Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Crises and crisis phenomena in modern Europe and civil society (exploratory opinion requested by the Polish Presidency of the Council of the EU)
Date: 2025-03-26
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Europe, civil defence, civil society, crisis management, disaster resilience, environmental risk prevention, social participation








C_202502957EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2957


16.6.2025






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

Crises and crisis phenomena in modern Europe and civil society


(exploratory opinion requested by the Polish Presidency of the Council of the EU)

(C/2025/2957)


Rapporteur: 
Ariane RODERT






Advisor


Martin CARLSTEDT (Advisor for the rapporteur, Group III)




Referral by the Polish
Presidency of the EU


Letter, 6.9.2024




Legal basis


Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship




Adopted in section


11.3.2025




Adopted at plenary session


26.3.2025




Plenary session No


595




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


199/3/3




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


The EESC welcomes the EU focus on civil preparedness and crisis management and the request from the Minister for the European Union of the Republic of Poland for an exploratory opinion on the role and experiences of civil society organisations in this context.












1.2.


Acknowledging the urgency and severity of the current crisis and security situation, the EESC stands ready to convey civil society’s perspective on the next steps, including through follow-up opinions on aspects of relevance for organised civil society.












1.3.


Preparedness and resilience require a mindset shift, fostering a culture of preparedness at all levels of society and across generations. Raising awareness and developing preparedness and resilience must be prioritised and strengthened across all sectors and levels of government.












1.4.


The EESC emphasises that all preparedness initiatives must aim to uphold a just and sustainable peace. This calls for preventively addressing underlying causes of conflict and fostering conditions that promote dignity, equal opportunity and social progress. Furthermore, all actions must adhere strictly to international law, including international humanitarian law.












1.5.


Civil preparedness enhances individual and societal safety and resilience to major and rapidly evolving crises. Solidarity, active citizenship and empowerment lie at the core of civil society action. However, while empowering citizens and considering civil society’s contributions, this must not absolve the EU and its Member States of their obligation to protect citizens.












1.6.


Civil society is diverse within the Member States and across the EU, ranging from grassroot initiatives to large, overarching national organisations. It must be recognised that contributions will vary based on their mission, roles, expertise, resources, and the nature of the crisis at hand. The EESC therefore stresses the need to develop a shared understanding between civil society and government at Member State level of each stakeholder’s respective role and responsibility.












1.7.


The EESC stresses that civil society’s main role and added-value during crises often is to continue with its ordinary activities, which contribute to civil preparedness in various ways. Contributions are diverse and include building trust, social cohesion, empowering and promoting active citizenship, raising awareness, sharing information, identifying risks, reaching vulnerable groups, mobilising volunteers, providing humanitarian and crisis support, and safeguarding fundamental rights and freedoms.












1.8.


The EESC urges the European Commission and the Member States to provide the necessary conditions for civil society to participate, contribute, and engage on an equal footing with other stakeholders when developing civil preparedness. Civil society must be fully integrated into EU and national preparedness initiatives, based on their specificities and remit. This necessitates mechanisms for secure, autonomous and interoperable information exchange, shared communication platforms, effective coordination, and civil society participation in training and exercises.












1.9.


The EESC stresses the importance of proactively investing in civil society, in order to ensure resilience and capacity to act when a crisis does occur. Investing in and supporting civil society action for social cohesion, integration and inclusion during times of peace and stability strengthens civil society’s capacity to respond during crises or even in the event of war.












1.10.


The EESC therefore notes with concern the shrinking space for civil society and the growing threats to democracy. The EU and its Member States must step up efforts to safeguard their autonomy, and preserve and strengthen the civil society space in order to ensure capacity to act. In this context, the EESC reiterates its call for a comprehensive strategy for civil dialogue, resulting in an action plan.












1.11.


The EESC emphasises the importance of transparent and consistent public funding for civil society preparedness. This includes funding for capacity building, infrastructure development and reimbursement for civil society organisations’ humanitarian assistance and crisis support. Additionally, any EU funding allocated for defence must include provisions for civil defence and preparedness.












1.12.


