This article reviews roles of military forces in Europe in support of civilian authorities in crises caused by natural or manmade incidents and disasters. These roles are shaped by five trendssome in effect since the end of the Cold war, others more recent. These are: transition from civil defence to civil protection; expanding noncombat roles of the armed forces; cooperation with an increasing number of actors; respective proliferation of modes of contribution; and searching ways to contribute to the resilience of both states and local communities. The authors elaborate and provide examples for these five trends and conclude by highlighting some enduring characteristics of the military contributions.

The management of crises triggered by natural or manmade events requires a concerted effort of various actors crossing institutional and geographic boundaries. Technological advances allow to make crisis management more effective, but innovation is hindered by dispersed and often disconnected knowledge on the lessons learned, gaps, and solutions. Taxonomies enable the search for information of potential interest. This article presents a taxonomy of crisis management functions, designed on the basis of a conceptual model integrating the concepts of hazard, vulnerability, risk, and community, and the main consequence- and management-based concepts. At its highest level, the taxonomy includes ten functional areas: preparatory (mitigation, capability development, and strategic adaptiveness), operational (protection, response, and recovery), and common (crisis communications and information management; command, control, and coordination; logistics; and security management). The taxonomy facilitates the navigation of online platforms and the matching of needs and solutions. It has broader applications, e.g., for structuring the assessment of the societal impact of crisis management solutions and as a framework for a comprehensive assessment of disaster risk reduction measures. While the taxonomy was developed within a research and innovation project supported by the European Union, it reflects and is compatible with established international concepts and classification schemes, and is thus applicable by a wider international community.

Recently, a team of Bulgarian analysts proposed a novel long-term planning methodology that envisions a scenario-based, concept-driven, and capabilities-oriented planning process intended to provide for robustness in an uncertain security and force development environment. The methodology uses two types of scenarios -context scenarios (or -alternative futures‖) and situational scenarios. This article presents a process for designing context scenarios and a summary information on the scenarios developed for use in Bulgaria's long-term planning process. The proposed approach to the development of context scenarios involves five distinct stepspreparation, strategic base analysis, analysis of the characteristics of the future, definition of national security interests' zones, and development and analysis of context scenarios. A specialized software tool called Intelligent Scenario Computer Interface Program Morphological Analysis/ System Analysis (I-SCIP-MA-SA) was developed to support both the morphological and system analyses within the process.

The present deliverable reports on the evolving concepts of security of Bulgaria, Serbia and Turkey. It does so in the form of national (or country) case studies which are then aggregated into a regional case study on SouthEastern Europe. The methodology used is based on the EvoCS deliverables 3.1 "Finalised analytical framework" and 4.1 "Tools for methodological support: templates, criteria and IT requirements" (see references section). Each national (and the regional) case study reports on key core values, security challenges, main levels of action, main actors, historical trajectory of the evolving concepts of security, and trends for the near future. The abstract of these results can be found below in Table 1. The final chapter of this report summarises the profiles, gives the key findings and formulates recommendations for security decision makers and other relevant stakeholders. This report is one of four, the others covering the regions of NorthWestern Europe, West-Mediterranean Europe and the Eastern EU border. The final deliverable 9.1 "Final report on the evolving concept of security" gives a synopsis of all regional case studies.