Economic Logistics Optimization in Fire and Rescue Services: A Case Study of the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service

Abstract

Background: Economic logistics in fire and rescue services is a critical determinant of operational readiness, fiscal sustainability, and resilience to large-scale emergencies. Despite its strategic importance, logistics remains under-researched in Central and Eastern European contexts, where legacy governance structures and EU-funded modernization coexist with systemic inefficiencies. This study focuses on the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service (HaZZ) as a case to explore how economic logistics systems can be restructured for greater performance and value. Objective: The objective of this paper was to evaluate the structure, performance, and reform potential of the logistics system supporting HaZZ, with a focus on procurement efficiency, lifecycle costing, digital integration, and alignment with EU civil protection standards. Methods: A mixed-methods design was applied, comprising the following: (1) Institutional analysis of governance, budgeting, and legal mandates based on semi-structured expert interviews with HaZZ and the Ministry of Interior officers (n = 12); (2) comparative benchmarking with Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands; (3) financial analysis of national logistics expenditures (2019–2023) using Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) principles, completed with the visualization of cost trends and procurement price variance through original heat maps and time-series graphs. Results: The key findings are as follows: (1) HaZZ operates a formally centralized but practically fragmented logistics model across 51 district units, lacking national coordination mechanisms and digital infrastructure; (2) Maintenance costs have risen by 42% between 2019 and 2023 despite increasing capital investment due to insufficient lifecycle planning and asset heterogeneity; (3) Price variance for identical equipment categories across regions exceeds 30%, highlighting the inefficiencies in decentralized procurement; (4) Slovakia lacks a national Logistics Information System (LIS), unlike peer countries which have deployed integrated digital platforms (e.g., CELIS in the Czech Republic); (5) Benchmarking reveals high-impact practices in centralized procurement, lifecycle-based contracting, regional logistics hubs, and performance accountability—particularly in Austria and the Netherlands. Impacts: Four high-impact, feasible reforms were proposed: (1) Establishment of a centralized procurement framework; (2) national LIS deployment to unify inventory and asset tracking; (3) adoption of lifecycle-based and performance-based contracting models; (4) development of regional logistics hubs using underutilized infrastructure. This study is among the first to provide an integrated economic and institutional analysis of the Fire and Rescue Service logistics in a post-socialist EU member state. It offers a structured, transferable reform roadmap grounded in comparative evidence and adapted to Slovakia’s hybrid governance model. The research bridges gaps between modernization policy, procurement law, and digital public administration in the context of emergency services.

1. Introduction

Logistics systems constitute a strategic foundation for the effective functioning of fire and rescue services, determining not only the operational readiness of emergency units but also the financial sustainability and responsiveness of public safety institutions under crisis conditions [1,2]. The intensification of climate-induced disasters, industrial risks, and large-scale emergencies has heightened the relevance of logistics as a core component of national resilience frameworks. In this context, fire and rescue logistics have garnered increasing attention among practitioners; however, they remain insufficiently examined in academic literature, particularly within the institutional and economic contexts of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) [3,4].

While countries in Western Europe have progressively adopted advanced logistics models—integrating digital systems, centralized procurement, and performance-based contracting—transitional states such as Slovakia face distinct structural challenges [5,6]. These include legacy governance arrangements, underdeveloped digital infrastructure, decentralized operational practices, and limited capacity for long-term asset planning. Despite notable investments from the European Union structural and cohesion funds aimed at modernizing fire and rescue capabilities, the logistics systems in many CEE countries continue to exhibit inefficiencies in procurement coordination, lifecycle cost management, and regional supply integration [7,8].

Existing research in emergency logistics tends to prioritize humanitarian supply chains, private-sector logistics optimization, or operational modeling under uncertainty [9,10,11]. There is a marked paucity of empirical studies examining the economic performance and institutional design of logistics systems within state-run emergency services. Moreover, concepts such as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), lifecycle-based procurement, and logistics information systems (LIS)—which are increasingly mainstream in public procurement literature—have been only marginally applied to the specific domain of emergency logistics in CEE [12,13,14].

This study seeks to address this knowledge gap by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of the logistics system supporting the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service (HaZZ). The central objective is to assess how the structure, performance, and institutional configuration of HaZZ logistics can be reformed to enhance cost-efficiency, digital integration, and alignment with EU civil protection standards. The study applies an integrated methodology comprising (1) qualitative institutional analysis based on semi-structured expert interviews; (2) comparative benchmarking against selected European systems; and (3) financial evaluation using TCO principles. In contrast to previous public audits or descriptive accounts, this research advances an empirically grounded, methodologically rigorous framework to support logistics reforms in a post-socialist governance context.

This study is motivated by the urgent need to understand how legacy logistics systems can be restructured for economic and operational sustainability. It does so by analyzing Slovakia’s fire logistics model and benchmarking it against four European systems (Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands). The core contribution lies in integrating financial diagnostics, stakeholder insights, and cross-national comparison to derive policy-relevant lessons.

The Slovak Republic, like many Central European countries, faces the challenge of modernizing its fire and rescue logistics infrastructure while operating within constrained public budgets. The Fire and Rescue Service of the Slovak Republic is a professional and centrally governed organization tasked with a wide range of responsibilities, from fire suppression and technical rescue to disaster response and civil protection. This multi-functional role requires a sophisticated logistics system capable of supporting diverse and often unpredictable operations.

Despite the importance of logistics in these services, limited research has been dedicated to understanding the economic dimensions of logistics planning and execution within the Slovak fire and rescue system. Anecdotal evidence suggests inefficiencies in areas such as procurement coordination, equipment standardization, inventory management, and regional supply distribution. At the same time, there are opportunities for optimization through digitalization, joint purchasing, and better forecasting.

By focusing on economic logistics within the fire and rescue services, this paper aims to contribute to both academic understanding and practical policymaking in the domain of public safety logistics.

This study aims to develop a context-sensitive, comparative framework that triangulates expert judgment, cost efficiency, and institutional alignment to identify and assess transferable emergency logistics practices for Slovakia.

1.1. Review of Economic Logistics Models in Emergency Services with a Contextual Analysis of the Slovak Fire and Rescue System

1.1.1. Economic Logistics in Emergency Services

Economic logistics refers to the strategic management of material, financial, and human resources to ensure optimal operational efficiency at minimal cost. In the context of emergency services, such as fire, rescue, and civil protection, logistics encompasses procurement, supply chain coordination, maintenance planning, and resource deployment. Unlike private sector logistics, where efficiency is primarily driven by profit motives, logistics in emergency services must balance financial constraints with non-negotiable service imperatives: reliability, speed, and resilience under crisis conditions.