Recent crises have demonstrated the vulnerabilities of the single market. The EESC recommends lowering the barrier for cross-border cooperation, with further measures to facilitate cross-border assistance, for example personnel and material assistance.




2.   Background and framing the opinion









2.1.


We live in uncertain times, marked by increasingly complex and interconnected crises in and around Europe. These include natural disasters, such as wildfires and flooding, epidemics, the severe effects of human-induced climate change, hybrid attacks, terrorism and full-scale armed aggression. There is also a need to build capacity to manage the effects of large migration waves. Against this backdrop, civil preparedness and societal resilience are more critical than ever.












2.2.


On 6 September 2024, the Minister for the European Union of the Republic of Poland requested an exploratory opinion from the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). The request was for the EESC to explore the roles and experiences of organised civil society regarding preparedness within this crisis landscape.












2.3.


This request aligns with the tasks of the European Commissioner for Preparedness, Crisis Management and Equality, Hadja Lahbib, and with the commissioned report Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness (1) (the ‘Niinistö report’).












2.4.


The concepts of civilian and civil preparedness are broad and encompass all of society. In line with the Polish request, mindful of the European Commission’s 2024–2029 Political Guidelines and the Niinistö report, this opinion focuses on the role of organised civil society in the crisis landscape. While the Niinistö report recognises civil society as a key stakeholder, its specific roles and contributions require further exploration, highlighting the importance of this opinion.












2.5.


In this opinion, the term ‘civil preparedness’ is understood as a comprehensive, society-wide approach to address security risks, societal disruption and crises, from natural disasters to malicious-actor-driven actions. ‘Civilian preparedness’, as used in the Niinistö report, focuses on protecting civilians and ensuring the crucial readiness of individuals and households. Consequently, civilian preparedness forms an important subset of the broader notion of civil preparedness. However, in this opinion’s references to the Niinistö report, these terms are essentially understood to be synonymous.












2.6.


To enhance clarity, the EESC is calling on the European Commission to develop a shared understanding, with clear definitions of concepts relating to civil and civilian preparedness, civil protection and civil defence. Different terms, cooperation models, and structures exist at Member State level, so clear and consistent terminology is essential to foster closer cooperation.












2.7.


The EESC has already drafted a number of opinions with a focus on, or aspects relating to, preparedness, touching on several areas identified in the Niinistö report. These opinions cover sectoral aspects such as civil protection, the defence industry, hybrid threats, critical infrastructure, cyber security, disinformation, space, military mobility, maritime security, health and food security and economic security. They thus provide valuable input from a preparedness perspective for the EU Preparedness Union Strategy.












2.8.


The EU’s current provisions on civil protection are primarily the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM), the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) and RescEU. Since the EESC has drafted several opinions on these mechanisms (2), this opinion will not address them, although they must be reviewed and built on in the anticipated EU Preparedness Union Strategy. The most recent EESC opinion evaluating the UCPM recommends significant improvements and upgrades.












2.9.


The Niinistö report is comprehensive and touches on a wide range of topics. While this opinion focuses on organised civil society, the EESC foresees the need for follow-up opinions in order to explore additional aspects. For instance, the preparedness and resilience of the private sector, including SMEs and industry, is crucial to ensure the robustness and continuity of societal functions. The Niinistö report addresses topics such as supply chains, dual-use potential, research and defence innovation, public-private partnerships, and procurement, as well as the need to systematically involve the private sector in preparedness. The EESC supports this emphasis and believes that the private sector’s contributions to preparedness merit a separate opinion.












2.10.


Another aspect to explore is the impact on frontline workers during crises. These workers fulfil crucial tasks and provide essential services under difficult circumstances. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed how understaffing and poor working conditions weaken resilience. This indicates that investment in decent working conditions and social aspects are essential for a robust society during a crisis. Niinistö also highlights the skills gap. Here the EESC draws attention to the value of retired professionals, such as former firefighters, police officers and health care personnel, who can be indispensable during a crisis. These perspectives also merit further exploration in a separate follow-up opinion.




3.   Key aspects of civil preparedness and resilience









3.1.


