This chapter describes three opportunities for improvement and related recommendations for strengthening the governance of the Swedish skills system under Priority Area 1 “Promoting co-ordination, co-operation and collaboration across the whole of government”, namely: Improving collaboration between national agencies at a strategic level, Improving collaboration between national agencies at an operational level, and Improving collaboration between national and sub-national levels of government.
Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System
Final Report
Abstract
Collaboration between the large number of actors – ministries, governmental agencies and others – with responsibilities for skills policy is key for establishing a holistic approach to understanding and solving skills challenges, while avoiding overlap or conflicting assignments (OECD, 2020[1]). Promoting co-ordination, co-operation and collaboration across the whole of government is the first pillar underpinning strong skills governance arrangements, as identified by the OECD (see Chapter 1).
Co-operation between national and sub-national levels of government helps keep local policy making consistent with the long-term goals of an overarching skills strategy, and, if designed well, ensures that unique regional needs are met. While vertical collaboration mechanisms are key to developing and sustaining strong skills systems, their complexity and multi-participant nature could create overlapping or conflicting activities, slow or inefficient progress, or policy gaps. It is therefore important to carefully design and implement governance structures for fostering engagement between the national level and sub‑national levels in a way that simply and effectively maximises their potential, while acknowledging the varying mandates and levels of autonomy of the different actors in the skills system.
Background
The governance of the Swedish skills system is complex, with roles and responsibilities for skills policy implementation spread across several governmental agencies overseen by various ministries (see Chapter 2). Agencies in Sweden have substantial independence, which can lead to a siloed system in the absence of adequate co‑ordination, co‑operation and collaboration mechanisms. While Swedish agencies demonstrate high professionalism and expertise in their respective domains, working in silos can lead to the misalignment of overarching goals and overlapping responsibilities The Administrative Procedure Act (Swedish Parliament, 2017[2]) promotes co‑operation between agencies by stating that they should co‑operate with each other within their area of activity. However, interpretation of the act varies between agencies, and it does not promote sufficient co‑operation and collaboration in practice. Strengthening mechanisms for co‑operation, collaboration and co‑ordination across the government around skills policy is therefore crucial and can potentially have positive spillover effects on other policy domains.
The need for better horizontal co‑ordination, collaboration and co‑operation was addressed by agencies in 2016, specifically by the Director-General (DG) of the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Tillväxtverket), in the area of validation of non-formal and informal learning, who established contacts first with the DG of MYH and then with other agencies and stakeholders. Soon after, additional agencies in Sweden recognised a greater need for collaboration on several other skills policy topics. The agencies also recognised the need for more high-level co-ordination to allow them to jointly make strategic decisions about the key collaboration priorities and most pressing goals, while using agencies’ resources effectively. From 2016 to 2019 agencies gradually strengthened their mutual collaboration across several skills policy areas, first led by the DG of Tillväxtverket and from 2017 by the DG of MYH. Their commitment has been crucial in establishing and sustaining the collaboration that later became the Inter-agency Co‑operation Structure for Skills and Lifelong Learning (Myndighetssamverkan för kompetensförsörjning och livslångt lärande, MSV). As previously mentioned, in 2019 a government inquiry identified the need to strengthen co‑ordination and collaboration on skills and suggested the creation of a new public agency with overall responsibility for skills policy (Government of Sweden, 2019[3]).
While the proposal to establish a new public agency overseeing skills policy did not materialise, Swedish agencies have taken significant strides towards adopting a collaborative approach that allows agencies to maintain their expertise and autonomy, while enhancing co‑ordination and co‑operation. In 2019, the DGs of seven Swedish governmental agencies1 established the MSV.
Parallel to the establishment of the MSV, in 2019 the government launched four Strategic Cooperation Programmes (Samverkansprogrammen), one of which was Skills Supply and Life-long Learning, co‑ordinated by the Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems (Vinnova). This programme was initiated and overseen by the government and facilitated effective communication across agencies and between ministries, agencies and other pivotal stakeholders within the skills system. Through ten working groups the programme aimed to identify key challenges and policy solutions around skills and lifelong learning by conducting analysis and collecting inputs from all relevant actors, such as business representatives, academia, civil society and the public sector. The final report published by the programme in 2022 highlighted the need for a more formalised platform for collaboration.
In 2022, the government formally recognised the MSV and tasked the seven involved agencies to “cooperate with the aim of contributing to a well-functioning supply of skills” via the MSV, with three initial priority areas: 1) promoting skills analyses/forecasts; 2) supporting regional skills supply efforts; and 3) ensuring a suitable offer of education and training programmes for students benefiting from the new “student finance for transition and retraining” (see the introduction section for more details on the transition and retraining scheme and 2022 government task). The government further tasked the Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education (Myndigheten för yrkeshögskolan, MYH) with responsibility for administrating and facilitating the MSV collaboration activities.
In MYH’s annual appropriation directive for 2024, published at the end of 2023, the government restated MYH’s role in administrating and facilitating the activities of the MSV and specified priority areas for the work of the MSV in 2024: data analysis for forecasts and planning of the education offer; support for regional skills work; education for the green transition; and increasing participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. The directive also states that MYH, together with other agencies participating in the MSV, must ensure that other relevant national and regional actors are given the opportunity to contribute to the collaboration for a well-functioning supply of skills. MYH must publish a joint report with the other participating agencies on MSV progress by 20 March 2025.
Issue
The MSV is well positioned to promote strong collaboration on skill policies and has made notable progress in enhancing collaboration across agencies
For Sweden, the MSV, or a similar structure, could be an effective way to strengthen horizontal collaboration between governmental agencies. Similar structures have been created by countries such as Norway to promote a whole-of-government approach to skills policy (OECD, 2020[1]; OECD, 2024[4]). Besides the benefit of allowing agencies to maintain their perspectives, expertise and autonomy, a collaboration mechanism such as the MSV ensures that skills policies remain on the agenda of even agencies not primarily working on skills. A more centralised solution, such as establishing a new skills agency, could lessen the importance of skills-related issues for some agencies given that many responsibilities would be transferred to the new agency.
Since its establishment, the MSV has made significant progress in enhancing collaboration and co‑ordination across agencies, demonstrating several key strengths. It facilitates a widespread recognition among consulted agencies of the need for a whole-of-government approach to addressing Sweden's most pressing skills challenges, which agencies perceive to be skills shortages and mismatches. This shared understanding of challenges and the need for strong collaboration in tackling them has bolstered commitment among participating agencies, despite varying levels of engagement. Moreover, agencies have reported that their involvement in the MSV has fostered new or strengthened existing professional relationships.
Agencies also highlighted the broad and diverse range of perspectives within the MSV as an important strength. The participation of various agencies with diverse expertise and viewpoints supports greater co‑ordination, alignment and complementarities between agencies in their work.
Despite broad acknowledgment of its importance, the MSV lacks a commonly agreed and formally defined role, affecting both the function and external perception of the MSV
However, a significant strategic challenge facing the MSV is the absence of a clear definition that outlines its roles and responsibilities within the skills system. While it is widely acknowledged and specified in agency ordinances with directives that the MSV should promote co‑ordination and collaboration on skills policies, there is currently no consensus on whether it should undertake the task of identifying and setting skills policy priorities, or assume a more co‑ordinative role. Some agencies interpret the government task and its broadness as enabling them to steer skills policy collaboratively. For example, during a meeting between the secretaries of state and directors‑general, some ministries called upon the agencies to help identify skills policy priorities. In response, MSV agencies recently drafted a concrete policy proposal focused on developing and enhancing learning centres (lärcentrum), based on feasibility studies conducted by an MSV working group and financed by the Council for the European Social Fund in Sweden (Swedish ESF Council, Svenska ESF-rådet), as well as policy suggestions for increasing participation in STEM (see more below).
However, some agencies are not convinced that the MSV is best placed for formulating policy proposals, and believe that ministries should take a more active role in steering skills policy. This would imply a more co‑ordinating role for the MSV, in which agencies use it to improve their implementation of mandates and existing tasks, with the MSV proposing adjustments to these mandates as needed for government consideration. Regarding policy implementation, agencies have recently agreed that the MSV should facilitate active collaboration, enabling agencies to work together to achieve results in areas related to their instructions.
Regardless of the decision regarding the role of the MSV, the specific role of the MSV has not been formalised or published in an official document, beyond the 2024 appropriation directive for MYH and the agencies’ ordinances with directives, as mentioned above. This ambiguity has in some cases resulted in confusion among external stakeholders regarding the precise role and capabilities of the MSV.
Limited government engagement has resulted in insufficient guidance on the MSV’s substantive goals, as well as inadequate funding to achieve joint objectives. Defining the substantive goals that the MSV aims to achieve is also a challenge. Even though the 2022 government task identified three specific priority areas for initial collaboration, the instructions provided to the agencies were relatively general, with no details on specific desired outputs nor specifications on how the agencies are expected to collaborate. Some agencies have argued that when the government directly tasks certain agencies with collaborating on a specific project to achieve a specific aim the outcomes are typically better than when the task assigned has been left more general. The recent change of government in Sweden has not led to greater clarity about specific outputs that the MSV should be delivering, and how they should be delivered. So far, the new government has communicated its expectation that the MSV will produce concrete and tangible results, with the 2024 appropriation directive for MYH outlining new priority areas for the MSV to work on in 2024 (see above), although still without mention of specific, expected outputs to be delivered. The StG has recently made progress on this front by defining the overarching goal of the MSV as developing “a well-functioning supply of skills that meets the needs of the individual and working life – through co‑operation between the labour market, business, and education”.
More generally, government engagement in the activities of the MSV has been limited. The government receives an annual progress report on inter-agency collaboration, including policy change proposals, from MSV agencies. A communication channel has also been established between the MSV, represented by the MYH, and the government, represented by the Ministry of Education and Research, which ensures that materials from the MSV are disseminated to relevant ministries such as the Ministry of Employment and the Ministry of Climate and Enterprise.
Enhanced government involvement in the MSV’s activities could provide clearer direction to agencies on collaboration. While even without a dedicated government task agencies have the mandate to collaborate on skills policy within their existing responsibilities,2 there is a recognised need for more explicit guidance on priorities and desired outcomes from collaborative efforts. This concern is underscored in a 2022 study on governance in cross-sectoral policy matters by the Swedish Agency for Public Management (Statskontoret) (Statskontoret, 2022[5]), which highlights the challenge national agencies face in addressing these gaps without clear government direction on cross-sectoral issues.
To achieve clarity in agencies’ collaborative efforts there must be robust co‑ordination across ministries. Currently, MSV priorities and government tasks involving participating agencies are often prepared jointly by relevant ministries and always require unanimous agreement among all ministries. However, the agencies have underscored the need to avoid conflicting or misaligned tasks across agencies, which can hinder effective collaboration. Active engagement by the three relevant ministries (Ministry of Education and Research, Ministry of Employment, Ministry of Climate and Enterprise) with the MSV could enhance dialogue and address misalignments identified by the MSV, as well as strengthen government oversight over MSV operations and alignment across government tasks given to individual agencies.
Agencies vary in terms of resources, goals, perspectives, tasks and regulations, and more, leading to challenges in joint strategic decision making
Achieving strategic agreements within the MSV has proven challenging, primarily due to significant differences among agencies, for example in terms of the extent to which agencies can and do actively contribute to collaboration within the MSV. Some agencies have greater flexibility than others due to differences in the prescriptiveness of their ordinances with directives or in financial capability, with larger agencies having more budgetary freedom. Differences in agency mandates outlined in their respective ordinances with directives also impact their ability to implement potential solutions proposed by the MSV. For instance, MYH can directly oversee providers of higher VET, whereas the Swedish Higher Education Authority (Universitetskanslersämbetet, UKÄ) and Swedish Council for Higher Education (Universitets- och högskolerådet, UHR) do not have authority over higher education institutions.
Despite fostering commitment among participating agencies, the MSV experiences varying levels of dedication from its members, which influences their contributions to collective efforts. Some agencies are more cautious about taking an active role, preferring to focus on areas already within their mandates, while others are more open to exploring new issues and developing joint solutions. Variability in commitment is also influenced by individual agency cultures and the priorities set by DGs. Other factors may hinder the ability of agencies within the MSV to reach strategic agreements. For example, there may be disagreements in cases where proposals within the MSV lack sufficient grounding in data and impact analysis, even when agencies are willing and able to collaborate.
Challenges in reaching strategic agreement within the MSV are compounded by Sweden's consensus-driven policy making approach. While consensus can be a strong tool to encourage ownership, commitment and accountability, it requires significant time and resources. Some agencies argue that consensus building is essential for designing an effective and widely supported governance structure, whereas others advocate for faster decision making due to the urgency of evolving skills challenges. Some collaborative initiatives have taken place outside of the MSV framework to bypass these constraints, indicating that the current structure may not facilitate collaboration effectively.
Participation in the MSV requires a substantial time investment on the part of the agencies, and some agencies reported lacking the necessary resources to fully contribute to MSV’s work. Following the 2022 amendment to the ordinance with directives of the MYH, which formally mandated the agency to co‑ordinate MSV’s work, there was an increase in MYH’s annual budget. However, the additional funding was not earmarked for tasks related to MSV.
The themes of the working groups are not always the result of a full strategic process but rather build on existing collaborations or tasks in areas with broad consensus
Strategic priority setting for the selection of Working Group (WG) themes presents another significant challenge within the MSV. The themes of the MSV’s WGs (see Chapter 2 and Opportunity 2 below) have been identified by the agencies to advance the overarching goal recently defined by the StG and to address the four priority areas outlined by the government in 2022 and in the 2024 annual appropriation directive for MYH (see above). The technical WGs can effectively promote ownership, accountability and actionability. However, the WG themes have not been the result of a full strategic process that assesses and prioritises skills policy needs, but rather tend to reflect existing areas of collaboration or easily agreed-upon topics among members. While building on existing collaborations and consensus can be a good place to start to create momentum, ensuring a comprehensive strategic process for setting priorities is key.
A related challenge has been prioritising the inclusion of skills-related government tasks under the MSV, and whether dedicated WGs should be established. The government has recently tasked eleven agencies, five of which participate in the MSV, led by Tillväxtverket to collectively identify and address issues related to attracting, establishing and retaining highly qualified international talent. Despite the absence of a current WG within MSV for this task, the introduction of the task poses a question as to whether and how to incorporate it into the work of the MSV. Furthermore, new priorities outlined in the 2024 appropriate directive for MYH have necessitated the creation of additional WGs, resulting in a surplus of such groups and further compounding the challenge of prioritisation.
Efforts have been made to tackle these challenges by deriving more detailed, short-term goals from the overarching goal developed by the StG (see above), while also mapping existing WGs to align them with the overarching MSV goal. Additionally, the StG annually re-evaluates the composition and themes of WGs to better synchronise operational activities with MSV's overarching goal, although further refinement is essential to achieve optimal alignment.
The inclusion of operational-level components (i.e. WGs) within the MSV constitutes an important strategic decision. This approach engages experts across various levels in discussions, fostering ownership, accountability and bottom-up initiatives. WGs play a pivotal role in translating high-level goals established by the DG and StG into actionable steps. They can enable the active participation of agencies, which facilitates feedback and generates new ideas for the StG.
Concerns have been raised about the absence of key agencies at the strategic level of the MSV The final challenge relates to concerns raised regarding the composition of the MSV at its strategic level, specifically the lack of representation from important actors such as the Swedish Board of Student Finance (Centrala studiestödsnämnden, CSN), which is responsible for approving and granting Swedish financial aid for studies and handling the repayment of student loans.
Summary
Sweden faces several challenges regarding collaboration and co‑ordination on skills policy across government agencies, as well as more broadly across the skills system (See Opportunities 3 to 5 for analysis of collaboration across levels of government and engagement with stakeholders). The MSV was established to foster inter-agency co‑operation and is well placed to address these challenges. However, it struggles with ambiguity in its roles and responsibilities, leading to confusion among participating agencies and other key actors within the skills system. Defining the substantive priorities and strategic assignment of WG themes has also proven difficult due to the large number of participating agencies and their differences across many important dimensions, compounded by the strong consensus approach in Sweden. Furthermore, insufficient government engagement in MSV’s work, along with insufficient resources for participation, adds to the complexity.
Recommendations
In the context of the decentralised skills system and the significant autonomy held by national agencies, a structure such as the MSV is crucial for aligning policy and ensuring an effective and responsive skills system. The MSV, which is comparable to other international best practices such as the Skills Policy Council in Norway (see Output 4 of this project (OECD, 2024[4]) and Box 3.1), has developed organically through the participation of its agencies, and has enjoyed relatively broad support from national agencies.
However, to establish the MSV as a central inter-agency co‑ordination body, its role and mandate need to be clarified. Participating agencies should develop and disseminate a document that formally outlines the role and responsibilities of the MSV. Norway's Skills Policy Council has a clearly defined and published mandate by the Ministry of Education and Research that can serve as a model for the MSV (see Box 3.1). The MSV’s mandate letter could begin with a succinct description of the main objective and role of the MSV. The following is an example of how the MSV’s mandate could be formulated:
MSV is an inter-agency body that facilitates co‑ordination, co-operation and collaboration across the Swedish skills system, identifying gaps, overlaps and untapped synergies in skills policy. It aims to promote the implementation of joint outputs to [insert overarching goal: foster a well-functioning supply of skills that meets the needs of individuals, the labour market, and the society]. Where relevant, the MSV provides input to the government on national skills policy priorities.
The document should also outline the various mechanisms and activities the MSV should employ to strengthen collaboration and co-ordination in skills development. This should include explaining the various groups within the MSV (as discussed in Opportunity 2 below), outlining the annual process for setting strategic priorities, and identifying skills policy gaps and overlaps that individual agencies should address (as further discussed below).
A comprehensive description of the MSV’s composition should also be provided in the document, specifying the agencies and organisations represented in each group. It should highlight specific members of the DG, StG and other subgroups, emphasising the importance of including officials who can contribute significantly to collaboration based on their expertise, while also representing their respective agencies' missions. Additionally, roles such as administrative co‑ordination of MSV activities and outputs should be clearly defined.
To improve the governance of Norway’s skills system, including strengthening horizontal co‑ordination across government, the Norwegian Strategy for Skills Policy 2017-2021 (Nasjonal Kompetansepolitisk Strategi) introduced the establishment of the Skills Policy Council. In 2022, the Ministry of Education and Research formally renewed the Council's mandate, specifying its mission to foster effective collaboration in skills policy formulation. The Council's primary role is to identify critical skills policy challenges, facilitate discussions on potential solutions, and provide the government with diverse inputs and perspectives from various stakeholders.
The Council comprises high-level representatives from public institutions, social partners and NGOs. Ministries represented include the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion, the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Education and Research, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and the Ministry of Health and Care Services. The Council also includes four employer representatives, four employee representatives, the Norwegian Association for Adult Learning (VOFO), the Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions, the Vocational School Council, and county municipalities represented by a county director/county councillor. The Sami parliament holds observer status.
The Council is chaired by the state secretary responsible for skills policy in the Ministry of Education and Research, which also provides the secretariat to the Council. An operational-level working group with representatives from Council members assists the secretariat with preparing Council meetings, ensures stakeholders arrive prepared with insights and facilitates policy harmonisation across institutions.
Source: OECD (2023[6]), OECD Skills Strategy Ireland: Assessment and Recommendations, https://doi.org/10.1787/d7b8b40b-en; OECD (2024[4]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills: Report on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance System, www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf.
