Task F- Evaluation of the technical results and deliverables, and follow-up

Task F- Evaluation of the technical results and deliverables, and follow-up

 

The Task F achieved the results and managed to deliver the Study report in a cost-effective manner. The workshops disclosed about 20 gaps that can limit the states ability to cope with the given situation and to collaborate with other states in the region while addressing possible macroregional disasters.

The  study  group  suggests  that  the  observed  gaps  observed  are  complex.    In  order  to understand better the nature and implications of these observations (20 gaps) the following categorization was prepared for use in any further analysis:

1)    Governance: policy, legal, regulatory…

2)    Operational: procedural, practical for use, suitable for conditions,…

3)    Technical: functionality, safety for use, efficiency, , maintenance,…

4)    Resources: sufficient financial support and staff, availability of required equipment, supplies and material,…

5)    Knowledge: situational awareness, efficient creation and sharing processes of data and information, expertise, training, exercises…

6)    Sustainability and resilience: taking care of the man and equipment trough out.

7)    Communication: transport of men, material and energy and transfer of information under all conditions.

8)    Ability to anticipate the unexpected, and to communicate and collaborate with the “unknown”. The uncertainty in prediction is big and requires flexibility and capacity to respond efficiently to unexpected calls.

A brief reflection suggests that the above identified about 20 individual gaps refer to many of the above categories. The above gaps are therefore understood to be an element of a major gap to be discovered at state level considerations and subsequent macroregional elaboration. It is therefore very important to continue the cooperation among the Baltic Sea States is this area.

The basis has been provided for the continued cooperation: The developed scenario, the Model Worst-Case Scenario (MWCS), proved to function well as a tool to discover potential major gaps. MWCS, as adapted, can be applied to particular conditions, at the first place, to state-level identification of capability and readiness gaps in the BSR. Methodology used in conducting the workshops as well as the one used for preliminary analysis served the purpose of the project efficiently. Set of potential major gaps identified through this study can be used as guidance in further analysis and evaluation of particular State-level elaboration. Subsequently, a Baltic Sea regional workshop can be conducted for better understanding of what can be undertaken at the macro-regional level to address the deficiencies determined at the state level.

Follow-up

There is a need for continued effort to evaluate the above identified potential gaps at the level of individual states of the region. As a result of such evaluation, areas can be identified were improvements are needed. Subsequent work at macroregional level, will result in identification of the concrete means and ways as to how and by whom the gaps may be taken care of, and that most efficiently taking into account the capacity available in the region.

Information and communication technological tools should be developed to facilitated communication, knowledge creation and sharing and collaboration in implementation in the Baltic Sea Region.

Immediate steps should be taken to initiate the work on the areas recommended by the Task F. Some of the work can be best undertaken as EC funded projects, some may be undertaken within the EGNRS framework.