REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the effectiveness of the implementation of the single European emergency number '112'
Date: 2020-12-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, European Commission
Subjects: data collection, emergency aid, mobile communication, mobile phone

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.12.2020  COM(2020) 808 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the effectiveness of the implementation of the single European emergency number '112'   
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  report  reviews  the  effectiveness  of  the  implementation  of  the  single  European 
emergency  number  ‘112’  in  line  with  Article  109(4)  of  the  European  Electronic 
Communications Code1 (EECC). The report is based on the responses of Member States and 
two  EEA  countries,  Iceland  and  Norway,  to  the  questionnaire2  submitted  to  the 
Communications  Committee 
emergency 
communications  and  the  European  emergency  number  ‘112’.  This  data-gathering  was  the 
fourteenth such exercise conducted by the Commission services since 2007. 

implementation  of 

(COCOM)3  on 

the 

Under Article 109(4) EECC the Commission is required to submit by 21 December 2020, and 
every  two  years  thereafter,  a  report  to  the  European  Parliament  and  to  the  Council  on  the 
effectiveness of the implementation of the single European emergency number ‘112’.  

The  data  gathering  relied  on  specific  questions  that  serve  to  assess  the  level  of 
implementation of EU law requirements and the improvement of the national Public Safety 
Answering Point (PSAP) systems. The reporting period for the quantitative data (e.g. number 
of  emergency  calls  to  ‘112’)  is  1  January  2019  to  31  December  2019.  When  assessing  the 
availability  of  a  system  (e.g.  deployment  of  a  caller  location  solution,  application,  etc.)  the 
latest information available is reflected in this report. Member States and COCOM observers 
from Candidate and EEA Countries were invited on 10 June 2020 to submit their responses 
by 4 September 2020. 

Member States were called on to develop their measuring tools for monitoring a number of 
indicators  in  order  to  provide  accurate  data  on  the  functioning  of  their  112  systems. 
Throughout the report, where Member States are not mentioned with regard to a qualitative 
or quantitative assessment, it means that relevant data was not provided to the Commission 
services. The detailed statistical data are provided in the annexes to this report. 

2.  CALLS TO ‘112’ 

In 2019 end-users in the EU called the single European emergency number ‘112’ close to 150 
million  times.  While  the  number  of  calls  to  ‘112’  remained  at  the  same  level  as  the  year 
before4, the total number of emergency calls dropped by 4.5% to 267 million. Calls to ‘112’ 
represented 56% of all emergency calls. 

‘112’ is the single emergency number in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Malta, the Netherlands, 
Portugal,  Romania  and  Sweden  and,  among  the  EEA  countries,  in  Iceland.  However,  only 
20% of calls to ‘112’ in the EU are placed in these countries. The large majority of calls to 
‘112’ are placed in Member States where national numbers are still in use. In these Member 
States, the use of the single European emergency number varies largely, from 9% in France 
to 99% in Bulgaria. 

1 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing 
the European Electronic Communications Code (OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36). 
2 COCOM20-19 
3 Communications Committee established on the basis of Article 118 EECC. 
4 Calls placed in the UK were deducted from the reference year. 

1 

 
 
 
                                                           
0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

0
0
1

9
  9
2
  9
5
8

3
  8
3
  7
3
  6
6
5

6
4

7
4

1
5

2
5

1
  4
2
3

2
4

8
  2
1
2

9

F R   A T   E L   S K   C Z   C Y   S I   N O   L V   B E   L U   E S   D E   I T   P L   H U  B G   D K   P T   E E   F I  

I E   L T   M T  N L   R O   S E   I S  

Figure 1. Percentage of calls to ‘112’ 

The number of calls to ‘112’ depends on the level of end-users’ awareness on the availability 
of  the  ‘112’  number  but  also  on  the  co-existence  of  national  ‘legacy’  numbers.  In  Member 
States  where  national  numbers  still  exist,  the  use  of  the  ‘112’  number  is  dependent  on  the 
effectiveness of the organisation of the PSAP system.  

In countries where each emergency service has its own PSAP, it should be assured that ‘112’ 
calls are effectively transferred and handled by the most appropriate emergency service. State 
of the art implementation of national PSAP systems ensure an interconnected and redundant 
handling of both ‘112’ calls and calls to the national numbers while providing for access to 
all concerned emergency services. Such systems should implement a routing function adapted 
to  current  technological  developments  that  ensures  that  all  emergency  communications  – 
calls,  text-based,  video,  including  those  originated  from  network  independent  electronic 
communication service providers – are handled by the most appropriate PSAP and the most 
appropriate emergency service.  

Calls  from  mobile  phones  largely  outweighed  the  number  of  calls  from  fixed  phones.  On 
average,  73%  of  the  calls  were  placed  from  mobile  phones.  However,  the  use  of  mobile 
phones  for  emergency  communication  purposes  varies  significantly  across  Member  States, 
from 55% in Croatia and Luxembourg to 97% in Czechia and 98% in Latvia. 

The growing penetration of mobile phones, in particular smartphones, shows the importance 
of ensuring uninterrupted access to emergency services in mobile networks. It also indicates 
that  the  growing  amount  of  data  and  features  derived  from  both  the  network  and  the  end-
user’s  handset  could  make  emergency  communications  more  effective  (e.g.  caller  location, 
text  and video for end-users  with  disabilities, vertical  location (z-axis) and other contextual 
data). 

