Who will pay for upskilling? The Almedalen perspective

The need for upskilling is increasing as demographics show a declining trend. Today, universities focus on educating young students, while industry expresses and increasing need for courses to upskill their workforce. The annual Almedalen week, in the medieval town of Visby, is the main political and policy event in Sweden. In 2026, the official Almedalen programme listed over 3200 events. While the word “kompetensutveckling” (skill development) appeared in 11 of them, the related term “kompetensförsörjning” (skill supply) showed up more than 10 times as often.

That says something. Swedish policy makers and industry comfortably discuss the fact that crucial skills are missing, but we tend to avoid stating how these skills should actually be developed — and who should pay for the process. This is a key question, since without clear responsibilities, a clear strategy is missing.

That was why Chalmers organised a roundtable discussion during this year’s Almedalen Week. We wanted to understand who should take the responsibility to pay for upskilling of the Swedish workforce in a fiercely competitive world.

The Chalmers Upskilling Academy roundtable gathered expert representatives from industry, employer organisations, and the trade union. We also had a representative for engineers, a member of parliament, a labour market analyst, people from an organisation working with transition support, and us from academia.

It is not why anymore – it is how and when!

Last year, our roundtable looked at reasons for upskilling. This year, no one questioned. What worries people now is demographics: Sweden is having fewer children than ever, while the population distributions in countries like India and Nigeria look completely different. A global study cited during the conversation found that 73% of companies worldwide can’t find the right talent with the right skills today. Our working-age population is shrinking, which makes lifelong learning increasingly urgent.

No strong consensus on who should pay

The roundtable discussion did not reach a consensus. Funding responsibilities for any specific stakeholder remained elusive – should the employer, the state, or the individuals fund up- and re-skilling? Several participants argued that the employer should pay when the skills development is needed to fulfil your work responsibilities. But if the individual isn’t employed, that is a different matter.  

In the case of the governmental “omställningsstudiestödet” it should fund the up- and reskilling. However, some participants mentioned that this programme, supporting individuals in need for upskilling, is still quite new and needs a few more years to show its effects.

Others pointed out that the state should set clear responsibilities for fundamental skill sets, while more specialised, company-specific training should be funded by industry itself. One large company around the table described how they’ve solved this internally with their own “academy”, deploying courses for their employees able to be performed during work time.

A recurring problem is that funding often is given as short projects instead of long-term investments. Project money gathers a group of people for while, but when the project ends, opportunities for training quickly disappears. Several participants called for a lasting model and compared to how Canada maps what individuals need to learn was drawn.

Do we even agree on the problem?

One participant asked: before we can solve the problem, we need to understand it. How many people need to develop new skills, and in what? Without numbers on the table, it’s hard to even know if everyone in the room is talking about the same problem. 

Here is where our own Chalmers Upskilling Academy model comes in. It is built on short, research-based course modules, roughly 40 hours and equivalent to 1,5 university credits. Several people around the table pointed to that short format as a reasonable way forward, while someone noted that universities also need a more stable market to plan long-term for upskilling modules.

What happens now

The conversation ended with only draft solutions, but with a clearer picture of where solutions could be found, we are looking for a split between the state, employers, and individuals, a better national coordination, and a daring wish to test new models before all answers are in place.

The Chalmers Upskilling Academy team will carry this important question forward, beyond the Almedalen Week. If you are interested in who should pay for upskilling and if you want to talk about it – please reach out to us!