Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – European Preparedness Union Strategy (JOIN(2025) 130 final)
Date: 2025-09-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU strategy, European security, adaptation to climate change, anti-crisis plan, crisis management, emergency aid, military cooperation, public health, public safety, public-private partnership








C_202600042EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/42


16.1.2026






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee
European Preparedness Union Strategy


(JOIN(2025) 130 final)


(C/2026/42)


Rapporteurs-general: 
                  Tomas ARVIDSSON (SE/I)


Giulia BARBUCCI (IT/II)


Ariane RODERT (SE/III)







Advisor


Martin CARLSTEDT (for Rapporteur GRIII)
Antonio POLICA (for Rapporteur GRII)




Referral


European Commission, 6.6.2025




Legal basis


Rule 26(1)of the Rules of Procedure




Referral


JOIN(2025) 130 final, 26.3.2025




Adopted at plenary session


18.9.2025




Plenary session No


599




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


155/1/2




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


We live in uncertain times, marked by increasingly complex and interconnected crises in and around Europe. These include natural disasters, such as seismic activity, wildfires and flooding, epidemics, the severe effects of human-induced climate change, cyber and hybrid attacks, major technological failures, terrorism and full-scale armed aggression. Against this backdrop, preparedness and societal resilience, including economic and social resilience, are more critical than ever.












1.2.


The EESC emphasises that the European Union is built on the foundations of peace, freedom, democracy and respect for fundamental rights. Initiatives must therefore aim to uphold a just and sustainable peace and address the underlying root causes of conflict, by ensuring solidarity, dignity, equal opportunities, social and societal progress, and a sound economy. Furthermore, all actions must adhere strictly to international law, including international humanitarian law.












1.3.


The EESC welcomes the European Preparedness Union Strategy, which aims to strengthen the EU’s capacity to prevent and respond to a wide range of human-induced and natural disasters based on an integrated ‘all-hazards’, ‘whole-of-government’, and ‘whole-of-society approach’. This focus helps bring together all relevant stakeholders, across all levels of government (local, regional, national and EU), citizens, civil society organisations, businesses and social partners, as well as the scientific and academic communities. Preparedness is a long-term commitment spanning generations which should begin at pre-school and school level and involve all groups in society.












1.4.


The EESC underlines that organised civil society is a key resource in preparedness, but it is currently under threat and experiencing shrinking space in several Member States. This must be urgently addressed to ensure meaningful and resourceful civil society contributions and engagement.












1.5.


The EESC considers this cross-sectoral, multi-disciplinary and coordinated approach crucial for a better prepared European Union. However, recognising that this initial stage will be followed by implementation of the proposed actions, which will address different issues and sectors, the EESC underscores the importance of keeping to the timetable and involving the relevant stakeholders throughout the process. The strategy is complemented by an extensive annex listing actions for achieving the vision presented in the Preparedness Union Strategy. The EESC will continue to follow the launch of the various initiatives and must be fully involved in subsequent new structures and initiatives.












1.6.


The EESC notes that the Communication calls on Member States to implement a wide range of actions but does not clarify what funds or financial leeway will be provided for Member States’ implementation. The EESC therefore calls for a holistic approach to this strategy, including from a financial perspective, and for uncertainties to be clarified. Prevention, mitigation and recovery in relation to extreme natural disasters and human-induced threats, as well as climate adaptation, must be financed through structural long-term funding mechanisms to fulfil the aims of the strategy.












1.7.


This underlines the importance of ensuring that the next multiannual financial framework provides sufficient and long-term funding to increase preparedness. However, this should not adversely affect other crucial EU budget lines that make society more resilient, such as the common agricultural policy (CAP), cohesion policy and the European Union Solidarity Fund. A comprehensive impact assessment is of utmost importance to ensure that the actions of the various policy areas are synergistic. Furthermore, as demonstrated during the pandemic, protecting employment in times of uncertainty and crisis will be crucial to ensure stability and social cohesion.












1.8.


