NFPA Journal - Winter 2022 - 65

The skyline of Stockholm,
Sweden. The country is
considering adopting
systems-based principles
that could be applied to a
restructuring of its building
regulatory system.
general recommendations
(nonmandatory guidance),
and specify what methods
of verification are to be
applied to check that the
requirements are met-
but only in those cases
where the Boverket sees
a need for authority control.
The committee also
recommended deleting
references to standards
in the regulations and
bolstering the standardization
process, the idea
being to give those with
technical expertise more
of a say in the technical
requirements for
buildings.
I found all of this very
intriguing. Standards
play a critical role in the
building regulatory system
that exists in the US, and
the fact that the committee
thought standards
should play a similar role
in Sweden seemed like
a good thing to me. The
removal of references
to standards made me
think a bit-my first reaction
was that this action
might create challenges
for verifying compliance.
The committee indicated,
though, that methods
of verification should be
specified where needed,
and these of course could
be through standards. It
also occurred to me that
not referencing standards
in the regulations could
actually boost the prominence
of those standards
that become widely
accepted by all stakeholders
within the regulatory
system. It would also put
more responsibility on
designers, engineers, and
developers to make better
decisions about good
design and the standards
that should be applied.
In response to the committee's
report, Boverket
proposed changes to the
country's building regulations,
incorporating
several of the committee's
recommendations.
I was subsequently
engaged by Boverket to
provide insights from
other countries and to
help facilitate discussions
with stakeholders about
the proposed changes.
Not surprisingly, some
In England, our assessment
revealed a range of system
failures that had resulted in
tragedies. Our assessment of
the Swedish system indicated
similar shortcomings.
stakeholders embraced
the idea of fewer mandated
requirements from
government (and the
additional flexibility provided
by standards that
they could help develop),
while others were significantly
opposed.
A number of questions
exist at the core of this
debate. How should minimum
requirements be
established and reflected
in regulations? What are
appropriate measures
and means of verification?
Who should be
involved in the decision
making regarding the
establishment of these
components? Who has
responsibility for assuring
that building designs are
proper and safe? Who is
accountable if something
goes wrong? Discussions
around all of these
issues continue.
I applaud Sweden's willingness
to consider how
adoption of STS principles
could benefit a restructuring
of its regulatory system.
I believe that application of
STS thinking would be helpful
in reviews and updates
to guidance in nearly
every country in the world,
including the US. -B.M.
NFPA .ORG/JOURNAL * NFPA JOURNAL | 65
DOMINGO LEIVA/GETTY IMAGES
https://www.nfpa.org/journal
NFPA Journal - Winter 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of NFPA Journal - Winter 2022
