Research Needs in Crisis Management - a European Perspective


Published on

Research Needs in Crisis Management - a European Perspective

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Fraunhofer INT: Trends and Developments in R&T (Technology Analyses and Foresight) Technology Monitoring Technology Foresight In-depth Analyses in selected Technology Areas Plans, Programs & Structures in R&T (Meta Analyses and Planning Support) National Research & Technology (R&T) International R&T Security Research Information Management and Methodology Nuclear Effects & Threats Nuclear Security Policy and Nuclear Detection Radiation Effects in Electronics and Optoelectronics Electromagnetic Effects & Threats EME HPM
  • Social Security European security is inseparable from the social, cultural and political values that distinguish European life in all its diversity. Security research and innovation must address the long-term vulnerability of these values via European economic, cultural, political, and technological systems. Societal Resilience Given the unpredictability of man-made and natural threats, security research and innovation should focus on strengthening Europe’s inherent resilience and ability to efficiently recover from crises by enhancing the cohesiveness and robustness of societal systems and their interface with security technologies. Trust Security implies nurturing trust among people, institutions and technologies. Under conditions of threat trust enhances transparency and social inclusion. It plays a decisive role at the interface between citizens and governments, social services and institutions, information agencies, ICT and other technological systems, and local and global markets. Interoperability Security organizations increasingly face technical, operational, and human interoperability issues at their geographical and organizational borders. A vigorous political will to share assets and standards across Europe will empower us all in jointly handling the security issues posed by a progressively more interlinked world. A systematic approach to capability development The growing complexity of security demands increasing sophistication in strategic foresight and risk assessment, modular generic capabilities and solutions at the system-of-systems level. Industrial policy Europe has a strong extensive industrial capability and knowledge base in the security field, but represents a fragmented market. Rectifying this would open the door to global leadership in the security market, and spawn an efficient European industry, making our society best security solutions available to the world. This ambition requires a clear political choice and a persuasive European industrial policy. Innovation To preserve its security, Europe must have strong in-house scientific, technological and industrial competencies. It is important to capitalize on this knowledge through pooling and clustering to maximize synergy between different technologies, stakeholders and services and in establishing a systematic interaction between demand and supply to ensure that security solutions are effectively tailored to meet operational needs. Security by design Securing the future will require that security be treated as integral part of any given system, process or operation from the point of conceptualization onward. Current add-on security solutions no longer suffice, Europe needs a systemic approach to security. Awareness raising through education and training Education and scenario-based training contribute significantly to the overall acknowledgement and recognition that security is a common responsibility of all stakeholders, especially, policymakers, regulators and citizens.
  • Research Needs in Crisis Management - a European Perspective

    1. 1. ESRIF WG4 Crisis Management Research Needs in Crisis Management – a European Perspective IDRC Davos 2010 – Workshop WED 3.3 Davos, 2nd June 2010 Hans-Martin Pastuszka (Ex-Sherpa ESRIF WG4) Fraunhofer Institute for Technological Trend Analysis (INT), Germany
    2. 2. Profile - Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft - <ul><li>Fraunhofer Institute for Technological Trend Analysis (INT) </li></ul><ul><li>Staff ~ 90, budget ~ 7 M€ p.a. </li></ul><ul><li>Four Business Units: </li></ul><ul><li>- Trends & Developments in R&T - Nuclear Effects, Threats & - Planning, Programs & Structures Detection Systems </li></ul><ul><li> in R&T - Electromagnetic Effects & Threats </li></ul><ul><li>Fraunhofer: a major RTO in Europe undertaking applied research </li></ul><ul><li>59 institutes, staff ~ 17 000, budget ~ 1 600 M€ p.a. </li></ul><ul><li>Main fields of activity: Light & Surfaces </li></ul><ul><li>Information & Communication Tech Production </li></ul><ul><li>Life Sciences Materials & Components </li></ul><ul><li>Microelectronics Defence & Security </li></ul>
    3. 3. Introduction into ESRIF Evolution of Security Research in Europe PASR (2004-2006) 45 M€ time 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 FP7 Security Theme (2007 -2013) 1400 M€ ESRAB report “Meeting the challenge: the European Security Research Agenda” (Oct 2006) ESRAB (2005-2006) “ European Security Research: The Next Steps” (Sept 2004) GoP report “Research for a secure Europe” (March 2004) GoP (2003-2004) ESRIF (2007-2009) “ Fostering Public-Private Dialogue in Security Research and Innovation” (Sept 2007) Various national programmes 2004 SRC’06 Vienna SRC’07 Berlin SRC’08 Paris SRC’09 Stockholm SRC’10 Oostende ESRIF Final Report & Commission’s Initial Position (Dec 2009) 2014
