Union Civil Protection Mechanism: the coordination of responses to disasters outside the EU has been broadly effective

(pursuant to Article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU)

Executive summary

I Disasters can strike anywhere, anytime. The human, environmental and economic impact of disasters, whether natural or man made, can be considerable. When a disaster occurs, the reaction must be swift. Sound disaster management saves lives, and effective coordination among different responders is critical to the successful preparation for and response to disasters.

II The European Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) was established to promote swift and effective operational cooperation between national civil protection services. It has two main objectives. Firstly, it aims to strengthen the cooperation between the Union and the UCPM’s Participating States (Member States plus six non-EU countries).
Secondly, it aims to facilitate coordination in the field of civil protection in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to disasters.

III The mechanism is managed by the European Commission. We examined whether the Commission had been effective in facilitating the coordination of the responses to disasters outside the Union through the UCPM. We did so by looking at the activations of the UCPM in response to three recent international disasters: the floods in Bosnia and Herzegovina (2014); the Ebola virus outbreak in west Africa (2014–2016); and the Nepal earthquake (2015).

IV We conclude that the Commission has been broadly effective in facilitating the coordination of the responses to disasters outside the Union since the beginning of 2014.

V For each of the three disasters we examined, activation of the UCPM was timely, and the EU civil protection teams (EUCP teams) facilitated coordination on the ground with the Participating States’ teams. The Commission’s facilitation of coordination is strengthened through the widespread dissemination of information products. The coordination among Commission departments, as well as with other EU and non-EU bodies, was inclusive. The Commission also respected the UN’s overall lead, and took steps to ensure a smooth transition into the recovery phase.

VI Notwithstanding our overall conclusion, we found a number of areas for further improvement, including: possible time savings during the early phases of disaster response, CECIS (the Commission’s communication and information platform), on-the-ground coordination and synergies, the Commission’s and ECDC’s financial and administrative arrangements for the large-scale deployment of epidemiologists through the UCPM, and UCPM performance reporting.

VII We therefore recommend that the Commission:

(a) identify ways to gain additional time during the pre-alert phase and during the selection and deployment of EUCP teams;

(b) develop CECIS’s features to improve the overview of assistance provided and requested, to allow for a better follow-up of priorities and to enhance user-friendliness;

(c) strengthen on-the-ground coordination through improving the EUCP teams’ reporting, exploiting the presence of ECHO Field Network experts and further involving EU delegations;

(d) assess, together with the ECDC, potential changes needed to strengthen arrangements for the deployment of ECDC experts outside the Union through the UCPM;

(e) improve reporting by automating the production of statistics and indicators, thereby strengthening accountability.