Challenges and the Road Ahead for Civil Protection Cooperation in the EU

  • Sten WidmalmEmail author
  • Charles F. Parker
  • Thomas Persson
Part of the European Administrative Governance book series (EAGOV)


In the final chapter, the authors summarize and make sense of the book's overall findings and discuss the factors which condition EU cooperation in the area of civil protection and crisis management. They also discuss the implications of the study's findings for evaluating the recent developments in civil protection cooperation and why what they have found should inform what the EU and its member states should concentrate on when planning for the future. Here the authors focus on the European Commission’s proposed rescEU plans for building an even stronger collective European response to disasters. The authors use the final conclusions to discuss how much cooperation within the Union can be sensibly expected in this area and which cleavages and barriers must be overcome.


  1. Alter, C., & Hage, J. (1992). Organizations Working Together: Coordination of Interorganizational Networks. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Ansell, C., Boin, A., & Keller, A. (2010). Managing Transboundary Crises: Identifying the Building Blocks of an Effective Response System. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 18(4), 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernitz, U., Mårtensson, M., Oxelheim, L., & Persson, T. (Eds.). (2018). Bridging the Prosperity Gap in the EU: The Social Challenge Ahead. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Boin, A., Ekengren, M., & Rhinard, M. (2013). The European Union as Crisis Manager: Patterns and Prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boin, A., Busuioc, M., & Groenleer, M. (2014). Building European Union Capacity to Manage Transboundary Crises: Network or Lead-Agency Model? Regulation & Governance, 8(4), 418–436.Google Scholar
  6. Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. H. (2016a). Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy. Public Administration Review, 76(6), 887–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christensen, T., Danielsen, O. A., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. (2016b). Comparing Coordination Structures for Crisis Management in Six Countries. Public Administration, 94(2), 316–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Comfort, L., Boin, A., & Demchak, C. (2010). Designing Resilience. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. European Commission. (2017a, February 17). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress Made and Gaps Remaining in the European Emergency Response Capacity.Google Scholar
  10. European Commission. (2017b). rescEU: European Commission Proposes to Strengthen EU Disaster Management. Retrieved from
  11. European Commission. (2017c). rescEU: A New European System to Tackle Natural Disasters. Retrieved from
  12. European Commission. (2017d, November 23). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Committee of the Regions, Strengthening EU Disaster Management: rescEU Solidarity with Responsibility, Brussels, COM(2017) 773 final.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2017e, November 23). Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism, Brussels, COM(2017), 772 final 2017/0309 (COD).Google Scholar
  14. European Court of Auditors. (2016). Special Report: Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Retrieved from
  15. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  16. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2004). Government by Network. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  17. Greve, C., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. H. (2016). Nordic Administrative Reforms: Lessons for Public Management. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hammerschmid, G., Van de Walle, S., Andrews, R., & Bezes, P. (Eds.). (2016). Public Administration Reforms in Europe: The View from the Top. Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Hood, C. (2011). The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Juncker, J. C. (2016, September 14). Towards a Better Europe—A Europe That Protects, Empowers and Defends, State of the Union Speech. Strasbourg. Retrieved from
  21. Kramer, R. (1999). Trust and Distrust in Organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kramer, R. (2004). Collective Paranoia: Distrust between Social Groups. In R. Hardin (Ed.), Distrust (pp. 136–166). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  23. Krastev, I. (2017). After Europe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muñoz, J., Torcal, M., & Bonet, E. (2011). Institutional Trust and Multilevel Government in the European Union: Congruence or Compensation? European Union Politics, 12(4), 551–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Norris, P. (2017). The Conceptual Framework of Political Support. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust (pp. 19–32). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Painter, M., & Peters, G. B. (Eds.). (2010). Tradition and Public Administration. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Persson, T., Parker, C., & Widmalm, S. (2017). Social Trust, Impartial Administration and Public Confidence in EU Crisis Management Institutions. Public Administration, 95(1), 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peters, B. G. (2010). The Politics of Bureaucracy—An Introduction to Comparative Public Administration (6th ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  31. Rothstein, B. (2011). The Quality of Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rothstein, B., & Uslaner, E. (2005). All for All. Equality, Corruption, and Social Trust. World Politics, 58(1), 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rykkja, L. H., & Lægreid, P. (2014). Coordinating for Crisis Management in Norway after the Terrorist Attack in 2011. In P. Lægreid, K. Sarapuu, L. H. Rykkja, & T. Randma-Liiv (Eds.), Organizing for Coordination in the Public Sector: Practices and Lessons from 12 European Countries (pp. 66–77). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Thompson, N., & Vogelstein, F. (2018). Inside the Two Years That Shook Facebook—And the World. Wired, December 2. Retrieved June 29, 2018, from
  35. Walsh, D. (2017). Rethinking Hierarchy in the Workplace. Stanford Graduate School of Business, September 15. Retrieved June 29, 2018, from
  36. Zaun, N. (2018). States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non-Adoption of a Refugee Quota System. Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(1), 44–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sten Widmalm
    • 1
    Email author
  • Charles F. Parker
    • 2
  • Thomas Persson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GovernmentUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Government Centre of Natural Hazards and Disaster Science (CNDS)Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations