied period. On the contrary, gender was subordinated to ideas about man and citizenship within the greater context of society and culture. The dissertation takes its starting point in the Swedish 1950’s, often characterized as the era of ”The Strong Society” or ”The People’s Home”. During this period, the neurosis discourse was fixed and remained unchanged. In practice, neurosis was a diagnosis that provided such symptoms that were otherwise difficult to measure and assess with a theory of origin. Neuroses were believed to principally affect a certain category of individuals, who, due to their constitution or disposition, were held to be particularly susceptible to neurotic sufferings. During the 1960s the belief in The Strong Society and its notion of ideal citizenship began to crumble. It was against this background that the Swedish medical profession started discussing ”stress”. Stress, in contrast, could afflict anyone and everyone, according to “the father of stress” Hans Selye and Swedish stress researchers. Stress was assumed to be a potential cause of ”nervous troubles” and disease, but was never considered to be a disease in itself. The concept of the individual as a citizen now gave way for the notion of the individual as a primarily biological organism. Within the stress discourse in the 1960s, the primacy of the universal normal (male) man was a recurring focal point. In the 1970s, the stress researchers distanced themselves from Selyes’ concept of stress by focusing on individual factors. In the discussion about stress during the 1970s, the ”constitutionally weak” individual of the 1950s and the biological organism of the 1960s blended into a hybrid construction of a unique, biological individual.