GZERO Media logo

The Sweden Model: Can it work for you?

The Sweden Model: Can it work for you?

People around the world are now comparing the coronavirus response of their own governments to those in other places, and the controversial strategy adopted in Sweden has drawn particular attention. What exactly is the "Sweden Model" for managing COVID-19, and would it work in other countries?

What is the "Sweden Model?" It's a coronavirus management strategy led by Anders Tegnell, state epidemiologist at Sweden's National Institute of Health. Sweden's government has closed universities and banned large public gatherings, but it has not ordered citizens to stay home or wear masks. Nor has it closed schools, gyms, bars or restaurants. The government has offered advice but hasn't imposed a lockdown.


The idea, according to Tegnell, is that a virus transmitted easily by people who show no symptoms of illness can't be contained by lockdowns and contact tracing. Only immunity can protect the broader population. Since there's no vaccine on the horizon, it's best to allow healthy people to become infected and develop natural immunity. He acknowledges that special care must be taken to protect those the virus is most likely to kill: the elderly and those with underlying health conditions.

You might want it for your country.

COVID-19 is not the only killer at large. Mass lockdowns have dire health consequences of their own. Research shows that joblessness, poverty, and isolation kill large numbers of people in every country in the world.

Many people don't trust government. They believe that it's dangerous and irresponsible for government bureaucrats to issue orders that impose joblessness, poverty, and isolation on their citizens. In some countries, people don't think government should have that much power, particularly on the subject of a virus even scientists are struggling to understand. In those places, many will ignore government orders or use their democratic power to force changes to them.

Some countries have health care systems that can manage a near-term surge of infections. If Tegnell and others are right that more near-term infections now move a society more quickly toward "herd immunity," which means fewer deaths later, then government-ordered lockdowns inflict economic and emotional misery on people without reducing the total number of deaths.

And now a few arguments for why this might not be a good model for other countries…

Few countries have political systems as centralized as Sweden's. Most central governments don't have the power to adopt a single approach to fighting the coronavirus. In nations where local officials adopt different strategies, the effectiveness of any single plan, including Sweden's, is sharply reduced.

Swedes are healthier than people in most other countries. It's easier for young Swedes to survive infection, because they have fewer chronic health problems — like obesity and diabetes — than people in many other countries. Their health-care system is better able to absorb a sudden surge in serious illness. And there's relatively little inequality in Sweden in access to quality health care.

Swedes are less exposed to the disease. Sweden has one of the highest work-from-home rates in the world. It also has relatively low population density outside of Stockholm, and is a place where social distancing is more culturally accepted.

Finally, many Swedish scientists say that their government's approach is a bad idea even for Sweden. We can't yet evaluate the long-term effectiveness of Sweden's strategy, but we do know that it has a much higher current coronavirus death rate than its Nordic neighbors with stricter lockdowns. Sweden's death rate is 28.88 per 100,000 people. Denmark stands at just 8.73, Finland is at 4.57, and Norway is at 4.06.

Strong arguments on both sides. What do you think?

Khant Thaw Htoo is a young engineer who works in Eni's Sakura Tower office in the heart of Yangon. As an HSE engineer, he monitors the safety and environmental impact of onshore and offshore operations. He also looks out for his parents' well-being, in keeping with Myanmar's traditions.

Learn more about Khant in the final episode of the Faces of Eni series, which focuses on Eni's employees around the world.

On his first day as president, Joe Biden signed a remarkable series of executive orders. Boom! The US rejoins the Paris Climate Accord. Bang! The United States rejoins the World Health Organization. Pow! No more ban on immigration from many Muslim-majority countries. Biden's press secretary reminded reporters later in the day that all these orders merely begin complex processes that take time, but the impact is still dramatic.

If you lead a country allied with the US, or you're simply hoping for some specific commitment or clear and credible statement of purpose from the US government, you might feel a little dizzy today. The sight of an American president (Barack Obama) signing his name, of the next president (Donald Trump) erasing that name from the same legislation/bill, and then the following president (Biden) signing it back into law again will raise deep concerns over the long-term reliability of the world's still-most-powerful nation.

More Show less

Kevin Sneader, Global Managing Partner at McKinsey & Company, provides perspective on what corporate business leaders are thinking during the global coronavirus crisis:

Should businesses be pessimistic or optimistic about 2021?

It's easy to be gloomy about the year ahead when faced with the realities of a cold, bleak winter in much of the world. Add to that lockdowns across Europe, surging case numbers and hospitalizations, and dreadful events in the Capitol in the US to name a few reasons for pessimism. But I think there is a case for optimism when it comes to this year. After all, it's true to say that it's always darkest before the dawn, and my conversations with business leaders suggest there are reasons to be positive by 2021.

More Show less

Renowned tech journalist Kara Swisher has no qualms about saying that many of the country's social media companies need to be held accountable for their negative role in our current national discourse. Swisher calls for "a less friendly relationship with tech" by the Biden administration, an "internet bill of rights" around privacy, and an investigation into antitrust issues.

Swisher, who hosts the New York Times podcast Sway, joins Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World, airing on public television nationwide beginning this Friday, January 22th. Check local listings.

Brexit pettiness lingers: Here we were naively thinking the Brexit shenanigans were over after the EU and UK agreed to an eleventh-hour post-Brexit trade deal last month. We were wrong — the saga continues. Now, a new row has erupted after the Johnson government said it will not give the EU ambassador in London the same diplomatic status awarded to other representatives of nation states. Unsurprisingly, this announcement peeved Brussels, whose delegates enjoy full diplomatic status in at least 142 other countries. The UK says it will give the EU envoy the same privileges as those given to international organizations, which are subject to change and do not include immunity from detention and taxation given to diplomats under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations. EU members are furious, with officials accusing London of simply trying to flex its muscles and engaging in "petty" behavior. The two sides will discuss the matter further when UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson meets EU representatives next week, their first face-to-face since the two sides settled the Brexit quagmire on December 31. Alas, the Brexit nightmare continues.

More Show less
The GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer. Listen now.

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal