EU (Union Civil Protection Mechanism) - Hoofdinhoud

Dit is een beperkte versie

U kijkt naar een beperkte versie van dit dossier in de EU Monitor.

dossier	COM(2025)548 - Union Civil Protection Mechanism and Union support for health emergency preparedness and response, and repealing Decision No ...
bron	COM(2025)548
datum	16-07-2025

1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

The proposed Regulation builds on the legal framework established by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (hereafter ‘the Union Mechanism’) as well as on Regulation (EU) 2021/522 establishing a Programme for the Union’s action in the field of health (‘EU4Health Programme’) for the period 2021-2027. It introduces a framework for civil protection and the financing of health emergency preparedness and response with a view of using synergies and supporting an improved coordination across sectors. This aims to improve the overall effectiveness in supporting the prevention, preparation for, and response to natural and human-induced hazards, including serious cross-border threats to health and considering the increasingly complex and interconnected nature of risks and threats the Union faces, as highlighted by the European Council's Conclusions in 2023 ¹ and 2024 ² .

Over the last years, Europe has been severely challenged by a worsening risk and threat landscape due to an increasingly volatile mix of security, health, climate change and environmental challenges. The sharply increased number of activations of the Union Mechanism indicates that national systems are likely to continue asking for enhanced support in responding to disasters and crises. Therefore, the Union-level coordination mechanism needs to be adequately equipped to act more efficiently and effectively in offering such support, including by strengthening prevention and preparedness.

Furthermore, the multifaceted nature of cross-sectoral crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine demands a more comprehensive and integrated approach to crisis management, necessitating close and efficient cooperation between the Union and its Member States to effectively navigate the challenges they present. The current geopolitical context necessitates the strengthening of Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness, as called for in the Preparedness Union Strategy ³ and Joint White Paper on European Defence Readiness 2030 ⁴ .

Effective crisis management will require close coordination between civilian and military actors to ensure seamless and efficient operations for civil and military efforts. This cooperation is particularly crucial for issues with a strong dual-use dimension, where civilian and military actors rely on shared infrastructures, such as transportation networks and logistics hubs. By working together, civilian and military actors can ensure that their respective efforts are well coordinated and complementary, ultimately enhancing the overall response to the crisis. Therefore, an important objective of the proposal is to ensure that the Regulation can offer more efficient and effective support to such complex, high impact crises ⁵ and its all-hazard, whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach it should forge stronger links between civil protection, health, environment, and security making available simplified and more flexible arrangements to effectively and efficiently address complex cross-sectoral and long-lasting crises.

The integration of health emergency preparedness and response measures into this proposal provides an additional layer of protection of EU citizens, ultimately enhancing resilience and safeguarding the population against serious health threats. Health emergencies can have far-reaching impacts beyond the health sector, affecting social stability, environmental balance or critical infrastructure. Health emergency preparedness and response actions will continue to be coordinated within current structures, including the Health Security Committee and the HERA Board.

Furthermore, together with related horizontal requirements and other programmes, the proposal supports and promotes measures to anticipate and prevent disasters, contributing to reduce their costs to the Union economy, and minimise their adverse social, economic, and environmental impact on the most vulnerable regions and people including women, children, older persons, refugees, people with a minority racial or ethnic background and persons with disabilities. This will ultimately contribute to a more sustainable and inclusive growth as well as intergenerational fairness. The proposal also makes a significant contribution to simplification, merging into a single text the provisions relating to the functioning of the Union Mechanism and those relating to the financing of its activities, thus simplifying existing procedures. Moreover, by ensuring that investments under the Union Mechanism also strengthen the competitiveness and resilience of the Union’s industrial base, it lays the ground for more strategic, reliable and autonomous responses, including, in line with Union law and international commitments, by promoting the use of solutions developed or produced in the Union.

The proposal recognises that individuals may experience multiple and intersecting forms of vulnerability and therefore promotes an intersectional approach to disaster risk management to ensure no one is left behind.

• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

This proposal builds on the positive results delivered under the existing framework so far, and intends to correct its shortcomings with reinforced provisions, to continue supporting, coordinating and complementing the action of the Member States in this area. It also builds on the crisis preparedness and response strand of the EU4Health Programme supporting the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2022/2371 on serious cross-border threats to health ⁶ , and Regulation (EU) 2022/2372 on a framework of measures for ensuring the supply of crisis-relevant medical countermeasures ⁷ in the event of a public health emergency at Union level, and other initiatives to enhance health emergency preparedness and response. It should ensure synergies with the crisis related mandates of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the European Medicines Agency, as well as relevant national and international organisations. This aims to ensure that the Union's health emergency preparedness and response are fortified alongside civil protection measures. The proposed Regulation continues to align with existing policies by enhancing preparedness, prevention, and response capabilities among Member States. It upholds the commitment to greater European solidarity and coordinated efforts, building on the strong foundations of past cooperation and initiatives.

Furthermore, besides the close alignment with the Preparedness Union Strategy, the EU Stockpiling Strategy ⁸ and a Medical Countermeasures Strategy preparing the Union for the next health crisis ⁹ , the Union Mechanism acts in accordance with the EU's Internal Security Strategy ¹⁰ , which aims to ensure a high level of security for Union citizens, and the Joint White Paper on European Defence Readiness 2030 and ReArm Readiness 2030 ¹¹ Plan in support of a stronger European defence posture against external threats. It is also consistent with the Stockpiling and Medical Countermeasures Strategies and supports Union obligations under the European Climate Law ¹² to ensure continuous progress in enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability to climate change.

• Consistency with other Union policies

Under the preparedness by design approach as outlined under the Preparedness Union Strategy, this proposal is designed to promote synergies with other internal and external policy areas under an integrated approach to disaster risk management across relevant sectors and stakeholders, including EU agencies, Member States, and international organisations, and contributing to the implementation of the Union's disaster risk reduction and management policies and of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

Specifically for the external policies, preparedness and resilience of the EU and Member States are increasingly intertwined with those of our partners in the world, who face a similar range of global crises and challenges. Working with our external partners to anticipate, prepare for, prevent and respond to crises is mutually beneficial and fundamental to lower the risk of cascading or spill-over effects for the EU of crises originating elsewhere. In an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, and to tackle global challenges, this proposal complements actions which are to be undertaken under Global Europe, where the EU and Member States will continue to develop and deepen tailored and mutually beneficial bilateral and plurilateral partnership.

The proposal puts particular emphasis on enhancing the Union Mechanism's collaboration with health emergency preparedness and response measures and provision of humanitarian aid. It stresses areas such as public health emergencies; justice and home affairs, including consular assistance and the safeguarding of critical infrastructure; environmental management, with a focus on flood control and preventing major industrial accidents; climate change resilience and preparedness; marine pollution mitigation; external relations and development cooperation, security, defence and space. To maintain coherence and complementarity with other Union financial instruments, the proposal incorporates clear provisions that define the Union Mechanism’s scope, thereby preventing overlaps or any possibility of double funding.

In relation to health security, this proposal complements actions on health security preparedness funded by other Union financial instruments aimed at enhancing the Union’s strategic autonomy and access to health innovation, as provided under the proposed Health, Biotech, Agriculture and Bioeconomy Window of the European Competitiveness Fund and its corresponding window under the proposed Framework Programme for Research Horizon Europe.

The proposal refers to the Union space systems that are fundamental to strengthening the Union’s crisis preparedness and response capabilities. The Preparedness Union Strategy emphasises that Copernicus, Galileo and the upcoming IRIS² services provide real-time situational awareness, support early warnings and reliable communication when terrestrial networks fail. These capabilities are indispensable when coordinating emergency operations, supporting civil protection, including by ensuring timely access to space-based early warning information to disseminate directly alert messages to the population, and mitigating the impacts of natural and human-induced disasters.

2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

• Legal basis

The legal bases of this proposal are Articles 168(5), 196 and 322(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

Article 168(5) TFEU provides a legal basis for incentive measures designed to protect and improve human health and in particular to combat the major cross-border health scourges, measures concerning monitoring, early warning of and combating serious cross-border threats to health.