The EESC supports the shift towards increased anticipation and proactivity and the underlying principle of ‘preparedness by design’. However, the division of responsibilities among EU, national and local actors must be better clarified. The strategy must therefore better balance national differences and perceptions, starting with shared definitions and a collective understanding of threats, including common urgent security challenges.












1.9.


Furthermore, swift, consistent and targeted EU solidarity is crucial for the rapid socio-economic recovery of regions affected by crises. In this context, anticipating crises and ensuring prompt recovery are two complementary and inseparable dimensions of a unified, integrated risk management strategy. The EESC stresses the need for an integrated approach to crisis response; the reconstruction phase should be an integral part of this, as emergencies only truly end when people and businesses return to normal life. Moreover, if temporary crisis factors become permanent, they can lead to long-term economic decline, poverty and depopulation, particularly in rural areas.












1.10.


To make the strategy successful, all citizens and stakeholders must be fully included, informed and empowered. The EESC supports the need for 72-hour household self-sufficiency, but stresses that preparedness levels vary due to socio-economic conditions and other vulnerabilities, as crises do not impact all groups equally. This calls for tailored support for vulnerable groups.












1.11.


The EESC supports the view that the integrity and smooth running of the internal market is key and that the EU must remain interconnected to ensure effective and sustained solidarity and boost societal and economic resilience. In this regard businesses must be given a clear and predictable legislative framework to ensure fair competition within the internal market.












1.12.


The EESC shares the view set out in the strategy that interaction between civilian and military actors should be improved and underscores that this will have to be done in a way that does not call into question their respective competences and roles.












1.13.


The EESC endorses the integration of preparedness and resilience into bilateral partnerships and multilateral institutions and the need to strengthen cooperation with like-minded partners. This cooperation should also encompass support for peacekeeping, peacebuilding, conflict prevention, stabilisation and post-conflict recovery, as well as approaches and actions aimed at preserving peace, freedom and stability.




2.   Specific comments

2.1.   Foresight and anticipation









2.1.1.


The EESC considers that developing a comprehensive EU-wide risk and threat assessment is the foundation for effective risk prevention and mitigation. However, it is essential to recognise that crises are perceived differently in different areas and can vary significantly in times of peace and war. There are also differences in terms of the stakeholders involved, the operational methodologies required and the applicable legislative framework.












2.1.2.


The EESC underlines that a crisis dashboard involving political decision-makers is important, particularly in cases of cross-border emergencies and crises, but stresses that roles must remain clearly separated from those in the technical and scientific fields.












2.1.3.


The EESC supports the proposal to strengthen the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC). However, civil protection systems differ significantly across Member States in terms of funding, structure, functions and regulations, highlighting the need to ensure genuine integration and effective interoperability mechanisms. Here, the EU should provide financial support to Member States who adapt standards for better interoperability.












2.1.4.


The EESC endorses the development of an EU training catalogue and a platform for lessons learned and stresses that training is an essential and compulsory component of effective risk preparedness and response. The EU catalogue must carefully consider the different threats and needs, in line with the all-hazards approach. In this context, best practices developed by organised civil society could provide valuable contributions and could be gathered and shared at EU-level.












2.1.5.


The EESC will launch an initiative to ensure the Committee’s preparedness, including continuity planning, information sharing and training. This will also include identifying the most suitable EESC body for managing preparedness issues on an ongoing basis.












2.1.6.


Further, the EESC should be included as an equal stakeholder when designing and setting up the proposed structures for the EU institutions. Here the EESC can play a role in implementing and monitoring the strategy, with a particular focus on uptake and the impact on civil society and the public.












2.1.7.


Furthermore, the EESC stresses the importance of encouraging long-term volunteering, recognising the different approaches needed for spontaneous and organised volunteers. Civil society is ideally suited to training and organising spontaneous volunteers and can provide the necessary infrastructure for collective action, while providing structure and coordination.




2.2.   Resilience of vital societal functions









2.2.1.


The EESC supports the proposal to embed preparedness by design into EU policies and actions, stressing that any actions should protect and support the fundamental rights and values upon which the EU and its democracies are founded. Sound economic, social and fiscal policies are prerequisites for preparedness. Moreover, mainstreaming preparedness into EU and national legislation must be balanced with the continued promotion of and investment in societal cohesion and social progress, which should themselves be considered as preparedness measures for preventing and resolving potential social conflicts.












