The European Community Civil Protection Mechanism

1
The European Community Civil Protection Mechanism
Coordinating the European response to disasters

• Dr. Peter Billing
• European Commission, Civil Protection Unit
  http//ec.europa.eu/environment/civil/index.htm

2
Structure of Presentation

• General overview of the Community Civil
  Protection Mechanism
• Scope and current activities
• Outlook and Perspectives
• Information tools and instruments
• Concluding remarks

3
General overview Basic facts

• Role and Mandate
• Response facilitating and supporting European
  civil protection assistance in the event of a
  major disaster
• Preparedness training, exercises, exchange of
  experts
• Legal base
• Council Decision of 23 October 2001
• Participating states
• EU 25 5 (Bulgaria, Romania, Iceland,
  Liechtenstein, Norway)
• Budget
• Some 10 mio p.a.
• Geographical scope
• Emergencies both inside and outside the EU

4
THE MONITORING AND INFORMATION CENTRE (MIC)
Heart of the Mechanism

• Based in the European Commission, on duty 24/7
• Entry point for requests for assistance
• Information role analysing and distributing
  reliable info to MS during disasters
• Coordination role despatching expert EU teams,
  matching requests for aid to offers from MS
• Technical support role, e.g. satellite images and
  access to other EC resources
• A one-stop shop for civil protection
  assistance

5
Official request for EU assistance from
affected country
Mechanism activated MIC issues request to
national contact points
Member states assess resources and send offers
back to the MIC
MIC sends info situation reports to MS
MIC appoints EU team on the ground
MIC compiles offers and sends to affected country
Civil Protection phase over handover to
humanitarian teams
Country accepts/rejects offers notifies MIC and
sends further requests
6
European added value

• Avoiding duplication ensuring 2 countries dont
  send the same aid
• Maximising efficiency targeted aid where most
  needed
• One contact point only between EU member states
  and affected country
• Coordination at HQ level
• Coordination on site ensuring teams from the EU
  work together

7
MECHANISM SCOPE

• MIC involved in over 80 emergencies since 2001
• Mechanism called upon on over 40 occasions

8
MIC Disaster Response Activities 2006

• Floods Algeria, Central Europe, Ethiopia
• eg. sandbags, pumping team, aircraft (UNHCR
  request)
• Earthquakes Indonesia Yogyakarta
• eg. mobile clinics, volcano and dam experts (UN
  OCHA/UNEP mission),
• Forest Fires Spain
• eg. fire fighting aircraft
• Crisis Lebanon /Cyprus
• eg. Dispatch of coordination experts to
  facilitate evacuation and delivery of assistance,
  satellite images (with UN OCHA), oil cleanup
  experts and equipment
• Environmental accidents
• eg. specialists and material to manage oil spills
  etc. Lebanon, Philippines, Ivory Coast

9
MIC Preparedness Activities

• Financing Simulation Exercises
• eg. to accelerate response, contingency planning
• 2006 exercises in Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy
• Training
• Community Mechanism Induction Course (CMI)
• Operational Management Course (OPM)
• Assessment Mission Course (AMC) Staff
  Management Course (SMC)
• High Level Co-ordination Course (HLC) High
  Level Co-ordination - Refresher Courses (HLCR)
• Exchange of Experts
• secondment of national civil protection experts

10
Civil protection action programme

• supports and supplement efforts at national,
  regional and local levels
• actions for the protection of persons, property
  and environment in the event of natural and
  technological disasters
• covers initiatives dealing with prevention,
  preparedness and response to disasters,
  information and awareness-raising activities
• specific thematic priorities/actions are set
  every year
• ends 2006

11
Outlook and Perspectives Adding Further Value
to the Mechanism

• Member States have clearly stated the added value
  of the Mechanism
• Any Member State may face one day a disaster that
  overwhelms its national response capacities and
  require assistance from its neighbours.
• Through the Mechanism, we have proven that by
  working together and pooling resources the EU can
  achieve significantly more than Member States
  could accomplish on their own.
• Experience has also demonstrated the vast
  potential of this instrument as a single European
  platform for all Member States civil protection
  assistance during emergencies in third countries.
  
• European Council and the European Parliament call
  for an even more robust European civil protection
  response to disasters
• Commission presented proposals to meet this
  request

12
The Commission Proposals

• Five key elements
• Enhancing transport capacities available under
  the Mechanism and creating a safety net at EU
  level.
• Playing a more active role in logistics.
• Mobilising additional equipment for the benefit
  of the affected country.
• Refining the coordination arrangements to improve
  the effectiveness of interventions in third
  countries.
• Enhancing the monitoring and analytical capacity
  of the MIC

13
Commission proposals

• Transport
• Responsibility of national civil protection
  authorities
• Risks transport not always available,
  insufficient or viable
• Better pooling
• Commission should have the right to hire the
  necessary transport means as a safeguard measure
  if not other means are available and assistance
  is urgently required
• Logistics and equipment
• Equipment provided by national authorities
• Risks in simultaneous or large-scale disasters,
  some equipment might not be readily available
• Commission should be allowed to mobilise
  additional equipment (eg fire fighting aircraft)

14
The Commission Proposals

• Strengthening co-ordination - develop roles of
• Presidency (political)
• Commission (operational)
• MIC on-site teams (risks communication failures)
• Improve monitoring, early warning and alerting
• Risks potential impact of a disaster not
  realized
• improve link between detection systems alert
  mechanisms
• make systems more accessible to decision-makers
  (eg. integrate existing systems into a common
  platform accessible through CECIS)
• More systematic use of GIS-based tools

15
Example Common Emergency Communication and
Information System (CECIS)
16
Other examples
MIC daily - monitoring disasters
Assessing fire risk EFFIS
17
Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System
(GDACS)
18
New tools (experimental stage)

• Upgrade of MIC Daily into a fully integrated,
  all-disaster monitoring tool
• Establishment of MIC Flash, a targeted rapid
  alert instrument
• Establishment of MIC in a box real-time
  feedback from disaster areas
• Adaptation of Inter-Active Disaster Analysis
  System (IDAS) for rapid assessment and simulation
  purposes

19
New tools IDAS damage assessment in a given
area
20
Concluding remarks

• The European Council and the EP have repeatedly
  called upon the Commission and the Member States
  to develop an "EU rapid response capability".
• The Commission has made appropriate proposals
  focusing on the key areas for improvement
• Transport logistics
• Modules
• Coordination
• Monitoring and analysis
• These proposals are now being discussed in the
  European Council

21
http//ec.europa.eu/environment/civil/index.htm pe
ter.billing_at_ec.europa.eu

• Thank you for your attention