To ensure continuity and effective strategic processes within the MSV, participation at the strategic level should remain consistent, using the current composition as a starting point. However, additional agencies could be invited to meetings as required. Although not a national agency, the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions (Sveriges universitets- och högskoleförbund, SUHF) could also be invited as it represents higher education institutions in Sweden, many of which are governmental agencies with considerable autonomy and play an increasing role the provision of adult education and training, beyond awarding tertiary degrees. The composition of MSV membership should be periodically reviewed and adjusted, with recommendations provided to ministries for the inclusion of additional or alternative agencies when necessary. Consideration should be given to whether SUHF should be permanently represented at the StG, as is the case for the Swedish National Council of Adult Education (Folkbildningsrådet). Alternatively, SUHF could be represented at the National Arena for Skills Supply (see Chapter 4). When selecting agency representatives for the StG it is crucial that members can effectively represent their organisations, have a solid understanding of key skills policies and challenges, and possess a high-level strategic outlook. They should also foster collaborative relationships across agencies.
The MSV outline document could be distributed to key actors such as regions and stakeholders (e.g. members of the National Arena for Skills Supply) by the agencies involved in the MSV. However, government backing and endorsement is essential to positioning the MSV as a central co‑ordination body and maximising its impact. This support should encompass formally acknowledging the MSV, providing guidance through appropriation directives or special government tasks, and utilising the inputs it generates. Appropriation directives to all agencies should specify whether they should be involved in such special tasks. Government endorsement should also include adequate ongoing funding to the agencies to sustain the MSV administrative operations, ongoing WGs (see Opportunity 2 below) and participation in activities as required.
In line with its overarching goal, the MSV should also define its short-term priorities and, through a strategic priority-setting process, establish associated, time-bound projects on an annual basis. These priorities should be informed by data analysis and a mapping of current skills policies, as well as inputs from agencies, regions and the National Arena for Skills Supply. The priorities would be implemented through projects undertaken by MSV’s outcome-orientated task forces, which would replace the majority of current WGs (see more in Opportunity 2 below). These projects should have clearly defined expected outputs and outcomes, and incorporate relevant government tasks as necessary.
Currently, the StG conducts annual reviews of WG topics and work plans. However, the MSV's adoption of an outcome-orientated approach could be enhanced through refining and formalising the annual priority-setting process and incorporating government input. This approach should ensure that diverse perspectives are considered while maintaining efficiency and focusing on selected topics each year.
The process should begin with the StG selecting potential short-term priorities and associated projects with clearly specified outcomes for the MSV to address. These priorities should be informed by robust analyses on the basis of undertaken by the reformed Data WG, which would compile and synthesise data on skills outcomes to shed light on key skills challenges, and the Skills Policy WG, which would map current policies and ongoing government tasks to identify potential gaps and overlaps (see Opportunity 2). Outputs and insights produced by previous task forces (see Opportunity 2), can also serve as inputs for this initial selection.
To further refine and tailor the priorities to practical needs, the pre-selected priorities and projects should be presented to regional development managers for feedback and additional suggestions (see Opportunity 3 below), following initial approval by the DG. Subsequently, the suggestions should be presented to stakeholders at the National Arena for Skills Supply for further comments and suggestions (see Chapter 4). Both regions and stakeholders would be invited to actively contribute to implementing these priorities through the MSV task forces (see Opportunity 2 below).
Based on the inputs from regions and key stakeholders, the MSV should finalise the selection of draft short-term priorities and time-bound projects. At this point the StG should consider their importance, potential impact and appropriateness for MSV’s collaborative approach which involves both governmental agencies and non-governmental stakeholders.
Once priorities have been finalised, the MSV could establish task forces to oversee their implementation throughout the year. Task forces should aim to be ambitious, piloting and implementing meaningful policy change and covering topics relevant to the work of the agencies that require collaboration, even if not included in the annual priorities assigned by the government to the MSV (see examples in Opportunity 2 below). Agencies, stakeholders and regional representatives would be invited to commit resources to the selected task force projects as they relate to their respective mandates.
In addition to identifying and suggesting projects for MSV task forces, the annual priority-setting process should highlight policy gaps or overlap across agency mandates. These gaps and overlaps should be flagged to the government as part of an annual MSV progress report so that they can be addressed. For instance, gaps in coverage could lead to assigning new responsibilities to an agency, while overlaps or conflicting assignments could require aligning instructions across agencies for better co‑ordination.
Government timelines must be considered when undertaking the annual priority-setting process. This will ensure that any findings or insights collected can be delivered to the government in a timely manner, allowing them to be reflected in the tasks or directives provided to the agencies. The process should also aim to ensure flexibility and allow finalised priorities to be implemented quickly.
The proposed linkages between the MSV, the government, the regions and the National Arena are illustrated in Figure 3.1 below and elaborated further in Opportunities 3 below and Chapter 4.
Note: The figure is a purposeful simplification of reality. For further details, please see the accompanying text. MSV refers to the Inter-agency Co‑operation Structure for Skills and Lifelong Learning (Myndighetssamverkan för kompetensförsörjning och livslångt lärande).
Co‑ordination between the MSV and the government, and between the ministries responsible for skills policies themselves, should be strengthened. As outlined in the analysis above, agencies are mandated to collaborate on policies in line with their responsibilities. Agencies maintain formal communication channels with overseeing ministries. However, the MSV would benefit from increased ministry involvement, stronger communication channels with relevant ministries and enhanced inter-ministry co‑ordination.
To strengthen co‑ordination between the MSV and the government, and alignment among ministries, the MSV should continue to publish a written annual progress report. The report should be submitted to all relevant ministries, including the Ministry of Education and Research, the Ministry of Employment, and the Ministry of Climate and Enterprise, and presented in a high-level meeting involving representatives from these ministries who could provide feedback on the report’s findings and proposals. The report should be comprehensive and include the background analysis and inputs received from regions and stakeholders that inform the suggestions. It should outline the achievements and challenges of the MSV, as well as suggestions for the upcoming year to be to be considered when assigning priorities or tasks to the MSV or individual agencies. Relevant agencies should also follow up on MSV proposals directly with their respective ministries in line with their formal responsibilities and regular ministry-agency dialogue.
In addition to annual meetings, ministry representatives should regularly attend relevant MSV meetings throughout the year at the strategic level to remain up to date on progress and challenges faced. Regarding ongoing communication beyond the annual meetings, the government could continue to assign MSV priorities to MYH as the administrative co‑ordinator, although any input from the MSV to the government should be sent to all three relevant ministries.
In summary, the MSV should be established as the main forum for promoting inter-agency co‑ordination on skills policy and supporting skills policy priority setting. Participating governmental agencies should issue a formal statement outlining the MSV’s mandate, roles, responsibilities and functions. Clear short-term priorities and associated projects should be defined annually by the StG based on a mapping of current skills policies and ongoing tasks, data analysis, and input from stakeholders and regions. The potential priorities should then be communicated to the government to be considered when providing future tasks to participating agencies, including those intended to be addressed through the MSV. Co‑ordination between the MSV and ministries should be strengthened through annual reports, regular meetings and ongoing communication to ensure alignment and prevent conflicting instructions.
Establish the MSV as the main forum for promoting inter-agency co‑ordination on skills policy and supporting skills policy priority setting. Participating governmental agencies should jointly issue a formal statement outlining the mandate, roles, responsibilities and functions of the MSV. This document should provide a high-level description of the MSV's main goal and role followed by details of the mechanisms and activities aimed at enhancing collaboration on skills-related issues. It should also outline the membership and composition of the MSV and its various components, including the DG, StG, operational WGs (detailed in Opportunity 2 below) and task forces, as well as the annual priority-setting process.
Establish clear short-term priorities and associated projects for the MSV. The StG should provide the MSV with clear annual priorities based on analyses of data and research on skills supply needs and challenges, and a mapping of current skills polices and ongoing government tasks. These priorities should be further refined based on inputs provided by the National Arena for Skills Supply and regions. Once finalised, the priorities should be translated into specific, time-bound projects with clearly defined outcomes and assigned to a dedicated task force (see Opportunity 2 below). The priorities and insights from the annual process should be communicated to the government for potential inclusion in future appropriation directives or government tasks.
Strengthen co‑ordination between the MSV and the government and among the ministries responsible for skills policies. The MSV should continue to publish an annual report and present it to ministries responsible for skills policy for their comments and input. The report should outline the results of projects undertaken by MSV task forces in line with the established priorities. A meeting would also be an opportunity to present and receive feedback from ministries on the proposed priorities for the next year, and to provide information about regional and sectoral perspectives on these priorities. Senior ministry officials should commit to attending additional MSV meetings throughout the year to remain up to date on the work of MSV task forces and to provide feedback and further guidance. Combined, these measures should enhance co‑ordination between the MSV and the government, as well as between the ministries themselves, preventing unnecessary overlap and strengthening the MSV’s impact.
Background
As illustrated in Chapter 2, the MSV has established several WGs involving technical-level officials. These WGs currently include: Analysis, Data Infrastructure, Entrepreneurship, Career Guidance, Learning Centres, Validation, EU Initiatives and Northern Sweden. Some WGs operating under the MSV have built on existing collaborations, such as the Validation WG. Others work on implementing government tasks and agencies’ appropriation directives, such as the Analysis WG, which focuses on data analysis for forecasts and planning of the education offer, one of the priorities given to the MSV by the government in MYH’s appropriation directive for 2024. While there are operational WGs on skills policy issues outside of the MSV, such as the collaboration between Skolverket and MYH to implement the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) in upper secondary vocational education, the focus of this Opportunity will be on MSV’s WGs.
Engaging technical-level officials through the MSV WGs facilitates the implementation of concrete policy solutions and promotes a bottom-up approach that fosters new ideas and perspectives. It also encourages ownership among participating agencies over proposed policy solutions, thereby enhancing implementation effectiveness.
