The paper "Hazard and Risk Management in Sweden " is an outstanding example of a case study on social science. Just like any other country, Sweden experiences several risks that are affecting its citizens and cause interference in economic performance. As a result, the country embarked on developing more informed assessment techniques for identifying major risks affecting its society (National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies 2015, 35). Moreover, such strategies aim at building the capacities of the local communities to prevent, manage, and recover from the occurrence of serious incidents and events. The main idea is that the national risk and capability assessment might assist in facilitating coordination, prioritization, and building of the country’ s system of emergency preparedness.
It is from such background the Swedish government commissioned the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) to continue producing the national risk assessment, which commenced in 2011. Besides, MSB initiated the work of developing a more coherent and reliable process that would ensure the production of national risk and capability assessment. The major document that resulted from the commission is the Swedish National Risk Assessment in 2012, which constitutes the procedures required to develop collectively method of preventing and managing several risks within different scopes of operations (National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies 2015, 28).
To enable these assessments to work effectively, the report identified common risks within the country that cause detrimental effects on the people and attempt to reduce by determining the probability of their occurrence. It is not only the role of the central government to ensure that these assessment practices are effective but also the local administrators, municipal council, and county officers.
Besides, the report established different definitions of risks for both natural and accidental depending on magnitude or scale. It is the responsibility of the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency, MSB, and the EU cooperation to manage the operations of the national risk assessment (National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies, 2015, 24). An effective method must ensure that people are aware of the risks the assessment is trying to manage and strengthen the capacity of the emergency management strategies. Summary The nature of the event in question, several risks are likely to exist. However, the magnitude and detrimental effects of these risks might differ depending on the outline provided by the report.
The selection of the risks for analysis depends on its level of severity. Upon selection, the management then focuses on the prevention mechanisms of developing effective measures that might help address the risks. The determination of the risk factors constitutes various strategic steps that ensure proper management of the underlying circumstances. It is necessary to outline the various schemes in establishing the most effective and efficient preparedness model as guided by the European guidelines and the Swedish NRR 2015 findings. Establishing the most appropriate method of curbing the increased number of risks in Sweden The assessment of scenarios 2013 and 2015 used workshops and model of operation.
Moreover, it incorporates the skills of the experts in the evaluation process, which plays an important role in providing qualitative analysis of the common risks like those that disrupt GNSS and shortages in fuels that continue to contribute to the decline of food supply within the country. In most cases, relying on the public to provide information might lead to biases and inaccuracy, which could lead to the application of parallel and ineffective models.
There are factors determining the reason for conducting the assessment including the underlying complexities that require both qualitative and quantitative analysis of the information at hand.
National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies. (2015). National Risk Register of Civil Emergencies.
Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency. (2012). Swedish National Risk Assessment 2012.