Co-Creating Safety and Security?: Analyzing the Multifaceted Field of Co-Creation in Finland

Abstract

Complexity is said to be on the rise in the security environment and co-creation has been proposed as one of the ways to respond to this situation. Through co-creation, complexity is addressed by a plurality of actors and actions, instead of by any single authority or recipe. Such an approach is the main premise of the Finnish Concept for Comprehensive Security. This article seeks to answer the question of how co-creation occurs as part of societal safety and security functions in Finland and what kind of challenges and problems are involved therein. The focus of the article is on the regional and local levels of action and on the public-sector/civil-society interface. The data informing this study are 31 small-group discussions that took place in so-called security cafés. This article uses the modified ladder of safety and security co-creation derived from previous research to provide its analytical framework. The ladder of co-creation proved to be a useful analytical tool to address the phenomenon and to illustrate the multifaceted and context-dependent nature of safety and security co-creation. Results indicate that at present co-creation within the safety and security functions in Finland seems to focus more on action-oriented co-production. Citizens as volunteers participate in the functions of producing safety and security, but talk-centered, planning-oriented co-creation seems to be less common. The data also provide clear indications of the darker sides of co-creation. Co-creation may be symbolic and tokenistic in that it remains at a rhetorical level. The data also offer examples of co-contamination (the lowest level of the ladder of co-creation). These examples were related to the roles of spontaneous volunteers and emergent citizen groups.

Adaptive Governance of Disaster Preparedness? The Case of Regional Networks in Finland

“…This is not surprising, as high quality and inclusive participation is notoriously hard to achieve [13], while poor participation can lead to unfulfilled expectations, reducing trust in local government and exacerbating conflicts [6,36]. Likewise, Raisio et al [19] note that Finnish preparedness planning is exclusive by nature: citizens may participate in the functions of producing safety and security by assisting authorities as volunteers, but they are not included in planning. Virta and Branders ([22], 1161) note that despite the whole-of-society approach of comprehensive security, the policymaking process itself is not particularly inclusive or deliberativecitizens are considered a "source for legitimacy and support for existing policy."…”

“…It should also be noted that governance models akin to AG have also been developed in other governance and research traditions, and these models are not always referred to as AG [18]. Governing complexity through a plurality of actors and wide-ranging collaboration is also the main premise of Finnish comprehensive security approach to safety, security and preparedness [19]. It focuses on maintaining the vital functions of society through cross-sectoral collaboration [20].…”