The current crisis landscape calls for a change of mindset, fostering a culture of preparedness, anticipation and prevention at all levels of society. Civil preparedness must fundamentally aim to protect and preserve a just and sustainable peace, firmly rooted in international law, including international humanitarian law. This requires pre-emptive action to address the underlying causes of conflict, ensure accountability and foster conditions that promote dignity, equal opportunities and social progress among individuals and groups in society.












3.2.


A just peace is grounded in international law, justice, equity and respect for human rights. Sustainable peace refers to a state of peace that is more than the mere absence of violence. It is peace that is not only achieved but maintained in the long term, building on social, economic and ecological sustainability and democratic governance in order to be resilient. Organised civil society, including the peace movement, plays a pivotal role in this context through actions such as advocacy, conflict resolution, monitoring and reporting, fostering social cohesion and inclusion. Further, civil society is an essential partner for the effective implementation of the EU Women, Peace and Security agenda, ensuring that the rights, agency and protection of women and girls are observed and upheld at all times.












3.3.


Recognising that citizen (3) empowerment will be at the core of comprehensive preparedness in the EU, the EESC stresses that this approach must not lead to the EU or the Member States abdicating their obligation to protect citizens during societal disruptions and armed conflicts.












3.4.


The EESC also underlines the importance of investments in quality public services, such as fire departments, healthcare, and other sectors, as their smooth operation is essential for European preparedness, resilience, and responsiveness. Moreover, quality public services will have better capacity to engage and collaborate with the relevant civil society organisations.












3.5.


When fostering civil preparedness, it is important to take into consideration both immediate measures and longer-term action, even over decades. Preparedness requires empowered citizens and active citizenship and must begin with children and include young people. Civic education must be included in both formal education and informal learning initiatives across different social groups and age groups. Civil society organisations, including the social partners, and specifically actors in life-long-learning, constitute a key resource in this context.












3.6.


The strategic use of disinformation, propaganda and hate speech by malicious actors, not least on social media, intensifies polarisation and disintegration, weakens resilience and fragments society. This underscores the importance of reliable fact checking, civic education, particularly media information literacy, and societal arenas that promote mutual understanding and trust. Previous EESC work on disinformation (4) offers valuable input on this matter.












3.7.


Civil preparedness extends beyond the EU, in the Union’s external cooperation, especially in neighbouring and candidate countries, and more globally. Diplomacy, development aid, trade relations and other forms of cooperation with countries in our neighbourhood and elsewhere must be explored as a resource for preparedness and resilience building.




4.   Civil society’s contributions to civil preparedness









4.1.


Civil society has proven to be an indispensable asset in addressing individual and societal needs in times of crises and societal disruption. By quickly mobilising support, often without state assistance, civil society demonstrates that solidarity lies at its very core.












4.2.


While no universal definition of civil society exists, it usually refers to all forms of social action carried out by individuals or groups who are neither connected to, nor managed by, state authorities. A civil society organisation is a structure whose members serve the general and/or a specific interest through democratic processes. Civil society organisations include, for example, voluntary associations, non-governmental organisations, grassroots organisations and the social partners (5).












4.3.


Civil society organisations are diverse, with different purposes and priorities. This autonomy, uniqueness and integrity must be safeguarded, even in periods of crisis and societal disruption. Some civil society organisations are assigned special roles and responsibilities during crises and armed conflicts (6), while others are grassroots-level initiatives providing immediate local support, nationwide organisations with extensive outreach, trade unions, or organisations with a specific field of expertise.












4.4.


Consequently, contributions vary according to each organisation’s remit and the nature of the crisis at hand. As such, forms of cooperation with public authorities will also vary based on this diversity. In addition to organised civil society, there are also members of the public who may spontaneously volunteer to provide critical assistance during crises.












4.5.


Civil society organisations principally contribute to civil preparedness and resilience by carrying on with their respective remits and ordinary activities, such as representing different groups, promoting fundamental rights and freedoms, providing services and contributing to meaningful interaction between members of the public. Their resilience during a crisis is closely linked to their strength during times of peace and stability. Historically, some of the most impactful resistance movements emerged where civil society flourished in peacetime. This underscores that investing in and supporting civil society organisations during periods of peace and stability strengthens its capacity to respond during a crisis or even in the event of war.