    4. 4. ESRIF European Security Research & Innovation Forum <ul><li>09/2007 – 12/2009 </li></ul><ul><li>Independent, honorary strategy group </li></ul><ul><li>Set up by the Commission, the EU Member States and Associated Countries </li></ul><ul><li>11 working groups, > 600 experts from 31 countries and EU institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions and recommendations on the future strategic orientation of security research & innovation in Europe in the mid- to long-term (up to 2030): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ESRIA: European Security Research & Innovation Agenda </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. ESRIF conclusions Vision & the European Security Research & Innovation Agenda (ESRIA) <ul><li>5 Strategic roadmaps for research & innovation: </li></ul><ul><li>Securing People </li></ul><ul><li>Civil Preparedness </li></ul><ul><li>Crisis Management </li></ul><ul><li>Explosives </li></ul><ul><li>CBRN </li></ul><ul><li>New Technologies, New Threats </li></ul><ul><li>Security of Critical Infrastructures </li></ul><ul><li>Security Economics </li></ul><ul><li>Border Security </li></ul><ul><li>Identity Management and Protection </li></ul><ul><li>Information and Communication Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Space </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence and Forensics </li></ul><ul><li>Informed Decision Making </li></ul>V) Cross-cutting enablers IV) Securing identity, access, movement of people & goods III) Securing critical assets II) Countering different means of attack I) Security Cycle <ul><li>9 Key Messages (Vision): </li></ul><ul><li>Societal Security </li></ul><ul><li>Societal Resilience </li></ul><ul><li>Trust </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Systematic approach to capability development </li></ul><ul><li>Industrial Policy </li></ul><ul><li>Innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Security by design </li></ul><ul><li>Awareness raising through education and training </li></ul>
    6. 6. <ul><li>WG4 composition: </li></ul><ul><li>Chair: Christoph Unger, DE </li></ul><ul><li>(President Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance, BBK) </li></ul><ul><li>Rapporteur: Johannes Prinz, AT </li></ul><ul><li>(Head Corporate Research FREQUENTIS AG) </li></ul><ul><li>Experts (~ 80): </li></ul>WG4 Crisis Management - WG4 in ESRIF context - S: supply side D: demand side CS: civil society S: 67 % D: 32 % CS: 1 % ESRIF methodology:
    7. 7. <ul><li>Maxim: Preparedness to react to man-made and natural catastrophes </li></ul><ul><li>Outcome of initial security policy paper analysis (ca. 40, from EU, Member States and US): </li></ul><ul><li>Main threats in the context of crisis management: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Terrorism & crime attacks, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Humanitarian crises, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Natural disasters, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Major industrial/technical accidents </li></ul></ul>WG4 Crisis Management - Threat analysis - Multi-hazard approach! WG4 task forces! WG4 TF 4.1 Terrorism & Crime TF 4.2 Humanitari-an Crises TF 4.3 Natural Disasters TF 4.4 Industrial Accidents Innovative Concepts
    8. 8. WG4 Crisis Management - Main challenges derived from threat analysis - <ul><li>‘ Scene of incident’ management </li></ul><ul><li>Crowd management and evacuation </li></ul><ul><li>Search and rescue of victims </li></ul><ul><li>Stress and psycho-social support (to first responders and the public) </li></ul><ul><li>Crisis and risk communication (to manage the crisis and to the public) </li></ul><ul><li>Political sensitiveness </li></ul><ul><li>Training and exercises </li></ul><ul><li>Information + communication for early warning, situational awareness and decision making </li></ul><ul><li>Complexity management </li></ul><ul><li>Providing basic help quickly to victims, refugees and IDPs </li></ul><ul><li>Coordination of large numbers of actors (horizontal, vertical) </li></ul><ul><li>Civil-military cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Projection of civil security teams, strategic transport </li></ul><ul><li>Logistics (e.g. sustainability) </li></ul><ul><li>Post–crisis needs assessments for humanitarian aid and reconstruction planning </li></ul>Bold text: most relevant challenges
