Crisis
Management and
Contingency
Planning
Athena Conference, 2014
Christoph Wagner, European Commission
Crisis management and
contingency planning
• 1. Pressure through crisis
• 2. EU crisis management: civil protection
• 3. EU crisis management: the role of civil-military
relations
• 4. EU disaster risks reduction at international
level
Pressure
through Crisis
Why do we need better crisis
management tools and contingency
planning?
Natural Hazard
5
8 April 2015
Human Hazard
7
8 April 2015
Lack of Coping Capacity
InfoRM - Index for Risk Management
• Quantitative humanitarian and disaster
assessment based on an open,
transparent, consensus-based approach to
humanitarian & disaster risk
• http://inform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
Natural catastrophes in Europe, 1980-2012
Geophysical events
(Earthquake, tsunami,
volcanic eruption)
Meteorological events
(Storm)
Hydrological events
(Flood, mass movement)
Climatological events
(Extreme temperature,
drought, wildfire)
Natural disasters
Significant events
(Munich Re, 2013)
Total estimated disaster impacts in
Europe, 2002-2011
151 BILLION USD
(*)
(*)
damage
116 Billion EUR
7.3 MILLION people affected
146 THOUSAND people killed
EU Crisis
management:
Civil Protection
What recent innovation has the EU put
in place to enhance civil protection?
The Civil Protection Mechanism
•
Natural and man-made disasters (no complex emergencies)
•
Inside and outside the EU
•
32 participating countries: 28 MS + Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and The
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
•
The Mechanism's tools
• Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC)
• Common Emergency and Information System (CECIS)
• Training programme
• Civil Protection modules
Disaster
stricken
country
Request for assistance
Acceptance / rejection of
assistance offered
Information update
ERCC
Offer of assistance
Deployment of EU CP Teams
Coordination of Transport
Activation of the Mechanism
Key elements of the new legislation
 Entered into force by end 2013 to revise the
existing CP Mechanism.
 Balances prevention, preparedness and response.
 Ensures predictable, high-quality assistance.
 Helps Member States on capacity development.
 Introduces new international elements.
Disaster prevention
Member States:
• develop risk assessments and make a summary
available to the Commission
• develop and refine their disaster risk management
planning
• make an assessment of their risk management
capability available to the Commission
• participate, on a voluntary basis, in peer reviews
Disaster preparedness
Commission & Member States:
• Continue existing activities: exercises, training, exchange
of experts, projects
• Establish Emergency Response Coordination Centre
(ERCC) with 24/7 operational capacity
• Establish a European Emergency Response Capacity
consisting of a "voluntary pool"
• Co-finance buffer capacities to address temporary
shortcomings
• Provide seed-funding for new response capacities, where
a potentially significant gap has been identified
Financial support
• Certification costs:
•
Costs of obligatory training courses, exercises and workshops necessary
for the certification of Member States' response capacities for the purposes
of the European Emergency Response Capacity
• Adaptation costs:
•
Non-recurrent costs necessary to upgrade Member States' response
capacities from their purely national use to a state of readiness and
availability that makes them deployable as part of the Voluntary Pool
• Transport:
•
Increased transport funding for assets from the Voluntary Pool
European Emergency Response Capacity
The voluntary pool is a
system whereby Member
States can pre-commit
response capacities for EU
missions
In return for this
commitment, Member
States benefit from
financial support for
developing and transporting
these capacities
The quality of the
assistance is ensured
through the establishment of
quality criteria and a
certification process
Buffer capacities
The EU can co-finance up to 40% of the
standby costs of
framework contracts
framework partnership agreements
similar arrangements
to have additional response capacities
available in order to address temporary
shortcomings in extraordinary disasters.
Capacity gaps
Member
states
European
Commission
a process to
identify
potentially
significant
response
capacity gaps
Where necessary, the Commission may
support Member States in addressing these
gaps by providing seed-funding for the
development of new response capacities up
to a maximum of 20% of the eligible costs.
International elements
• Requests through or by the United Nations and its agencies,
or a relevant international organization
•
•
Coordinating function of UN OCHA
Possible roles for IOM, IFRC, ICRC, OPCW, IAEA
• Possibility to deploy expert missions to advise on disaster
prevention and preparedness at the request of the country
concerned
• Specific prevention and preparedness activities expanded to
the EU Neighbourhood, Art. 28(2)
• Possibility for potential candidate countries to join the
Union Civil Protection Mechanism
Examples of Serbia and Bosnia
Herzegovina – Floods 14 May 2014
• 1.5 million people affected in Bosnia Herzegovina
• 1.6 million people affected in Serbia
• Activation of the CPM on May 16: 22 Members
States offered assistance through the CPM
• 2 EU Civil Protection teams sent on the ground
• 500 relief workers from the Member States
deployed through the CPM
• Constant contact between the ERCC, participating
states and the two affected countries.