Article 196 TFEU provides a legal basis for Union initiatives to enhance cooperation and collective preparedness among Member States in managing prevention, preparedness and response to natural or human-induced disasters.

These legal bases are combined with Article 322(1) TFEU to enable financial flexibility by providing the possibility to carry-over appropriations.

• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

The Commission has a supporting competence in the area of civil protection. Member States bear the primary responsibility when it comes to preventing, preparing for and responding to disasters. The Union Mechanism was established because major disasters can overwhelm the response capacities of any Member State acting alone while health emergency preparedness and response measures ensure a more robust coordination and cooperation, in particular regarding the availability and access to relevant medical countermeasures against existing and emerging health threats. The provision of well-coordinated and rapid mutual assistance amongst Member States is at its core.

The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting on their own. Union action in this field involves managing situations with a strong cross-sectoral and trans-boundary dimension, which necessarily require overall coordination and concerted action beyond the national level.

In cases of complex transboundary emergencies and crises where the European Union as a whole is affected – such as COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine - a well coordinated collective approach is needed to avoid fragmentation and duplication. The Union can efficiently support Member States in their efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to crises, and continue to promote a culture of prevention and resilience across the EU. The proposal addresses a need that cannot be met by Member States acting alone and provides a clear Union added value.

The benefit of EU action includes reducing the loss of human life, environmental, economic, and material damage, allowing Member States to contribute more effectively to EU assistance under the Mechanism and to benefit from improved coordination and cooperation, increasing the level of preparedness for large-scale disasters and creating a more coherent disaster risk management policy, and pursuing economies of scale, such as cost-effective logistics and transport, coherent and effective response through the voluntary pool of capacities, and better use of scarce resources by sharing EU-funded capacities. It supports protecting also EU financial interest by promoting measures that increase structural preparedness and resilience and thus reduce losses of EU-financed assets in disasters. Similar benefits can be achieved by enhancing cooperation and coordination in preparedness and response to threats to health. Virus do not know borders, and as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic, only coordinated action at EU level ensured the development, manufacturing and equitable distribution of vaccines and other relevant medical countermeasures to all EU Member States.

• Proportionality

In accordance with the principle of proportionality, this proposal does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives. The principle of proportionality has guided the Commission's design of the proposed Regulation, which aims to identify and enable synergies with other programmes and to strengthen collaboration with the Member States in defining priorities for it.

The proposal is proportionate and seeks to increase participation of Member States in the actions it supports by lowering as much as possible the barriers to participation. It provides for a reduction of administrative burden on the Union and national authorities that has been limited to what is necessary for the Commission to exercise its responsibility for implementing the Union budge. It does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the established objectives.

• Choice of the instrument

To ensure general application and financial flexibility, the proposal is a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council. The form of Regulation as a legal act is compatible with the requirements governing carry-over of appropriations laid out in the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union. The proposal Regulation aims to replace and repeal the Decision No 1313/2013/EU.

3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation

The Regulation implements findings and recommendations of the “Interim Evaluation of the implementation of Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism, 2017-2022” and the “HERA review: Taking stock to reinforce health security in the EU” (2024), as well as preliminary findings of the “Evaluation of the EU4Health Programme” and the “Evaluation of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2022/2371” on serious cross-border threats to health.

• Stakeholder consultations

The Commission has conducted a specific open public consultation on the ‘EU funding for civil protection, preparedness and response to crises. The survey was open to all EU citizens, businesses, associations, government bodies and has received 1,187 responses of which a total of 139 had attached position papers.

• Collection and use of expertise

The Commission has organised over the past years several meetings with external stakeholders, experts in civil protection representing Member States: Heads of civil protection services and high-ranking officials for civil protection as well as thematic experts to discuss specific topics relating to the revision of the legal framework.

• Impact assessment

In preparation of the proposal, the Commission carried out an Impact Assessment to identify problems, define objectives of the proposal as well as to establish several options for the improvement and to assess their impact. The RSB Opinion as well as the summary report can be found in the Register of Commission Documents , under the reference 2025/MFF/05.