    9. 9. WG4 Crisis Management - Long-term challenges (2030) - Potential impact on crisis management (CM) ESRIF scenario <ul><li>Thriving economy leads to a tendency to organise civil protection in novel public-private partnerships (PPP) </li></ul><ul><li>“ Innovation” of crisis management ? </li></ul>(N) New welfare for all <ul><li>Tendency of outsourcing CM capabilities to a maximum extent </li></ul><ul><li>Maybe multinational security companies are filling this gap </li></ul><ul><li>“ Blackwaterisation” of crisis management ? </li></ul>(W) The West between threat and attraction <ul><li>Interests-driven military interventions worldwide </li></ul><ul><li>Militarisation of crisis management (consequences: redundancy of civil protection forces, increasing rivalry between them and military?) </li></ul>(M) Multi-polar realism <ul><li>Novel and far reaching CM capabilities on global level </li></ul><ul><li>Globalisation of crisis management (consequences for principle of subsidiarity, role of federalism etc.?) </li></ul>(G) Global governance
    10. 10. WG4 Crisis Management Priority areas for research & innovation Recovery Logistics Medical & Psycho- social Support Resource Management Communication Co-operation Situational Awareness & Decision Making Management Concepts Simulation Planning The Response Forces The Public CM
    11. 11. WG4 Crisis Management - Priorities for research & innovation - <ul><li>Strategic foresight & risk assessment capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Scenario development & analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Concept development & experimentation (CD&E) </li></ul>Strategic planning 3 <ul><li>Simulation-supported training methods (multi-hazard training simulators) </li></ul><ul><li>Methods & tools for structured lessons identified analysis, exchange & integration into planning & training </li></ul><ul><li>Standards, e.g. for PPE </li></ul>Strengthening response forces 2 <ul><li>To analyse how public could be best enabled to actively contribute to crisis overcoming </li></ul><ul><li>To identify the key enablers </li></ul><ul><li>How to best educate, train and prepare the public </li></ul>Enabling the public 1 Research & Innovation Needs Capability Area Prio
    12. 12. WG4 Crisis Management - Priorities for research & innovation (II) - <ul><li>Accurate data compilation depending on processes, workflows & individual needs of users </li></ul><ul><li>New ways of offering information to the user (information overflow) </li></ul>Situational awareness & decision making 6 <ul><li>Flexible co-operation with multiple organisations (multi-dimensional/-national/-agency, remote etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Cross-cultural needs capabilities </li></ul>Co-operation 7 <ul><li>Implementation of modern management concepts & tools </li></ul><ul><li>Novel system-of-system approaches (NEC) </li></ul>Innovative concepts for management 5 <ul><li>Modelling & simulation (M&S) – based supporting tools </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability of different M&S tools </li></ul>Strategy & tactical simulation 4 Research & Innovation Needs Capability Area Prio
    13. 13. WG4 Crisis Management - Priorities for research & innovation (III) - <ul><li>Optimum deployment scenarios of medical & psycho-social intervention forces </li></ul><ul><li>Improved tools & methods of intervention </li></ul>Operations support (medical & psycho-social) 10 <ul><li>Sharing resources among different crisis management actors on different levels </li></ul><ul><li>Joint resource allocation </li></ul>Managing resources 9 <ul><li>Post-crisis needs assessment methods </li></ul><ul><li>Tools for reconstruction & recovery planning </li></ul><ul><li>Structural damage assessment tools etc. </li></ul>Recovery logistics 11 <ul><li>New forms of addressing the public (via all forms of media) </li></ul><ul><li>New forms of addressing the media for the benefit of crisis containment & overcoming </li></ul>Communication with the public & media 8 Research & Innovation Needs Capability Area Prio
    14. 14. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 1: Education, Training & Exercises - <ul><li>Situation: </li></ul><ul><li>Lot of efforts are made already: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>predominantly national trainings & exercises for first responders, civil protection etc., some bi-/multilateral, few “multinational” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>some exchange of experts, lessons learned, best practices … </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Some challenges : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enhancing crisis response capabilities of individuals, families, communities … “the public”! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dedicated education of the public , eventually appropriate inclusion into professional training & exercises </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education and training of policy makers and regulators </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Role of the media </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exchange of experience & knowledge across borders & disciplines </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 1: Education, Training & Exercises (II) - <ul><li>ESRIF main recommendations: </li></ul><ul><li>Development of multi-hazards virtual training environment </li></ul><ul><li>Multiplication of joint training and exercises (multi-agency, multinational) </li></ul><ul><li>Development of supporting tools for scenario evolution forecast , incorporating “uncertainties” </li></ul><ul><li>Need for common (harmonised) training curricula and advanced training concepts (“International Crisis Management Excellence Centre”) </li></ul><ul><li>Need for establishing specialised (e.g. virtual) expert centres , e.g. in CBRN response </li></ul><ul><li>Exploitation of CD&E ( concept development & experimentation ) with M&S (modelling & simulation) support for crisis management demonstrations and experiments </li></ul>
