COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism - Strengtening EU's emergency preparedness
Date: 2024-05-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), European Commission
Subjects: EU financial instrument, European cooperation, aid to disaster victims, civil defence, crisis management, disaster resilience, emergency aid, environmental risk prevention, man-made disaster, natural disaster

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 29.5.2024  COM(2024) 212 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism - Strengtening EU's emergency preparedness   
 
 
Table of content 

1. 

Introduction – the UCPM, bolstering the EU’s readiness ............................................................... 2 

2.  Delivering despite challenges. Emerging threats on the horizon .................................................... 2 

3.  Evaluation findings – the UCPM operating in a changing risk landscape ...................................... 5 

4.  Looking ahead – Learning from the past to strengthen the EU’s ability to face crises ................... 7 

5.  Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 10 

 
 
 
 
1.  Introduction – the UCPM, bolstering the EU’s readiness 

In  the  wake  of  a  disaster,  civil  protection1  is  the  lifeline  for  affected  populations.  When  a 
crisis  overwhelms  the  capacity  of  a  single  country,  the  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism 
(‘UCPM’)2 stands as the operational backbone, facilitating Europe’s collective response, both 
within and beyond its borders. 

While more than 500 activations of the UCPM were triggered in the evaluated period 2017-
2022, the UCPM was called into action on over 3203 occasions in the period between 2020 
and  2022  alone,  marking  a  five-time  increase  compared  to  the  previous  decade’s  average. 
This  uptrend  underscores  the  growing  importance  of  the  UCPM  in  bolstering  the  Union’s 
emergency readiness at all levels. 

In  2021,  the  European  Ombudsman  Award  for  Good  Administration  recognized  the 
exceptional contributions of DG ECHO and the EEAS, whose extraordinary efforts facilitated 
the  repatriation  of  over  a  half  million  EU  citizens  stranded  worldwide  during  the  Covid-19 
pandemic.  

This exemplifies the pivotal role played by EU institutions and agencies within the UCPM in 
supporting  and  complementing  the  action  of  Member  States  in  times  of  crisis.  In  essence, 
safeguarding  our  society,  nature,  and  cultural  heritage  hinges  on  our  ability  to  prevent  and 
prepare  for  future  disasters.  Civil  protection  does  not  operate  in  isolation;  it  demands 
collaborative  efforts,  breaking  down  silos,  and  working  together  as  a  cohesive  Union  to 
fortify our collective resilience and readiness.  

This  Communication  outlines  the  evolving  needs  and  challenges  confronting  the  civil 
protection landscape in Europe and formulates recommendations to enhance the effectiveness 
across the UCPM prevention-preparedness-response contiguum in diaster management.  

2.  Delivering despite challenges. Emerging threats on the horizon  

Europe’s risk landscape is evolving dramatically. Today, the EU is confronted with multiple, 
simultaneous  challenges  and  threats  of  varying  nature  and  growing  complexity. The  rise  in 
the number of conflicts, man-made and natural disasters – including extreme weather events 
–  and  the  changing  nature  of  security  risks  increasingly  challenge  the  disaster  risk 
management  structure  of  the  EU  and  the  ability  of  the  UCPM  to  operate  effectively.  The 
steady increase in the number of activations of the UCPM in recent years indicates that this 
trend will continue further. 

1  Civil  protection  consists  of  emergency  assistance  provided  under  the  auspices  of  government  authorities  in 
preparation for, or immediate aftermath of, a disaster in Europe and worldwide. 
2 The 27 Member States and 10 third countries (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Montenegro, North 
Macedonia, Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Türkiye, and Ukraine) are part of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism. 
3 While the activation from Ukraine in 2022 related to the war was counted only once, this includes more than 
120 updated requests for assistance. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 1 - number and types of UCPM activations 

The graph (left) shows the increasing number of UCPM activations from 2017 to 2022. The  bubbles (right) illustrate the 
types of crises the UCPM addressed in the same period of time. 