The administrative secretariat is a vital operational component of the MSV, comprising experts from MYH alongside representatives from Vinnova and Arbetsförmedlingen. The secretariat's responsibilities include co‑ordinating meetings, facilitating communication across MSV levels and with external stakeholders, and preparing an annual mapping of all governmental tasks and instructions on skills policies and related inter-agency collaborations. The secretariat also supports the MSV in publishing annual reports for the government on MSV progress throughout the year.
The MSV has established an additional operational “Preparation group” to improve the efficiency of StG meetings. The group aims to support StG meetings and collect information ahead of strategic decisions.
Issue
Many WGs have broad participation and limited resources, complicating operational collaboration
Swedish agencies face several challenges in regard to effectively contributing to the various MSV operational groups. First, they often lack the necessary resources to fully engage in WGs. While participation is voluntary and agencies can choose their involvement, representatives must be allocated who can actively participate in meetings, conduct analyses and contribute expertise, which can strain resources. Varied levels of commitment among agencies, influenced by alignment between WG mandates and agency roles as well as differences in size and budgets, can also hinder the achievement of concrete goals within WGs.
Working groups differ in experience, impacting their ability to achieve results and undermining commitment to the MSV and its WGs
Establishing effective WGs takes time, with those built on existing collaborations generally proving more successful at generating concrete outcomes than those newly established. Some consulted individuals attribute this success to higher levels of commitment, ownership and experience from participating agencies, such as in the longstanding Validation WG. Newly formed WGs may require additional support from the MSV to mature and achieve similar levels of effectiveness.
Some agencies have expressed frustration over the perceived lack of tangible outcomes, which undermines commitment to the MSV and its WGs. There are concerns that discussions within WGs often do not translate into actionable results, despite the push for a more results-orientated approach across the MSV. This has been particularly challenging for groups such as the EU Initiatives WG, which by default may be better placed to support strategic decision making by raising awareness of available tools and policies, rather than producing practical outcomes. Factors contributing to the lack of tangible outcomes produced by WGs include varying resources and commitment levels among participating agencies, as well as Sweden's consensus-driven policy making approach slowing decision-making processes (see Opportunity 1 above). The secretariat has therefore provided support to help WGs establish mechanisms and workflows to achieve actionable results. These include pre-preparing meeting agendas, assigning certain WG members to prepare and run certain meetings, and clarifying and assigning action points to be achieved between meetings.
A lack of clearly defined communication channels and operational guidance from the StG hampers collaboration across MSV levels
Enhancing alignment between the operational and strategic levels within the MSV is crucial. This entails ensuring that WG actions align with strategic priorities set by the DG and StG, as outlined in Opportunity 1 above. Currently, WGs operate with a degree of independence, which may lead to insufficient co‑ordination across the MSV unless there is ongoing communication that allows the StG to guide WG actions and receive timely inputs.
Some WGs struggle to identify appropriate stakeholders and the mechanisms for effective engagement
Finally, effective WG functioning requires the involvement of stakeholders, although guidelines from the StG on which to involve and how are lacking. While some WGs, such as the Northern Sweden WG, have independently engaged stakeholders, others find this challenging. This could be due to differences between stakeholders in their role, motivation for collaborating or work cultures.
Summary
The MSV faces several operational challenges within its WGs and administrative structures. Resource constraints hinder effective WG participation, particularly among smaller agencies or those less aligned with WG themes. The resource-intensive consensus-building approach, varying agency mandates, commitment to the MSV and insufficient guidance from the StG have impeded some WGs from achieving tangible outcomes. To address these issues, the secretariat has supported WGs in establishing workflows for actionable results. Involving stakeholders has seen mixed success, with some WGs struggling to identify and engage the right actors due to diverse stakeholder missions, motivations and work methods.
Recommendations
To enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the MSV, it is recommended that Sweden transform all except two MSV WGs into time-bound, outcome-orientated task forces. This shift will reorient their focus towards the efficient achievement of tangible and measurable results. Task forces will be formed expressly to work on specific MSV priorities (see Opportunity 1 above) within a defined timeframe, fostering a sense of urgency and accountability among members. This approach aligns with the goal of producing actionable outcomes and ensures that collaborative efforts are directed towards clear, strategic objectives, ultimately strengthening the overall effectiveness and responsiveness of the MSV.
The current MSV WGs have been effective in engaging operational officials to collaborate on specific topics and generate input for consideration at the strategic level. However, their orientation could be improved to focus on the achievement of concrete outcomes. The MSV should maintain two ongoing operational groups – the Skills Policy WG and the Data WG (detailed further below) – to support strategic decision making at the StG. The remaining WGs should be replaced with time-bound, project-based task forces focused on delivering specific outcomes, or continue outside of the MSV, where relevant. This shift will enhance efficiency and ensure that collaborative efforts are directed towards clear, measurable goals.
Most existing WGs are assigned themes or topics with an indeterminate timeframe and are reassessed annually. In contrast, future task forces (see Figure 3.2 below) would be established to further the priorities of the MSV by working on time-bound projects with clear goals. These priorities and projects would be identified through the annual priority-setting process described in Opportunity 1 above. The StG would set clearly defined goals for each task force, along with a detailed delivery plan that outlines specific tasks, outputs and timelines assigned to its members. While priorities should be established or updated annually, task force timelines should be in accordance with their assigned project and could span more or less than one year, as needed. The composition of each task force should be carefully curated to include the expertise required to achieve its goals. These experts could include government officials, stakeholders and representatives of sectoral bodies, regions and other actors, as needed.
To ensure the successful implementation of task force projects, government agencies, stakeholders and other participants should allocate targeted funding and dedicated resources. Agencies should allocate resources from their budgets in line with the Administrative Procedure Act (Swedish Parliament, 2017[2]), while additional funding could be requested through the annual budget process (Government of Sweden, 2024[7]) and provided to agencies partaking in the relevant task forces. Upon completing the projects, the task force should produce a report evaluating its success, identifying key findings and making recommendations for any necessary further work. Task forces should also include in their report a plan for how they expect to ensure lasting impact. This would outline any follow-up actions that need to be taken by agencies to sustain the project's impacts beyond its conclusion, whether by a continuation of the task force under the MSV, by a new WG outside of the MSV or by individual agencies. Examples of successful skills policy initiatives that could serve as inspiration to future task forces are detailed in Box 3.2 below.
Note: The figure is a purposeful simplification of reality. For further details, please see the accompanying text.
2024 MSV input to the government's STEM strategy
The MSV's approach to enhancing participation in STEM education demonstrates how task forces can effectively advance strategic priorities. As outlined in Opportunity 1 above, in response to a government directive to MYH for 2024 to increase STEM participation, the MSV formed a time-bound, action-orientated group instead of a permanent WG. The primary goal of this task force was to draft a letter to the government providing advice on the formulation of a national STEM strategy. The letter identified key challenges in STEM participation and proposed policy solutions for consideration by implicated agencies. It also highlighted means for sustaining impact beyond the project's conclusion. Initiated in mid-April 2024, the task force had completed its recommendations by the end of June. The task force included representatives from UHR, Skolverket, MYH, UKÄ, Vinnova and the Swedish National Council of Adult Education (Folkbildningsrådet). Other MSV agencies provided feedback through the Preparation Group and the Steering Group. This method highlights the advantages of using focused, temporary task forces to achieve specific, high-priority objectives.
Piloting work with regions and municipalities
Task forces can be effectively used to pilot programmes aimed at enhancing and supporting skills development in regions and municipalities. Swedish agencies frequently implement targeted initiatives that aid local and regional stakeholders. For instance, as part of the state and government grants for regional vocational growth initiative, multiple municipalities collaborate to secure grants supporting vocational education development through consultations with relevant employers and industry representatives.
Another initiative has involved regions being supported to organise Validation Conferences with all relevant actors and stakeholders at the regional level. The initiative to decentralise Validation Conferences from national to regional levels was led by the Validation Working Group within the MSV. In 2020, the group decided to support this transition financially and logistically, empowering regional stakeholders to take on a more active role.
Source: MYH (2024[8]), Så kan deltagande i STEM-utbildningar öka [How participation in STEM education can increase], www.myh.se/nyhetsrum/nyheter/sa-kan-deltagande-i-stem-utbildningar-oka.
Beyond task forces, the MSV should maintain ongoing operational WGs to support strategic decision making. These operational WGs would generate necessary inputs on skills and policy outcomes to be used by the StG for strategic decision making (see Box 3.2). This approach can be found in other countries such as Ireland, where the Labour Market Advisory Council is supported by two ongoing operational subgroups that support strategic-level decision making by compiling data, conducting policy analysis, evaluating existing policies and gathering insights from stakeholders on potential improvements. These inputs then inform the council’s deliberation on how to guide strategy and policy formulation (see Box 3.3 below).
The operational WGs that should be maintained by the MSV to support its work are: 1) The Data Working group (Data WG) and 2) The Skills Policy Working group (Skills Policy WG).The Data WG would be charged with compiling data analyses on skills to provide a comprehensive overview of skills outcomes to the StG, thereby supporting strategic decision making on the MSV’s short-term priorities and projects. It should also identify skills data gaps and provide input and advice to the StG on potential task forces focused on strengthening Sweden’s skills data infrastructure. In identifying skills data gaps and potential solutions through task forces, the group should consider EU-wide skills data initiatives, drawing on the work of international affairs co-ordinators (see more in Chapter 5).
To enhance the effectiveness of the Data WG and position it as a key venue for discussing and promoting the management, sharing and use of skills data, its membership should be extended to include the SCB, the Agency for Digital Government (Myndigheten för digital förvaltning, Digg), Vinnova CSN and Tillväxtverket. This would ensure alignment between national and regional priorities and activities. The Data WG should maintain its principles of openness and transparency, while engaging actively with governmental actors and stakeholders from across the skills data infrastructure. This would involve developing a regular programme of engagement with different user groups and forums. Further details on the Data WG can be found in Opportunities 7 and 8.
