Strengthening European Union’s future disaster resilience
Strengthening European Union’s future disaster resilience
A strategic foresight study identifying priority capabilities and emerging technologies towards 2040
Tasoulas, V., Skiadaresis, G., De Maleville, A., Favino, R., Redecke, C. et al.
Publications Office of the European Union, 2026,
180 p.
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/8720215
selected aspects:
document page 34/35:
Critical Communications
- The EU Critical Communication System (EUCCS)
- IRIS²: the new EU Secure Satellite Constellation
References:
The European Critical Communication System (EUCCS)
Currently, Member States use systems for communication during emergencies that do not work in the territory of other Member States. When crossing an internal border in the EU and Schengen, the communication of first responders currently stops functioning.
That complicates the international collaboration during daily operations, and even more during disasters and major incidents.
The EUCCS Preparation Project brings together experts from EU Member States and Schengen countries to test new technologies, ways of working and shared procedures. These could support smoother cooperation and create a more resilient system that emergency responders can rely on in the future.
IRIS²: the new EU Secure Satellite Constellation
Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite
IRIS² which will provide by 2030 a sovereign, secure satellite constellation (of up to 290 satellites) underpinning resilient connectivity for crisis management
https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/eu-space/iris2-secure-connectivity_en
document pages 56/57
4.2.2. Advanced sensors combined with satellite technology, IoT, UAVs to
What is new is the shift from stand-alone monitoring tools to integrated, near-real-time ecosystems that combine Earth observation, in situ sensors, IoT devices, UAV platforms and AI-based analytics. Advances in remote sensing, low-power communications, cloud and edge computing, and predictive analytics make it possible to fuse multiple data streams and update risk information continuously rather than periodically. This improves both the temporal and spatial resolution of monitoring and supports dynamic risk mapping, more adaptive decision support and faster warning generation. Recent work highlights how Earth observation, Geographical Information Systems (GIS), AI, drones and real-time monitoring tools are increasingly combined for risk mapping, hazard tracking and early warning, while systems approach help connect data collection, processing and actionable decision-making across the warning chain.
Document pages 62/63
Hyper-Realistic City-Scale Digital Twin for Multi-Hazard Urban Resilience
Recent advances in edge computing, high-speed connectivity, artificial intelligence, and data integration standards have made it increasingly feasible to create highly realistic digital twins that are updated continuously through live data streams rather than remaining static 3D models. Urban digital twins are therefore moving beyond visualisation towards dynamic simulation, predictive analytics, and decision support across multiple interconnected urban systems. The novelty lies in their ability to integrate environmental, infrastructure, and socio-economic data into a single evolving model, allowing decision-makers to analyse how disruptions propagate across sectors and scales and to test alternative preparedness and response strategies before crises occur.
They also introduce notable cybersecurity and privacy risks, since sensitive real-time urban data may be centralised and thus more vulnerable to potential breaches. Furthermore, validating these systems is inherently complex: the non-linear, multi-scale nature of the models makes accuracy difficult to ensure, and low-quality input data can easily lead to “Garbage In, Garbage Out” outcomes. Finally, persistent interoperability challenges between legacy systems and heterogeneous data sources continue to restrict the scalability and seamless integration of digital twin implementations.
Document page 129
Methodological limitations
Several methodological constraints should be acknowledged when interpreting the findings of this study.
Sample sizes and expert selection.
The preliminary survey (N=7), designed primarily as a filtering instrument to reduce the initial signal set, necessarily relied on a small expert panel; the scores from this round should be interpreted as indicative screening assessments rather than definitive rankings. The interview round (N=9) complemented this filtering with qualitative depth but equally reflects a limited number of expert perspectives. The broader panel of the final survey — circulated across CERIS, EU-CIP, DIREKTION, AHEAD networks and JRC — yielded 18 complete responses.
——————————————————————————————
Remarks:
A periodic (annual? Bi-Annual?) report on “Strengthening European Union’s future disaster resilience” is very welcome!
Nevertheless, this first compilation raises a number of questions mainly in connection with what the study calls “methodological limitations”, especially about the low numbers of sample sizes and expert selection.
This goes together with limited numbers of authors quoted in some parts of the study, which in consequence leads to not really adequate coverage of available competences and best practice in the various European Union member states.
Yes, and communication is not only about Technology. And no, please not only mention Interoperability but cover all the intricacies that need to be overcome when dealing with all “Situations of Exceptional Need” (EU Data Act) in an “all-of-society” way, in order to handle the really challenging complexities of Content. Insofar, there is an obvious mismatch in Programs/Funding/Recommendations envisaged for the next years in this study.
Looking forward to the next versions of this challenging strategic foresighting study
Horst Kremers (Berlin)
