91Ô­´´

Public Order Situation & Trends: This report takes its starting point in the recent years' negative developments in public order. However, we look back to the relatively positive situation in the late 2010s; a major pyrotechnic scene, but few other disturbances. What can we learn from this development?

Current Work and Supporter Culture: We describe the Swedish approach, which has long been comparatively balanced - on the one hand, using controlling, law-enforcing methods, and on the other, normative, dialogue-based approaches - something supported by both research and experience. We also note that Swedish supporter culture is often somewhat less radical than its counterparts across Europe. Could there be a connection?

"Continental methods risk creating continental problems - that does not benefit public order." 

Current Situation - A Crossroads: We further note that the current public order situation, combined with a highly emotionally driven debate, presents a crossroads for football security efforts. Judging by the tone of the debate, major changes may be on the way - perhaps even a paradigm shift? 

The Choice for the Future: Research and experience emphasize the importance of balancing repression with normative approaches. There is a risk if the debate is dominated by an investigative directive that has already stated repressive legislation as the primary action - and explicitly cited countries like the UK and the Netherlands as sources of inspiration. If we work like they do in Europe, it is not unthinkable that the results will mirror Europe. That would not benefit public order. 

The Report - A Swedish Model for Working with Football Security?

Part I: Future Security Work - A Crucial Choice 

Part I discusses the goals of security work, current public order trends, and perspectives on the Swedish approach. It reflects on the importance of upcoming decisions and how these may shape the future of football security in Sweden. Are we on the right path? Do we understand what we are about to choose?

Part II: Fundamentals and Context

Part II describes the foundations for a positive football environment, including the roles of football organizations, the police, and supporter culture. The three chapters first examine the work from an experience-based perspective, then from a research perspective. Finally, it analyzes the factors and contexts that together support a sustainable and knowledge-based approach.

Part III: Reflections and Recommendations

Part III summarizes the public order situation and discusses a primary short-term objective: to combat the disturbances that have accelerated after the COVID pandemic. We describe the challenges and strengths we observe in the Swedish approach. Based on this, a number of recommendations are made for how football security efforts can evolve - both strategically and operationally.  

From the report A Swedish Model for Working with Football Security?

The choices we make for the future should be directed towards clear goals and based on a nuanced understanding of the current situation. They should aim to address areas for improvement while also protecting or strengthening effective work and structures. 

The prioritized disturbances, as we see them, are the extreme behaviors that have increased after the pandemic; for example, incidents of violence, the throwing of flares, the use of firecrackers, and the launching of pyrotechnics. 

Prioritization is important. Everything cannot be done at once, and there are no simple solutions. 

The strengths mainly revolve around a balance between repressive and normative efforts. Examples include the police's operational concept Special Police Tactics (SPT), football's SLO system (Supporter Liaison Officer), as well as the very structured and formalized collaboration work that the parties carry out locally around matches. 

Areas for improvement pointed out in the report are that both the work and the debate, especially at the national level, are often driven by emotions rather than knowledge. This results in recurring conflicts between football and the police, weak strategic continuity, and at times less effective or counterproductive working methods. 

There are lessons to be learned here to address the negative trend in public order and to creat more sustainable strategic collaboration. 

From the report A Swedish Model for Working with Football Security?

The reasoning in the report leads us to recommendations at both a structural level and of a more operational nature. Both repressive and normative methods are proposed. 

1. Strengthened Collaboration 

The Swedish Football Association (SvFF), Swedish Professional Football Leagues (SEF), and the Police Authority should sign a national cooperation agreement. This should specify, among other things, goals, a systematic working procedure, and a plan for public communication. 

2. Clear Knowledge Base

The foundational knowledge that should support this work needs to be defined and formalized. This is because the area of work is difficult to oversee, the pace is high, and external pressure is often intense. This easily leads to stress and emotional decision-making. The proposal aims to strengthen the ability to reach consensus on effective working methods in a knowledge-based way, and to handle conflicts of interest constructively. 

3. Targeted Repression

Laws and regulations may need to be tightened to address the most extreme disturbances. However, it is also important to encourage individual responsibility. We therefore propose that repressive measures be directed specifically at prioritized disturbances with high risk factors, while penalties for non-prioritized disturbances remain unchanged. This is to protect the legitimacy of the system and achieve faster results against the most extreme behaviors. 

4. Information Initiatives

Among the normative proposals, various types of targeted information initiatives are suggested to raise awareness about specific problems, such as thrown objects. The aim is both to increase personal responsibility and to enhance the effect of repressive actions. 

5. Mapping & Education 

Finally, a mapping of normative working methods is recommended, followed by continued training within both football and the police. This is because awareness of normative work is generally lower than repressive work, something that in itself contributed to an imbalance toward repression. The measure is therefore about protecting the balance between method groups. 

No single party can carry out the necessary analyses required to advance the Swedish effort alone. This also applies to ENABLE Sweden and the material we have produced. However, we hope that our report will complement the basis for the absolutely necessary debate we face in 2025. 

We must remember that the challenges faced by stakeholders working with Swedish football after the pandemic also represent an opportunity. We believe there is a real chance to reverse the negative trend in public order - and at the same time lay the foundation for a Swedish model for football safety work, which could become a leading example across Europe. 

"The main strengths of the Swedish approach are found at the local, operational level. The areas for improvement are often at the national level. There are structural reasons for this that need to be addressed."

From the report A Swedish Model for Working with Football Security?