Disaster response actors are facing new challenges, which encompass not only new and ever more complex threats but also the need to collaborate across organizational boundaries and even state borders. Depending on scale, these interactions have to work across governance setups, political and legal conditions, organizational cultures, as well as personal preferences and experiences that vary among actors, organizations, and countries. But which concrete measures are taken by crisis management actors at different scales to bridge these challenges and which of these could serve others as example to address comparable challenges in their contexts? This study made attempts to analyze whether certain solutions across organizations and states exist that facilitate effective interorganizational crisis management in the member states of the European Union (EU). It is based on selected expert interviews with representatives of different types of disaster response organizations (health services, police services, fire services, and other crisis management organizations) from seven EU member states (Germany, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Austria, and Greece).

Wildfire risk has been exacerbated across Europe by climate change favoring more damaging and severe wildfire events. This evolving wildfire risk context interacts with a broad landscape of EU policies including those on nature conservation, forestry, bioeconomy or climate and energy, all of which may increase or reduce fire hazard and the level of exposure and vulnerability of the values at risk. Coherently addressed, policies may support wildfire disaster risk management synergistically while reducing potential dysfunctions. This research conducts a content analysis of EU policies and initiatives under the European Green Deal with respect to integrated wildfire risk management and related nature-based solutions. The results show that a consistent EU policy framework to address wildfire risk reduction in a synergic way exists, with no major conflicts in the policy design. Nevertheless, better guidance on fire-smart land management practices and the conceptualization of wildfire-related nature-based solutions may enhance a more coherent policy implementation. Additional suggestions around the legal status of wildfire protection and ‘whole of government’ governance frameworks are discussed. Notably, within the laws, policies and initiatives analyzed, the beneficial side of fire addressed by integrated fire management is either missing or not explicitly mentioned, although it is considered in policy-related supporting guidelines.

Climate change, resilience building and vulnerability reduction are emerging issues in spatial development and spatial planning in Germany, the European Union and globally. This paper introduces different concepts of and views on adaptation, vulnerability and resilience and outlines their implications for spatial planning in the context of a changing climate. On the basis of a conceptual discussion of key terms, the authors underscore the importance of assessing vulnerability as baseline information for the promotion of resilience and the enhancing of adaptation. The challenges of identifying and assessing vulnerability are illustrated through a case study of local flood vulnerability in Cologne with a specific focus on the vulnerability of different population groups as well as critical infrastructures. The respective key elements and phases of such assessments are identified. New challenges with regard to systemic risks are addressed and recommendations for improved linkages between spatial planning and civil protection formulated. The final part of the paper evaluates the upcoming challenges for adaptive planning in the context of climate change adaptation, for example regarding scenario development and its application.

Escalating extreme wildfires, fueled by the confluence of climate change, land use patterns alterations, ignitions by humans, and flammable fuels accumulation, pose significant and increasingly destructive risks to critical infrastructure (CI). This study presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of wildfire impacts and the corresponding CI resilience strategies employed across the EU and the US. It examines the vulnerability of CIs to the devastating effects of wildfires and their inadvertent contribution to wildfire ignition and spread. The study evaluates the EU’s CER Directive and the US National Infrastructure Protection Plan and assesses European Commission wildfire resilience-related initiatives, including FIRELOGUE, FIRE-RES, SILVANUS, and TREEADS flagship projects. It synthesizes empirical evidence and extracts key lessons learned from major wildfire events in the EU (2017 Portuguese fires; 2018 Mati wildfire) and the US (2023 Lahaina disaster; 2025 Los Angeles fires), drawing insights regarding the effectiveness of various resilience measures and identifying areas for improvement. Persistent challenges impeding effective wildfire resilience are identified, including governance fragmentation, lack of standardization in risk assessment and mitigation protocols, and insufficient integration of scientific knowledge and data into policy formulation and implementation. It concludes with actionable recommendations aimed at fostering science-based, multi-stakeholder approaches to strengthen wildfire resilience at both policy and operational levels.