4.6.


Although civil society is diverse in the Member States, due to the different national and historical contexts, there are still shared values and core elements. When building civil preparedness initiatives at EU level, this diversity must be recognised and accommodated in order to ensure meaningful engagement.












4.7.


The EESC highlights the efficiency of leveraging civil society expertise and legitimacy on specific issues in a crisis. The following paragraphs explore civil society’s specific contributions in crises and adverse circumstances.




4.7.1.   Building trust and social cohesion

Civil society can bridge gaps between citizens and public authorities, fostering a culture of shared responsibility and trust. It provides checks and balances, upholds the rule of law, ensures accountability, promotes transparency and combats corruption. Rooted in local communities and active over long periods, civil society organisations build close relationships with the public. By mobilising and organising people, mutual trust and social cohesion is created. This social capital enables communities to respond quickly, with relevance and resolve, to both expected and unexpected disruptions.
4.7.2.   Providing spaces for purpose, direction and a sense of belonging

During crises in particular, long-term, existential questions arise about purpose and a sense of belonging. Civil society at large, including values-based organisations, faith communities and cultural institutions, provide perspectives, places to reflect, opportunities to express unease, and psychological support. Being part of a bigger picture and engaging in shared goals and collective action can boost psychological resistance and resilience and improve well-being when under severe stress.
4.7.3.   Raising awareness and sharing information

With its unique reach, civil society can raise awareness and share accurate information and verified facts. While maintaining autonomy from government, civil society can tackle disinformation and propaganda, polarisation and discrimination by tailoring accessible, culturally relevant, and actionable messages to diverse populations. This is especially relevant when civil society gives a voice to hard-to-reach, marginalised groups and sections of the population that are less inclined to trust the authorities. Civil society is also instrumental in informing and educating the public on preparedness and security risks through, for instance, life-long and informal learning platforms.
4.7.4.   Early warning and risk identification

Civil society often acts as a first line of protection, risk detection and an early warning system, before public authorities come to the rescue. This is particularly important for vulnerable populations and people in remote and rural areas. Equipped with grassroot-level insights, civil society organisations are well positioned to identify risks, make timely and accurate assessments, and convey them to the relevant authorities.
4.7.5.   Empowering and supporting vulnerable and marginalised groups

Preparedness levels vary due to socio-economic factors and other vulnerabilities, as crises do not impact all groups equally. Many civil society organisations focus on giving a voice to vulnerable and marginalised groups, advocating equitable access to resources and support. They push for social and economic policies that address vulnerabilities before a crisis strikes, working preventively and making communities more resilient over time. Civil society can also provide tangible support when it comes to increasing civil preparedness.
4.7.6.   Mobilising and organising volunteers

By mobilising, organising and coordinating volunteers, civil society helps communities act quickly and strengthens the collective response to crises. Promoting long-term volunteering is essential and should be encouraged. In addition, civil society can also coordinate spontaneous volunteers by providing the necessary infrastructure for collective action.
4.7.7.   Providing humanitarian assistance and crisis support

Civil society serves as a bridge between citizens and government agencies, delivering services, humanitarian assistance and other kinds of on-the-ground support, such as first aid and assistance in evacuation procedures. This complementary role, which can also be provided by private entities, is essential for the continuity of crucial services and critical support, especially when government resources are thinly stretched.
4.7.8.   Recovery and reconciliation

Civil society remains pivotal before, during and after crises. Following a major crisis, including armed conflicts, civil society can contribute to rebuilding communities, in line with local needs and values. Civil society also facilitates reconciliation by fostering dialogue between parties, drawing on its expertise, trustful relationships, and local presence.
4.7.9.   Safeguarding fundamental rights and freedoms

Civil society organisations act as watchdogs defending fundamental rights, freedom and the rule of law, ensuring that international conventions are upheld even in adverse conditions, including armed conflicts. In a well-functioning democracy, civil society organisations remain loyal not to any specific government or its authorities, but, within the boundaries of democratic procedures and principles, to their own remit, values and constituencies. It is in the interest of society at large that civil society continues to pursue its respective remit during adverse times. This includes organisations promoting viewpoints that run contrary to the prevailing political discourse.
5.   Needs identified and suggested actions









5.1.