1.1.2. Unique Characteristics of Emergency Logistics

Emergency logistics systems are distinct from conventional logistics in several key dimensions. First, they must operate under high uncertainty and temporal pressure. Events such as large-scale fires, natural disasters, and industrial accidents often arise without warning, requiring rapid and flexible deployment of resources [1]. This unpredictability complicates demand forecasting, supply planning, and inventory management.

Second, emergency services operate under strict public accountability and regulatory oversight. Unlike commercial supply chains, where service failures are typically measured in financial losses, logistical failures in fire and rescue services may result in loss of life or environmental damage. Therefore, redundancy, rather than efficiency alone, becomes an embedded design principle. For example, excess equipment and backup systems are maintained to meet rare but high-impact scenarios, which can appear economically inefficient in traditional terms [3].

Third, the logistics system must integrate multiple stakeholders—including national and regional governments, suppliers, emergency personnel, and civil society organizations. This multi-actor dynamic can cause delays in procurement and coordination, especially where responsibilities are fragmented or poorly defined [2].

1.1.3. Cost Structures and Economic Trade-Offs

In economic terms, logistics in emergency services represents a significant portion of operational expenditure. This includes the acquisition and lifecycle management of fire engines, personal protective equipment (PPE), communications systems, tools, and consumables. For example, studies in European municipal fire departments show that logistics-related costs (excluding personnel) can constitute between 20% and 35% of annual budgets, depending on the extent of in-house maintenance and outsourcing [4].

Key areas of economic trade-off in emergency logistics include the following:

• Centralization vs. localization of procurement and warehousing: Centralization can yield cost savings through scale economies but may reduce local adaptability.
• Stockpiling vs. just-in-time delivery models: Stockpiling provides readiness but ties up capital and may lead to obsolescence; just-in-time is risky in crises with supply chain disruptions [5].
• In-house vs. outsourced logistics services: Outsourcing can reduce fixed costs but may limit control and introduce supplier dependency, especially in rural or remote regions [6].

Addressing these trade-offs requires a strategic perspective on long-term cost efficiency rather than short-term budget minimization. Tools such as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis and lifecycle costing are increasingly applied in emergency procurement to capture hidden or deferred expenses, such as maintenance, training, and disposal [7].

1.1.4. Public Sector Logistics Efficiency and Reform

Efforts to improve the economic efficiency in emergency service logistics often face structural challenges. Procurement procedures are typically governed by public sector tendering laws, which, while intended to ensure transparency, can lead to rigid specifications and delays [8]. Fragmentation across agencies and levels of government often results in the duplication of effort and missed opportunities for economies of scale.

Reform efforts in various EU countries have focused on introducing joint procurement frameworks, digital supply chain systems, and performance-based contracts to enhance both transparency and cost-effectiveness. For example, the Dutch Safety Regions have implemented a shared procurement model for firefighting equipment, resulting in up to 20% savings compared to individual municipal purchases [9]. In the United Kingdom, the Fire and Rescue National Framework encourages the pooling of procurement resources and regional logistics hubs to reduce redundancies [10].

Technological modernization also plays a central role in economic logistics reform. Digital platforms that integrate inventory tracking, maintenance schedules, and supplier databases enable real-time visibility into resource status, improving both financial control and response planning. Predictive analytics is increasingly used to anticipate equipment wear and replacement needs, avoiding costly emergency procurement [11].

In parallel, recent advances in stochastic programming offer new approaches for optimizing emergency logistics under uncertainty. For example, Kapukaya et al. [12], to address the resource allocation challenges in disaster response, developed a multi-objective, two-stage stochastic programming model for search and rescue and first aid activities. The model aimed to minimize the total unmet human demand, the number of resources transferred between regions, and the total unmet material demand.

1.1.5. Emergency Logistics in Crisis Contexts

The COVID-19 pandemic and recent wildfire crises across Southern Europe have underscored the fragility of traditional logistics systems in emergency services. Disrupted supply chains, delayed shipments of PPE, and inadequate regional coordination exposed systemic weaknesses. In response, several EU member states began to reassess their logistics models, focusing on supply chain resilience, local manufacturing capacity, and transnational resource pooling under the rescEU framework [13].

Economic logistics in these high-pressure contexts has demonstrated the value of flexibility, interagency interoperability, and multi-level governance. Investments in resilience—such as modular logistics units, decentralized depots, and cross-border stockpiles—may appear costlier upfront but significantly reduce the overall response costs and damage over the long term [14].

Recent studies using fuzzy dynamic Bayesian networks and multi-objective optimization have enhanced emergency scenario modeling, offering practical tools for risk-aware logistics resource allocation in fire, chemical, or explosion contexts [15,16]. These methods complement the lifecycle and procurement analytics by providing data-driven insights into deployment strategy under uncertainty.

In sum, economic logistics in emergency services is a balancing act between financial prudence and operational readiness. Unlike purely commercial systems, emergency logistics must incorporate redundancy, stakeholder complexity, and public accountability into their cost structures. While financial efficiency remains a goal, it must be contextualized within the overarching mission of life and property protection. Emerging practices across Europe indicate that strategic planning, digitization, and regional collaboration are key levers for improving economic efficiency without undermining effectiveness. For countries like Slovakia, these insights offer valuable direction for systemic improvement.

1.2. Logistics Models in Fire and Rescue Services

Logistics systems in fire and rescue services differ considerably across Europe, reflecting national governance structures, decentralization levels, and procurement maturity. This section classifies logistics models into three types—centralized, decentralized, and hybrid—and analyzes how these influence operational effectiveness and cost-efficiency. The typology serves as the foundation for comparing international practices and identifying models applicable to Slovakia.

1.2.1. Centralized Logistics Models

In centralized logistics systems, decision-making and resource management are concentrated within a central authority, often at the national or federal level. This model typically ensures uniform standards in procurement, equipment specifications, and training, while also facilitating bulk purchasing and streamlined inventory control. For example, Germany’s federal civil protection logistics is coordinated through the Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe (BBK), which supports Länder (federal states) with centrally procured equipment and strategic reserves [17].

Centralized models are particularly effective in achieving economies of scale and consistency in quality assurance. However, they may also be less responsive to local operational needs, particularly in geographically diverse or decentralized administrative systems. This rigidity can slow down the allocation of resources during rapidly evolving local incidents [18].

