Arbetar länsstyrelserna lika? : en analys av hantering och prioritering av anmälningsärenden

Abstract: Jordbruksverket, the Swedish Board of Agriculture, are the ones that establish the legislation for animals beyond the Swedish Animal Welfare Act and Ordinance. The County Administrative Board (Länsstyrelsen) is the authority that ensures that animal keepers comply with the legislation. They receive reports from the public that alert them about animal keepers who are not complying with the legislation and treat the animal poorly. Together the Swedish Board of Agriculture and the County Administrative Boards have set a goal where a maximum of 25% of all reported cases where controls have been carried out shall be unjustified. Under the year 2019 it was only two out of 21 County Administrative Boards that achieved that goal. This study aims to investigate the reason why so many County Administrative Boards did not achieve this goal. The method that was used was to ask three different County Administrative Boards (Kalmar, Stockholm and Västmanland) questions about how they are working with reported cases, what information is important and how they prioritize the cases. Fifteen reported cases from each County Administrative Board were examined. The results from this study shows that the County Administrative Board in Stockholm had 15% reported cases that were unjustified, Kalmar had 41% and Västmanland had 47%. Both Kalmar and Västmanland had insufficient information from the public in their reports that could have been important for how the cases were concluded. The County Administrative Board in Stockholm have produced their own form that they use and write down all the information from the informer. More than half of the reported cases about animalsthat have not been treated according to the legislation was from anonymous people. One reason to why there was so many reported cases from anonymous informers that were unjustified can be because of conflicts between the informer and the animal keeper. The clearest reason why Kalmar and Västmanland had more unjustified reported cases than Stockholm is that they are not as accurate and do not have as detailed information from the public in their reports as Stockholm. One other thing that was discussed in this study was if it could be some risk with having a goal like this. The answer to that question is that if the County Administrative Boards work hard with getting all important information in their reports, no reported cases where animals are suffering will be unprioritized. The conclusion of this study is that all the County Administrative Boards in Sweden should use a form like the one Stockholm uses to make sure that all the important information is included in the report. And that they must work harder with getting all the important information and all the details that are necessary and be more accurate in the prioritizing.