The  five  key  dimensions  outlined  below  exemplify  this  evolving  risk  landscape  and 
demonstrate  how  the  UCPM  already  utilizes  its  ability  to  adapt  and  its  entire  set  of 
instruments  to  address  risks  across  these  dimensions.  However,  the  evolving  risks  are 
expected to have a more significant impact on Europe in the future, likely widening gaps in 
the way Europe addresses risks. 

2.1.  Navigating Complexity: Coordinated Responses to Emerging Crises 

The  Evaluation  underscored  the  UCPM’s  remarkable  flexibility  in  adapting  to  evolving 
challenges4.  The  swift  adjustments  made  in  EU  legislation  to  accommodate  DG  ECHO’s 
tools were cited as prime examples of this flexibility. In this regard, in the wake of the Covid-
19 pandemic, the significant upscaling of the medical stockpiling capacity under rescEU was 
considered  as  a  notable  achievement  by  the  striking  majority  of  stakeholders5,  both  at 
national and EU level.  

Throughout  the  evaluation  period,  it  became  evident  that  the  ERCC  played  a  pivotal 
coordination  role  between  civil  protection  and  health  authorities,  and  also  between  the 
ministries of Foreign Affairs in Member States and Participating States together with EEAS 
and  EU  Delegations.  Additionally,  together  with  the  Secretary  General,  it  facilitated 
coordination between European Commission Directorates, the EEAS, and the Council. This 
cross-sectoral cooperation proved key to addressing the consequences of Covid-19, including 
the  provision  of  medical  supplies  and  logistical  support  for  consular  assistance  for  the 
repatriation of EU citizens stranded in third countries. In this context, innovative approaches 
and adaptability to new situations were key success factors.  

2.2.  Dynamic Challenges: Adapting Risk Mapping and Early Warning Systems 

The dedicated focus group of scientist contributing to the Evaluation of the UCPM identified 
areas  for  improvement  to  enhance  the  effectiveness  of  Early  Warning  Systems  (EWS)  in 
increasing preparedness at national and EU level. In particular, EWS could be revised to:  

4 The majority of respondents in the survey with Member State authorities (ICF, independent support study of 
the UCPM 2017-2022). 
5  Survey  with  Member  State  authorities  and  EU  Institutions  (ICF,  independent  support  study  of  the  UCPM 
2017-2022).  

3 

 
 
 
1. Ensure that information is less fragmented across EU and domestic EWS: several 
stakeholders  highlighted  the  challenge  of  managing  a  vast  amount  of  information 
from  various  systems,  making  it  difficult  to  promptly  conduct  expert  assessments 
during major events. In addition, EU-level EWS could influence national EWS more 
systematically6; 

2. Cover more hazards: the hazards most effectively covered by early warning and 
monitoring  systems  are  wildfires,  floods,  and  droughts,  thanks  to  near  real-time 
monitoring. However, the monitoring of floods, health emergencies, and other human-
induced or anthropogenic disasters could be improved and made more effective7. 

2.3.  Urgent Responses: Mobilizing Resources for Severe and Cross-Border natural Disasters 

The Summer of 2023 has seen Europe battered by heatwaves, record-breaking wildfires, and 
catastrophic  floods.  These  often  happened  simultaneously,  fitting  into  a  broader  pattern  of 
extreme  climatology.  In  July  and  August  2023,  global  temperatures  reached  record  highs, 
surpassing  the  1.5°C  threshold  set  in  the  Paris Agreement. This  serves  as  a  preview  of  the 
potential average summer conditions in the future if climate action is not taken. 

The Evaluation findings showed that the pre-positioning of firefighters in 2021 had a positive 
impact  on  facilitating  knowledge  sharing  among  firefighters  in  regions  affected  by  forest 
fires.  This  approach  was  also  well  received  as  a  tool  to  enhance  the  effectiveness  of 
responses.  In  2021,  firefighters  were  pre-positioned  in  Greece  to  assist  with  the  summer 
forest  fire  season.  Following  positive  feedback  from  Member  and  Participating  State,  this 
initiative  has  been  renewed,  with  11  Member  States  committed  to  send  almost  450 
firefighters  to  France,  Greece,  and  Portugal  in  preparation  for  the  upcoming  forest  fire 
season.  

Moreover,  the  Evaluation  underscored  that  a  large  majority  of  stakeholders  valued  the 
flexibility of the UCPM and, more crucially, its capacity to swiftly adapt and respond to new 
situations. The introduction of the rescEU reserve, along with the recent, prompt decision to 
increase the rescEU aerial fleet, was heralded as a notable demonstration of the flexibility and 
innovation capabilities of the UCPM to stay relevant. The adaptability of the UCPM training 
programme  and  EU  MODEX  has  also  been  commended  and  regarded  as  evidence  of  the 
flexibility of the UCPM. 

2.4.  Evolving risks and security threats requiring enhanced response capabilities 

The  response  to  Russia’s  war  of  aggression  against  Ukraine  triggered  the  largest  UCPM 
activation  to  date,  including  complex  logistic  operations.  On  15  February  2022,  Ukraine 
activated the UCPM in preparation for a large-scale emergency and updated its initial request 
consecutively. Requests included - among others - medical supplies, food, shelter items, fire-

6  In  this  context,  one  national  authority  remarked  that  some  countries  have  better  alignment  between  their 
national systems and the EU EWS. It emphasized a notable instance during the 2021 flash floods in Germany, 
where  early  warning  information  was  available  at  European  level,  but  local  and  regional  authorities  were 
unaware of the system and the extent of the anticipated floods. 
7 A recent example of the UCPM operating in this domain is the co-funding of a new all-hazard early warning 
system for the State Fire and Rescue Service of Latvia. The key outcomes of the project included a feasibility 
study comparing the various solutions that telecom companies could provide, a survey among the population to 
understand  the  disaster-alert  awareness  level  of  the  Latvian  population,  and  a  draft  of  the  architecture  of  the 
proposed system, including the required infrastructure and interoperability.  

4 

 
 
 
fighting  equipment,  IT  and  communications  equipment,  cultural  heritage  protection 
apparatus, CBRN countermeasures, and agricultural supplies.  

The ERCC supported Poland, Romania, and Slovakia  in establishing UCPM logistics hubs8 
where  incoming  assistance  was  received,  consolidated,  and  subsequently  dispatched  to 
Ukraine.  Additionally,  in  response  to  the  significant  volume  of  inquiries  from  private 
companies following the “Stand for Ukraine”  campaign  by the Commission, a pilot  project 
was established in Belgium to channel private sector donations under rescEU.  

In response to the increasing demand for medical treatment, the European Commission (DG 
ECHO  and  DG  SANTE)  set  up  a  standard  operating  procedure  for  the  medical  evacuation 
(MEDEVAC)  of  displaced  people  from  Ukraine.  Poland,  Moldova,  Slovakia,  and  Ukraine 
requested support for medical evacuation operations from their respective countries to other 
European countries with available hospital capacity. 

Furtermore,  the  scenario  building  initiative9  aims  to  provide  comprehensive  evidence  for 
further  improvements  under  the  UCPM  to  address  the  challenges  anticipated  in  Europe’s 
evolving risk landscape, including cascading effects of security threats, which may lead to an 
increased  likelihood  of  high-impact,  cross-sectoral,  and  multi-country  disasters.  In  essence, 
the scenarios reinforce the case for additional resources, adaptations to the UCPM’s existing 
functioning across the entire emergency management cycle, and related modifications to the 
UCPM’s legal framework. 

2.5.  Protecting the Vulnerable: Addressing the Impact of Disasters on Vulnerable Groups 

Climate risks disproportionately affect vulnerable populations due to socio-economic factors 
such  as  income,  gender,  age,  disability,  health,  and  social  exclusion,  with  pre-existing 
disadvantages further hampering the ability of vulnerable groups to recover from disasters10. 
Gender-based and sexual violence, hate speech, and xenophobia have been documented since 
the inception of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. 

Against  this  backdrop  and  in  the  context  of  the  Commission’s  Recommendation  and 
Communication  on  ‘Union  Disaster  Resilience  Goals’11,  the  Commission  advocated  for  the 
systematic  consideration  of  the  specific  needs  of  people  in  vulnerable  situations,  including 
individuals with disabilities and children, within national early warning systems.  