The  ratio  of  false  calls5  to  the  total  number  of  emergency  calls  still  varies  considerably 
among the Member States6, reaching 78% in Greece. Some Member States do not allow calls 

5 False calls are calls that are not followed up with intervention or assistance from the PSAP or the emergency 
services.  Calls  that  report  an  emergency  event  that  have  already  triggered  intervention  or  assistance  from  the 
part of the PSAP, therefore not triggering separate intervention or assistance will not be considered false calls. 
6 20 Member States and Iceland provided information on false calls. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
from SIM-less phones in order to decrease the risk of false calls that may potentially burden 
the PSAP system. However, access to emergency services from SIM-less phones is mandated 
in the majority of Member States (19)7 and Iceland. 

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

27  28  29 

17  20 

10 

7 

1 

72  74 

78 

61 

48 

33  35  36  39  40  41  42  42 

LT DE DK

IS

BE

LV CZ

FI

PL

ES NL HR

IT HU SE BG RO EE

PT MT EL

Figure 2. False calls to emergency numbers (%) 

Under  Article  109  EECC,  Member  States  may  mandate  other  means  of  emergency 
communications  than calls  to  ‘112’. Currently Member States are deploying SMS and  app-
based communication as an alternative means of access available for all end-users. 

13 Member States and Iceland mandated SMS-based emergency communications for all end-
users8. In 10 Member States9 and Iceland the emergency SMS is sent to ‘112’. The number of 
emergency  communications  through  SMS  varies  significantly  depending  on  the  level  of 
promotion  of  this  type  of  emergency  communication,  from  a  few  to  tens  of  thousands.  9 
Member States and Iceland confirm that the provision of emergency SMS is ensured free of 
charge. 

In  addition  to  the  possibility  to  access  emergency  services  by  calling  ‘112’,  14  Member 
States10  and  Iceland  deployed  national  or  regional  applications  available  to  all  end-users11, 
which enable emergency communications. These means of access, depending on their design, 
enable end-users to share additional information with the PSAP, potentially provide handset-
derived location information or ensure a text-based communication with the PSAP. Belgium 
and  Poland  confirmed  that  the  data  traffic  generated  by  the  emergency  application  is  zero-
rated. 

eCalls  originated  in  cars  capable  of  placing  a  ‘112’  emergency  call  should  be  adequately 
routed to the most appropriate PSAP in case of an accident. Member States had to ensure that 
their PSAP system is  ready to receive eCalls as of 1 October 201712. As of 31 March 2018 

7 AT, CY, CZ, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, HU, IE, IT, LT, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, SE, SK. 
8  SMS  communication  is  deployed  in  some  Member  States  exclusively  for  end-users  with  disabilities,  as 
indicated in section 8. 
9 EE, EL, FI, HR, IE, IS, LT, LU, LV, SI, SK. 
10 AT (regional), BE, CY, CZ, DK, FI, IT, LU, LV, MT, PL, RO, SE, SK. 
11  Application  based  communication  is  deployed  is  some  Member  States  exclusively  for  end-users  with 
disabilities, as indicated in section 8. 
12 Decision No 585/2014/EU, adopted on 3 June 2014, provides for the mandatory deployment, no later than 1 
October 2017, of the necessary public safety answering points (PSAPs) infrastructure necessary to receive and 

3 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
car manufacturers13 should fit the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system in all new types of M1 
(passengers cars) and N1 (light commercial) vehicles.  

25000

20000

15000

10000

5000

0

MT BG IS EE LT HU PT FI RO SI LU HR IE CY SK DK EL AT SE CZ NL PL DE NO BE LV ES FR IT

Figure 3. Number of eCalls placed in the EU 

As the relevant regulation targets only new types of vehicles that need to go through a type-
approval process – hence not all newly built vehicles – its effects should begin to be felt only 
as the number of new vehicles on the streets grows. The data reported by 27 Member States, 
Iceland and Norway indicates that the eCall system is effectively deployed. 

3.  ANSWERING TIME

14 

21  Member  States,  Iceland  and  Norway,  reported  less  than  10  seconds  for  the  average 
answering time needed to get in contact with the emergency services. At the same time, in 12 
Member States and Iceland at least 90% of the calls are answered within 10 seconds.  

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

IE NL CZ LT RO IS MT HU FI NO ES BG SI EE LU PT SK DK LV HR SE IT EL DE CY FR AT PL

handle 112 eCalls in the EU, in accordance with the specifications laid down by Delegated Regulation (EU) No 
305/2013. 
13  Regulation  (EU)  2015/758  establishes  the  general  requirements  for  the  EC  type-approval  of  vehicles  in 
respect of the 112-based eCall in-vehicle systems, and of 112-based eCall in-vehicle systems, components and 
separate technical units. 
14 The time between the moment the emergency call is presented to the 1st stage PSAP switch and the moment 
the call is being answered by a PSAP human operator. 

4 

 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
Figure 4. Average answer times to emergency calls (seconds) 

4.  CALL ABANDON RATE 

26 respondents reported15 on the calls that are presented to the PSAP switches but terminate 
prior to an answer by a human operator. Call abandons may be caused by network problems, 
call  congestion,  technical  faults,  handling  capacity,  caller  disconnect  (possibly  dialling  by 
mistake), etc. While involuntary calls and caller disconnect are not under the control of the 
PSAP  system  operators,  the  lack  of  handling  capacity  is  pointing  towards  the  failure  to 
adequately answer and handle calls to ‘112’ in the national PSAP system. 