1.2.2. Decentralized Logistics Models

In contrast, decentralized logistics models delegate procurement, maintenance, and inventory management to regional or local authorities. This model allows greater responsiveness to local risks, topographical conditions, and community needs. For example, municipalities in Switzerland and Austria often operate their own fire brigades with logistical autonomy, supported by regional or cantonal governments [19].

While this approach fosters flexibility and local engagement, it also creates challenges in standardization and can lead to redundancies or inefficiencies, especially in procurement and asset management. Studies have shown that decentralized procurement can lead to price differentials of up to 30% for the same firefighting equipment due to smaller volume orders and inconsistent tendering practices [20].

1.2.3. Hybrid and Integrated Logistics Models

To balance the strengths and limitations of both systems, many countries have moved toward hybrid or integrated logistics models. These systems combine centralized strategic planning and procurement with decentralized operational control. For instance, Sweden’s Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) manages centralized procurement for core equipment and maintains national stockpiles, while regional fire services handle daily logistics autonomously [21].

The integrated model facilitates interoperability during large-scale emergencies and cross-border operations, an increasingly important consideration in the context of climate change-related disasters and EU-level civil protection cooperation. Moreover, hybrid systems often incorporate tiered logistical support, such as pre-positioned regional depots or mobile supply units that can be rapidly deployed [22].

1.2.4. Role of Technological Integration and Economic Tools

Across all models, there is a growing emphasis on technological integration in logistics. The use of Logistics Information Systems (LIS), RFID-based asset tracking, predictive maintenance tools, and centralized databases has transformed how logistics is managed in fire and rescue services. For example, the Czech Republic’s Fire Rescue Service has implemented a Logistics Information System (LIS) that links regional units to a centralized database for real-time equipment tracking, leading to improved resource availability and data-driven decision-making [23].

Digital tools have also enabled predictive modeling for equipment lifecycles, stock turnover rates, and supply chain vulnerabilities. The integration of logistics with incident command systems allows for more efficient mobilization of assets based on operational priorities rather than static allocation plans [24].

From an economic perspective, the choice of logistics model directly affects cost structures, investment needs, and sustainability. Economic tools like Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) and performance-based contracting further enhance procurement efficiency and asset utilization [24,25]. Their uptake, however, remains uneven across systems.

Centralized systems often require substantial initial investment in infrastructure and technology but may yield long-term savings through optimized procurement and reduced duplication. Decentralized systems may incur lower start-up costs but often face higher operational expenses over time due to inefficiencies in scale and coordination [25]. Hybrid systems present a middle ground but require clear governance mechanisms to manage the interface between national and local authorities. Without proper coordination, hybrid models risk falling into an institutional ambiguity or unclear accountability structure [26].

In conclusion, while there is no universally optimal logistics model for fire and rescue services, successful systems tend to align logistics structures with national governance models, financial capacity, geographic distribution, and technological readiness. Slovakia’s current logistics system, which blends central governance with regional management, shares characteristics with hybrid models seen elsewhere in Europe. However, its effectiveness depends heavily on the strength of coordination mechanisms, the integration of digital tools, and the consistency of procurement policies—topics explored in the following chapters.

1.3. Slovak Fire and Rescue Services

The Fire and Rescue Service of the Slovak Republic (Hasičský a záchranný zbor, HaZZ) represents the backbone of the country’s emergency response infrastructure. Established under the Ministry of Interior, HaZZ is responsible for a broad range of tasks beyond fire suppression, including technical rescue, chemical hazard response, civil protection, disaster coordination, and international assistance through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. Understanding the organizational structure and economic constraints of this service is essential to evaluating the logistical and operational challenges it faces.

1.3.1. Organizational Structure and Governance

HaZZ is a centrally governed yet operationally decentralized institution. It operates through a network of eight regional directorates and 51 district-level units, each responsible for coordinating emergency response activities within its jurisdiction. Strategic planning, budget allocation, and international cooperation are managed by the General Directorate of HaZZ in Bratislava, while regional directorates oversee daily operations, personnel, and logistics within their respective territories [27].

This structure reflects a quasi-hybrid governance model: while national authorities dictate policy and standards, operational control is distributed. However, the decentralization of logistical management, particularly procurement and inventory practices, often leads to fragmentation and inefficiencies. Regional units may operate under varying procurement procedures and asset tracking systems, complicating coordination and reducing economies of scale [28].

HaZZ also cooperates with municipal voluntary fire brigades, which are numerous—approximately 2500 across the country—and play a vital role in rural areas. These units are managed locally but partially supported by the state, creating a multi-layered governance environment with differing levels of capability and access to resources [29].

1.3.2. Legal and Strategic Framework

The operation of HaZZ is regulated by Act No. 315/2001 Coll. on Fire Protection, which defines its core functions, command structure, training standards, and coordination mechanisms with other actors, including police, military, and civil protection authorities. This act was supplemented by Act No. 129/2002 Coll. on Integrated Rescue System, which outlines joint emergency response procedures among various state services [30].

Strategically, the “National Civil Protection and Crisis Management Strategy 2021–2026” identifies key challenges for emergency services, including aging infrastructure, inadequate logistical capacity, insufficient digitalization, and vulnerability to transboundary disasters, such as floods, wildfires, and pandemics [31].

1.3.3. Budgetary and Economic Landscape

The funding of the Slovak fire and rescue services derives primarily from the state budget, managed by the Ministry of Interior. However, resource allocation is often rigid, with limited discretion at the regional level. Annual public expenditure on the fire and rescue services in Slovakia has fluctuated between €150 and €180 million, depending on investment cycles, EU co-funded modernization programs, and crisis response needs [32].

Significant components of the budget are allocated to

• Salaries and personnel costs (over 60% of total budget).
• Equipment procurement and maintenance (approx. 20%).
• Infrastructure and station upkeep.
• Training and operational logistics (approx. 10%).

EU structural and cohesion funds have played a substantial role in modernization. Between 2014 and 2020, Slovakia received over €60 million in EU support for upgrading firefighting equipment, vehicles, and facilities through Operational Program Quality of Environment and Integrated Regional Operational Program [33]. However, evaluations from the Supreme Audit Office (NKÚ) and the European Court of Auditors have raised concerns about the long-term sustainability of these investments due to insufficient planning for maintenance, lifecycle costing, and human resource capacity [34,35].

