We have therefore compiled some initial hypotheses from the perspective of social science disaster research, especially regarding Germany, with which we provide food for thought about similarities, differences, and developments in the field of civil protection and disaster relief between the events of 2015/16 and those of today.

• Migration movements from the East due to armed conflicts were, at least until the collapse of the Eastern Bloc following World War II, a realistic scenario for German civil defense (Dittmer/Lorenz 2020). However, after this timeframe, corresponding planning and resources were almost completely disregarded at least until 2015/16, meaning that by 2015/16, hardly any relevant knowledge remained. Some of this was reactivated for managing the refugee situation in 2015/16, and as a consequence, larger care concepts for future humanitarian emergencies, such as the Labor 5000 project, were initiated. At the same time, it must also be noted that since 2015/16, many structures have been dismantled again and learning experiences have been documented only to a very limited extent.
• Unlike in 2015/16, Germany is currently not the primary destination for refugees; most are staying in Ukraine’s neighboring countries. However, this could change with a further escalation of the war or very high numbers of refugees in those countries. Therefore, it’s quite possible that, similar to 2015/16, resources from civil protection and disaster relief might have to be utilized again soon to create temporary accommodation or ensure basic supplies.
• Ukrainians—this applies only to individuals with a Ukrainian passport and not necessarily to people of other nationalities—can enter the Federal Republic of Germany without a visa. Therefore, in contrast to 2015/16, asylum-related issues do not play an immediate role, and border regimes, especially the German external borders (recall, for example, the dramatic scenes at the Slovenian-Austrian or German-Austrian border), are also not a concern. The necessary support for refugees along the changing escape routes was an additional challenge for civil protection and disaster relief actors or humanitarian emergency aid across the entire Balkan route in 2015/16. This is currently not an issue either, as the transport routes are relatively clear and people are moving with their own vehicles or by train, and at least after leaving Ukraine, are not on foot.
• This also has far-reaching implications for transport logistics: for example, there is currently no need for a nationwide distribution of refugees in Germany or corresponding coordination centers (KoSt-FV) for trains and buses (refer to Dittmer/Lorenz 2020). Instead, refugees can distribute themselves across the country, also supported by special trains operated by Deutsche Bahn. However, since the majority of refugees are currently arriving in Berlin, there are calls for a nationwide distribution.
• Unlike in 2015/16, there is widespread agreement among EU member states regarding the response to the refugee movement. This allowed, for the first time on March 3, 2022, the activation of the EU’s Mass Influx Directive. This directive results in a completely different status for the refugees than in 2015/16, particularly relieving the asylum systems in Eastern European countries, which likely would not have been able to cope with such an influx, and facilitates integration into further societal systems (housing, education, job market, etc.). In 2015/16, special facilities had to be created for initial registration, such as the waiting rooms in Feldkirchen and Erding, which were also set up and operated with the support of civil protection organizations, the Bundeswehr, and the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF).
• Structures, learning experiences, and procedures from the refugee situation in 2015/16 are still largely present or can be reactivated in 2022. Therefore, the state reception structures are fundamentally better positioned than in 2015/16; this also applies to aid organizations, which, in part, are already coordinating the arrival of refugees at bus terminals on behalf of the Berlin crisis staff, a task that is currently still mainly performed through spontaneous helpers or organized volunteers. In other places, such as the Berlin Central Station, aid organizations are increasingly supplementing spontaneous help with emergency medical care following requests for assistance.
• For the reasons mentioned, there is currently no indication of a major deployment of the German disaster relief services for the accommodation of refugees. While it is possible that organizations such as the German Red Cross may operate facilities for refugees, this is likely to be done through professional structures (for example, in the form of non-profit limited liability companies) and not with volunteer disaster relief services. Such a deployment would probably only be expected in the event of a sudden and very massive increase in refugee numbers.
• The help from the population seems to be as high today as it was in 2015/16. Even though the aid from civil society was often highly professional back then, a further professionalization can be observed today. At the same time, as in 2015/16, it is evident that the high willingness to donate goods can sometimes overwhelm the organizational structures (including those of civil protection organizations) in terms of capacity. How civil society aid will develop further also crucially depends on what state aid offers exist or are established. Should civil and disaster protection organizations with their volunteer structures be added later on, this could lead to conflicts and “turf battles,” as the very different organizational logics can partly contradict each other, as was the case in 2015/16.
• Even though we are dealing with war refugees both in 2015/16 and today, there seems to be less societal polarization regarding the reception of refugees nowadays. While the humanitarian crisis necessitating the reception of refugees was assessed differently by political actors in 2015/16, there seems to be a much larger political consensus currently. Reasons for this may include that anti-Muslim sentiments and racism are less resonant in society, the war is taking place in Europe and is simultaneously seen as an attack on Europe and its political order. The fact that primarily women and children – traditionally defined as victims and vulnerable groups – are fleeing or can leave Ukraine, further facilitates empathy and thus also confirms existing gender stereotypes of military conflicts as well as media representations of “vulnerable refugees“.
• German civil protection organizations as well as international humanitarian organizations are currently active in the neighboring countries of Ukraine as part of humanitarian (foreign) aid, similar to their involvement in Greece or along the Balkan route in 2015/16. Unlike 2015/16, which was heavily influenced by political disputes among European countries, there currently appears to be a significant agreement between the humanitarian and political mandates, which should greatly facilitate the work of these organizations.
• While German civil protection organizations made use of a wide range of civil protection structures and resources in 2015/16, currently, there’s only limited utilization of transportation capacities and personnel for transporting relief supplies to Poland, for example, or in supporting partner organizations in Ukraine. Further deployments of civil and disaster protection services are conceivable, heavily dependent on how the war progresses. It will be fundamentally interesting to see if and to what extent resources from civil and disaster protection are utilized for accommodating, distributing, or providing for refugees. This need not only arise from necessity; it could also present a good opportunity to deploy and realistically test individual existing modules of the Labor 5000.
• In light of the discussion processes initiated following the refugee situation in 2015/16, which were intensified by recent events like the pandemic and the flood events of 2021, it’s expected that the current refugee situation, in conjunction with the immediacy of a conventional war in close geographical proximity, will raise and update questions regarding the orientation and equipment of civil protection, as well as a reorientation of civil and disaster protection that has already begun in parts. The care and provision for people who cannot return to their homeland for shorter or longer periods will likely be just one of many aspects.