In recent years, scholars and policymakers have expressed growing concern that violent extremism is increasingly marked by ideological fluidity, hybrid motivations, and digitally mediated forms of engagement. Commonly referred to as hybrid extremism, this development challenges traditional Prevention and Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE) frameworks, which are largely built around fixed ideological categories. This thesis examines that challenge by analyzing how hybrid extremism is governed within Sweden’s P/CVE system, with particular attention to potential misalignments between policy-level framings and practitioner-level interpretations. The study combines a thematic analysis of Swedish national P/CVE policy documents with semi-structured interviews conducted with local and national practitioners. The findings show that hybrid extremism is widely recognised as an emerging phenomena. However, rather than undermining preventative efforts, ideological ambiguity is managed through a shift towards risk-based, behaviour-oriented, and relational forms of governance. While policy documents continue to rely on traditional ideological classifications, the operative logic of prevention emphasises observable risk indicators, protective safety mechanisms, dialogue and multi-agency coordination. The thesis concludes that hybrid extremism exposes a conceptual gap between policy language and practice rather than a fundamental operational failure. By representing extremism as a preventable risk to societal values rather than ideological deviation, Sweden’s P/CVE system remains functional under conditions of ideological uncertainty.
Salomea Gosenius (Thu,) studied this question.