3.  Evaluation findings – the UCPM operating in a changing risk landscape 

The  new  emergency  management  reality  described  above  has  provided  numerous 
opportunities for the UCPM to demonstrate its efficiency and effectiveness as an emergency 
instrument  that  can  further  strengthen  European  resilience  to  complex,  long-lasting  and 

8 Funding-support of goods channelled through hubs. 
9 Implemented under Article 10.1 of Decision No. 1313/2013/EU. 
10 European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions:  Managing  climate  risks  – 
protecting  people  and  prosperity,  COM/2024/91 
final,  <b04a5ed8-83da-4007-9c25-1323ca4f3c92_en 
(europa.eu)>. 
11 Commission Recommendation of 8 February 2023 on Union  disaster resilience  goals, 2023/C 56/0, <EUR-
Lex  -  32023H0215(01)  -  EN  -  EUR-Lex  (europa.eu)>;  European  Commission,  Communication  on  European 
Union Disaster Resilience Goals: Acting together to deal with future emergencies, COM/2023/61 final, < EUR-
Lex - 52023DC0061 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu)>. 

5 

 
 
 
occasionally  concurrent  crises.  The  main  findings  of  the  performance  of  the  UCPM  in  the  
period 2017-2022 underscore this assessment. 

Main findings of the UCPM performance from the 2017-2022 Evaluation 

1.  The  UCPM  adapted  to  changing  pressures  and  demands  and  successfully  maintained  a  high 

response rate despite increasing activations;  

2.  The  UCPM  has  shown  flexibility  to  adapt  to  evolving  needs  on  the  grounds  and  unanticipated 

events. Innovative answers to new dimensions of crises were a key success factor.  

3.  The UCPM reinforced its prevention and preparedness dimensions, enhancing cost-effectiveness;  
4.  The UCPM contributed to enhancing disaster preparedness at national and EU level; 
5.  The UCPM helped enhance cooperation between civil protection actors and non-traditional disaster 

management actors; 

6.  The UCPM contributed to raising awareness of disasters within the civil protection community;  
7.  Risk  mapping  through  the  EU-level  overview  of  risks  contributed  to  strengthening  disaster 

prevention although challenges remain in the comparability and availability of data;  

8.  The UCPM facilitated cross-border cooperation between the EU, Member and Participating States 

on disaster preparedness and response; 

9.  DG  ECHO  and  national  civil  protection  authorities  face  resource  constraints  and  significant 

workload. 

Additionally, the Evaluation has shown that the evolving risk and threat landscape also tested 
the limits of the UCPM. This assessment is shared by the European Council for the broader 
European  crisis  management  system.  Several  Council  Conclusions  of  the  years  202312  and 
202413  acknowledge  the  challenges  posed  by  cross-sectoral  and  cross  border  crises  and 
natural  and  human-made  disasters,  which  are  additionally  exacerbated  by  the  projected 
increase in climatic hazards.  

Overall,  emphasis  is  placed  on  strengthening  European  resilience  in  strategic  areas  through 
an  all-hazards  approach  to  preparedness  and  response  by  utilizing  relevant  mechanisms, 
including the UCPM. Further, the ability to maintain societal functions depends on Member 
States to systematically embed the all-hazard approach in all relevant policies, thus ensuring 
resilience by design14. The first line of defence in risk management lies in policies that can 
reduce vulnerabilities and limit human exposure15. Against this backdrop, climate adaptation 
and  mitigation  efforts  are  pivotal  in  enhancing  the  EU’s  resilience  and  crisis  response 
capacity.Considering  the  aforementioned  political  steering,  safeguarding  the  sustainable 
operation of the UCPM’s existing emergency management model has become a key concern. 
At the same time, there is a recognised need to further equip the UCPM for new hazards and 
risks  within  a  more  inclusive  all-hazard  approach  in  Europe’s  broader  crisis  management 
architecture.  

