Crime Prevention in Sweden

Crime prevention efforts in Sweden continue to show positive momentum. An increasing number of national actors are becoming involved in this work through both specific mandates and changes in legislation. Both municipalities and the police have bolstered their crime prevention activities following the introduction of the Municipal Responsibility for Crime Prevention Act.

However, alongside this positive trend with the work, there are signs that the Police Authority is prioritising other aspects of crime-fighting. As other actors step up their efforts, the police appear to be deprioritising prevention work. There is also some uncertainty in the Police Authority’s guidelines for law enforcement management within the regular organisation (referred to as LiO) in terms of how the authority should approach long-term crime prevention work.

As previously highlighted in Brå’s reports, organised crime is a key focus of national crime prevention work. The Government’s strategy to combat organised crime expresses a clear political intent, and the authorities are acting in accordance with this. Combating organised crime is the aim of most of the government mandates in this area that have been assigned to authorities in recent years. There is continuous knowledge development within the national effort, with an increasing number of authorities compiling situational intelligence for use as strategic foundations for the work to combat organised crime.

National crime prevention work has considerable potential for development, particularly with regard to the role of the authorities in supporting and developing crime prevention work at the local level. However, crime prevention appears to be a new issue for many public authorities to address. In many cases, an authority will link this work to their safety and security efforts. Crime prevention measures therefore prioritise, first and foremost, protecting the organisation or its operations from crime.

There is a strong demand from the municipalities for more explicit and coordinated support from national authorities, tailored to local conditions and needs. At the same time, some frustration is expressed when there is a perception that national initiatives fail to take the local situation into account. Local authorities face a challenge when prioritising resources as they attempt to strike a balance between local needs identified from situational intelligence and demands for action against identified crime areas, such as organised crime and the criminal economy.

In 2025, Brå and the county administrative boards were tasked with continuing to develop support for crime prevention work. National coordination with other authorities, particularly the Police Authority, will be a key component of this form of support.

Brå’s conclusions and recommendations

Brå finds that crime prevention work has been bolstered through increased focus and a greater number of mandates, which has improved the conditions for this work. At the same time, the rapid pace of reform and parallel initiatives have created a risk of fragmentation and a lack of clarity in implementation. To ensure long-term sustainability, clarity and impact, crime prevention work needs to be coordinated and prioritised even further. Brå therefore recommends a clearer and more centrally positioned coordination role within the municipalities, a more clearly defined and centrally organised responsibility for crime prevention within the Police Authority, and that the Police Authority’s responsibilities be more clearly set out in its instructions and in its annual appropriation directions. The Authority’s crime prevention work should also be monitored more systematically and qualitatively. In addition, Brå recommends that legislation equivalent to that for municipalities be investigated for the regions and that more authorities be given long-term and clearly formulated crime prevention mandates. Finally, Brå wishes to emphasise that greater focus should be placed on efforts to combat volume crime and on work to prevent recidivism at all levels.