Comparative Analysis of the Risk of Nature Management in Countries of European and African Unions

Abstract

   The partnership between the EU and the AU in the fi eld of protection against natural disasters leads to the rapprochement of Africa and Europe, strengthening economic cooperation, sustainable development, when both continents coexist in peace, security, democracy, prosperity, solidarity and human dignity. A comparative analysis of the risk of nature management in the EU and AU countries has shown that countries with a high level of economic development do not have a clear advantage. Moreover, the AU countries oft en look more favorable. The overall picture for the EU and the AU, both in terms of absolute indicators and in terms of the percentage ratio of natural hazards, protection from natural disasters and risk of nature management, is also not in favor of the European Union. The leadership of the EU, the European Commission and its specialized disaster management units often overestimate their economic capabilities. Dangerous natural processes catch the highly developed states of Europe unawares and cause significant damage also because of the very high level of development of the EU territory. In the AU, firstly, a significant part of the territory is pristine natural landscapes, oft en completely unpopulated, secondly, in many countries the adaptation mechanisms of the local population to natural disasters are widely developed, and thirdly, the AU countries practically do not spend their own resources to combat natural disasters, and provide this process at the expense of external fi nancial and humanitarian aid from donors — the UN, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, various public organizations and, actually, from the EU. Nevertheless, the eff ective functioning of the entire disaster management system requires a strong economy in the EU and the AU as a whole, as well as in individual countries. Its basic subsystems should be: 1) market management — leadership at the level of company management, mentoring, creation of institutional conditions for development of innovative entrepreneurship, consulting and teaching entrepreneurs new methods of managing and running business; 2) financing — private investments, business projects, access to credit; 3) national-cultural and cross-cultural processes — entrepreneurial culture, formation of new progressive ideas on the principles of sustainable development, tolerance of entrepreneurial risk, self-employment, encouragement of success in innovation, establishment of business innovation summits; 4) regulation and promotion — regulatory framework, ease of starting and doing business, access to information and consulting infrastructure, new information and communication technologies, transport accessibility; 5) development and growth of human capital — universities and research centers as catalysts of innovation, promotion of employment and interaction with employers for employment of university graduates in innovative companies, talent management, availability of outsourcing; 6) new areas of activity — domestic market, large, medium, small companies as customers, including the state (state order, state procurement), logistics.