12 European Council meeting on 29/ 30 June 2023 and on 26/ 27 October 2023. 
13 European Council meeting on 21/ 22 March 2024. 
14 Structural decisions, such as decisions on spatial planning, should consider all relevant risks and be approved 
by the national authorities responsible for the resilience of critical infrastructure and entities. 
15 COM(2024) 91 final 

6 

 
 
 
 
In a similar vein, the independent scientific advice on strategic crisis management in the EU 
issued by the Group of  Chief Scientific Advisors to  the EU16  concluded that  efficient crisis 
management  entails  strengthening  EU  governance,  enhancing  infrastructure  resilience, 
optimising financial resources, fostering societal  collaboration, and ensuring accessible data 
for effective communication. 

Strategic  crisis  management  in  the  EU:  Improving  EU  crisis  prevention,  preparedness,  response  and 
resilience 

The  independent  scientific  advice  on  strategic  crisis  management  in  the EU  issued by  the  Group of  Chief 
Scientific Advisors to the College of European Commissioners found that the EU should: 

1.  Develop a roadmap to create synergies between existing legislation and instruments;  
2.  Respond to cascading and transboundary crises by strengthening European governance for strategic 

crisis management;  

3.  Make critical infrastructures more resilient to cascading effects;  
4.  Make  existing  EU  financial  instruments  and  resources  more  scalable,  rapidly  deployable,  and 

efficient; 

5.  Collaborate closely with society to manage crises effectively; and  
6.  Provide  interoperable,  high-quality  data,  and  easy  to  communicate  information  for  crisis 

management.   

In  addition  to  the  recognized  need  to  strengthen  European  resilience  against  shocks  at  the 
political  level,  nine  in  ten  Europeans  feel  that  it  is  important  for  the  EU  to  assist  in 
coordinating  the  response  to  disasters  in  the  EU  and  other  countries17.  Further,  94%  of 
European  citizens  believe  that  when  a  disaster  occurs  in  a  EU  country  that  is  too 
overwhelming for them to handle alone, other EU countries should provide assistance.  

4.  Looking ahead – Learning from the past to strengthen the EU’s ability to face crises 

Damage from catastrophic events is massively rising whereas the overall capacity to absorb 
and recover from such shocks is limited. Therefore, the EU faces the challenge of ensuring 
that the European approach to crisis management is “future proofed”. This demands a strong 
UCPM  that  can  adapt  to  the  constantly  changing  risk  landscape.  In  response  to  this,  the 
Commission developed five strategic reccommendations.  

Recommendation 1: Strengthen the operational response capabilities of the UCPM 

The  success  of  the  UCPM  relies  fundamentally  on  the  capabilities  of  Member  States.  This 
foundation needs further strengthening while promoting deeper engagement within both the 
European  Civil  Protection  Pool  (‘ECPP’)  and  rescEU.  It  is  crucial  to  equip  both  the  ECPP 
and rescEU to effectively address the transboundary, large-scale risks of the future.  

16 European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Strategic crisis management in the 
EU  –  Improving  EU  crisis  prevention,  preparedness,  response  and  resilience,  Publications  Office  of  the 
European Union, 2022, <https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/517560>. 
17  European  Commission,  Civil  Protection  –  Eurobarometer  (February  2024),  2977  /  SP541,  <EU  civil 
protection - February 2024 - - Eurobarometer survey (europa.eu)>.  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
The UCPM’s capabilities should be strengthened based on gaps identified through common 
scenario  analysis  and  a  comprehensive  assessment  of  needs  at  the  European  level,  while 
considering  the  civil  protection  –  security  nexus  and  its  future  needs  for  interoperability  as 
important  strategic  guidance  for  the  future.  In  sectors  where  common  needs  and  risks  are 
identified,  a  further  expansion  of  rescEU  is  the  most  cost-effective  alternative  as  well  as  a 
vibrant  demonstration  of  European  solidarity  and  of  the  EU’s  commitment  to  collective 
resilience and response.  

Furthermore,  the  UCPM  must  be  able  to  continuously  adapt  to  evolving  technologies  and 
play  a  leading  role  in  the  development  and  promotion  of  effective  and  efficient  tools  and 
instruments in disaster response.   