The Labour Market Advisory Council (LMAC) in Ireland serves as an advisory body to the Minister for Social Protection and the government concerning the efficient operation of the labour market.
Chaired by an independent labour market expert, LMAC has representatives from government departments including the Department of Social Protection, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, the Department of the Taoiseach, and the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation, and Science. It also incorporates stakeholders from state agencies, employer bodies, unions, individual employers, academics and community sectors across its various subgroups.
LMAC performs comprehensive labour market analyses and provides policy advice with a focus on enhancing employer engagement in policy design and implementation. It operates through two key subgroups: the Evaluation Subgroup, which assesses labour market conditions, evaluates policy effectiveness, and offers data-driven recommendations to the government with inputs from academic experts and additional stakeholders; and the Employer Engagement Subgroup, which fosters dialogue with employers to formulate new strategies and enhance policy implementation.
LMAC also produces an annual report on the Pathways to Work Strategy's implementation and advises on new policy frameworks. Quarterly full council meetings and subgroup sessions ensure ongoing policy discussions and updates, supported by secretariat services provided by the Department of Social Protection. Each subgroup operates with dedicated secretariat support tailored to its specific functions, ensuring effective co‑ordination and implementation of LMAC’s initiatives.
Source: OECD (2024[4]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills: Report on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance System, www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf.
In Sweden, the primary function of the Skills Policy WG would be to map ongoing activities and policies related to skills supply, including tracking work within various agencies, new government tasks, stakeholder-led initiatives and other relevant efforts, including at the EU level. It would analyse these activities to identify gaps and overlaps in skills policies that the MSV can address. The group's findings would be presented to the StG to enrich strategic discussions and ensure alignment with skills-related efforts across the system. The group should also support the evaluation of existing policy tools.
Given the dynamic nature of the Swedish skills landscape, the Skills Policy WG should keep the MSV informed about existing and planned initiatives beyond its remit to identify areas where collaboration might be needed. Although collecting information from MSV agencies would be central to its work, the group should also regularly consult with other actors such as national stakeholder arenas, regional representatives, sectoral organisations and other collaborative bodies. Furthermore, it should monitor EU‑wide developments related to skills, promote EU initiatives and tools, and raise awareness on its findings among the StG. It could also advocate for integrating EU tools into task force activities or agency initiatives, where applicable.
Curating the membership of the Skills Policy WG to best achieve its purpose is key to its success. The group should comprise mainly technical-level representatives to provide detailed information from agencies’ field work. This could encompass individuals with prior experience in an MSV WG who are familiar with inter-agency collaborations and have built robust working relationships with other actors. To facilitate effective communication with the StG, a member of the StG should also be included. The StG would provide direct steering and guidance to the group to ensure that it best supports the strategic needs and provides information most needed to guide decision making.
It is important to note that the StG currently undertakes many of the responsibilities proposed for these ongoing working groups, such as addressing challenges identified through data analysis conducted by various agencies, as well as discussing ongoing collaborations, projects or exploring potential initiatives. However, this occurs in an ad hoc manner, and there is a lack of formal pathways to ensure a comprehensive and strategic approach. Establishing these working groups would refine, expand and formalise this work, ensuring that decisions made at the StG level are better informed and more effectively aligned with strategic needs.
In addition to the operational WGs, the secretariat would provide important, ongoing operational support to the MSV (see Box 3.3), including administrative support for StG and DG meetings and for the two operational WGs and temporary task forces. These administrative functions would include compiling inputs from meetings, supporting communication between the various MSV levels, WGs and task forces as needed, and preparing meetings with the National Arena (see more in Chapter 4).
In summary, replacing all except two existing WGs within the MSV into time-bound, outcome-orientated task forces would significantly enhance the MSV’s efficiency and effectiveness. This approach could help promote a balance between long-term, collaborative strategic work, and short-term, impactful action that is aligned with strategic objectives.
Replace the majority of current WGs in the MSV with time-bound, outcome-orientated task forces to strengthen the impact of its work. The MSV should adjust its operational structure by creating an ongoing Skills Policy WG and Data WG to support strategic decision making at the StG, while replacing the remaining WGs with time-bound task forces. These task forces would be established based on short-term goals identified through an annual priority-setting process involving regions and stakeholders (see Opportunity 1 above). Each task force should have clearly defined goals and detailed delivery plans, and include experts from across the skills system. The composition of each task force should be carefully curated and its operations supported by targeted funding from governmental agencies and/or stakeholders to ensure successful implementation. Upon completion of projects, task forces should produce evaluation reports and outline plans to sustain the project's impact beyond its conclusion.
Reduce the number of ongoing WGs under the MSV and refocus their objectives to better support strategic decision making by the DG and StG. The MSV should maintain two core operational WGs to support its strategic decision making: a Data WG tasked with compiling and synthesising data on skills outcomes, identifying data gaps, and providing inputs and insights on skills and skills data gaps and challenges to the StG; and a Skills Policy WG responsible for mapping ongoing work on skills topics, identifying policy gaps and overlapping mandates, and ensuring the MSV remains informed about initiatives across the Swedish skills system and at the EU level. The MSV’s secretariat should continue to provide administrative support, compile inputs for meetings, support effective communication across the MSV levels and prepare National Arena meetings (see Chapter 4).
Background
Sweden's multi-level governance structure adds complexity to the governance of its skills system. The country has a highly decentralised system, with 290 municipalities providing core education and training services, and 21 regions tasked with aligning skills supply with local and regional economic needs. This decentralisation helps to ensure that skills provision matches demand in regional and local labour markets, which is essential given Sweden’s significant variation in population density, economic composition and skills demand across different regions.
Recent legislative changes and the National Strategy on Sustainable Regional Development (Nationell strategi for hållbar regional utveckling i hela landet 2021-2030) have elevated “skills supply work” (kompetensförsörjningsarbete) to a central position within regional development policies. By law, every region must set goals and priorities for activities to align skills supply with demand across the public and private sectors in the short and long run.
There is substantial variation in the investment in and organisational structure of regional efforts to align skills supply with demand. As a starting point, all 21 Swedish regions have one regional development manager responsible for regional development and skills work. In addition, the regions have one or more regional skills strategists in charge of implementing the region’s responsibilities on aligning skills supply with demand on a day-to-day basis. However, national funding for these activities is limited, and while regions can prioritise skills supply activities within their budget, some have limited resources, which results in limited analytical capacities and a more informal and ad hoc approach. In other regions, work to align skills supply with demand is more formalised and has been a priority area for many years. For example, regions such as Västra Götaland and Stockholm have established Regional Skills Councils (Regionala Kompetensråd) to facilitate structured, long-term engagement on skills-related issues (see Box 3.4). In some regions, a more “light touch” model of the Regional Skills Councils has been implemented, such as in the Västmanland region, which regularly facilitates meetings with social partners, education providers and municipalities, has decided not to set up a more formal forum as in other regions.
Västra Götaland region
In Västra Götaland, a Regional Skills Council (Regionalt Kompetensråd) was established in 2010 following the adoption of the Act on Regional Development Responsibility. The council is organised at two levels: 1) an overarching regional council covering all 49 municipalities in the region; and 2) four sub-regional skills councils overseen by smaller clusters of municipalities (Fyrbodal, Skaraborg, Göteborg and Boråsregionens). The council also includes several sector skills councils, each dedicated to addressing skills supply challenges within specific sectors integral to the regional economy. The composition of the Regional Skills Council reflects an array of stakeholders, with representatives from the region and municipalities, trade unions, businesses and employers’ organisations, education institutions and independent providers, and Arbetsförmedlingen. The council’s primary mandate is to identify and analyse skills demand and supply in the region and disseminate the findings to relevant public and private stakeholders.
Stockholm region
In April 2021, the Stockholm region created the Skills Arena Stockholm (Kompetensarena Stockholm) to support collaboration and dialogue on skills supply and demand issues among various regional stakeholders, including the 26 municipalities, Arbetsförmedlingen, Skolverket, social partners, and representatives of regional education institutions. These actors are all members of the Stockholm Skills Council (Stockholmsregionens kompetensråd), the main decision-making body in the Skills Arena. The arena also includes a preparatory group/secretariat, topical working groups and sector skills councils that feed into and support the work of the Stockholm Skills Council. The work of the arena focuses on strengthening regional skills analyses and forecasting, and regional co-operation to adjust skills provision to changing skills demand. It has also facilitated dialogue between local industries and career guidance counsellors in education institutions, organised events to increase the attraction and visibility of VET among youth and established new procedures to collect labour market intelligence on skills shortages from municipalities, training providers and employers.
Source: Fact-finding interviews with regional representatives and the Swedish Association for Local and Regional Authorities.
Prominent Regional Skills Councils in Sweden, exemplified by those in Västra Götaland and Stockholm, adhere to an annual strategic framework or schedule. Annually, these councils formulate comprehensive work plans with goals and activities to support skills development within their respective regions. The foundation of these strategies rests upon yearly assessments of regional skills supply and demand, leveraging data from SCB and regional sources (e.g. employer surveys and sectoral sub-groups). In Stockholm, the day-to-day implementation of the strategy is organised by working groups featuring representatives from local and regional stakeholders. In Västra Götaland, the sub-regional councils play an important role in implementation.
Over time, as foreshadowed in Chapter 2, various national agencies have developed structures to facilitate co-operation with regions within their specific area of competence. These include dialogue meetings between MYH and regional development managers, and regional dialogues on adult education (regionala dialoger om vuxenutbildning) overseen by Skolverket. Furthermore, some national agencies maintain regional/local offices (including Arbetsförmedlingen, the Svenska ESF-rådet, Skolverket and Tillväxverket), a practice acknowledged by consulted stakeholders as instrumental in fostering collaboration between national and regional levels.