2. The impact assessment analysed three policy options:

Under Option 1, a strengthened sectoral UCPM, including a targeted strengthening of the ERCC, was put forward. Activities at EU-level need to be complemented by significant efforts at national level, including with view to response capacities, which at EU level are limited to the ‘traditional’ civil protection sector (medical stockpiles, chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CBRN) stockpiles, aerial forest firefighting, etc.). While increased national efforts allow to successfully address all objectives, the added value of EU-level action is not fully utilised. As a result, this option was considered to lack in effectiveness, efficiency, external coherence, and simplification, compared to Option 2.

Under Option 2, a cross-sectoral UCPM brings together UCPM and relevant activities for public health security preparedness. Compared to Option 1, synergies and complementarities between civil protection and health emergency preparedness activities are achieved through a single instrument. The integrated budget structure ensures flexibility and agility in the management of the instrument. Option 2 foresees the establishment of an EU crisis coordination hub, thus becoming the central EU capacity for cross-sectoral risk preparedness, including stockpiling, and crisis management coordination. Response capacities at EU level are adapted to the new hazard and threat landscape. An EU risk assessment exploits synergies and complementarities of sectoral assessments and expertise. Further pertinent health emergency activities are encompassed to combat serious cross-border threats to health in line with the general cross-sectoral nature of the initiative.

Policy option 3 entails as its main element the creation of a single funding instrument (Preparedness Fund) at EU level comprising all preparedness-relevant mechanisms and activities for the entire MFF. This fund will subsume all preparedness- related mechanisms and funding elements of the current MFF, including but not limited to UCPM, the EU4Health crisis preparedness strand, and preparedness-relevant elements in the National Envelopes, the European Competitiveness Fund, and Erasmus+. In terms of structure, this would imply that the various management modes of the programmes are all used within this single fund: direct (implemented by the Commission), shared (e.g. structural funds) and indirect (e.g. different organisations of the UN system such as WHO, UNHCR, UNICEF). This option would bring about inherent fundamental challenges, including in the management of the budget allocations for all funding programmes and instruments. Policy Option 3 is considered non-viable and was thus discarded at an early stage.

Inhoudsopgave

The preferred policy option and its main impacts
The impact assessment analysed three policy options:

1. The preferred policy option and its main impacts

The preferred policy option was considered to be Option 2 as it fully utilises the EU added value and, in doing so, comprehensively achieves the objectives. In the context of a crisis landscape that is becoming more multi-dimensional, and cross-border, opting for policy option 2 brings about important social (e.g. higher common denominator in population preparedness), environmental (e.g. more successful preservation of natural spaces and biodiversity), as well as economic (e.g. costs associated with comprehensive prevention and preparedness are significantly lower than those for response) benefits.

• Regulatory fitness and simplification

The proposal implements significant improvements to streamline and simplify the overall legal framework, including, in particular, enhanced operational clarity and efficiency. For example, risk reporting procedures have been centralised into a dedicated structure, elucidating the collaborative production of deliverables by Member States and the Commission, thereby promoting a shared understanding of risk awareness.

In addition, Union support for response is unified within a single article, simplifying the identification of possible operational scenarios, which enhances readiness and response effectiveness. The coordination efforts are strengthened and better clarified by enhancing further the capabilities of the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) and creating a specialised crisis coordination hub to support Member States on anticipating and managing the consequences of crises across sectors. The response layer is complemented by clarity on applicable co-financing rates, by integrating them cohesively into one comprehensive reference point, superseding the need for multiple article consultations. Emphasising transport flexibility, the Regulation allows for financeable actions where no commercial transport options are viable but where Member State alternatives are available, a measure that rewards innovative state solutions and underscores adaptable strategies.

These enhancements reflect a committed effort to refine the Union Mechanism’s structural and operational frameworks, ensuring they are both adaptable and robust in addressing the complexities of both anticipated and unforeseen emergencies. This cohesive approach aligns with the overarching goal of creating a more effective and transparent civil protection framework. Further dialogue and feedback are encouraged to ensure the alignment of these strategies with practical operational needs.