Recommendation  2  –  Enhance  EU  prevention  and  preparedness  through  cross-sectoral 
coordination,  an  all-hazards  approach,  and  a  strong  Emergency  Response  Coordination 
Centre  

The  active  engagement  of  all  relevant  stakeholders  in  all  stages  of  disaster  prevention, 
preparedness,  and  response  in  an  all-of  society/  all-hazards  approach  is  imperative.  The 
ERCC  has  proven  its  ability  to  work  in  close  coordination  with  different  services  during 
complex emergencies and crises (especially in areas such as CBRN, civil-mil, cyber, hybrid, 
health,  logistical  support  for  consular  assistance,  and  climate  change).  Fragmenting  into 
further,  sectoral  response  structures  is  ill-suited  for  tackling  complex  scenarios  and  should 
thus be sidestepped. Elevating the ERCC as the Commission’s cross-sectoral crisis hub would 
bring  together  sectoral  expertise  from  various  policy  areas,  ensuring  comprehensive 
operational coherence and effectiveness within a better integrated EU crisis response system. 

Consequentially, it is important to ensure that all EU and national processes are aligned18 to 
ensure resilience by design. The UCPM prevention pillar needs to be better articulated with 
other EU policies and programmes that have the capacity to impact societal resilience.  

Moreover,  addressing  civilian  disasters  with  security  or  defence  components  necessitates 
systematic coordination  among civil, security, and defence authorities throughout all phases 
of 
the  disaster  management  cycle.  Civilian  and  military  preparedness  should  be 
complementary and involve the whole of society. The ERCC should intensify its cooperation 
with  NATO,  the  EEAS,  and  the  UN  (OCHA),  facilitating  a  smooth  response  in  climate 
related  emergencies  or  conflict  scenarios.  The  same  applies  to  the  exchange  with  selected 
International  Organisations  and  countries  which  possess  specialised  knowledge  and 
capacities crucial for managing major disasters.  

Furthermore,  efforts  should  be  intensified  to  enhance  private  sector  involvement  at  the  EU 
level  in  specialised  civil  protection  tasks  related  to  prevention,  preparedness,  and  response. 
This entails establishing arrangements for strategic cooperation with relevant private entities 
within a clearly defined scope. 

Recommendation  3  –  Streamline  knowledge  and  expertise  sharing  on  risk  identification 
and early warning 

18 Including by making use of the Technical Support Instrument (TSI) and the Horizon Europe programme of the 
European Commission. 

8 

 
 
 
 
Union-wide,  cross-border,  multi-country,  and  cross-sectoral  disasters  must  assume  a  more 
prominent position in relevant European and national risk assessments. This can be achieved 
by  expanding  the  analysis  of  underlying  drivers  of  risks  and  emerging  threats,  leveraging 
existing resources across sectors at both EU and national levels, and using the knowledge and 
expertise available from third parties. This  could  be reflected in  a more comprehensive EU 
overview of risks, bridging all sectors19.  

Furthermore,  there  should  be  an  increase  in  knowledge  sharing  by  national  civil  protection 
authorities, particularly on highly specialised expertise related to low-probability high-impact 
disasters. Therefore, it is essential to reinforce the information sharing and interoperability of 
early warning systems across Member States with an all-hazard approach. The UCPM/ERCC 
is well positioned to coordinate this effort.  

Moreover,  a  flexible  and  comprehensive  European  disaster  management  structure 
necessitates  a  more  systematic  knowledge  exchange  at  all  levels.  The  UCPM  should  be 
further  strengthened  to  link  scientific  institutions  and  Member  States  and  make  scientific 
knowledge available to all relevant stakeholders.  

The  role  of  the  Commission  in  disaster  risk  and  crisis  communication  efforts  should  be 
comprehensively  integrated  across  services  to  deliver  added  value  for  Member  States  and 
European citizens.  

Recommendation  4  –  Consider  and  address  the  needs  of  vulnerable  groups  in  existing 
prevention, preparedness, and response arrangements 

Recent  events  such  as  floods,  forest  fires,  and  Russia’s  war  of  aggression  against  Ukraine 
have  shown  that  vulnerable  groups  suffer  disproportionately  during  major  disasters.  It  is 
crucial  to  enhance  consideration  and  address  the  needs  of  these  vulnerable  groups,  – 
particularly individuals with disabilities, the elderly, and marginalised communities  - within 
existing prevention, preparedness, and response arrangements.  

This can be achieved through various measures, including adapted early warning systems and 
alert  mechanisms,  ensuring  warning  messages  are  accessible,  clear,  and  actionable,  and 
provided in multiple languages to reach all segments of the population, implementing tailored 
preparedness  and  response  actions,  systematically  integrating  vulnerable  groups  into  risk 
assessments, and empowering their representation in disaster risk management planning. 

Recommendation  5  –  Reinforced  budget  and  increased  synergies  and  integration  into 
relevant  EU  instruments  to  ensure  long-lasting  European  disaster  management  across 
sectors and borders 

It  is  crucial  to  ensure  that  the  EU’s  investments  under  the  UCPM  are  both  effective  and 
efficient, with a focus on sustainability to yield long-term positive impacts on the European 
resilience and the lives of European citizens. Additionally, reinforcing the budget is essential 
where investments at the European level prove to be cost-effective and bring added value.  

19 The role of Copernicus Emergency Management Service at EU and national levels should be reinforced. Once 
launched, the new Galileo Emergency Warning Satellite Service (EWSS) will constitute an important 
complement to existing early warning systems. 

9 

 
 
 
Furthermore,  European  disaster  risk  management  must  be  integrated  into  all  relevant  EU 
funding  instruments.  Given  the  increasing  disaster  risk  and  its  impacts  on  economic,  social 
and  environmental  development  in  the  EU,  it  is  important  to  ensure  that  disaster  risk 
management  is  mainstreamed  as  an  investment  priority  across  all  the  relevant  EU  funding 
programmes.  Every  Euro  spent  in  this  area  saves  substantial  amounts  in  response  costs, 
particularly evident in the context of wildfires (approximately € 2 billion per year).  

Moreover,  to  complement  its  existing  framework,  the  UCPM  requires  greater  flexibility  to 
adapt  its  response  and  financing  arrangements  to  address  exceptional  needs  in  complex  or 
prolonged crises scenarios, possibly  through specific emergency funding mechanisms. Civil 
protection authorities, Member States, and the Commission would benefit from simplified co-
financing  rates  and  more  flexible  direct  procurement  processes.  These  measures  would 
ultimately enhance the UCPM’s agility and ability to deliver a tailored response to crises in a 
timely manner. 

5.  Conclusion 

To  address  Europe’s  new  reality,  it  is  now  time  for  the  Commission  to  further  develop  an 
integrated crisis management approach capable of bringing all relevant Commission services 
together  to  work  in  a  coordinated  manner,  effectively  supporting  and  complementing  the 
efforts  of  Member  States  across  the  prevention,  preparedness,  and  response  contiguum. 
Consequentially, this enhanced approach should foster prevention, bolster preparedness, and 
facilitate rapid and efficient response to disasters both at Member State and Union levels.  

At  the  Commission  level,  a  horizontal  approach  is  needed  in  order  to  improve  coherence, 
avoid duplication and overlap while exploiting potential synergies.,. The ERCC is the natural 
and  most  competent  coordinating  body  to  understand,  analyse,  coordinate,  and  mobilise 
actions across all relevant  sectors  and dimensions of disaster management. A fragmentation 
into  a  multitude  of  instruments  across  different  services  would  lead  to  inefficiencies  and 
potential  duplication,  thus  hampering  the  integrated,  resilient,  and  effective  European  crisis 
management that European citizens expect.  

Moreover, to tackle the main challenges for crisis management over the next decade, namely 
climate  change  and  evolving  security  threats,  the  Commission  and  Member  States  must 
upscale  their  strategic  preparedness,  in  close  cooperation  with  its  key  stakeholders  and 
partners. Strengthening rescEU, the most effective and efficient tool at  the EU level, would 
bolster  the  Union’s  resilience  against  threats  that  could  impact  the  fundamental  fabric  of 
European society. 

10