2.2.2.


The EESC generally supports the proposal to adopt minimum preparedness requirements and highlights the importance of close dialogue between the European Commission and the Member States in order to manage potential administrative burdens and ambitious and realistic timelines for implementation.












2.2.3.


The EESC underlines the importance of investments in quality public services, such as fire departments, health and social care, schools and other sectors, as their smooth operation is essential for European preparedness, resilience and responsiveness. Moreover, the European Pillar of Social Rights should be considered. Workers in critical sectors must be trained for crisis conditions, prioritising high standards of health and safety, with social partners playing an active role in training, information, dissemination and awareness-raising campaigns. Vocational training should teach new skills for emerging challenges as well as updated safety protocols to build capacity for newly evolving threats.












2.2.4.


The EESC supports the proposal to broaden competences and tasks established under the Union Civil Protection Mechanism. In the context of a Preparedness Union, it is essential to connect the local level to the national and EU levels, with a clear understanding of the complementary roles and responsibilities. National civil protection systems should leverage the knowledge of local territories and address their specific risks and needs.












2.2.5.


The EESC endorses the European Commission’s initiative to launch an EU Stockpiling Strategy, which should be based on the recognition, already highlighted during the pandemic and the war in Ukraine, that the EU is not self-sufficient in many key sectors. This calls for tailored approaches, and the EESC underlines the need for dialogue with social partners and operators in the private sector, for example to ensure seamless and cross-border business agreements and to guarantee fair competition.












2.2.6.


The EESC welcomes the European Commission’s planned Climate Adaptation Plan to support Member States in adapting to and preparing for climate risks and strengthening the EU’s resilience. The results and good practices from the EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change should be urgently shared and scaled up across the EU. In this context the EESC points to the need to also focus on preparedness measures in relation to natural disasters, such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, for a holistic preparedness approach.












2.2.7.


The EESC supports the approach of ensuring permanent access to critical natural resources, particularly water. Here the EESC’s initiative for an EU Blue Deal (1) should be seriously considered, as it presents a holistic approach to the geopolitical, economic, social and environmental dimensions of water management and use. The EESC underscores that water security is crucial, with more than 10 million people in the EU still lacking access to safe drinking water.












2.2.8.


The EESC stresses the importance for all stakeholders to draft preparedness plans, including continuity planning. This is a weak spot across several sectors in the EU. The European Commission and Member States should provide guidance, technical assistance and training in this area.




2.3.   Population preparedness









2.3.1.


The EESC believes that advanced early warning systems, for all kinds of crises and threats, are essential, since timely and accurate information is crucial for effective action. Furthermore, the varying sensitivity of information requires appropriate sharing protocols and accurate management mechanisms. To make the strategy successful, all citizens and stakeholders must be fully included, informed and trained so that they can reduce their risk exposure and respond in an emergency. The EESC underscores that an ‘as low as reasonably practicable’ (ALARP) approach to risk should be mainstreamed.












2.3.2.


The EESC supports the proposal to raise citizens’ awareness of risks and threats. The introduction of an EU Preparedness Day is a positive initiative. However, it must be part of a broader cross-sectoral, intergenerational and inclusive strategy to enhance preparedness across all social groups, including the most vulnerable members of society, ensuring that no one is left behind.












2.3.3.


The EESC points out that approximately one quarter of EU citizens live in border regions. Given that the impacts of crises can be transnational, it is important to promote and establish cross-border cooperation and coordination as part of a coherent and shared information and training model.












2.3.4.


Organised civil society is a key resource in preparedness but is under threat and experiencing shrinking space in many Member States. In this context the EESC draws attention to the recently adopted opinion on civil preparedness and organised civil society (SOC/812). Here the EESC calls on the Member States at local, regional and national levels to initiate civil dialogue with civil society organisations (CSOs) to jointly identify roles, responsibilities and the resources needed as a preparedness measure to ensure meaningful engagement when a crisis strikes. Including civil society on an equal footing with other stakeholders in training exercises, coordination and communication initiatives is key, as are urgent measures to boost civil society space.