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

EE EL IS NL FI FR ES IE SE BE CY SI SK LT DE RO HR HU LU PT BG MT LV IT DK CZ PL

Figure 5. Percentage of abandoned calls to emergency numbers 

While  end-user  behaviour  and  network  issues  do  influence  both  answer  times  and  call 
abandon rates, the organisation and capabilities of the national PSAP system is decisive in the 
effectiveness  of  handling  the  emergency  calls  and  emergency  communications  through 
alternative  means  of  access.  PSAP  redundancy  requirements  would  ultimately  ensure  the 
resilience  of  the  PSAP  system.  Large-scale  emergencies  –  natural  disasters,  terror  attacks 
and,  more  recently,  the  outbreak  of  the  COVID  crisis  –  proved  the  importance  of  meeting 
redundancy  requirements  that  ensure  the  possibility  to  offload  emergency  communications 
traffic  to  other  interconnected  PSAPs  in  the  system.  In  order  to  leverage  the  technological 
developments,  all-IP  networks  of  interconnected  PSAPs  are  being  deployed  in  several  EU 
Member States to ensure resource efficiency and, most importantly, that all emergency calls 
are effectively handled. 

5.  LACK OF AVAILABILITY OF CALLER LOCATION 

Article  26(5)  of  the  Universal  Service  Directive  (USD)16  provides  for  the  obligation  of 
electronic communications operators to make caller location information available as soon as 
the call reaches the authority handling the emergency call. As of 21 December 2020, Article 

15 Austria and Norway did not report on this data 

16 Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service 
and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services, OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 51. 

5 

 
 
 
                                                           
109 EECC makes mandatory the availability of not only network-based but also of the more 
accurate handset-derived17 location information to the most appropriate PSAP. 

In  most  of  the  reporting  Member  States18,  the  lack  of  availability  of  network-based  caller 
location  information  occurs  in  less  than  5%  of  the  calls.  Higher  rates  of  failure  to  provide 
caller  location  were  reported  for  Hungary  (9%),  Italy  (10%),  Spain  (12%),  Poland  (13.5%) 
and Latvia (21%).  

The availability of handset-derived location depends on the scope of its deployment. In some 
Member  States,  the  Advanced  Mobile  Location  (AML)  solution19  is  deployed  on  the  two 
most  popular  mobile  operating  systems  –  Android  and  iOS  –  or  only  on  one  of  them. 
Therefore,  it  may  happen  that  although  the  national  PSAP  system  is  upgraded  to  receive 
AML,  still  up  to  60-70%  of  the  calls  do  not  benefit  from  this  very  accurate  location20.  In 
addition to locating the end-user that places a call to ‘112’, Member States could also enable 
AML on Android phones for the SMS type of emergency communications. This feature is not 
yet available on Apple’s iOS. 

Roaming end-users, visiting other Member States, might potentially be in a more vulnerable 
situation in  case of emergency as they may not  be able to  describe their location precisely. 
While AML is deployed in 19 Member States, and in  Iceland and Norway, only 6 Member 
States  confirmed  that  handset-derived  location  is  available  for  roaming  end-users.  All 
Member States indicate that they cannot ensure that the end-user is not charged by the home 
operator for the transmission of the handset-derived caller location information. This can be 
explained by the limits in jurisdiction and lack of monitoring capacity. 

the  benefit  of  making  emergency 
The  high  penetration  of  smartphones  carries 
communications  more  effective  through  the  availability  of  accurate  caller  location 
information.  The  HELP112  II  project  financed  by  the  European  Commissionfor  the 
deployment of AML in 7 Member States estimates that in a 10-year perspective AML could 
potentially save between 8,620 and 10,530 lives in total in the EU. Meanwhile, AML could 
positively  impact21  between  88,360  and  104,640  lives  in  total  in  the  EU.  To  attain  these 
benefits, AML should be fully deployed across EU Member States, including free of charge 
accurate  caller  location  information  for  roaming  end-users,  that  account  for  approximately 
1% of all emergency calls placed in the EU.  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/112-112-day-locating-emergency-calls-aml-technology-

17  While  the  accuracy  of  network-based  location  may  vary  from  50  m  to  40.000  m,  handset-derived  location 
provides a much more accurate location up to 5 m. 
18 22 Member States have provided relevant data. 
19 
rise 
20  Estonia  (70%),  Romania  (60%),  Sweden  (45%),  Ireland  (43%),  Malta  (36%),  Norway  (30%),  Lithuania 
(14%). 
21 Positive impact represents reduced injuries due to faster intervention of emergency relief that is made possible 
by the accurate location and finding of the victim. 

6 

 
 
                                                           
6. 