• Fundamental rights

The legal revisions of the Union Mechanism and the proposed support measures in the area of health preparedness and response are designed to align with and uphold the fundamental rights as outlined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This memorandum details how these revisions integrate key fundamental rights.

The right to life (Article 2) is a primary focus, as the objective of the proposal is to protect and preserve human life during disasters and emergencies. By streamlining procedures, the amendments aim to enhance the Union Mechanism's responsiveness, directly supporting the protection of life through efficient disaster management.

Rights to liberty and security (Article 6) are also central to the proposal. The improvements ensure timely responses to threats, thereby enhancing both individual and collective security across the Union. These improvements help safeguard citizens by ensuring rapid deployment and coordination during crises.

Attention to the right to health care (Article 35) involves clarifying the Union Mechanism’s role in ensuring robust public health responses. Particularly during health-related emergencies, these revisions enhance cross-border cooperation and resource allocation, thereby supporting health as a fundamental right.

The fundamental right to environmental protection, as enshrined in Article 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, plays a crucial role within the framework of the Union Mechanism. This mechanism, which is designed to support coordinated responses to natural and human-induced disasters across the EU and beyond, must inherently include the protection of the environment as a core component of its operations. Environmental protection is particularly relevant in all three phases of disaster management, including as regards serious threats to health: prevention, to reduce the likelihood and impact of environmental hazards; preparedness, to ensure systems are in place to mitigate damage to ecosystems and biodiversity; and response, to swiftly address environmental harm resulting from disasters such as forest fires, chemical spills, or floods. Recognising environmental protection as a fundamental right reinforces the obligation of EU institutions and Member States to integrate ecological considerations into civil protection policies and actions.

Embracing a whole-of-society approach, the revisions of the Union Mechanism reinforce the fundamental right to equality (Chapter III) ensuring that the needs of women and groups in situation of vulnerability and/or facing discrimination and social exclusion - such as children, older people, persons with disabilities, people with a minority racial or ethnic background - are taken into consideration across all phases of prevention, preparedness and response.

Additionally, the right to good administration (Article 41) is evident in the emphasis on procedural clarity and simplification. These changes ensure that the mechanism operates transparently and efficiently, creating a reliable framework for emergency response.

These revisions reflect a fundamental rights-based approach to enhancing the Union Mechanism ensuring that it supports the protective capacity and values embedded in the EU Charter. Further feedback and discussion are encouraged to refine these strategies to best uphold and serve the fundamental rights of all individuals.

This proposal considers the obligations stemming from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), to which the EU is party alongside all Member States. In particular, Article 11 of the Convention on Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies indicates that States Parties shall take, in accordance with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk.

4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

The indicative financial envelope under this Regulation amounts to EUR 10 675 000 000 (current prices).

5. OTHER ELEMENTS

• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

Based on Chapter II of the regulation on risk assessment and anticipation, the policy development process under this revised proposed regulation involves several key elements and reports, which are aligned in reporting cycles and sequenced to ensure a cyclical and effective approach to disaster risk management.

The process begins at the national level, where Member States are responsible for developing and making risk assessments at the national or sub-national level publicly available. These risk assessments inform the development of disaster risk management planning, including security risks and hybrid threats, which considers cross-border collaboration and risks with transboundary effects. Such assessments and plans should be consistent and coordinated with other relevant national processes. Additionally, and as a pre-requisite to informed risk assessments, Member States are expected to improve their collection of disaster loss data.

At least once every five years, Member States submit summaries of their risk assessments, response capabilities, and activities supporting Union disaster resilience goals to the Commission. The Commission further develops the guidelines for the submission of these summaries, ensuring that the process is standardised and effective.

At Union level, the transmission of the requested information and other available data enables the Commission to map risk management capabilities at the Union, national and sub-national levels to facilitate best practice exchange and related capacity building. Based on the established risk assessment, the Commission regularly reviews Union wide disaster scenarios for disaster prevention, preparedness, and response, which feed then into the further development of the Union disaster resilience goals as agreed planning assumptions on the disaster risk management capabilities to have in place. With these agreed indicators established, the Commission produces regular reports on the natural and human-induced risks the Union faces, progress made in implementing risk management actions and disaster resilience goals as well as on the response capacities and capabilities needed at Union level to support national action in addressing the evolving risk and threat landscape. This reporting should be consistent and coordinated with other relevant EU-level processes.