2.3.5.


Civil society organisations vary in size and in presence at local, national and European levels, as well as in their missions. As a result, some may contribute to specific preparedness tasks, while others may support resilience efforts as cultural organisations, social service providers or advocates for groups or rights. Moreover, 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.












2.3.6.


Despite their diversity, these organisations share values, logic and specific characteristics that are essential for building trust and fostering social cohesion. This is especially relevant given that the strategy must be tailored to the specific needs and risks of different territories and communities and include targeted actions for the most vulnerable groups to provide everyone with appropriate support, information and training. The EESC is well placed to build awareness and promote and support preparedness initiatives for civil society organisations through its reach in Member States and through the Liaison Group.












2.3.7.


The EESC stresses that communication from authorities plays a crucial role, especially in informing citizens correctly. It must be proactive, synergistic, authoritative and integrated to avoid alarmism, or it will not be taken seriously. Social partners and civil society organisations can play an important role by leveraging their ability to reach and involve different segments of the population. Furthermore, the private service sector, including SMEs, also has an essential role in crisis management.












2.3.8.


The EESC supports the objective of 72-hour household self-sufficiency, but stresses that preparedness levels vary due to socio-economic conditions and other vulnerabilities, as crises do not affect all groups equally. This must be considered, with proper, tailored support provided to vulnerable groups. It is crucial to ensure the continuation of essential public and private services, such as the supply of affordable, accessible and stable energy as well as access to financial services. However, the EESC stresses that self-sufficiency does not absolve Member States of their obligation to protect citizens in all circumstances












2.3.9.


The EESC believes that building a preparedness union takes time and spans over generations. Therefore, awareness campaigns and training should begin at pre-school and school level. Engaging young people could be a particularly effective way of informing parents and families. This calls for an emphasis on civic education, where informal and non-formal education initiatives to promote lifelong learning are central. In this regard, social partners and CSOs dedicated to lifelong learning and non-formal education are particularly valuable.












2.3.10.


The EESC underlines the strategic importance of high-quality, inclusive education and a skilled workforce as a cornerstone of the EU’s competitiveness and resilience. It also considers that the Union for Skills plays an important role, not only in teaching and updating professional competences, but also in supporting workers, including young people, in developing critical thinking skills to help combat disinformation and promote the conscious use of the internet and social media. Trade unions can contribute to this goal by supporting and engaging with teachers and school staff. These campaigns could be reinforced and complemented by actions from civil society organisations.












2.3.11.


The EESC considers the Erasmus+ Programme to be one of the most iconic and successful initiatives of the European Union. Designed to promote education, training, youth and sport, this youth mobility scheme is essential for fostering a genuine sense of European citizenship. It could include aspects of preparedness but must retain its initial purpose. As for the European Solidarity Corps (ESC), it already undertakes numerous vital activities that benefit the population. Considering insufficient funds (2) and growing challenges, the ESC’s budget should be increased, provided this does not compromise or reduce the quantity or quality of the social services currently delivered.












2.3.12.


The EESC recognises the need to attract talent to boost the EU’s preparedness and underlines the important role of social dialogue in achieving the goals set out in this regard. Moreover, the EESC believes that, from a long-term perspective, it is essential to revive the quality and importance of education at the national level, particularly among younger generations, with a focus on STEM and other critical sectors facing a shortage of skilled labour. At the same time, these sectors, potentially supported by talents from third countries, must guarantee all fundamental labour and social rights for those workers.




2.4.   Public-private cooperation









2.4.1.


The EESC strongly supports the creation of a Public-Private Preparedness Task Force that includes social partners and organised civil society. Similar cross-sectoral task forces should be replicated at national and local levels. However, the EESC points out that fragmentation of governance structures must be avoided, and all newly created structures should have a clear mandate. The EESC considers that emergency public-private protocols should be designed to ensure the rapid availability of essential materials, goods and services, and to secure critical production lines.