    16. 16. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 2: Communications - <ul><li>Situation: </li></ul><ul><li>Some challenges : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National communication lines and systems for response forces, little or no cross-border interoperability (cf. e.g. TETRA, TETRAPOL radio communication systems) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ First link establishment’ between different services and communities; geographical evolvement of incident impacted area </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New forms of media (twitter, YouTube, etc.) speed up the spread of information worldwide through numerous eye witnesses of an incident </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Impact of mass media coverage : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Way of coverage could help to contain and overcome a crisis situation, or boost it </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>“ Mediatization” of decision making </li></ul></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 2: Communications (II) - <ul><li>ESRIF main recommendations: </li></ul><ul><li>Development of mobile, ad-hoc communication systems </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced energy consumption of communication systems </li></ul><ul><li>SatCom: secure, broad bandwidth </li></ul><ul><li>Harmonisation of emergency languages and used symbols (formatted messaging, dynamic symbolism) </li></ul><ul><li>Automatic translation systems for first responders, improved foreign language education </li></ul><ul><li>Development of news forms of addressing the public and the media by crisis managers </li></ul>
    18. 18. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 3: Cooperation & Coordination - <ul><li>Situation: </li></ul><ul><li>Some challenges : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Growing complexity of crisis management operations (range, scale & rate of incidents, affected population, deployed forces, etc.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited interoperability (technical, semantical, cultural) across disciplines and borders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sometimes too many coordinators in the field: “Who coordinates the coordinators”? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Coordinated use of critical resources , e.g. strategic transport capabilities, landing strips etc. </li></ul></ul>
    19. 19. WG4 Crisis Management - Example: Complexity of information and coordination needs in EU external CM - Rosters of experts, Assessment of research results, Test and Adaptation of technologies Expert Advice, Assessment Missions, Evidence-based analysis Information Requests Work Coordination EU Research projects EU Agencies and Research Centres Commercial Service Providers EU Satellite Centre Technical Depts of Int’ l Orgs (UN, WB, ..) Crisis Platform ENV/MIC ECHO RELEX DEV, AIDCO PSC EU SitCen Int’l Orgs TREN EU Member States JLS SANCO ENTR, RTD, INFSO CIVCOM EUMS Partner Orgs (regional, NGOs) Public Service Providers in MS SG - ARGUS Receive requests, Provide Information Source: DG RELEX (2008) EU Commission layer
    20. 20. Research Needs in Crisis Management - Focus 3: Cooperation & Coordination (II) - <ul><li>ESRIF main recommendations: </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability solutions need to reflect existing and being developed technology, looking at an early stage for interfaces with legacy systems </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on flexible, modular, adaptive systems, e.g. C2/C3/C4ISR </li></ul><ul><li>Increase the functionality of units and technology in terms of multi-use, multi-purpose, multi-task, multi-mission, multi-effect and multi-mode abilities (“multi-x” capability) </li></ul><ul><li>Exploitation of novel system-of-systems approaches , e.g. the NEC concept (how much networking do we need?) </li></ul><ul><li>Joint and multinational training and exercises (like e.g. NATO multinational exercises - “Common shield”, “Combined endeavor”, etc.?) </li></ul>
    21. 21. Contact: Hans-Martin Pastuszka Fraunhofer Institute for Technological Trend Analysis (INT) Appelsgarten 2 53879 Euskirchen, Germany Phone: +49 22 51 18 298 E-Mail: [email_address]
    22. 22. ESRIF - The Concept - Integration Team 11 working groups >600 Working group leaders & rapporteurs European Security Research and Innovation Forum Public Private Dialogue (PPD) European – national (EU MS + Associated Countries*) Demand side – supply side – civil society side 63 Annual public event: SRC’08 SRC’09 Chairman + 2 deputy chairmen + 2 Contact Points EC * associated are: Croatia, FYROM, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey
    23. 23. ESRIF Roadmap „ Security Cycle”