 CALLER LOCATION ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY 

Article 26(5) USD requires Member States  to  lay  down  accuracy and  reliability  criteria for 
the caller location information. In addition to the network-based solutions deployed under the 
USD, the EECC lays down in Article 109(6) the obligation for Member States to ensure that 
both  network-based  and  handset-derived  location  information  is  provided  to  the  most 
appropriate  PSAP.  Member  States  will  have  to  continue  to  set  caller  location  accuracy  and 
reliability  criteria,  if  necessary  after  consulting  BEREC.  The  Commission  has  adopted  the 
Delegated Regulation 2019/32022 aiming at supporting the policy objectives laid down in the 
EECC.  The  act  mandates  manufacturers  of  smartphones  to  ensure,  as  a  market  access 
condition,  that  data  from  Global  Navigation  Satellite  Systems  (GNSS),  at  least  from  EU’s 
Galileo, and data from Wi-Fi, are made available in emergency communications. This allows 
to  locate  the  smartphone,  and  hence  the  person  carrying  it,  with  an  adequate  and  effective 
accuracy. It shall apply from 17 March 2022. 

Network-based location 

In all Member States, as well as in Iceland and Norway, the location of the caller from fixed 
networks  is  given  by  the  installation  address  or  street/mailing/billing  address  of  the  calling 
party.  

All Member States reported that for calls from mobile networks the location is given by the 
Cell/sector ID providing a high reliability of the data transmitted to the PSAP operator. The 
reported accuracy ranges from 500 m to 40 km, depending on the density of the network, i.e. 
urban or rural area. More accurate mobile network-based location solutions used are Timing 
advance, Round trip time or Sector ID. These positioning methods substantially improve the 
accuracy of network-based location up to 50 meters in some cases. 

Handset-derived location solutions 

In  terms  of  handset-derived  location  solutions,  Member  States  reported  two  types  of 
implementation described below. 

a) Advanced Mobile Location (AML) solution 

AML can improve accuracy levels by up to 4000 times, providing accuracy to under 100 m23. 
The solution  does not  ignore the Cell-Id location information  provided by  the network, but 
rather  supplements  it  with  either  GNSS  or  WiFi  location  information  derived  from  the 
handset.  In  order  to  bring  GNSS  data,  in  particular  provided  by  EU’s  Galileo  satellite 
navigation  system,  for  the  benefit  of  EU  citizens,  in  November  2018  the  European 
Commission signed and launched the deployment project of handset-derived AML known as 
the  HELP112  II.  The  winning  consortium  included  7  Member  States,  namely  Croatia, 

22  Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2019/320  of  12  December  2018  supplementing  of  Directive 
2014/53/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  with  regard  to  the  application  of  the  essential 
requirements  referred  to  in  Article  3(3)(g)  of  that  Directive  in  order  to  ensure  caller  location  in  emergency 
communications from mobile devices, OJ L 55, 25.2.2019, p. 1–3. 
23 
rise 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/112-112-day-locating-emergency-calls-aml-technology-

7 

 
 
                                                           
Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Portugal, and Sweden. In August 2020 the project was 
successfully concluded.  

In 2020, in addition to the 7 Member States participating in the HELP112 II project, another 
4  Member  States  deployed  the  solution:  Czechia,  Greece,  Latvia  and  Romania.  As  of 
September  2020,  19  Member  States,  Iceland  and  Norway  ensure  that  their  PSAP  system  is 
AML enabled. 

Figure 6. AML deployment in the Member States 

b) Location information derived from the handset through an emergency application 

Emergency applications deployed at a national or regional level enable the delivery of more 
accurate  caller location information,  based on GNSS or WiFi  capability  of the smartphone, 
than that provided through network-based solutions. 

However,  these  applications  require  prior  action  by  the  citizen  –  as  opposed  to  AML  –  as 
they  need  to  be  downloaded.  The  transmission  of  location  data  is  possible  only  when  data 
connection is active.   

7.  AVERAGE  TIME  NEEDED  FOR  RECEIVING  THE  CALLER  LOCATION  BY  THE  112 

OPERATOR  

Article  26(5)  USD  requires  instant  provision  of  the  caller  location  information  to  the 
authority handling emergency calls.  

The  Commission  monitors  regularly  the  compliance  by  Member  States  with  these 
obligations.  As  a  result  of  this  monitoring,  the  Commission  initiated  infringement 
proceedings in July 2019 against Croatia and Greece due to the lack of timely provision of 
caller location. Since then, the concerns raised by the Commission were addressed by these 
Member States. 

8 

 
 
 
Due to the implementation of the "push" system or the automatic "pull" system all Member 
States  reported  near  instant  times  (up  to  10  seconds)  for  the  provision  on  network-based 
caller location. 

Due  to  its  inherent  architecture,  handset-derived  location  technologies  rely  on  the  speed  of 
the handsets to derive relevant location parameters from GNSS or Wi-Fi signals. On the basis 
of the reports from 15 Member States, it was confirmed that the provision of handset-derived 
location could range from near instant to up to 20 seconds. 

Under  Article  109(6)  EECC  Member  States  have  the  responsibility  to  ensure  that  caller 
location information, both network-based and handset-derived, is made available to the most 
appropriate PSAP without delay. 

8.  ACCESS TO EMERGENCY SERVICES WHILE EU ROAMING 

All  Member  States  reported  the  availability  of  access  to  ‘112’  and  network-based  caller 
location information in case of roaming calls. 

11  Member  States24  and  Iceland  provided  information  on  the  number  of  calls  placed  by 
roaming end-users to ‘112’. These Member States account for one third of emergency calls to 
‘112’. On the basis of these data it may be extrapolated that 1,09% of all calls to ‘112’ are 
placed by roaming end-users, approximately 1.5 million calls to ‘112’ in the EU.   