2.4.2.


To make business resources available more quickly, more efficiently and with more precision in a crisis, it is important that the public and private sectors make preparations and determine allocations primarily through agreements in line with laws and directives. Nevertheless, these provisions must be strictly used for extreme circumstances and must not undermine the traceability and transparency obligations for both public and private actors, nor oversight by the competent supervisory authorities. To be eligible for public funding, companies must respect existing regulations to safeguard workers’ rights in all circumstances.












2.4.3.


The EESC underlines that millions of EU workers are employed in critical sectors that are at the forefront when a crisis emerges. Yet many still face job insecurity and low wages. Previous crises have demonstrated that investment in adequate wages and good working and living conditions for these workers is essential for a resilient society during crises. The EESC draws attention to the fact that, during the pandemic, the SURE mechanism served as a tool for workers and businesses in a time of crisis, which should be considered as part of a broader preparedness framework, as a temporary measure. The EESC supports the European Commission’s statement that ensuring the integrity and smooth running of the internal market is key. During COVID-19, individuals and businesses suffered from the negative consequences of uncoordinated national measures. The EU must remain interconnected to ensure effective and sustained solidarity, boosting societal and economic resilience. At the same time, it is essential to provide businesses with a clear and predictable legislative framework in which to operate to ensure fair competition within the internal market in all circumstances. Reducing administrative barriers and ensuring interoperability standards, both across EU Member States and with partners, would enhance industrial cooperation and enable more efficient joint preparedness initiatives.












2.4.4.


The EESC underscores the potential insurance gap regarding climate-induced and other natural disasters, pandemics, major cyber incidents and major technical failures. This will have a significant impact, particularly in certain areas at certain times. The EESC welcomes the fact that the European Commission is reviewing the concrete proposals made by European Central Bank and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority in this regard. However, the exceptional nature of such events does not exempt national governments from their responsibility to invest in prevention, ensure effective crisis management and support recovery efforts.












2.4.5.


It is important to improve and safeguard the business community’s ability to adapt in a crisis, drawing from the pandemic. The EU and the Member States should provide financial and other support to encourage cooperation among all stakeholders involved in research and innovation – particularly at cross-border level – paying special attention to strengthening synergies between public institutions, businesses, universities and civil society (the so-called quadruple helix).












2.4.6.


The municipal level is of particular importance in crisis situations. Immediate problems must first be resolved on site. Therefore, co-creation is essential. Municipalities must work closely with locally organised civil society and businesses. It is important to know what civil society resources are available locally and to have networks that can be quickly activated in case of emergency.




2.5.   Civil-military cooperation









2.5.1.


The EESC supports the goal of improving interaction between civilian and military actors and underscores that this will have to be done in a manner that does not call into question their respective competences and roles.












2.5.2.


The EESC stresses that investments in infrastructure with dual-use potential must be developed and implemented in a way that ensures that it is equally beneficial and effective for civil and military purposes. The European Commission standards for dual-use items must be duly consulted, considering both civilian and military requirements and involving all relevant stakeholders, including social partners and businesses.












2.5.3.


The EESC underscores the need to clarify roles, responsibilities and priorities and mitigate vulnerabilities between public agencies and private sub-contractors in relation to vital societal functions. In this context, it is essential to provide clear legal frameworks, fully respect social rights and involve social partners and civil society in decision-making processes. Some Member States are activating or updating existing schemes based on either planned and prepared voluntary contributions or civil conscription to support vital societal functions as a means of preparedness, which could be reviewed in this context. Furthermore, the resources of voluntary defence organisations and CSOs at large need to be considered.












2.5.4.


The EESC welcomes the initiative to organise regular EU-wide comprehensive and cross-sectoral preparedness exercises. It underlines the importance of including relevant civil society organisations and social partners in joint exercises with other stakeholders to capitalise on the various stakeholders’ competences.












2.5.5.


The EESC welcomes the EU’s and relevant stakeholders’ increased focus on emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing and cloud infrastructure, which are critical for cybersecurity and cyber resilience. More efforts are needed to ensure affordable access to state-of-the-art technologies through strategic investments and public-private partnerships.




