Summary:

Our security environment hasbecome more complex during the past years and the variety of threats and vulnerabilities that emerge have become more unpredictable and transboundary. Civil prepared-nessis aconceptwhich is used to addresscross-sectoralsecuritymattersfocusing on sustainingthe essential societal functions, ensuringbasic supply tothe population and actingin extraordinary cir-cumstances as well as the civilian sector’s ability to support the military defence if needed.The or-ganisation of civil preparedness is a national matter and the ways governments have organised itvaries. This study seeks to find out how civil preparedness is conceptually understood and institu-tionally organised in Finland compared with theconcepts and institutionalarrangements in Sweden and in Norway.The study begins by presenting a concept map aiming to increase the understanding of the studied phenomenon of civil preparedness as a broad and cross-sectoral security matter, while it also illus-trates the interdependency ofthedifferent concepts.Then,atheoretical frameworkbased on security governance studiesis built, focusing on complexity as an inherent part of security governance and security mentalities as ways to approach and handle security. The theoretical framework will be used in understanding the core findings and in finding theoretical logics and linkages to the factors identi-fied in the analysis.The case-oriented comparative study uses qualitative data based on official documents and an ex-pert interview.Content analysis was used as a method for analysingthe data. Contextual factors ex-plaining the findings are especially looked for from the strategic decisions implemented regarding the national security and defence policies in the studied countries during the past years and by mir-roring the findings to different ways to govern security. The national approaches to civil preparednesshave been modified in Finland, Sweden and Norway during the years to better respond to the new security environment. However, the development has not been similar in all thestudiedcountries and different solutions have been implemented. The find-ings show that civil preparedness has been conceptually covered in fundamentally different way in Finland compared to the concepts established in Sweden and in Norway. Due to the differencesbe-tweenthe conceptual understandings ofcivil preparedness, also the institutional arrangements estab-lished for it variesbetween the studied countries. While Sweden and Norway are clearly aiming for strong coordination in the field of civil preparednessin their total defence approaches, Finland is counting on its joint preparedness model of comprehensive securityin which the concept of civil preparednessis not a separateentity.The studied countries are often characterised by similarity which appliesalso to the identified security mentalitiesbehind the approaches,whileimportant differences in the strategic decisions made regarding the national security and defence policiesexist.Keywords: Civil preparedness,Societal security, Comprehensive security, Security governance