Tillväxtverket is pivotal in advancing regional skills initiatives by disseminating insights and best practices across the regions (e.g. through reports). The agency also supports regions in skills supply work based on various governmental tasks, such as improving regional capacity to validate skills. Notably, the agency organises knowledge exchange meetings on skills issues (nätverksträffar för regionalt arbete med kompetensförsörjning) and runs the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work (Nätverk for regional kompetensförsörjning), which are both forums that convene all 21 regions (at the regional skills strategist level) to facilitate peer learning on skills-related matters. These exchange meetings aim to improve communication and relations between the regions, and between regions and national authorities. Tillväxtverket also organises the Skills Supply Day (Kompetensförsörjningsdagarna) in co-operation with SKR, the Ministry of Rural Affairs and Infrastructure, and Arbetsförmedlingen. The Skills Supply Day is a yearly event that gathers regional development managers for an exchange of knowledge and sharing of experiences. Complementing these efforts is the Reglab platform, created in 2010 for the exchange of knowledge on regional development, which encompasses skills supply and demand dynamics. Reglab has 23 members: the 21 regions, Tillväxtverket and Vinnova (Reglab, 2023[9]). The Regional Contact (Regional Kontakt) is another forum established and run by the regions and SKR to facilitate dialogue between the 21 regional development managers. Regional Contact has a sub-group on skills supply work, which includes regional development managers from some regions.
Diversity among Swedish municipalities, marked by economic composition, geography and population size variations, results in disparate approaches to skills development activities. Recent efforts have sought to enhance the link between upper secondary VET, municipal adult education and the broader labour market, signifying a shift in the Swedish skills system away from student-driven planning towards a stronger alignment of education provision with labour market demands. These vertical co‑ordination mechanisms include reforms in the Swedish upper secondary VET and municipal adult education system, regional planning documents on upper secondary education, and an ongoing national inquiry into VET in municipal adult education (see Box 3.5).
Reform of upper secondary VET and municipal adult education
In 2022, the Swedish parliament reformed upper secondary VET and municipal adult education to strengthen the link between labour market demands and the supply of skills. The reform came into effect in 2023 and will affect education provision from 2025 onwards. It will mean that municipalities must consider both young people’s demands and the needs of the labour market when planning upper secondary education or programmes in municipal adult education (komvux). In addition, planning in each municipality must be co‑ordinated with at least two other municipalities.
Regional planning documents on upper secondary education
Connected to the reform, the Swedish government tasked Skolverket with developing regional planning documents (regionala planeringsunderlag) to guide the provision of upper secondary education and upper secondary VET provided through municipal adult education. The regional planning documents will be developed based on input from, for example, education providers and businesses, and co‑ordinated with the regional assessments of the short- and long-term skill needs in the public and private sectors. As part of this work, Skolverket must co‑ordinate with other national agencies such as SCB and Arbetsförmedlingen, for example on the development of statistics and other labour market intelligence within the context of the MSV.
Inquiry into VET in municipal adult education
In June 2022, the Swedish government established a national commission to review how VET in municipal adult education can be made more effective and better adapted to the needs of the labour market and individuals. The commission was asked to analyse if the provision of education meets the needs of different groups of students, and to propose a new model for central government funding of VET in municipal adult education. It was also asked to provide recommendations on a potential reform of upper secondary VET to strengthen the link between adult education and working life. The report was finalised in spring 2024, and the new form of upper secondary education (nationell yrkesutbildning, national vocational education for adults at upper secondary level) will begin in autumn 2024 through a pilot overseen by MYH.
Source: Government of Sweden (2022[10]), Dimensionering av gymnasial utbildning för bättre kompetensförsörjning. Prop. 2021/22:159 [Dimensioning of upper secondary education for better skills supply], www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/proposition/2022/03/prop.-202122159; Skolverket (2022[11]), Uppdrag om regionala planeringsunderlag [Assignment on regional planning documents], www.skolverket.se/download/18.64cemsv90183ff475a641ef9/1672887942103/U2022-02828_Regionala-planeringsunderlag-2.pdf; Government of Sweden (2022[12]), Långsiktig och behovsanpassad yrkesutbildning för vuxna [Long-term and needs-based vocational education and training for adults], www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/kommittedirektiv/2022/06/dir.-202284/.
Local agreements between Arbetsförmedlingen and municipalities (överenskommelse om samverkan med kommunerna) are another important co-operation mechanism. These agreements, which exist in nearly all 290 municipalities, are designed to align the local supply of municipal adult learning with employer demand. One component of these agreements is the Job Tracks programme, which fosters collaboration among employers, municipalities and Arbetsförmedlingen to assist individuals furthest from the labour market (Arbetsförmedlingen, 2024[13]). Apart from these structures, activities to align local supply and demand primarily take place through inter-municipality or region–municipality co‑operation. Inter-municipality collaboration often assumes an ad hoc nature, guided by shared interests rather than administrative boundaries. For instance, in the regions of Norrbotten and Västerbotten, inter-municipality collaboration is structured around two principal groups: coastal municipalities and inland municipalities. Overall, these co‑operation structures aim to co‑ordinate the local provision of skills across larger geographical areas, for example to fill gaps in provision in more rural and remote areas, or strengthen specialisation in more densely populated areas.
Issue
Although the Swedish skills system includes numerous structures to support co-operation across levels of government, consulted stakeholders expressed challenges with the existing governance system. These relate to the national co‑operation structures with regional and local governments, and the scope, funding and data available for regional activities to align skills supply with demand.
There is a lack of legal clarity and financing to support regional efforts to align skills supply with demand
Recent changes in the law and regulations on regional development responsibilities have put skills supply work (kompetensförsörjningsarbete) at the heart of regional development policies. By law, every region must set goals and priorities for activities to align skills supply with demand across the public and private sectors in the short and long run. While recent legislative changes, together with the National Strategy on Sustainable Regional Development (Nationell strategi för hållbar regional utveckling i hela landet 2021‑2030), have strengthened the role of regions in the skills system, there still lacks clarity on the specific tasks and activities the regions should perform in this field.
At the same time, financing to deliver on the regional task is limited and not ring fenced from other regional responsibilities. In many regions, efforts to align skills supply and demand heavily rely on project-based funding, including from EU funds. This impedes long-term planning and diverts resources from core activities towards fundraising. Consulted stakeholders expressed a desire for a more stable funding model where EU project funding fills smaller gaps or addresses pressing issues not covered by regular funding. They also raised the need to allocate funding based not only on population density (with the more densely populated regions getting relatively more financial support), but also on labour market and skills challenges (e.g. unemployment rates or skills levels) and size (e.g. larger geographic distances within a region need more resources to establish good co‑ordination structures). The production and accessibility of data at the regional level is also a challenge, with stakeholders highlighting the issues regions face when accessing available data on key employment and skills indicators.
The structures to facilitate co-operation between regions and between regions and national agencies are fragmented and overlapping
Another key challenge mentioned by stakeholders is that the multiple co-operation structures between national agencies and regions operate in parallel, and sometimes systems overlap without co‑ordination across national agencies. This puts pressure on regional resources, as regional stakeholders must participate in several co-operation structures across different national agencies. Consulted stakeholders underscored the need for more streamlined co-operation between the regions and national agencies to: 1) support information sharing on the regional labour market and skills developments; 2) streamline dialogue between public bodies and businesses at the regional level; 3) co‑ordinate and harmonise analysis and forecasting, and streamline data requests; and 4) harmonise validation systems. While Tillväxverket is central to facilitating inter-regional co‑operation, the existing co-operation system has two clear challenges: first, it is too complex and could benefit from simplification to reduce the number of forums and better link discussions on various topics; and second, it lacks a clear link between regional development managers (strategic level) and regional skills supply strategists (implementation level).
The co-operation between the MSV and the regions is still in its early stages
Regarding vertical co‑ordination, the Swedish skills system lacks robust and simplified mechanisms for co‑ordination and co‑operation between the national and regional levels. The 2022 government task and the current government task that was given ahead of 2024 to MYH explicitly mandates that the agency must ensure that other relevant actors at the national and regional levels actively contribute to the MSV (ESV, 2021[14]). Furthermore, the March 2023 report on the administrative co‑ordination of agency collaboration for a well-functioning skills supply underscores the pivotal role of regions in aligning skills supply with demand (MYH, 2023[15]). Initial steps have already been taken towards fostering collaboration with sub-national governments through the MSV, with certain regions participating in MSV WGs (see Opportunity 2 above). More recently, the five regions making up the sub-group of Regional Contact (see above) were invited to an MSV StG meeting to represent all 21 regions. In addition, as a member of the National Arena for Skills Supply, SKR serves as an advocate, representing the voices of regions and municipalities. The MSV is also working on several questions linked to skills activities at local and regional levels, including on local learning centres (lärcentrum)3 and the implementation of a government task on the development of structures for validation at the regional level (MYH, 2021[16]).
There are four key challenges in further engaging the sub-national levels within the MSV: 1) national agencies have different responsibilities for and interests in engaging with the sub-national level, resulting in different views on their engagement; 2) the MSV has limited resources to engage with the sub-national level; 3) differences in the format and quality of regional activities pose challenges for national agencies in developing a coherent structure for co-operation across all regions; and 4) the purpose and focus of co‑operation with sub-national governments have yet to be understood and agreed upon.
Regarding the role of municipalities in the MSV, consulted stakeholders have argued that the regions should play a central role in linking local skills supply with demand, and in channelling local insights and needs to the national level. It has been mentioned that all regions should make regional skills analysis and forecasting easily available at the local level; facilitate knowledge sharing across municipalities, and between municipalities and local employers; and gather and transfer local insights on labour market needs to the national level. However, consulted stakeholders also stressed that existing resources for regional skills activities were not sufficient to cover such extended work at the local level.
Summary
Enhancing vertical co‑ordination and empowering regions to facilitate effective co‑operation among municipalities are essential steps towards strengthening Sweden's skills system and ensuring more equitable skill development across the country. The regions suffer from legal uncertainty and limited financial resources to support their efforts to align skills supply with demand. In addition, the structure to facilitate co-operation between regions and between regions and national agencies are fragmented and overlapping. Lastly, co-operation between the MSV and the regions is still in its early stages and could be further developed to ensure input from the regions.
Recommendations
To clarify the role of regions within Sweden's skills system, the country could consider introducing legislative amendments aimed at defining regional responsibilities more explicitly. One approach could be to amend the Law on Regional Development Work to mandate the establishment of Regional Skills Councils in each region. These councils would serve as structured platforms for facilitating dialogue and collaboration among key stakeholders involved in regional skills provision. This includes municipalities, social partners, industry representatives, individual employers, education institutions, social economy organisations and national agencies.
The structure and operation of these Regional Skills Councils could vary depending on regional needs and conditions. For instance, larger regions such as Stockholm, Skåne and Västra Götaland might adopt comprehensive models, while smaller regions such as Västmanland could implement more streamlined approaches. Despite these differences, the fundamental goal of fostering structured dialogue and collaboration around regional skills development would be consistent across all regions.
Sweden could specify in the Law on Regional Development Work that the tasks of the Regional Skills Councils would include:
Analysing and sharing regional labour market and skills intelligence to guide regional measures to align skills supply with demand in the short and long term based on available regional and national data (see also Opportunity 6 on regional access to national data).
Facilitating co‑operation and co‑ordination on skills activities across relevant regional stakeholders (e.g. municipalities, education institutions, independent education and training providers, national authorities in the region, employers and employers’ organisations, trade unions, and learners or learner representatives).
Developing goals and priorities for the regional skills supply (e.g. in the form of a Regional Skills Strategy).
Supporting implementation/development of key elements of the skills system (e.g. vocational school education, regional planning documents on upper secondary education, regional structures for validation of education and learning, regional vocational adult education, learning centres, employer engagement in training, folk high schools, and career guidance).
Aligning and co‑ordinating regional development work with regional supply work to support regional development through skills and labour mobility/attraction of skilled labour.
To strengthen the role of its regions, Sweden could draw inspiration from Ireland’s regional Education and Training Boards, which work to align skills policies across levels of government and adjust skills provision to regional and local labour market needs. Ireland has also established nine Regional Skills Forums, which serve as a platform to foster engagement and collaboration between employers and the education and training system at the regional level (see Box 3.6). Emulating Ireland's model could provide Sweden with valuable insights into how regional governance structures can effectively co‑ordinate on skills policy, ensuring that they are responsive to local economic needs. By adopting similar regional structures, Sweden could strengthen its ability to align national skills strategies with regional priorities, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness and relevance of its skills development initiatives nationwide.
To empower regions to effectively fulfil their roles as described, Sweden should allocate additional financial resources to regional skills supply initiatives by earmarking funds through the central government budget. This additional funding would be essential to support regions to deliver on the above-described tasks, such as establishing a Regional Skills Council and participating in strengthened horizontal and vertical co‑ordination mechanisms (see below). The funding distribution must not disadvantage less densely populated regions, with allocation based not just on population density, but also on labour market challenges and needs, for example unemployment rates; young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) rates; skills mismatches; or job vacancy rates.
Sweden could also strengthen the prioritisation of regional skills supply initiatives when allocating funding from the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) through the Svenska ESF-rådet. However, this should complement rather than replace core funding from the central government budget.
To enable effective regional planning and decision making, Sweden should improve regional access to detailed labour market and skills data provided by national agencies (see Chapter 5). Access to granular data is vital for regions to analyse local skills needs accurately, address gaps and tailor interventions that align with specific regional economic contexts.
By taking these steps, Sweden can strengthen regional capacity to respond proactively to skills challenges, ensuring that all regions have equitable opportunities to enhance their skills supply systems and contribute effectively to national economic development goals.
Two regional bodies – Education and Training Boards (ETBs) and Regional Skills Fora (RSF) – play a role in the Irish skills system. While Ireland only has two government levels (national and county governments), the ETBs and RSF operate at the regional level – i.e. combining several counties – to align skills policies across levels of government and adjust skills provision to regional and local labour market needs.
There are 16 ETBs in Ireland, each responsible for providing education and training services in their respective regional area. The mission of ETBs is to promote lifelong learning, support skills development, and foster community engagement in education and training initiatives. Their core tasks include overseeing initial and further or adult education, managing schools, providing adult and further education and training, delivering youth services, co‑ordinating training programmes, and performing quality control of school and adult education offers. Each board has 21 members, including 12 local authority representatives, 5 members from bodies representing community and business interests, staff representatives, and parent representatives.
The nine RSF were established in 2016 and serve as platforms to foster engagement and collaboration between employers and the education and training system to meet the emerging skills needs in the region. The RSF act as a one-stop shop for supporting employers with reskilling and upskilling activities, collecting data on and helping employers identify their skills needs, and raising awareness among employers of the range of services and programmes available across Ireland’s education and training system. Each RSF is managed by an RSF manager (one per region), who collects data on employee skills needs and serves as the main point of contact for many employers on lifelong learning. While the membership of RSF varies, they typically comprise employers and their representatives, education and training providers (e.g. universities, VET schools, ETBs, private providers), and government departments and bodies (e.g. government agencies, county authorities).
Source: OECD (2024[4]), Strengthening the governance of the Swedish skills system: Report on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance, www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf.
In addition to clarifying the tasks and responsibilities of the regions, Sweden could take steps to strengthen horizontal and vertical collaboration on regional skills supply initiatives. In particular, it could strengthen the role of the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work, overseen by Tillväxtverket, by expanding and restructuring it to serve as the primary platform for inter-regional dialogue between regional and national levels on skills supply initiatives.
The network could be particularly important at the strategic level and at the operational/implementation level. At the strategic level, all 21 regional development managers could convene regularly, potentially meeting four times a year. These gatherings would focus on addressing overarching strategic questions and setting regional goals related to skills supply work. This level of discussion would ensure that regions are aligned with national priorities and collectively working towards common objectives. At the operational/implementation level, the 21 regional skills strategists could meet more frequently, possibly six to eight times a year instead of the current four. These meetings would be geared towards addressing practical implementation issues and sharing best practices among regions (see Figure 3.3). By increasing the frequency of these meetings, regions can enhance their capacity for peer learning and collaboration, thereby improving their ability to effectively implement regional skills initiatives. Tillväxtverket and SKR would play a pivotal role in organising and facilitating these meetings, ensuring that they are structured and productive. It would also be beneficial for other relevant national agencies such as Arbetsförmedlingen, MYH and Skolverket to actively participate.
By implementing these structural enhancements, Sweden can strengthen both horizontal collaboration among its regions and vertical co‑ordination between regional and national levels. This approach would promote better alignment of strategies, more efficient resource allocation, and ultimately lead to more effective responses to regional skills challenges nationwide.
Note: The figure is a purposeful simplification of reality. For further details, please see the accompanying text.
The strengthened Network for Regional Skills Supply Work could effectively replace one or more existing forums and dialogues related to regional skills supply issues, thereby streamlining and consolidating efforts across Sweden. For instance, it could replace ad hoc meetings organised by Tillväxtverket and meetings organised within the Regional Contact sub-group on skills supply work. However, it would not replace the Regional Contact network in its full form. Sweden could consider integrating several key dialogues between regions and national agencies into the new network. These could include annual dialogue sessions between MYH and regional development managers, regional dialogues on adult education managed by Skolverket, and the regional skills networks facilitated by Arbetsförmedlingen.
By integrating these dialogues into the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work overseen by Tillväxtverket, Sweden would foster a more cohesive and co‑ordinated approach to addressing skills challenges, promoting better communication, information sharing and strategic alignment between regions and national agencies, and enhancing overall effectiveness in responding to regional skills needs and priorities. While this type of consolidation will require significant work by national authorities and the regions, it will be important to further exploit synergies across various parts of the skills system at national and regional levels, and to ensure the effective and efficient use of available resources.
Finally, Sweden could improve co‑ordination between its regions and the MSV by establishing a structured framework for dialogue, depicted in Figure 3.3 above. This framework would aim to achieve two main objectives: first, gather insights from the regions on MSV priorities; and second, oversee collaborative efforts within the MSV's framework. While the meetings between strategists and regional development managers in the reformed Network for Regional Skills Supply Work would function as a forum for addressing practical implementation issues and sharing best practices among regions, the framework for intervention with the MSV would be focused on the priorities and work of the MSV. Key components of the framework would include:
Designating a contact person within the MSV, such as the secretariat, and one or more regional skills supply strategists from the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work to facilitate ongoing communication between the national and regional levels, ensuring that regional perspectives are effectively integrated into MSV initiatives.
Maintaining the involvement of representatives from individual regions, such as regional development strategists, in MSV task forces, as outlined in Opportunity 1 above. This participation would ensure that regional expertise directly contributes to the planning and execution of MSV initiatives.
Organising biannual meetings between the MSV and regional development managers, as proposed in Opportunity 1 above. These meetings would serve as platforms for discussing strategic priorities, aligning agendas, and enhancing mutual understanding between national and regional stakeholders.
Selecting two to three regional development managers, elected by the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work, to participate in MSV StG meetings, when relevant to the agenda. These representatives would act as liaisons, bringing regional perspectives to MSV StG discussions and reporting back to the network on outcomes and decisions.
By implementing this structured dialogue framework, Sweden could strengthen co‑ordination across its multi-level governance structure, ensuring that regional priorities are effectively integrated into national policies, and enhancing the overall effectiveness of the MSV in addressing skills supply challenges nationwide.