2.6.   Crisis response









2.6.1.


Currently, the EU’s primary tools for civil protection are the European Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM), the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) and rescEU. The EESC has drafted several opinions on these mechanisms (3), with suggested improvements. The EESC supports the need to review and build on these initiatives as a central part of the EU Preparedness Union Strategy.












2.6.2.


The EESC supports the proposal to create an EU crisis coordination hub, in full respect of the subsidiarity principle, avoiding overlap with national authorities and fostering robust communication channels with all stakeholders, including organised civil society.












2.6.3.


The EESC supports the proposal to strengthen rescEU, which plays a crucial role in revitalising areas affected by catastrophic events and helping them recover. In particular, the EESC agrees with the European Commission’s intention to expand rescEU’s mandate. Moreover, it considers the current financial allocation to be largely insufficient considering the growing frequency and socio-economic impact of such events.












2.6.4.


In the event of an extreme crisis or, in the worst-case scenario, an armed conflict, quick, robust and innovative action is crucial. This requires society to display a degree of risk acceptance. Managing situations at high speed, under extreme conditions, could lead to some shortcomings and misjudgements, despite rigorous planning and preparation. However, fundamental rights, including international humanitarian law, must be respected under all circumstances. Shared understanding and mandates should be clarified in times of peace and stability to prevent the risk of paralysis in crisis situations.




2.7.   Resilience through external partnerships









2.7.1.


The EESC welcomes the proposal to involve EU candidate countries and EEA countries in a cooperation plan on preparedness and reaction. This process should be part of the overall integration process. The EESC underlines that, given current challenges, enhancing cross-border cooperation on humanitarian aid is a priority. In any case, the implementation of the strategy must not compromise the full respect for and enforcement of key EU legislation. It is also essential that social partners and organised civil society in these countries are meaningfully involved in the process.












2.7.2.


The EESC endorses the integration of preparedness and resilience into bilateral partnerships and multilateral institutions. A multilateral approach is particularly crucial, notably through cooperation with the United Nations providing development aid and humanitarian assistance to proactively address preparedness and resilience challenges. This cooperation should also encompass support for peacekeeping, peacebuilding, conflict prevention, stabilisation and post-conflict recovery, and all those approaches and actions aimed at preserving peace, freedom and stability.












2.7.3.


The EESC emphasises that, to lessen vulnerabilities and ensure open strategic autonomy, there is a need to strengthen cooperation with like-minded partners, promote an ambitious trade agenda and diversify supply chains of vital goods and services as well as exports and imports.






Brussels, 18 September 2025.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  
            Umbrella Opinion ‘A call for an EU Blue Deal’, Rapporteurs: Kinga Joó, Florian Marin, Paul Rübig, Co-rapporteur: Péter Olajos, adopted on 25.10.2023 (OJ C, C/2024/878, 6.2.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/878/oj).

(2)  European Parliament Report (A9-2023-0308): The Parliament highlights that the financial allocation of EUR 1 033 billion, equivalent to EUR 143 million per year for 2021-2027, is entirely insufficient, as there were 43 000 participants in 2022-2023, even though 80 000 applied, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2023-0308_EN.html.

(3)  EESC opinion on 
Consolidating the EU Civil Protection Mechanism in order to improve the EU’s capacity to react in the face of extreme events, including those occurring outside its territory
 (OJ C 290, 29.7.2022, p. 30); EESC opinion on 
EU Climate Diplomacy
 (OJ C, C/2024/1575, 5.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1575/oj); EESC opinion on 
Addressing the impact of climate change and environmental degradation on peace, security and defence
 (OJ C, C/2024/2106, 26.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2106/oj); EESC opinion on 
Strengthening the EU’s civil protection response – rescEU
 (OJ C 10, 11.1.2021, p. 66); EESC opinion on a 
Union Civil Protection Mechanism (amendment)
 (OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 49); EESC evaluation report on 
Ex-post evaluation of the European Union’s Civil Protection Mechanism (including RescEU)
.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/42/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)