The EESC supports Commissioner Lahbib’s stance (7) for a comprehensive and integrated EU approach to crisis management, emphasising proactive, cross-sectoral preparedness. As the EU consultative body representing organised civil society, the EESC stands ready to convey the civil society perspective in developing the EU Preparedness Union Strategy and related initiatives.












5.2.


The EESC notes with interest the Niinistö report’s recognition of civil society as a key stakeholder for comprehensive and coherent preparedness across Europe. The EESC endorses the recommended ‘whole-of-government’, ‘whole-of society’ and ‘all-hazards’ approach to preparedness. The report’s point of departure is the understanding that preparedness is about bringing together all relevant actors and resources, including civil society, the public and private sectors, and members of the public. However, the report underexplores civil society’s roles, contributions, and the enabling conditions it requires, highlighting the need for enhanced focus on civil society as a key stakeholder when acting on the Niinistö recommendations.












5.3.


The Niinistö report presents several recommendations where civil society can play a crucial role. The EESC urges the European Commission and the Member States to create conditions that allow civil society to participate fully, contribute, and engage on an equal footing with other stakeholders. In this context, civil society’s unique characteristics must be respected, and adequate resources allocated for meaningful engagement at EU, national and local level. This is particularly important for the upcoming EU Preparedness Union Strategy, Civil Defence Mechanism, and a potential EU Preparedness Law, etc., as proposed in the Niinistö report.












5.4.


Civil preparedness varies significantly between Member States, so a first step is to develop a shared understanding of the different roles and responsibilities of civil society and the government at Member State level. In addition, the European Commission is well placed to gather and share best practices from the Member States on effective cooperation with civil society. This could be augmented by mapping existing structures, cooperation methods, and research in this field.












5.5.


The EESC stresses the urgency of investing proactively in civil society to ensure better readiness and capacity to act when crises occur. This, since civil society space is shrinking in Europe and beyond, as documented by the EU and the EESC (8). The EU and the Member States must therefore increase support for civil society at all levels, including transnational cooperation.












5.6.


In this context, the EESC’s call for a strategy for civil dialogue, resulting in an action plan (9) is crucial for interaction and engagement with civil society. This needs to be complemented by suitable dialogue structures at Member State level, designed for the diversity of civil society. In civil dialogue on preparedness, civil society must be involved at both strategic and more operational levels.












5.7.


For effective civil society engagement, the EESC urges the EU and the Member States to develop secure, autonomous and interoperable information exchange mechanisms and shared communication platforms between stakeholders, including civil society. Recognising that information may be classified, the EU and Member States should investigate how to balance security requirements with the imperative of timely information access for civil society.












5.8.


The EESC emphasises the need for effective and meaningful coordination at EU and Member State level, grounded on the specific resources, expertise and perspectives of each actor. Civil society contributions are often from multiple actors with varied expertise, scale and character. Past crises suggest that coordination is a weak spot, hampering effective preparation, assistance and support.












5.9.


For effective crisis management, civil society organisations need to proactively plan and develop their own crisis preparedness arrangements, including continuity planning for prioritised tasks with roles and responsibilities. This includes, for example, reviewing the vulnerability of internal systems and organising training and exercises, as well as reinforcing civil society cybersecurity capacities.












5.10.


The EESC stresses that all crisis response, relief and recovery efforts should address the specific needs of women and girls in line with the EU Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (2023–2027). The full and meaningful participation of women in decision-making, the protection of women and girls in crisis and prevention of violence against women should be prioritised. In this regard civil society organisations play an important role, not least in relation to advocacy and pressing for accountability.












5.11.


It is equally important for the EU institutions, including the EESC, to develop crisis preparedness and continuity planning. This must be prioritised urgently and includes removing existing obstacles for an overarching, comprehensive approach.












5.12.


Recognising that crises do not impact all groups equally, people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups are more likely to get hurt or cut off from important services in a crisis. This can be addressed by complementing general preparedness plans with personal preparedness plans. These include, for example, self-assessments of preparedness, capabilities, available resources and support needs. In this context, civil society at local and regional level plays a key role, together with the relevant public authorities.