In establishing mechanisms to foster dialogue between regions and the MSV, Sweden could benefit from studying Norway's Regional Competence Fora, which perform tasks akin to Swedish regions, but employ more highly developed mechanisms for fostering inter-regional and cross-government co‑operation. For example, they co‑ordinate activities via a network of regional directors overseeing skills and education who hold regular meetings with the Ministry of Education and Research (see Box 3.7).
In summary, introducing legislative amendments to clarify regional responsibilities within Sweden's skills system will enhance the effectiveness and coherence of skills provision. Establishing Regional Skills Councils across all regions will facilitate structured dialogue and collaboration among key stakeholders, ensuring alignment with local and regional economic needs. Emulating successful models from other countries, such as Ireland and Norway, can provide valuable insights into effective regional governance and co‑ordination mechanisms. Additionally, ensuring adequate funding and improving access to detailed labour market and skills data will empower regions to address skills challenges proactively. Strengthening both horizontal and vertical collaboration through platforms such as the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work would promote better strategic alignment and resource allocation, ultimately enhancing Sweden's ability to meet its skills development goals nationwide.
The Norwegian Regional Competence Fora (RCF) are part of Norway's efforts to strengthen regional economic growth and workforce development. The RCF were created following the 2017 regional governance reform (regionsreformen), which placed responsibility for regional skills development policy at the regional level, and the launch of the Norwegian Strategy for Skills Policy 2017–2021. The responsibilities of the regions were further defined in a 2018 government white paper, which highlighted: supporting the matching of skills supply and demand at the regional level, linking regional development with skills policies, facilitating co‑operation across regional stakeholders, and developing regional skills strategies that set goals for skills supply and demand.
While the composition of RCF varies across regions, they generally consist of representatives from regional and local governments, employers, trade unions, the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (Arbeids- og velferdsforvaltning, NAV), vocational schools, universities, and other education providers. While some fora are run directly by the elected members of the Regional Councils (fylkesting), others are organised and run at the administrative level. Regional work on skills supply and demand, including the RCF, is financed through block grants from national to regional governments. However, there is no earmarked funding for regional skills development activities within the block grants.
Work across regions is co‑ordinated through a network of regional directors of skills and education, which meets regularly. A smaller group of these directors has been selected to prepare the network meetings. This group also meets monthly with the Ministry of Education and Research to ensure co‑ordination across national and regional levels of government. More recently, a network for regional officials responsible for skills and education policies has been created to foster co‑operation between regions and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. social partners and the NAV).
Source: OECD (2024[4]), Strengthening the governance of the Swedish skills system: Report on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance, www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf.
Consider amending the Law on Regional Development to make it mandatory to establish Regional Skills Councils in a way that aligns with the regions’ needs, and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the regions in the skills system. Proposed amendments to the Law on Regional Development could mandate all regions to establish Regional Skills Councils. These councils would serve to facilitate structured dialogues with regional stakeholders, focusing on aligning skills supply with demand. The legal amendments could also comprehensively outline the key components of regional skills supply work. The amendments should recognise the importance of allowing regional flexibility in determining the specific structure and operations of Regional Skills Councils, which would be tailored to meet local needs and conditions.
Allocate additional financial resources to regional skills supply work to align funding with responsibilities. Additional financial resources should be allocated from the central government budget and specifically earmarked for skills supply initiatives. It should be allocated according to labour market challenges rather than population density. Sweden could also consider allocating resources from the ESF+ through the Svenska ESF-rådet to further bolster regional skills supply efforts.
Establish the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work as the primary forum for facilitating dialogue among regions and between regional and national levels of government. The structure of the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work could change to facilitate ongoing collaboration between regions at the operational level (regional development strategists) and the strategic level (regional development managers). In parallel, similar inter-regional networks or meetings on skills supply work could be discontinued, and various structures for co‑ordination between national agencies and regions could be integrated into the strengthened network to streamline efforts, enhance communication and ensure a more cohesive approach to addressing skills challenges across Sweden. The final decision on which networks or meetings to discontinue or integrate into the strengthened network should rely on further analysis of the purpose and membership make up. Regional Contact, run by SKR, should continue to facilitate strategic discussions on other topics across regions, but the sub-group on skills supply work should be discontinued to avoid overlap with the network.
Establish a structured framework for improved communication between the regions and the MSV. This framework would be a way for the regions to provide input into the agenda of the MSV. It could encompass several key elements: 1) regular exchanges between designated contact persons from the MSV and the Network for Regional Skills Supply Work; 2) biannual meetings between the MSV and regional development managers; 3) selection of two to three regional development managers to represent all regions in relevant MSV StG meetings; and 4) ongoing participation of representatives from individual regions, such as regional development strategists, in MSV task forces.
References
[13] Arbetsförmedlingen (2024), Lokala jobbspår [Local Job Tracks], Arbetsförmedlingen (Swedish Public Employment Service), https://arbetsformedlingen.se/for-kommuner/overenskommelser-for-samverkan/lokala-jobbspar (accessed on 30 September 2024).
[14] ESV (2021), Regleringsbrev för budgetåret 2022 avseende Myndigheten för yrkeshögskolan [Regulation letter for the budget year 2022 regarding the Authority for the University of Applied Sciences], Ekonomistyrningsverkets (The Swedish National Financial Management Authority), https://www.esv.se/statsliggaren/regleringsbrev/?RBID=22370 (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[7] Government of Sweden (2024), The budget process, https://www.government.se/government-of-sweden/ministry-of-finance/central-government-budget/the-budget-process-and-the-fiscal-policy-framework/ (accessed on 30 September 2024).
[10] Government of Sweden (2022), Dimensionering av gymnasial utbildning för bättre kompetensförsörjning. Prop. 2021/22:159 [Dimensioning of upper secondary education for better skills supply], https://www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/proposition/2022/03/prop.-202122159 (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[12] Government of Sweden (2022), Långsiktig och behovsanpassad yrkesutbildning för vuxna [Long-term and needs-based vocational education and training for adults], https://www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/kommittedirektiv/2022/06/dir.-202284/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[3] Government of Sweden (2019), Effektivt, tydligt och träffsäkert – det statliga åtagandet för framtidens arbetsmarknad [Effective, clear and accurate – the government’s commitment to the labor market of the future], https://www.regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/statens-offentliga-utredningar/2019/01/sou-20193/.
[8] MYH (2024), Så kan deltagande i STEM-utbildningar öka [How participation in STEM education can increase], Myndigheten för yrkeshögskolan (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education), https://www.myh.se/nyhetsrum/nyheter/sa-kan-deltagande-i-stem-utbildningar-oka (accessed on 2 July 2024).
[15] MYH (2023), Aterrapportering: Administrative samordning av myndighetssamverkan för en väl fungerande kompetensförsörjning [Reporting back: Administrative coordination of cooperation between authorities for a well-functioning competence supply], Myndigheten för yrkeshögskolans (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education), https://www.myh.se/publikationer/aterrapportering-administrativ-samordning-av-myndighetssamverkan-for-en-val-fungerande-kompetensforsorjning (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[17] MYH (2022), Lärcentra för kompetensförsörjning och livslångt lärande – Behovsinventering och analys [Learning centers for competence provision and lifelong learning - Needs inventory and analysis], Myndigheten för Yrkeshögskolan (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education), https://www.myh.se/publikationer/larcentra-for-kompetensforsorjning-och-livslangt-larande-behovsinventering-och-analys.
[16] MYH (2021), Uppdraf att stödja arbetet med at utveckla effektiva strukturer för validering pa regional niva [Assignment to support the work of developing effective structures for validation at regional level], Myndigheten för Yrkeshögskolan (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education), https://assets.myh.se/docs/om-oss/uppdrag-att-stodja-arbetet-med-att-utveckla-effektiva-strukturer-for-validering-pa-regional-niva.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[4] OECD (2024), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills: Report on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2024).
[6] OECD (2023), OECD Skills Strategy Ireland: Assessment and Recommendations, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d7b8b40b-en.
[1] OECD (2020), Strengthening the Governance of Skills Systems: Lessons from Six OECD Countries, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3a4bb6ea-en.
[9] Reglab (2023), Reglab (homepage), Reglab Sverige, https://www.reglab.se/ (accessed on 30 September 2024).
[11] Skolverket (2022), Uppdrag om regionala planeringsunderlag [Assignment on regional planning documents], Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket), https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.64ce3790183ff475a641ef9/1672887942103/U2022-02828_Regionala-planeringsunderlag-2.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[5] Statskontoret (2022), Regeringens styrning i tvärsektoriella frågor: En studie om erfarenheter och utvecklingsmöjligheter [The government’s governance in cross-sectoral matters: A study of experiences and development opportunities], Statskontoret (Swedish Agency for Public Management), https://www.statskontoret.se/siteassets/rapporter-pdf/2022/oos-44---utskriftsversion.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2024).
[2] Swedish Parliament (2017), Förvaltningslag (2017:900) [Administrative Procedure Act (2017:900)], Ministry of Justice, Sveriges Riksdag (Swedish Parliament), https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/forvaltningslag-2017900_sfs-2017-900/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
← 1. The Swedish Public Employment Service (Arbetsförmedlingen), the Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education (Myndigheten för Yrkeshögskolan, MYH), the Swedish Higher Education Authority (Universitetskanslersämbetet, UKÄ), the Swedish Council for Higher Education (Universitets- och högskolerådet, UHR), the Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket), the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Tillväxtverket) and the Council for the European Social Fund in Sweden (Swedish ESF Council, Svenska ESF-rådet).
← 2. The mandate is given through the specification in the agencies’ ordinances with directives to participate in the MSV, as well as section eight of the Administrative Procedure Act (Swedish Parliament, 2017[2]), which states that agencies should collaborate with each other within their respective areas.
← 3. Learning centres (lärcentrum) is an umbrella term for local meeting places managed by municipalities to facilitate adult learning through enhanced accessibility to guidance, support measures, and education and training opportunities (MYH, 2022[17]).