Swedish service democracy is solidly based on a successful welfare state configuration. When good social services are received, citizens reciprocate with their stabilizing trust and legitimacy. Towards the turn of the last century, several economic, organizational and ideological foundations of Swedish representative democracy were faltering. A governmental commission was set up in 1997 in order to combat a weakening legitimacy. Confronted with extensive social science research, the commission chose to try to shift the focus from the output side to the input side of Swedish democracy. It argued for a legitimacy rooted primarily not in substantial qualities of social service but in procedural qualities such as citizen opportunities to gain influence and autonomy. Not completely disinterested (as its members were party representatives), it recommended leaving room for a participatory democracy with advanced deliberative qualities. In the ensuing debate, competing ideals of democracy were advanced.
Over the past decade dialogue with citizens between elections has become increasingly important for Local Authorities and Regions in Sweden. This is in part driven by the challenges facing our democratic society – for example declining membership in political parties, large disparities in voter turnouts between constituencies, an increasing lack of faith in politicians and various forms of social exclusion.
At the same time, education levels in the Swedish population are on the rise and research shows that a growing number of Swedes believe they should be able to shape their own lives. People also increasingly expect public services to be shaped by their individual needs.
Research shows that a large percentage of citizens are interested in discussing society and political issues with others. These developments create new challenges and opportunities for politicians and civil servants in Local Authorities and Regions – especially in light of limited budgets and rising expectations.
SALAR International has found that citizen engagement needs to be institutionalisedand systematised in Local Authorities and Regions as part of the overall governance system. Mainstreaming citizen dialogue and engagement requires, among other things, capable internal structures with agreed policies, clearly defined responsibilities, and changes in municipal culture A shift is needed to a culture where the skills and knowledge of citizens are seen as an asset by municipalities and where citizen dialogue has clear impacts on decisions and services.