Can Artificial Intelligence Help Sweden Predict Disasters and Protect Its Critical Services?

Can Artificial Intelligence Help Sweden Predict Disasters and Protect Its Critical Services?

A World Bank report warns that fragmented disaster data, weak coordination and funding gaps are limiting Sweden’s ability to prepare for floods, wildfires, landslides and emerging security threats. It calls for a unified national risk and resilience data system, supported by artificial intelligence, stronger governance and sustained investment to protect communities and critical infrastructure.

Sweden faces growing challenges in protecting its population, infrastructure and economy from natural disasters and emerging security threats, according to a 2026 report by the World Bank Group and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). Developed under the European Commission-funded Technical Assistance Financing Facility for Disaster Prevention and Preparedness, the study draws on consultations with the Swedish Civil Defence and Resilience Agency, Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Statistics Sweden, Uppsala University, Karlstad University, Lund University and the Swedish Centre for Impacts of Climate Extremes. Titled Toward a Modern Risk and Resilience Data System in Sweden: Diagnostic and Recommendations, the report warns that fragmented disaster information, weak coordination and insufficient long-term funding are limiting Sweden's ability to anticipate emergencies, protect essential services and strengthen national resilience.

Sweden already has a well-developed disaster management framework supported by climate adaptation policies, emergency legislation and its total defence strategy. However, increasing risks from floods, storms, wildfires and landslides are exposing weaknesses in preparedness. Events such as Storm Hans and the Stenungsund landslide in 2023 demonstrated how natural hazards can threaten communities, damage infrastructure and disrupt essential services.

The report argues that Sweden must move beyond responding to disasters after they occur and develop stronger systems for anticipating threats. This requires identifying vulnerable communities, understanding how disasters affect interconnected infrastructure and directing investments toward areas facing the greatest risks.

One major concern is that Sweden possesses extensive disaster-related information but lacks a unified national system to collect, analyze and share it. Government agencies, universities, municipalities and private companies maintain separate databases covering weather conditions, landslides, infrastructure disruptions, insurance losses and emergency incidents. Although much of this information is reliable, inconsistent methodologies and restricted access prevent authorities from developing a comprehensive picture of national risks.

Sweden's existing databases demonstrate considerable technical expertise. The Swedish Geotechnical Institute maintains records of more than 1,600 landslide, debris-flow and erosion events, while the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute operates a flooding and storms database extending back to 1961.

The Swedish Forest Agency maintains wildfire information dating from 2019, and Uppsala University is developing a database covering approximately 800 multihazard events. Insurance Sweden also publishes aggregated information about economic losses caused by natural hazards.

Despite these resources, information remains scattered across institutions, making coordinated planning difficult. Authorities often lack detailed knowledge about vulnerable populations, critical infrastructure, emergency response capabilities and the potential consequences of simultaneous disruptions.

The report identifies the absence of a formal institutional mandate as a fundamental weakness. No central authority currently has comprehensive responsibility for coordinating disaster risk information across sectors. Individual agencies collect information according to their responsibilities, but systematic sharing is not mandatory.

Funding shortages create additional problems. Several databases depend on temporary grants or limited institutional budgets, making regular updates difficult. A natural hazards database developed by Karlstad University and the Swedish Civil Defence and Resilience Agency stopped receiving updates in 2016 because maintenance funding was unavailable.

To address these weaknesses, the World Bank recommends establishing a centralized, interconnected risk and resilience database supported by common technical standards and secure information-sharing arrangements.

The Swedish Civil Defence and Resilience Agency could coordinate the system, while Statistics Sweden could contribute expertise in database management, confidentiality and secure data exchange. Geographic information systems would help authorities identify high-risk locations, assess infrastructure vulnerabilities and prioritize investments.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning could further strengthen disaster preparedness by processing historical records, monitoring emerging threats and improving predictions. Researchers at the Swedish Centre for Impacts of Climate Extremes are already exploring large language models to extract information about extreme weather impacts.

The report also highlights opportunities to use online news reports and social media information to monitor flooding and other emergencies. Machine-learning models could help identify areas where flooding risks are increasing, supporting earlier warnings and better emergency planning.

However, the authors caution that advanced technologies cannot compensate for unreliable or fragmented information. Strong data standards, secure systems and clear institutional responsibilities must be established before these tools can deliver their full benefits.

The World Bank recommends introducing the proposed system gradually rather than attempting to build a comprehensive platform immediately. The first stage would focus on historical disaster records, including locations, impacts, economic losses and lessons learned.

Later stages would incorporate future hazards, population exposure, infrastructure vulnerabilities and emergency response capacities. More advanced analysis could examine how disruptions in transport, electricity, healthcare and supply chains affect one another.

The report also calls for formal coordination agreements, permanent financing and greater public access to non-sensitive information. European Union funding mechanisms could help support development and implementation.

Importantly, the proposed system would strengthen Sweden's broader total defence strategy, which aims to maintain essential societal functions during emergencies, heightened security threats and wartime conditions.

Ultimately, the report concludes that Sweden already possesses the scientific expertise, institutional capacity and information needed to improve disaster preparedness. Its greatest challenge is bringing these resources together through stronger governance, sustained investment and cooperation. A unified national system could help policymakers make better decisions, reduce disaster losses, protect vulnerable communities and build a more resilient society capable of managing increasingly complex threats.