A series of transboundary crises and disasters has increased pressure on European states to cooperate in the realm of crisis and disaster management. The European Union has taken an active role to connect national capacities of member states. Little is known, however, about the compatibilities of national civil protection systems. This article attempts to fill that void. We draw on a comparative study on 22 European states and highlight similarities as well as patterns of variation. We explore how different states define the role of government during crises and disasters; we map the administrative structures and procedures in place to provide civil security. We also assess the quality of these systems. Our findings reveal that administrative responsibilities, legal frameworks and operational practices differ markedly, as the national systems are rooted in national contexts and historical experiences. In the light of our findings, we contemplate what role the EU can play to build joint transboundary crisis management capacity.
After clarifying the ideal-typical characteristics of action plans, this contribution shows how the Action Plan on Combating Terrorism emerged out of a hectic process of policy-entrepreneurship by the European Commission and other integration-minded actors. This overloaded the EU's policy-making capacity and fostered policy conflict, while the strategic dimension was neglected. Copyright (c) 2008 The Author(s); Journal compilation (c) 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Critical infrastructure protection (CIP) constitutes a paradigmatic as well as challenging case for EU security governance, which has received limited academic attention to date. This article draws on a heuristic framework to survey the EU's capacities to 'meta-govern', that is, to stimulate and steer governance efforts across multiple sectoral and political divides, in this complex issue area. The main part of the paper assesses the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), which comprises a variety of policy instruments and initiatives, on this basis. It is shown that the attempt of an authoritative regulation of European critical infrastructures has remained narrow and of questionable effectiveness. Scientific networks have developed more dynamically, while the participation of private companies and corresponding EU financial instruments are yet to show their potential. Finally, the EU's organizational capacity in CIP suffers from a lack of coordination structures in the European Commission, but also needs to take the scarcely known Joint Research Centre (JRC) into account. The conclusions highlight the barriers to comprehensive governance of as well as large research gaps on European critical infrastructure policies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.