5.13.


Training and exercises for preparedness are crucial, with programmes already existing for the UCPM. The Niinistö report proposes an EU-wide exercise policy for sharing approaches across different sectors and institutions, as well as an Exercise Knowledge Hub and cross-sectoral EU training courses. To ensure compatibility and complementarity between stakeholders, civil society organisations should be one of the main target groups for EU training initiatives on security, defence and crisis management, to ensure that the specific competence of each stakeholder is considered.












5.14.


In cases of extreme crisis or armed conflict, civil society must act quickly, robustly and innovatively. This requires society to display a degree of risk acceptance. Managing situations at high speed, under extreme conditions, will inevitably lead to some shortcomings and misjudgements, despite rigorous planning and preparation. Shared understanding and clearly established mandates will therefore help reduce the risk of paralysis in crisis situations.












5.15.


The EESC stresses the importance of transparent and consistent public funding for civil society preparedness. First, this requires long-term funding for capacity building and the development of infrastructure to ensure readiness. Secondly, accessible and transparent funds must be available to reimburse civil society’s and other stakeholders’ humanitarian assistance and crisis support costs incurred when complementing government actions during rapidly evolving crises. Funding structures should also support civil society’s ability to coordinate spontaneous volunteers.












5.16.


The Niinistö report proposes a European Preparedness and Readiness Investment Framework, with a coherent package of instruments and mainstreaming preparedness in the next EU budget. The upcoming White Paper on the future of European Defence (10) will address the defence sector’s capabilities and investment needs. The EESC stresses the importance of any EU funding initiatives for defence also including investment in peace, civil defence and preparedness, with funds accessible to civil society, including the social partners. This is in line with the proposals set out in exploratory opinion ECO/655 on Defence funding in the EU (11). Furthermore, the EESC stresses the need for continued social investments, since ultimately, investing in social cohesion is a proactive measure for civil preparedness.












5.17.


Recent crises have demonstrated the vulnerabilities of the single market. The Niinistö report mentions this in relation to the recently adopted Internal Market Emergency and Resilience Act (12), and recommends lowering the barrier for cross-border cooperation. The EESC supports this view and emphasises, in the context of civil society, that further measures are needed to facilitate cross-border assistance, for example personnel and material assistance. To this end, the EESC also stresses the importance of the full implementation of the proposal for a Directive on European Cross-Border Association (ECBA).






Brussels, 26 March 2025.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  
            https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/5bb2881f-9e29-42f2-8b77-8739b19d047c_en?filename=2024_Niinisto-report_Book_VF.pdf.

(2)  
            
OJ C 290, 29.7.2022, p. 30
,

OJ C, C/2024/1575, 5.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1575/oj, 
OJ C, C/2024/2106, 26.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2106/oj, 
OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 231
,

OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 49, EESC evaluation report 
Ex-post evaluation of the European Union’s Civil Protection Mechanism (including RescEU)
.

(3)  In this opinion, the term citizen is used to denote both citizens of the EU and EU residents with other citizenships.

(4)  
            
OJ C, C/2024/4052, 2.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4052/oj; 
OJ C 152, 6.4.2022, p. 72.

(5)  
            Civil society organisation - EUR-Lex: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/civil-society-organisation.html.

(6)  This refers to the Voluntary Defence Organisations and civil society roles in various national and international contexts, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.

(7)  
            https://hearings.elections.europa.eu/documents/lahbib/lahbib_writtenquestionsandanswers_en.pdf.

(8)  EESC, Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law – National developments from a civil society perspective – 2018-2024, https://www.eesc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2024-11/qe-01-24-008-en-n.pdf and 
OJ C, C/2025/1184, 21.3.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1184/oj.

(9)  
            
OJ C, C/2024/2481, 23.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2481/oj.

(10)  Political Guidelines for the Next European Commission 2024-2029, p. 13.

(11)  To be adopted in spring 2025.

(12)  
            https://www.internal-market-emergency-resilience-act.com/.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2957/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)