This sequencing ensures that national risk assessments and planning are fed into a Union-level assessment and goal-setting process, which in turn informs national actions and capacity building, with regular review and update mechanisms to ensure the policies remain effective and relevant.

The Commission may request additional information from Member States regarding specific prevention and preparedness measures. The Commission can also propose the deployment of experts or make recommendations to strengthen prevention and preparedness levels.

• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

The main novelty of the proposed Regulation is the establishment of the cross-sectoral preparedness layer as well as incorporation of financing for health emergency preparedness and response.

The new preparedness layer aims to fill quantitative and qualitative gaps in the current legal framework. It builds on identified lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic, the recent surge of mpox and recent UCPM operations, in particular as regards complex transboundary crises and the response to needs in relation to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. It reflects research and foresight on Europe’s evolving risk and threat landscape stressing the increasingly systemic nature of risks and increasing impact of cascading effects across sectors. It furthermore considers forward looking reflections with Member States on the need to safeguard the continued functioning of existing civil protection systems in Europe under increasingly complex emergency and crisis scenarios.

As regards quantitative gaps, this new layer should allow to address cross-sectoral high impact crises in a more comprehensive and integrated approach coordinating preparedness and response arrangements more effectively across affected sectors. As regards qualitative gaps, it allows to address risks and threats for which no existing tools are available. This will allow to reduce fragmentation in crisis management structures at EU level, will simplify procedures and use resources more efficiently in addressing in particular emerging security risks related to hybrid threats and critical infrastructure disruptions with cross-sectoral impact.

The health emergency preparedness and response component of the proposed Regulation will improve the financing for surveillance, detection, and understanding of emerging and imminent health threats, and link these insights with medical countermeasures. In close coordination with Member States, it will enhance access to production capacities during crises, and support the procurement, stockpiling, and deployment of medical countermeasures as part of preparedness and response efforts. It will also support knowledge development and capacity of EU Member States to prevent, prepare and respond to serious cross border threats to health.

The ERCC is envisaged to play a key role with an extended new capability of a central EU Crisis Coordination Hub. Its main area of activity aims to focus on a better understanding of crises facilitating more proactive preparedness and response arrangements, cross-sectoral coordination without taking over or duplicating sectoral expertise and improved monitoring while keeping the Member States and decision-makers informed, in respect of competence and responsibility.

Due the support competence in this policy area and related national sensitivities of expanding EU crisis management capabilities, the operational use of response arrangements under this additional preparedness layer should be linked to a trigger mechanism to be activated by the Council and linked to existing procedures such as the activation of the IPCR arrangements or the solidarity clause (under Article 222 TFEU).

Based on lessons learnt, co-financing rates and operational rules set out in Decision No 1313/2013 and under the EU4Health programme will be simplified to allow for more effective and flexible implementation in fast-moving crises. The proposed Regulation, therefore, aims to clarify rules on operationalizing many response actions, such as the establishment of logistical hubs and medical evacuation hubs, medical evacuations proper, prepositioning of response capacities and intervention teams. It will also incorporate private sector donations more clearly under the UCPM, which have been successfully established during operations in response to needs in Ukraine.

Furthermore, the proposed Regulation will better define UCPM support to Member States in their national preparedness cycles. This includes dedicated rules encouraging peer reviews and voluntary assessments of national preparedness systems. The role of the Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network as a pillar of capacity building will be further strengthened as a platform for exchanging expertise, lessons learnt, and innovative practices in disaster risk management, while adding rules on population preparedness and cooperation with key stakeholders (military and private sector) in the context of trainings and exercises.

The proposed Regulation seeks to set a more flexible and integrated budget structure based on its broader objective and preparedness scope. Its enhanced flexibility and responsiveness to high impact crisis and newly emerging threats will need to be accompanied with corresponding prevention and preparedness-related activities, such as anticipation, foresight, and capacity development.