1.3.4. Logistics and Infrastructure Challenges

The Slovak Fire and Rescue Service currently exhibits a fragmented hybrid model of a logistics system with centralized governance but decentralized operational logistics. Procurement, inventory, and maintenance are handled disparately across 51 district units, with minimal use of standardized tools or national digital systems. The absence of shared procurement platforms and real-time inventory visibility places Slovakia behind comparable European systems in logistics modernization.

The Slovak fire and rescue logistics system suffers from several persistent issues:

• Aging vehicle fleet: A large proportion of emergency vehicles in Slovakia exceeds 15 years of service, increasing breakdown risk and maintenance costs [36].
• Inconsistent procurement standards: Different regions and brigades apply varied specifications for identical equipment types, complicating interoperability and bulk procurement [37].
• Limited digital infrastructure: Most logistics-related tasks, including inventory, maintenance tracking, and asset allocation, are still handled manually or in disparate spreadsheets, lacking integration across units [38].
• Storage and supply vulnerabilities: Regional units maintain separate supply depots, with no shared national inventory visibility or automated resupply mechanisms. This decentralization limits strategic pre-positioning and emergency redeployment [39].

The introduction of partial e-procurement systems and early-stage logistics digitization efforts began in 2022 under the “Digital Transformation Strategy of the Ministry of Interior”, but coverage remains limited, particularly among voluntary brigades [40].

1.3.5. Civil Protection and International Integration

Slovakia is an active participant in the EU Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) and contributes to rescEU, which provides shared European logistical and response capabilities. Slovak units have participated in international wildfire and flood response missions, most recently in Greece and Slovenia. However, Slovakia still relies heavily on EU partners for large-scale logistical support, highlighting the need for enhanced domestic capacity [41].

The country’s mountainous terrain, cross-border forest zones, and flood-prone river basins (e.g., Danube, Morava) necessitate transboundary cooperation. This includes bilateral agreements with Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, covering joint drills, information sharing, and coordinated response planning.

The organizational and economic context of the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service presents a complex landscape characterized by central oversight, decentralized operations, and layered governance across professional and voluntary units. While substantial progress has been made in modernizing infrastructure through EU support, persistent logistical inefficiencies, procurement fragmentation, and digital underdevelopment continue to challenge cost-effective and reliable service delivery. Understanding these structural and fiscal dynamics is essential for developing targeted economic logistics reforms, which are explored in the subsequent sections of this study.

1.4. Comparative Perspective: European Best Practices

To contextualize Slovakia’s fire and rescue logistics system and identify actionable improvements, this section presents a structured comparison of four European countries—Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands. These countries were selected based on their diversity of governance models, demonstrated progress in logistics modernization, and relevance to Slovakia’s policy environment.

The comparative analysis is guided by five criteria: (1) governance and structural model, (2) digital logistics integration, (3) procurement strategy and lifecycle costing, (4) logistics infrastructure (hubs, modularity), and (5) institutional transferability to Slovakia.

The aim is to extract specific mechanisms that have improved cost-efficiency, transparency, and operational readiness in other systems while critically assessing their adaptability to Slovakia’s political and economic context.

1.4.1. Germany: Federated Logistics with Strong Federal Support Mechanisms

Germany operates under a federal system, wherein fire and rescue services are constitutionally delegated to the Länder (federal states). Each Land maintains its own fire brigades, logistics policies, and training facilities but operates under national civil protection strategies coordinated by the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK). The BBK plays a vital role in supporting large-scale disaster response logistics through federal stockpiles, standardized equipment specifications, and cross-Land coordination frameworks [42].

Municipal fire brigades (both professional and volunteer) are the core operational units, but procurement and logistics are increasingly managed through state-level procurement consortia. For example, North Rhine-Westphalia operates a centralized procurement agency that negotiates bulk contracts for over 350 municipal fire services. This has resulted in a 15–20% reduction in unit costs for fire engines and PPE while ensuring standardization for inter-agency deployments [43].

Germany also invests in logistics-specific infrastructure, including decentralized disaster logistics centers and mobile logistics bases (Logistikstützpunkte) capable of storing and distributing medical supplies, high-capacity pumps, mobile power systems, and field kitchens. These centers are complemented by deNIS II+, a digital coordination platform that integrates data from federal, state, and municipal emergency services. It tracks resource availability in real time and supports automated logistics planning and deployment across jurisdictions [44]. This model excels in interoperability and surge capacity but may be less compatible with Slovakia’s unitary governance structure. However, digital integration, reserve planning, and consortium procurement represent high-value practices for selective adoption.

1.4.2. Austria: Community-Based Services with Centralized Logistical Support

Austria features one of the most community-integrated fire service systems in Europe, with over 4800 volunteer fire brigades operating alongside a small number of professional units concentrated in major cities (e.g., Vienna, Graz, Linz). Despite the high decentralization of operations, Austria achieves strong coordination and cost control through the centralized role of the Österreichischer Bundesfeuerwehrverband (ÖBFV) and the Federal Ministry of the Interior [45].

The ÖBFV oversees national procurement templates, equipment standardization, and the development of interoperable communication systems (such as BOS-Austria). One of Austria’s standout features is its regional logistics platforms, which serve multiple municipalities. For instance, Styria and Lower Austria maintain regional logistics hubs that house shared inventories of hazmat suits, foam agents, spare parts, and seasonal equipment (e.g., flood barriers, snow response kits). These hubs include repair workshops and training grounds, allowing volunteer brigades to operate without maintaining expensive equipment themselves [46]. This model is highly transferable to Slovakia given the similar institutional density of volunteer brigades and comparable legal frameworks. Austria’s bundled procurement and decentralized logistics depots offer scalable strategies to address Slovakia’s current fragmentation.

Austria also utilizes a container-based modular logistics system. Equipment for specific incident types (e.g., tunnel fires, industrial accidents, high-angle rescue) is stored in ISO containers pre-packed for quick deployment. These containers are moved using hook-lift trucks available at regional hubs, improving rapid access to specialized tools while minimizing local duplication [47].

Importantly, logistics development is supported through bundled procurement models administered by regional fire associations. These models apply aggregated demand from multiple brigades and use competitive tendering to secure favorable pricing. Legislative changes in 2016 allowed municipalities to participate in these consortia without triggering complex public procurement procedures, significantly enhancing uptake.

1.4.3. Czech Republic: Centralized Data-Driven Logistics with Regional Autonomy

The Czech Fire Rescue Service (Hasičský záchranný sbor České republiky, HZS ČR) operates under the Ministry of the Interior and combines centralized strategic oversight with regional operational autonomy. There are 14 regional directorates responsible for logistics management within their areas, but procurement and planning are guided by the General Directorate, which also operates the national logistics database and procurement portal [48].