• EUFOR Althea and EULEX participation
EU Crisis
management:
Civil military
relations
Map of current
CSDP missions
Role of military in humanitarian aid
• Military capacities can supplement civil protection and
humanitarian assistance by filling certain critical
capacity gaps  natural disasters vs complex
emergencies
• Provided that conditions are respected, military
capacities can play a role in very specific
circumstances:
1)It can contribute to the provision of relief;
2)It can contribute to the provision of security;
UN Guidelines
• Complex Emergencies:
 MCDA Guidelines: The Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to
Support United Nations Humanitarian Activities in Complex
Emergencies (March 2003)
 Country Specific Guidelines (Iraq, 2004, Afghanistan 2001)
• Natural, Technological, Environmental Disasters:
 Oslo Guidelines: The Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets in
Disaster Relief (May 1994)
29
MCDA and Oslo Guidelines
 In order to avoid a blurring of roles between military operations and
humanitarian aid/civil protection, military assets and capabilities
should only be used when the following conditions are met:
 'last resort’, i.e. no comparable civilian alternative ->UNOCHA to
request
 civilian nature and command of the operation
 the primary responsibility of the affected State and overall role of
the UN are respected
 no cost to the humanitarian actor/affected State
30
Cooperation between CSDP
missions and humanitarian aid
PoC
• Artemis, EUFOR DRC, EUFOR Chad/CAR, EUFOR CAR
• EUPOL DRC, EUMM Georgia
Support to humanitarian aid
• EUFOR Libya
• EUNAVFOR Atalanta
Promotion of IHL, principles and civmil practice
• EUTM Mali, EUTM Somalia
EU Comprehensive Approach
Crisis
•
Diplomatic
actions
Humanitarian
Assistance
Range of EU options
Economic
Sanctions
CSDP
Activity
Development
Aid
political
framework
for
crisis approach
Conflict
Prevention
measures
JHA, TRADE,
CLIMA,…
In But Out
In
Out
• assess situation and ring the alarm
bells (as we did in CAR); to help
formulate key messages on issues like
IHL (as we do in Syria); to help
mobilize our political and development
colleagues when needed.
• HA cannot be put under any political
objective. It needs its neutrality,
impartiality and independence to be
able to act in conflict. It is often the
only tangible symbol of EU solidarity.
Disaster risk
reduction at
international level
What has been the EU's role in
promoting a Post Hyogo Framework
for Action?
The Hyogo Framework for Action
• Objective: to reduce disaster losses by building
the resilience of nations and communities to
disasters before 2015
• First plan to detail the work required from all
different sectors and actors to reduce disaster
losses
• Five priorities for action
The EU in the HFA revision process
• Ambitious EU position in helping shape pre-Sendai 2015
oActive role in revision process
oBuilding on active EU contribution to current HFA
oBuilding on EU experiences
• Commission Communication on post-HFA
oDefining EU position – contributing to sustainable development
oIdentifying progress and challenges in disaster management
oIdentifying Principles for the new Framework
oExplaining EU disaster risk management policy and resilience agenda
 Policy achievements
 EU support to developing countries with focus on building
resilience in crisis prone countries
5 principles of the new framework
for Sendai:
 Improving accountability, transparency and governance
 A framework to deliver results - role of targets and
indicators to measure progress and encourage
implementation
 Strengthening the contribution to sustainable and smart
growth
 Addressing vulnerabilities and needs in a comprehensive
framework
 Ensuring coherence with the international agenda
EU disaster prevention activities
• Risk assessments: EU overview based on national risk
assessments by end-2013
• Good practice guidelines: exchange of prevention practices
focusing on five cross-cutting themes: governance,
planning, disaster data, risk communication and
information, and research and technology transfer (by late
2013)
• Disaster data study and steps towards European standards
• Mainstreaming: cohesion policy, environmental impact
assessments, climate change adaptation etc.
• Peer reviews
EU financial support to DRR in
developing countries
oSHARE
oAGIR
oGCCA
oDisaster
Resilience in
ACP countries
oDIPECHO
programme
Thank you
for your
attention
European Commission