In Member States where national emergency numbers are still used, roamers may call these 
numbers as well. Although the data reported by 5 Member States is not fully conclusive25 an 
estimated  800.000  calls  are  placed  by  roaming  end-users  to  national  emergency  numbers. 
Therefore, a  consolidated estimation indicates a total  of 2.3 million  emergency calls placed 
by roaming end-users in the reporting period. 

Available  data  confirm  that  roaming  end-users  do  not  benefit  from  free  of  charge  handset-
derived  location,  as  explained  in  section  4.  Only  6  Member  States  confirmed  that  handset-
derived location is available for roaming end-users. Due to limits in jurisdiction and lack of 
monitoring capacity, visited Member States cannot ensure that home operators do not charge 
end-users for the transmission of the handset-derived caller location information.  

9.  ACCESS TO EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR END-USERS WITH DISABILITIES 

In accordance with Article 26(4) USD, Member States have the obligation to ensure that end-
users with  disabilities benefit from  equivalent  access  to  emergency services to  that enjoyed 
by other end-users.  

The principle of equivalence implies that end-users with disabilities should be able to access 
emergency  services  through  electronic  communications  services  in  a  way  functionally 

24 LU, HR, MT, SI, SE, CY, EE, CZ, RO, IT, BG. 
25  For  example,  in  Italy  the  calls  placed  to  national  numbers  by  EU  roamers  (169.681)  broadly  outweigh  the 
calls placed to ‘112’ (93.699). Meanwhile, in Cyprus the calls to national numbers (251) represent a fraction of 
calls to ‘112’ (26.520) placed by EU roamers. Similarly, in Luxembourg ‘112’ is called four times more by EU 
roamers than national numbers (6.353 compared with 1.565).  

9 

 
 
                                                           
equivalent to the access to emergency services ensured to other end-users by way of calling 
the ‘112’ number.  

Against this legal background, Member States have to implement accessibility solutions that 
replicate (are equivalent to) the two-way voice communication ensured in the case of a call to 
‘112’.  These  solutions  should  enable  two-way  communications  through  text  or  video, 
including  in  roaming.  By  virtue  of  equivalence,  Member  States  should  ensure  that  caller 
location is available to the most appropriate PSAP to enable emergency services to intervene 
effectively.  As  a  result  of  the  regular  monitoring  of  compliance  with  these  rules,  the 
Commission initiated infringement proceedings in July 2019 against Czechia, Germany and 
Spain for lack of equivalent access for end-users with disabilities26. Since then, the measures 
taken by Spain addressed the concern raised by the Commission, while Czechia and Germany 
are in the process of implementing measures that address those concerns. 

Member States have deployed a broad range of accessibility solutions to enable the access of 
end-users  with  disabilities  to  emergency  services:  real  time  text,  total  conversation27,  SMS, 
emergency  applications,  web  services,  relay  services,  access  from  special  devices,  email  or 
fax. 

The technology that is most deployed is SMS, in 23 Member States28, Iceland and Norway. 
SMS  technology  ensures  a  two-way,  text-based  interaction  between  the  person  alerting  the 
emergency  services  and  the  PSAP.  In  some  Member  States,  emergency  SMS  generates  on 
Android smartphones an accurate handset-derived AML localisation that is sent to the PSAP. 
This feature is not yet available on iOS devices.  

Emergency applications are deployed in 17 Member States and Iceland29 and, depending on 
their design, may rely on initiating emergency calls or SMS communications, but  may also 
serve  as  a  platform  to  provide  state  of  the  art  real  time  text  and  total  conversation 
communications.  In  addition,  applications  may  provide  accurate  handset-derived  location 
based on GNSS/WiFi positioning data (5-100 m) through the data channel. 

Relay services for end-users with disabilities may also relay a transfer to  access emergency 
services. In such cases, user location is not yet implemented in Member States but this should 
be technically feasible. 

Fax is deployed in a number of Member States. However, it does not ensure the swift two-
way communication that is required in case of emergency, in contrast with the effectiveness 
of a ‘112’ call. Similarly, an e-mail, which is also mentioned as an accessibility solution in 
some circumstances, does not allow the provision of automatic user location to the PSAP. 

From 21 December 2020, the amended and reinforced legal framework laid down in Article 
109(5)  EECC  should  be  implemented  for  end-users  with  disabilities.  The  EECC  requires 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/INF_19_4251 

26  
27 As defined in  Article 2 EECC: (35) ‘total conversation service’  means a  multimedia real time conversation 
service  that  provides  bidirectional  symmetric  real  time  transfer  of  motion  video,  real  time  text  and  voice 
between users in two or more locations. 
28 AT, BE, CY, CZ, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK. 
29 BE, BG, CY, CZ, DK, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, SK. 

10 

 
 
                                                           
measures  for  end-users  with  disabilities  to  be  in  accordance  with  Union  law  harmonising 
accessibility requirements for products and services30, seek to ensure interoperability across 
Member States, and, where feasible, avoid pre-registration for accessing emergency services 
by alternative means of emergency communications. The European Accessibility Act (EAA) 
provides for the availability of emergency communications in addition to voice by real time 
text  or,  where  video  is  available,  synchronised  as  total  conversation31.  The  national  PSAP 
systems will have to comply with these requirements32 by 28 June 2025. It also requires that 
emergency  communications  to  the  single  European  emergency  number  ‘112’  shall  be 
appropriately answered, using the same communication means as received, namely by using 
synchronised voice and text (including real time text), or, where video is provided, voice, text 
(including real time text) and video synchronised as total conversation. Member States also 
have the possibility to defer the relevant upgrade of their PSAP systems until 28 June 2027.  

In addition, in line with Article 109(7) EECC, Member States shall ensure that end-users are 
adequately  informed  about  the  existence  and  the  use  of  the  single  European  emergency 
number  ‘112’,  as  well  as  its  accessibility  features,  including  through  initiatives  specifically 
targeting  persons  travelling  between  Member  States  and  end-users  with  disabilities.  That 
information shall be provided in accessible formats, addressing different types of disabilities. 
Article  14  of  the  Roaming  Regulation33  reinforces  this  provision  only  with  regard  to  the 
possibility to access emergency services by “dialling the European emergency number ‘112’ 
free of charge”. In practice roaming end-users are only informed by their mobile operator of 
the  possibility  to  place  a  voice  call  to  ‘112’.  Disabled  end-users  are  not  informed  by  their 
mobile  operators  on  the  means  of  accessing  emergency  communications  in  the  visited  EU 
country. 

End-users with disabilities do not benefit from equivalent means of access, especially when 
roaming.  While  these  end-users  are  not  able  to  place  a  call  to  ‘112’,  they  have  to  rely  on 
nationally  fragmented  solutions  often  not  equivalent  to  the  two-way  voice  communication. 
This  state  of  affairs  is  in  contrast  with  the  availability  of  the  harmonised  single  European 
emergency number ‘112’ for other end-users. Roaming end-users do not always have access 
to emergency services ensured in the visited Member States and they are not informed on the 
means of access available.  

Only 9 Member States (BE, BG, ES, FR, IT, LV, MT, NL, PT) reported the deployment of a 
means  of  access  ensuring  basic  functionalities  of  interactive  communication  and  user 
location,  which  would  be  available  to  roaming  end-users.  All  these  visited  Member  States 
indicate that they cannot ensure that the end-user is not charged by the home operator for the 
use of the alternative means of access. This can be explained by the limits in jurisdiction and 
lack of monitoring capacity. 

30  The  European  Accessibility  Act  (EAA),  Directive  (EU)  2019/882  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  17  April  2019 on  the  accessibility  requirements  for  products  and  services  (OJ  L  151,  7.6.2019,  p. 
70). 
31 EAA Article 4(1) and Annex I, Section IV, point (a). 
32 EAA Article 4(8) and Annex I, Section V. 
33 Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2012 on roaming on 
public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 172, 30.6.2012, p. 10). 

11 

 
 
                                                           
Article 109(5) of the EECC requires to ensure access to emergency services, where feasible 
without  pre-registration.  In  case  of  national  emergency  applications  serving  end-users  with 
disabilities,  this  would  mean  that  the  home  application  could  be  used  in  the  visited  EU 
Member State to access emergency services34. 

Legacy PSAP systems are not yet able to handle and process emergency communications that 
are truly accessible for end-users with disabilities. The deployment of state of the art real time 
text and total conversation necessitates the upgrade of the PSAP system to an all-IP network 
of  interconnected  PSAPs  that  could  adequately  route  and  process  IP-based  emergency 
communications. 

An  overview  of  the  alternative  means  of  access  for  end-users  with  disabilities  currently 
deployed in the EU is presented in Annex II.  

10.  CONCLUSIONS 

A Europe fit for the digital age should warrant effective access to emergency services fit for 
every citizen. Since the introduction of the single European emergency call number35 in 1991, 
the  goal  of  the  EU  legislators  was  to  ensure  that  every  citizen  in  need  has  access  to 
emergency  services  as  soon  as  possible.  This  report  shows  that  handling  of  emergency 
communications,  availability  of  accurate  caller  location  information,  availability  of 
equivalent means of access for end-users with disabilities and access for roaming end-users 
play an important role in the effectiveness and speed of the relief action that is deployed by 
emergency services. The potential of the digital technologies could be fully realised only if 
both  the  emergency  communication  services  and  the  national  PSAP  systems  are  able  to 
leverage  the  technological  developments.  This  objective  requires  a  deployment  of  all-IP 
networks  of  interconnected  PSAPs  by  all  Member  States  to  ensure  the  redundancy  of  the 
systems  and,  most  importantly,  that  all  emergency  communications  –  calls,  real  time  text, 
total conversation – are effectively handled. 

Main findings: 

  The  share  of  emergency  calls  to  the  single  European  emergency  number  ‘112’ 
represented 56% of all emergency calls: out of a total of  267 million calls placed in 
the EU, 150 million were ‘112’ calls. It is estimated that 2.3 million emergency calls 
were placed by roaming end-users, out of which 1,5 million were ‘112’ calls. 

  The  implementation  of  handset-derived  caller  location  continued  to  improve  in  the 
EU.  In  2020,  in  addition  to  the  7  Member  States  that  deployed  AML  through  the 
Commission  financed  HELP112  II  project,  other  4  Member  States  deployed  the 
localisation  solution:  Czechia,  Greece,  Latvia  and  Romania.  As  of  September  2020, 
19  Member  States,  Iceland  and  Norway  ensure  that  their  PSAP  system  is  AML 
enabled. However, only 6 Member States confirmed that handset-derived location is 
available for roaming end-users. Due to limits of jurisdiction and lack of monitoring 

34 https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/103400_103499/103478/01.01.01_60/ts_103478v010101p.pdf 

35  91/396/EEC:  Council  Decision  of  29  July  1991  on  the  introduction  of  a  single  European  emergency  call 
number, OJ L 217, 6.8.1991. 

12 

 
 
                                                           
capacity,  the  visited  Member  States  cannot  ensure  that  the  transmission  of  caller 
location is free of charge for the end-user. 

  According to the estimates, in a 10-year perspective AML could potentially save more 
than 10,000 lives in total in the EU. Meanwhile, AML could positively impact36 over 
100,000 lives in total in the EU. 

  End-users  with  disabilities  do  not  benefit  from  fully  equivalent  means  of  access  to 
emergency services, especially when roaming. When these end-users are not able to 
place a call to ‘112’, they have to rely on nationally fragmented solutions.  This state 
of  affairs  is  in  contrast  with  the  availability  of  the  harmonised  single  European 
emergency number ‘112’ for other end-users and represents a significant void in the 
accessibility of emergency services. Roaming end-users do not always have access to 
emergency services ensured in the visited Member States and they are not informed 
on the available means of access. 

  The  Commission  monitors  regularly  the  compliance  by  Member  States  with 
obligations  related  to  the  functioning  of  ‘112’.  As  a  result  of  this  monitoring,  the 
Commission initiated infringement proceedings in July 2019 against several Member 
States  and  continues  working  towards  full  compliance,  in  order  to  ensure  that  EU 
citizens can fully benefit from it. 

Future actions and milestones: 

-  Member  States  have  to  transpose  and  implement  the  necessary  measures  to  comply 
with  the  requirements  of  the  EECC  and  in  particular  Article  109  on  emergency 
communications and the single European emergency number. All end-users, including 
end-users with disabilities, no matter where in the European Union, should be able to 
effectively request and receive help from emergency services. 

-  To make that possible, Member States will have to deploy accurate caller location for 
all end-users and equivalent means of access for end-users with disabilities, including 
those travelling to another EU Member State. 

-  Member States should upgrade their PSAP systems to ensure that these are fit for the 

digital age. 

-  The  Commission  has  set  up  the  Expert  Group  on  emergency  communications37  to 
work  together  with  Member  States  to  support  them  in  this  process.  In  addition,  the 
Commission  intends  to  launch  a  study  to  identify  technical  and  regulatory  solutions 
that would improve the access to emergency services. The Commission will leverage 
on  the  recent  experience,  prompted  by  the  COVID  crisis,  of  setting-up  a  digital 
infrastructure to facilitate the interoperability of national contact tracing and warning 

36 Positive impact represents reduced injuries due to faster intervention of emergency relief that is made possible 
by the accurate location and finding of the victim. 
37  Commission  Decision  C(2020)1133  of  3  March  2020  setting  up  the  group  of  experts  on  Emergency 
Communications, see also in the Register of Commission Expert Groups and Other Similar Entities. 

13 

 
 
                                                           
mobile applications. As it is the case with tracing applications, all end-users should be 
able to use their national emergency applications in another visited EU Member State.  

-  The Commission aims to ensure that all citizens, including those travelling within the 
European  Union,  benefit  from  effective  access  to  emergency  services  including 
through  harmonised  technical  solutions.  For  this  purpose,  the  Commission  is 
preparing an initiative through delegated act pursuant to the mandate given in Article 
109(8) EECC. 

14 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX I – STATISTICAL DATA ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF ‘112’   

Total  number  of  calls  to  ‘112’  in  2019  reached  149.928.021,  while  the  total  number  of 
emergency calls was 266.853.441. 

.

1
3
9
4
7
2
2
2

.

.

6
8
6
1
0
5
2
2

.

.

1
3
6
6
5
8
2
2

.

25.000.000

20.000.000

15.000.000

10.000.000

5.000.000

0

4
3
9
4
9
1

.

6
4
7
2
8
3

.

9
4
1
9
8
3

.

.

9
0
6
7
9
3

7
6
6
2
4
4

.

9
0
7
4
3
7

.

8
6
6
7
5
9

.

.

4
1
7
7
5
0
1

.

.

2
1
1
2
0
1
1

.

.

1
5
7
8
0
4
1

.

.

6
8
3
7
8
4
1

.

.

7
5
9
1
4
5
1

.

.

0
8
8
8
9
5
1

.

.

4
3
3
7
8
9
1

.

.

0
7
9
0
2
3
2

.

.

0
4
4
8
7
4
2

.

.

1
8
2
8
8
8
2

.

.

7
1
7
5
4
9
2

.

.

0
0
6
1
5
9
2

.

.

6
8
8
4
6
1
4

.

.

4
1
0
1
8
5
4

.

.

7
0
4
4
3
3
5

.

.

5
8
1
6
5
7
6

.

.

5
3
2
3
1
8
7

.

.

1
8
8
1
0
3
1
1

.

.

4
8
1
4
0
0
6
1

.

IS MT LU CY SI NO EE LV SK AT HR DK EL CZ IE LT BE NL FI BG SE HU FR PT RO DE PL ES IT

Figure 7. Number of calls to ‘112’ 

24  Member  States38  reported  the  number  of  emergency  calls  that  originated  in  fixed  and 
mobile networks in the reporting period.  