A key innovation is the Central Emergency Logistics Information System (CELIS), which links regional inventories, maintenance schedules, fuel consumption data, and supplier performance indicators. This cloud-based system allows real-time access to logistical information across all fire stations, and it is directly connected to the ministry’s budgeting tools for better alignment of resource planning and financial forecasting [49].

Czech fire services use performance-based procurement, particularly for high-value equipment like turntable ladders, breathing apparatuses, and command vehicles. Contracts include service-level agreements (SLAs) with minimum uptime thresholds, supplier response times for repairs, and penalties for delivery delays. This has improved equipment reliability and total lifecycle cost efficiency [50].

Moreover, the Czech Republic has successfully implemented EU co-funded national procurement projects, such as the 2016–2020 framework for standard firefighting vehicles. The program resulted in the delivery of over 350 identical vehicles across regions, enhancing interoperability and training efficiency while lowering acquisition costs by an estimated 22% [51].

The Czech model offers a near-analog for Slovakia due to shared EU compliance obligations and similar post-socialist administrative structures. The adoption of CELIS-style platforms and performance-based procurement could significantly improve asset management in Slovakia.

1.4.4. The Netherlands: Regionalized Multi-Service Logistics with National Strategy

The Dutch system is highly regionalized under the structure of 25 safety regions, each responsible for fire and rescue services, emergency medical care, disaster risk reduction, and civil protection. Despite strong regional autonomy, national coordination is facilitated by the Ministry of Justice and Security, which sets framework agreements and oversees the National Crisis Centre [52].

Dutch logistics strategy is characterized by the operation of Regional Logistics Centers (RLCs), which support all services within a safety region. These centers serve as integrated depots for PPE, fuel, technical equipment, and even IT systems, allowing seamless cross-service resource allocation. They are designed for scalability during major incidents, with pre-planned surge capacity and mobile supply units [53].

Procurement is largely carried out through national framework agreements negotiated by the Dutch Institute for Public Safety (IFV). These contracts cover everything from turnout gear to command software, enabling standardized capabilities across all regions. The Netherlands is particularly advanced in its use of e-procurement and supplier dashboards, which include performance tracking and lifecycle cost modeling integrated into decision-making tools [54].

Centralized procurement via the Dutch Institute for Public Safety (IFV), predictive modeling of stock usage, and regionally managed logistics centers contribute to system-wide efficiency. While this model is less transferable in full—due to higher digital maturity and fiscal capacity—it exemplifies strategic foresight, long-term costing, and multi-agency integration that Slovakia can emulate incrementally.

Another best practice is the use of dynamic stock management models, developed in collaboration with academic institutions (e.g., TU Delft), that use incident pattern data to predict equipment usage and resupply needs. This predictive approach has been credited with reducing logistics bottlenecks during large-scale flooding events in 2021 and the COVID-19 pandemic [55].

Table 1. Summary of best practices and lessons for Slovakia.

Country	Distinctive Feature	Key Logistics Benefit
Germany	Federated system with federal reserves and digital platform (deNIS II+)	National coordination with local autonomy
Austria	Volunteer system with shared logistics hubs and modular container deployment	Cost-sharing and flexibility
Czech Rep.	Centralized digital inventory system (CELIS), performance-based procurement	Standardization, lifecycle efficiency
Netherlands	Regional logistics centers with national procurement strategy	Multi-service integration and predictive modeling

presents an overview of best practices and lessons learned to be applied in Slovakia.

The comparative analysis of European fire and rescue logistics systems underscores several core principles that are essential for building an economically efficient and operationally resilient logistics framework. Central to these systems is the comprehensive digital transformation of logistical operations, which includes the integration of real-time inventory management, predictive maintenance scheduling, and centralized data platforms that enhance transparency and strategic planning. Equally important is the establishment of standardized national procurement frameworks that not only streamline acquisition processes and ensure interoperability of equipment but also provide sufficient flexibility for regional or local authorities to tailor procurement to their specific operational environments. These frameworks are often complemented by the creation of regional logistics hubs or shared service centers, which serve as multi-functional platforms for the storage, maintenance, and distribution of equipment, significantly reducing redundancies and promoting resource-sharing across jurisdictions. Furthermore, modern logistics systems increasingly rely on performance-based contracts with suppliers, shifting the focus from lowest-price tendering to long-term service reliability, availability of spare parts, and total lifecycle value. This shift in procurement philosophy incentivizes suppliers to prioritize durability and after-sales support, thereby reducing downtime and hidden maintenance costs. Finally, the integration of logistics across emergency service domains, particularly between fire services, emergency medical units, and civil protection authorities, has emerged as a key factor in enhancing multi-agency coordination and ensuring rapid, scalable response capabilities during complex or large-scale emergencies. Together, these elements form the foundation of a modern public safety logistics system that balances cost-effectiveness with preparedness and adaptability.

2. Materials and Methods

This study employed an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design, an established approach in empirical social research that enables the integration of qualitative insights and quantitative validation through a phased methodology [56]. The design unfolded in three core stages: (1) qualitative analysis, (2) comparative benchmarking, and (3) economic (financial) performance evaluation. The qualitative stage informed the development of analytical categories and hypotheses, which were subsequently examined through comparative and financial lenses. This approach supports both data triangulation and theoretical integration, ensuring that insights are both empirically grounded and contextually relevant.

The choice of this design reflects its alignment with recognized standards in mixed-methods scholarship. Specifically, it enables exploratory depth through interviews, contextual benchmarking to frame performance variance, and cost analysis to quantify systemic inefficiencies. This methodological rigor is essential in addressing complex, institutionally embedded phenomena such as public sector logistics reform.

Figure 1 provides the workflow diagram titled “Research Design” visualizing the three analytical components and their integration into the study’s mixed-methods approach.

2.1. Qualitative Institutional Analysis (Semi-Structured Interviews)

Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with logistics officers and procurement specialists from the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service (HaZZ) and the Ministry of the Interior. Participants were selected via purposive sampling to capture institutional perspectives from both national and regional levels. Interviews were conducted in person or via secure video conferencing between May and September 2024, each lasting approximately 45–60 min.

An interview protocol was developed to guide data collection across six predefined domains: (1) procurement practices, (2) inventory and asset management, (3) budgeting and expenditure, (4) digitalization and data use, (5) coordination with EU-funded modernization, and (6) lifecycle planning. The interview guide, included in Appendix A, was refined following two pilot interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using NVivo 15 software. Thematic coding followed a structured framework, with intercoder reliability checks performed by two independent researchers.

Triangulation was applied across three axes: (1) between interview responses and documentary evidence (laws, audits, policy reports), (2) between interview data and benchmarking findings, and (3) within the interview corpus through source triangulation. Reliability was enhanced via cross-case comparison and constant comparison techniques.

2.2. Comparative Benchmarking Matrix

A standardized benchmarking matrix was developed to compare logistics governance models across four European countries: Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands. The matrix was structured around five performance dimensions: (1) procurement centralization, (2) logistics information system (LIS) integration, (3) lifecycle costing and contracting, (4) physical infrastructure and logistics hubs, and (5) transferability to Slovak context.

The matrix was populated through an analysis of peer-reviewed literature, official national civil protection documents, and interviews with Slovak officials who had participated in EU civil protection projects. The goal was to identify both system-level contrasts and actionable practices relevant to Slovakia.

Benchmarking matrix with scoring rubric is available in Appendix B.

2.3. Economic Evaluation: Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

The financial analysis component utilized a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) framework, following the conceptual model set out by Monczka et al. [57], which emphasizes the full lifecycle cost of the procured assets. TCO in this study includes both direct and indirect cost elements across the following categories:

• Capital acquisition costs: purchase price, delivery, and installation;
• Maintenance and repair: routine servicing, parts replacement, and labor;
• Training costs: staff training in equipment use and upkeep;
• Inventory holding: storage, insurance, and warehousing costs;
• Administrative overhead: procurement processing and system management;
• Disposal and decommissioning: retirement, recycling, or resale of assets.

The analysis covers a five-year lifecycle horizon (2019–2023), selected to reflect the renewal period of core operational assets such as fire engines, protective gear, and communication systems. Financial data were sourced from the Slovak Ministry of the Interior’s procurement records and EU-funded program documents. Where possible, figures were disaggregated by region to identify price variation and assess procurement efficiency.

To go beyond simple descriptive reporting, the study incorporated basic comparative cost ratios (e.g., maintenance-to-capital expenditure ratios) and year-over-year growth rates. Additionally, select categories of expenditure were analyzed using regional cost variance metrics, identifying procurement inconsistencies across administrative units. While formal discounting was not applied, the study presents a preliminary break-even estimate for selected high-cost items, showing how lifecycle costs diverge from initial budget expectations.

Although not a full economic model, this enriched TCO analysis adds comparative depth and begins to address strategic cost-efficiency questions within logistics modernization.

2.4. Integration and Triangulation

To strengthen internal validity and enhance explanatory coherence, a triangulation framework was applied across the three methodological components. First, qualitative interviews provided institution-specific insights, which informed the construction of benchmarking indicators and guided the interpretation of financial trends. Second, comparative benchmarking highlighted systemic practices in four countries selected for their policy relevance and structural comparability to Slovakia. Austria and the Czech Republic were chosen due to their shared post-socialist administrative legacies and EU integration trajectories; Germany and the Netherlands represent more mature models with advanced logistics systems and EU-aligned procurement strategies. This selection ensured both contextual resonance and aspirational benchmarking.

Third, financial analysis was used not in isolation but to validate and contrast the institutional perceptions and policy patterns identified in the previous stages. For example, interview-based critiques of fragmented procurement were cross-referenced with disaggregated capital expenditure trends and benchmarking scores.

A triangulation matrix (Appendix C) was developed to trace how each theme, indicator, or insight was supported or challenged across the three data streams. This integration allowed the study to move beyond descriptive summaries toward analytical synthesis, facilitating a more holistic understanding of logistics system inefficiencies and reform opportunities in the Slovak context. Thus, findings are not only descriptive but grounded in comparative logic, institutional insight, and cost-based evidence.

3. Results

This chapter presents the empirical findings from the three methodological strands of the study: qualitative interviews, comparative benchmarking, and economic performance analysis, and integrates them through triangulated interpretation. Each subsection systematically details the results aligned with the study’s core objectives: (1) to diagnose institutional and operational inefficiencies in Slovakia’s emergency logistics system; (2) to benchmark these findings against selected EU comparators; and (3) to assess financial implications through a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis.

Findings are reported in clearly delineated thematic clusters supported by coded data, cross-national performance metrics, and cost-based indicators. The structure ensures transparency of method-specific results while also guiding the synthesis of cross-cutting insights. The discussion interprets these outcomes in light of logistics reform theory and public sector innovation models to derive evidence-informed, context-sensitive recommendations.

3.1. Thematic Insights from Qualitative Interviews

To enhance transparency and analytical rigor, the following thematic summary table presents the frequency of coded segments by theme, the number of interviews in which each theme was observed, and the illustrative subcodes.

Table 2. Thematic summary of interview findings.

Finding	No. of Coded Segments	Interview Coverage	Representative Subcodes
Fragmented Procurement	23	10 of 12	Procedural variation, contract delays, and decentralization
Lifecycle Blind Spots	21	9 of 12	Upfront cost focus, short-term cycles, and no TCO modeling
Digitalization Deficit	18	8 of 12	Manual records, low interoperability, and outdated systems
Budget Rigidity	16	10 of 12	Fund inflexibility, late disbursement, and EU compliance strain

complements the narrative findings and provides a structured overview of institutional patterns derived from the qualitative analysis.

The analysis of twelve interviews yielded four dominant themes across institutional logistics practices. A total of 78 coded segments were identified using a deductive thematic analysis approach, with coding performed in NVivo 14 based on a predefined framework (Appendix A.2). Intercoder agreement for the thematic categories exceeded 87%, indicating high reliability. Thematic saturation was achieved by the tenth interview, ensuring a comprehensive coverage of perspectives.

Table A2. Thematic Coding Framework Used in NVivo 14.

Code	Definition	Example Quote
Decentralization	Evidence of fragmented procurement or logistics management	Each district does its own tendering. There’s no national list.
Lifecycle Planning	Structured maintenance or asset aging	Vehicles stay in use until they break down.
Digital Maturity	Use of information systems or their absence	We still use Excel for tracking stock.
Modernization Impact	Effects of EU projects or upgrades	New trucks came in 2020, but parts are already a problem.
Coordination Gaps	Gaps in communication or resource duplication	We didn’t know another unit had 10 extra hoses.

in Appendix A summarizes the distribution of coded references by theme and subcode, alongside example quotations. The quantified coding enhances analytical rigor and allows cross-validation of qualitative claims.

