Suchergebnisse

AbstractDespite its rising relevance, the cyber crisis is a largely unexplored phenomenon empirically and conceptually. This article suggests that cyber crises can be understood specifically as transboundary crises. Through the comparative analysis of two cases of cyber crises, Estonia 2007 and UK 2017, the study investigates whether the time gap and the difference in cyberattack type between the cases (untargeted ransomware vs. targeted DDoS) correlate with variation in transboundary crisis features and crisis management challenges during the performance of central crisis management tasks in the national settings of the cases. The analysis identifies some variation between the cases in terms of transboundary crisis features but finds that the cases entailed similar prominent crisis management challenges during the performance of central crisis management tasks. Implications are discussed in terms of how to advance our understanding of cyber crises and the practical strategic management requirements they entail.

This article draws on a comprehensive new data set of crisis management capacities at the European Union level to highlight key patterns in their development and use. Organised within the categories of detection, sense-making, decision-making, coordination, meaning-making, communication, and accountability, the data show considerable accumulation of capacities in detection and sense-making, while decision-making capacities lag behind. We find that most capacities are sector-oriented rather than cross-sectoral, and reside primarily within the European Commission rather than other EU institutions. Comparing the data to previous studies, we note that capacities overall are increasing and some are undergoing evolution; for example, horizon-scanning tools once limited to collecting information have increasingly been given an analytical, information enrichment function akin to sense-making. ; This article has been produced as part of the research agenda of the TRANSCRISIS project funded by the Horizon 2020 Programme of the European Union (H2020-REFLECTIVE-7: 649484-TransCrisis).

This article draws on a comprehensive new data set of crisis management capacities at the European Union level to highlight key patterns in their development and use. Organised within the categories of detection, sense‐making, decision‐making, coordination, meaning‐making, communication, and accountability, the data show considerable accumulation of capacities in detection and sense‐making, while decision‐making capacities lag behind. We find that most capacities are sector‐oriented rather than cross‐sectoral, and reside primarily within the European Commission rather than other EU institutions. Comparing the data to previous studies, we note that capacities overall are increasing and some are undergoing evolution; for example, horizon‐scanning tools once limited to collecting information have increasingly been given an analytical, "information enrichment" function akin to sense‐making.

This article draws on a comprehensive new data set of crisis management capacities at the European Union level to highlight key patterns in their development and use. Organised within the categories of detection, sense‐making, decision‐making, coordination, meaning‐making, communication, and accountability, the data show considerable accumulation of capacities in detection and sense‐making, while decision‐making capacities lag behind. We find that most capacities are sector‐oriented rather than cross‐sectoral, and reside primarily within the European Commission rather than other EU institutions. Comparing the data to previous studies, we note that capacities overall are increasing and some are undergoing evolution; for example, horizon‐scanning tools once limited to collecting information have increasingly been given an analytical, "information enrichment" function akin to sense‐making.

This report inventories the crisis management capacities of the European Commission, Council of Ministers of the European Union, and the European Council. It responds to a central concern in the Transcrisis project: that the 'institutional capacities in the three institutions need to be better measured in terms of how they contribute to preparation, response, and recovery' (Transcrisis proposal, p. 34). Capacities are defined in terms of politico-administrative features that facilitate the pursuit of seven tasks of effective crisis management, defined by the project as: detection, sense-making, decisionmaking, coordination, meaning-making, communication and accountability. Investigating capacities in seven issue areas, we reveal a host of emerging capacities in recent years (roughly 200 in total). Some of these capacities were expected, others are surprising. When compared with previous studies, the results show intriguing trends in how, where and in what forms capacities have evolved in recent years. While this report serves as a stand-alone deliverable with its own essential findings, it also provides the foundation for further exploration of effectiveness, legitimacy and leadership across Transcrisis subprojects.

This report covers the key findings about mapping exercises and the analysis of: - the effectiveness and legitimacy of Commission, European Council, and Council of the European Union's transboundary crisis management capacity -the role of the European Commission, in which much crisis management capacity, expertise and leadership potential can be found; and the relatively recent role of European Council in providing political direction to EU crisis management efforts