As climate and disaster risks intensify, countries around the world are looking to leverage data-driven approaches to identify and prioritize resilience measures. Effective systems for collecting, managing, and using disaster risk data are central to this effort. While gaps are often greatest in lower-income countries, rapidly changing risks and emerging technologies such as remote sensing, artificial intelligence, and machine learning mean that even countries with advanced systems need to continually adapt and modernize.

Sweden is no exception. Despite strong administrative capacity and well-developed risk management institutions, the country faces a need to strengthen how disaster damage and loss data are used to inform actions toward national resilience objectives, while making efficient use of resources. Recent events, including Storm Hans and the Stenungsund landslide in 2023, have underscored the importance of this agenda.

Two new reports explore this agenda from complementary perspectives. They were produced under the Technical Assistance Financing Facility (TAFF), financed by the European Commission and implemented by the World Bank and GFDRR to strengthen disaster prevention and preparedness in member states of the European Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM).

The report Disaster Damage and Loss Data Systems: Review of International Practice draws on experience from 16 countries and identifies principles and lessons for building effective systems. It finds that successful systems need a clear purpose, defined responsibilities, common standards, sustainable financing, and a strong link between data collection and decision-making.

The second report Toward a Modern Risk and Resilience Data System in Sweden provides recommendations how these lessons can be applied in the Swedish context. It finds that Sweden already has many important building blocks, including high-quality data and strong expertise across government agencies, academia and the private sector, but that fragmentation, inconsistent methods, limited interoperability and the absence of a formal coordinating mandate remain important challenges.

Key findings and recommendations: 
 

• Establish a clear institutional mandate and governance structure. A formal mandate or regulation should define roles and responsibilities for a national risk and resilience data system, supported by formal data-sharing agreements and coordination mechanisms. A lead coordinating agency should provide clear authority across the data value chain.
• Build on existing data and institutions. A centralized and interoperable system should connect and harmonize the existing resources rather than create parallel systems.
• Develop common standards and methodologies. Consistent definitions, standards, metadata, and approaches to data collection are essential to improve interoperability, comparability, and analytical reliability.
• Design the system around users and clearly defined purposes. The intended use of the information should determine what data are collected, the level of detail required, how frequently information is updated, and who can access it. 
• Ensure sustainable financing and maintenance. Long-term funding and dedicated personnel are critical to maintaining data quality, updating systems, and ensuring that investments in disaster data deliver lasting value.
• Strengthen analytical capabilities. GIS-based tools, and emerging technologies such as AI and machine learning where appropriate, can help transform fragmented datasets into actionable information for preparedness, response, investment, and risk reduction.
• Develop the system incrementally. Rather than attempting to establish a comprehensive system serving every possible purpose from the outset, Sweden can begin with a focused use case, build on existing capacities and institutional structures, and expand the system as needs and capabilities evolve.

Better damage and loss data can help countries make more evidence-based investments, strengthen emergency preparedness and response, identify vulnerabilities and interdependencies, and support climate adaptation and resilience. For Sweden, and for countries facing similar challenges, the lesson is clear: better data can help turn experience from disasters into stronger preparedness for the future.

These two reports were produced under Sweden: Review of the State of the Art of National Disaster Loss Databases, a country-specific activity delivered under the Technical Assistance Financing Facility (TAFF), financed by the European Commission — Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) — and implemented by the World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). Both reports were delivered in partnership with the Swedish Civil Defense and Resilience Agency.