Fixed

Mobile

Weight of mobile (%)

100

 97   98  

 87   87   88   89   89   89   89   89   90   91   91   92   94  

)
S
N
O
I
L
L
I

M

(
S
L
L
A
C
Y
C
N
E
G
R
E
M
E

60

50

40

30

 79   79  

 76  

 74  

 66  

 63   65  

 60  

 55   55  

20

10

0

LU HR DE BE FR IE ES AT IT IS SK NL MT RO DK SI LT HU PT SE EE BG CY CZ LV

Figure 8. Number of emergency calls to ‘112’ from fixed and mobile networks 

38 No data were reported by Finland, Greece and Poland. 

75

50

25

E
L
I
B
O
M
M
O
R
F
S
L
L
A
C
Y
C
N
E
G
R
E
M
E
F
O
E
G
A
T
N
E
C
R
E
P

S
K
R
O
W
T
E
N

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0

8
0
2
0
5

7
8
3
2
3

2
0
1
7
1

1
1
9
0
1

0
0
5
1

0
0
2
2

8
3
2
2

3
2
1
5

7
5
6
6

FI

LU

IS

SI

HR

LV

SK

EL

LT

0
1

MT

1
8

AT

4
2
3

IE

6
8
3

BE

2
4
8

EE

Figure 9. SMS-based emergency communications 

%
9
6

%
0
7

%
4
7

%
4
7

%
2
7

%
6
7

%
7
7

%
8
7

%
9
7

%
0
8

%
3
8

%
8
8

%
9
8

%
0
9

%
1
9

%
1
9

%
2
9

%
2
9

%
4
9

%
4
9

%
6
9

%
9
9

%
9
9

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
4
4

100% 
90% 
80% 
70% 
60% 
50% 
40% 
30% 
20% 
10% 
0% 

FR  LU  IT  AT  SE  BE  SK  DE  DK  HR  CY  PT  LV  PL  BG  ES  LT  EE  RO  FI  MT  NL  IS  HU  IE  CZ  SI 

Figure 10. Percentage of emergency calls answered within 10 s 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  II  –  ALTERNATIVE  MEANS  OF  ACCESS  TO  EMERGENCY  SERVICES  IN  EU  MEMBER 
STATES AND EEA COUNTRIES 

Feature available 

Feature not available 

Means of access 

Inter 
active 

User 
location 

No 
registration 

Free 

Roaming 
access 

Free 
roaming 

Number of 
access 

AT 

SMS to 0800-133133 

Fax to 0800-133133 

email 

BE 

SMS to short number 

112.be application 

Fax to 112 or 101 

BG 

112 Bulgaria application 

Web based service 

CY 

Fax to 1408 or 1409 

SMS to 112 (only for Cyta) 

Application 

email to police 

General accessibility relay service 

CZ 

SMS to 112 

Application 

Web based emergency access 

General accessibility relay service  

Relay service - specialised devices 
(fixed) 

Email 

Fax 

DE 

Fax to 112 or 100 

Relay service 

DK 

SMS to long number 

General accessibility relay service  

Emergency application 

EE 

EL 

SMS to 112 

SMS to 112 

Email 

Fax to short number 

81 

0 

26 

386 

N/A 

N/A 

424 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

315 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

15 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Means of access 

Inter 
active 

User 
location 

No 
registration 

Free 

Roaming 
access 

Free 
roaming 

Number of 
access 

ES 

regional SMS to long numbers 

regional Emergency apps 

Specialised emergency relay 
service (video call)  

regional specialised emergency 
relay services 

Specialised emergency relay 
service 

Emergency application  

FI 

SMS to 112 

112 Suomi app 

FR 

SMS to 114 

Fax to 114 

Email 

Emergency application 

Web based application 

HR 

SMS to 112 

Fax to 112 

HU 

SMS to 112 

112-SOS application 

IE 

SMS to 112 

Specialised emergency relay 
service 

General accessibility relay service 

IT 

Flag Mii app 

Where ARE U app 

Police emergency application 

LT 

LU 

SMS to 112 

SMS to 112 and 113 

GouvAlert and Echo 112 apps 

Specialised fixed devices  

email 

Fax to112 

LV 

SMS to 112 

Emergency application 

MT 

112.mt application 

112.mt web service 

220 

1900 

100 

2000 

350 

50 

1500 

N/A 

10,048 

164 

N/A 

5397 

17 

0 

30,263 

324 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

50,208 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

10911 

N/A 

145 

18 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Means of access 

Inter 
active 

User 
location 

No 
registration 

Free 

Roaming 
access 

Free 
roaming 

Number of 
access 

SMS to long number 

NL 

Emergency application 

Web based emergency access 

SMS to 112 

Specialised emergency relay 
service 

General accessibility relay service 

PL 

PT 

Alarm 112 app 

SMS to long number 

Emergency application 

RO 

SMS to 113 

SE 

SMS to 112 

specialised fixed devices 

General relay service 

SI 

SK 

SMS to 112 

SMS to 112 

Application 155.sk 

IS 

SMS to 112 

112 Döff and SOS Iceland 

NO 

SMS 112 

10 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

772 

N/A 

N/A 

51 

138 

0 

video: 325, 
text: 328 

5,123 

17,102 

141 

2238 

50 

N/A 

19