Table A1. Semi-Structured Interview Guide for Senior Officers and Logistics Coordinators.

Theme	Sample Questions
Procurement Strategy	How is procurement organized across regions? Do you face delays or inefficiencies?
Logistics Operations	How are inventory and supplies tracked? Is there a shared logistics system in use?
Equipment Lifecycle	How often is equipment replaced or upgraded? What maintenance policies exist?
Funding and Budgeting	How predictable is funding for logistics? Are there cost overruns?
EU Modernization Projects	Have EU-funded projects improved logistics capabilities in your unit?
Interagency Coordination	How do you collaborate with other fire units or ministries on logistics?

(Appendix A) provides a summary of key themes, subcodes, and representative quotes.

Finding 1: Fragmented procurement procedures (n = 23 coded segments)—Interviews consistently revealed a high procedural variability across regional units. This theme was supported by 23 coded references across 10 of the 12 interviews. Most notably, three respondents detailed instances where identical tenders produced equipment cost variations of over 15% due to localized vendor selection criteria. Subcodes included lack of procedural standardization, delayed contract finalization, and decentralization-induced price variation.

Finding 2: Lifecycle blind spots (n = 21 coded segments)—This theme was derived from 21 coded excerpts spanning 9 of the 12 interviews. Interviewees consistently reported that asset acquisition decisions were largely driven by initial purchase costs, with insufficient consideration for long-term maintenance, operational efficiency, or decommissioning needs. Several participants acknowledged that procurement frameworks lacked cost-accounting tools to calculate total lifecycle burden. Subcodes included cost minimization bias, short-term budget cycles, and absence of TCO modeling.

Finding 3: Digitalization deficit (n = 18 coded segments)—Supported by 18 distinct coded references, this theme emerged across eight interviews. Participants highlighted systemic underuse of digital infrastructure in inventory tracking and interdepartmental data exchange. Multiple interviewees described ongoing reliance on paper-based systems and a lack of automated logistics data flow between regional and national levels. Subcodes included reliance on paper records, fragmented digital platforms, and low interagency data interoperability.

Finding 4: Budget rigidity (n = 16 coded segments)—This theme, supported by 16 references from 10 interviewees, reflects constraints imposed by annualized, inflexible budgeting processes. Participants explained how emergency purchases were frequently postponed or reallocated due to rigid budget lines, undermining long-term planning. Additionally, while EU funds were appreciated, administrative complexity often delayed implementation. Subcodes included earmarked rigidity, delayed fund release, and compliance-driven inefficiency.

The analysis of budgetary data and interview responses revealed significant inefficiencies, as introduced in

Table 3. Budgetary data and interview responses.

Indicator	Value/Status
Avg. maintenance cost growth (2019–23)	+28%
Vehicles >15 years old	45% of national fleet
Digital inventory systems	None; paper-based in 70% of units
Procurement structure	Decentralized; 51 separate units
EU modernization funding (2014–20)	€60 million (mostly vehicles)

.

These inefficiencies correlate with (1) rising operational costs, (2) underutilized modernization funds, and (3) lack of national asset visibility.

3.2. Benchmark Analyses Results

The results of the following two analyses are presented here: (1) Comparative benchmarking matrix and (2) benchmark country practices and strengths.

3.2.1. Comparative Benchmarking Matrix Outputs

Table 4. Country score summary.

Country	Procurement	Digital Systems	Lifecycle Costing	Infrastructure	Transferability
Germany	5	5	4	5	3
Austria	4	3	4	4	5
Czech Rep.	4	4	5	3	5
Netherlands	5	5	5	5	2
Slovakia	2	1	2	2	—

presents the comparative benchmarking scores across five dimensions. These scores were derived using a structured rubric described in Appendix B. The rubric evaluated each country based on policy documentation, institutional data, and structured expert validation interviews.

Each dimension was scored on a three-point ordinal scale (low, medium, high), with the following interpretation:

• Procurement centralization: Degree of national coordination and consolidation in logistics procurement.
• LIS integration: Presence and functional depth of Logistics Information Systems.
• Lifecycle-based planning: Inclusion of total lifecycle cost criteria in logistics acquisition.
• Logistics infrastructure: Density, accessibility, and strategic positioning of logistics hubs.
• Transferability to Slovakia: Evaluated using three filters—(a) institutional similarity, (b) legal adaptability, and (c) operational feasibility.

The comparative benchmarking matrix presents a structured evaluation of five countries: Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, and Slovakia, across five key dimensions: procurement, digital systems, lifecycle costing, infrastructure, and transferability. The scores, rated on a scale presumably from 1 (low) to 5 (high), provide insights into the maturity and effectiveness of each country’s systems and practices in public procurement and logistics management.

Germany and the Netherlands emerge as the top performers overall. Germany scores consistently high (mostly 5) across procurement, digital systems, and infrastructure, with a slightly lower but still strong score in lifecycle costing (4) and moderate transferability (3). This reflects a mature system with established processes but some limitations in adaptability or model replication. The Netherlands achieves perfect scores (5) in four out of five categories, showcasing a fully integrated and advanced system. However, its notably low transferability score (2) suggests that while its practices are highly effective domestically, they may be difficult to replicate elsewhere, possibly due to high reliance on unique digital infrastructure, regulatory environments, or institutional maturity.

Austria and the Czech Republic represent strong middle performers with balanced profiles. Austria scores well in procurement, lifecycle costing, and infrastructure but is slightly weaker in digital systems. Interestingly, Austria receives the highest transferability score (5), suggesting its practices are well-structured and adaptable—making it a good model for peer countries seeking to implement improvements. The Czech Republic mirrors Austria’s strengths and adds a leading score (5) in lifecycle costing, indicating a strong emphasis on long-term value in procurement decisions. Its score (5) in transferability reinforces its role as a promising benchmark for reform-oriented countries.

Slovakia stands out for its significantly lower scores, particularly in digital systems (1), procurement (2), and infrastructure (2), with no rating provided for transferability. This suggests foundational gaps in capacity, modernization, and strategic planning. The low scores may point to systemic constraints, such as underinvestment, policy fragmentation, or weak institutional coordination. Slovakia could benefit from targeted capacity building and technical assistance, potentially drawing on the Czech Republic or Austria as models for gradual improvement.

The matrix clearly distinguishes between countries with advanced, integrated systems and those still developing foundational capacities. The Netherlands and Germany demonstrate the highest levels of performance, albeit with lower transferability. Austria and the Czech Republic provide strong, replicable models. Slovakia shows room for substantial improvement and may benefit from tailored partnerships and phased adoption of best practices. The comparative analysis helps to contextualize Slovakia’s system within the broader EU public logistics reforms. Transferability was rated using three filters: institutional similarity, legal adaptability, and operational feasibility.

These findings provide a useful roadmap for policymakers and reformers to identify both role models and key areas for intervention.

3.2.2. Benchmark Country Practices and Strengths

The summary of the benchmark country practices and strengths findings from the analyses is provided in

Table 5. Benchmark country practices and strengths.

Practice	Country	Impact
Central procurement	Germany, Austria, Netherlands	Economies of scale, price leverage
Lifecycle costing	The Czech Republic, Netherlands	Reduced long-term maintenance cost
Shared logistics hubs	Austria, Netherlands	Improved regional deployment speed
Integrated LIS	Germany, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands	Reduced stock-outs and redundancies

.

The data presented in Table 4 highlights a range of procurement and logistics practices adopted by select European countries, along with their associated impacts. The analysis reveals that the Netherlands stands out as a leader, participating in all four benchmark practices. This suggests a comprehensive and integrated approach to supply chain and procurement modernization. Germany and Austria also demonstrate notable engagement, though their focus appears more specific to particular practices. The Czech Republic is emerging as a strong performer in strategic areas such as lifecycle costing and logistics information systems (LIS).

Each practice listed in the table addresses a key component of procurement and logistics efficiency. Central procurement, implemented by Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands, contributes to economies of scale and strengthens price negotiation leverage. Lifecycle costing, adopted by the Czech Republic and the Netherlands, allows for a more strategic evaluation of long-term maintenance and operational costs rather than just upfront investment. The use of shared logistics hubs in Austria and the Netherlands supports faster and more efficient regional deployment of resources—especially important for emergency preparedness and responsiveness. Finally, integrated logistics information systems in Germany, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands reduce redundancies and stock-outs by improving the supply chain visibility and coordination.

A notable insight from the data is the synergy created when multiple practices are implemented concurrently. The Netherlands, in particular, may benefit significantly from the combined effects of central procurement, lifecycle costing, shared logistics hubs, and integrated LIS, potentially yielding superior system-wide efficiencies. This multifaceted approach suggests a model worth further examination or emulation by other countries.

However, the data also reveals certain limitations. For instance, there is no mention of other advanced economies such as France, the UK, or Scandinavian countries, possibly indicating either gaps in data collection or differing approaches to procurement reform. Furthermore, the impacts described are qualitative. Including quantitative metrics—such as specific percentages of cost savings or reductions in stock-out incidents—would strengthen the evidence base and support more robust policy comparisons.

Overall, the practices captured in Table 5 underscore the value of strategic coordination and digital transformation in public procurement and supply chain management. Countries that implement these practices not only enhance operational efficiency but also improve service delivery and resilience in critical sectors. For policymakers and procurement planners, these examples provide a solid foundation for identifying successful models and potential areas for reform.

3.2.3. Economic Performance Analysis (2019–2023)

The economic performance analysis based on financial data from 2019 to 2023 reveals persistent inefficiencies and cost escalations in the logistics operations of the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service (HaZZ), particularly in asset procurement and maintenance.

Budget vs. Maintenance Expenditure Trends

As illustrated in Figure 2, capital investment in logistics rose steadily from €38 million in 2019 to a peak of over €51 million in 2022 before slightly declining in 2023. Meanwhile, maintenance costs exhibited a continuous upward trend, increasing from €24 million in 2019 to €34 million in 2023—a cumulative rise of approximately 42%.

This divergence signals a structural imbalance in asset lifecycle management: while significant funding was directed toward modernization, the lack of lifecycle planning and standardization has failed to curb rising maintenance demands. The simultaneous increase in both capital and maintenance spending suggests that newly acquired assets may not be reducing the upkeep burden of older fleets or that fleet heterogeneity is driving inefficiencies in servicing and parts procurement.

Procurement Price Variance Across Regions

Figure 3 provides a heat map of regional procurement price variance across four key equipment categories: personal protective equipment (PPE), fire trucks, communication radios, and water pumps.

The data show significant discrepancies in procurement costs across Slovakia’s eight administrative regions. For example, the price variance for fire trucks ranges from 12% (Trnava and Žilina) to 34% (Prešov), while radios show extreme disparities—from 5% (Košice) to 33% (Bratislava and Trnava). PPE costs vary by as much as 24 percentage points, with Košice and Banská Bystrica consistently paying higher-than-average rates.

These discrepancies highlight a major inefficiency in the decentralized procurement system. A variance of up to 30–34% for identical or comparable equipment categories suggests missed opportunities for bulk purchasing and standardization. The lack of a unified procurement framework likely contributes to higher overall expenditure and undermines interoperability, especially for specialized vehicles and technical equipment.

Correlation of Costs and Fragmentation

Together, the financial trends and procurement data underscore the high cost of fragmentation. Despite increased investment, the absence of a centralized digital inventory system, common procurement templates, and coordinated maintenance planning has resulted in rising operational costs and systemic underperformance. The fact that capital investment peaked in 2022 while maintenance costs continued climbing through 2023 indicates that investment alone, without structural reforms, does not yield lasting efficiency gains.

Moreover, anecdotal evidence from interviews confirms that many newly procured vehicles were not aligned with a national lifecycle strategy and are serviced independently, contributing to rising costs and delayed maintenance cycles. Several regional logistics officers noted difficulties in sourcing compatible spare parts due to varied vehicle specifications—a direct outcome of regionally autonomous procurement.

The economic performance analysis substantiates the need for a national logistics information system, centralized procurement mechanisms, and lifecycle-based contracting. Without these interventions, Slovakia risks perpetuating a pattern where modernization funds are absorbed without addressing the root inefficiencies in the logistics architecture. Cost optimization will depend less on increasing investment and more on deploying smarter, system-integrated logistics practices.

3.3. Synthesis and Policy Interpretation

Drawing on triangulated insights,

Table 6. Synthesis matrix of emerging high-impact reforms.

Recommendation	Cost Implication	Implementation Feasibility
Centralized procurement framework	Budget neutral	Medium (policy reform)
LIS deployment for national stock	Moderate initial	High (EU funding eligible)
Lifecycle-based contract standards	Long-term saving	High
Regional logistics coordination hubs	Cost-saving	High (leverages existing depots)

synthesizes practices identified in comparator countries and assesses their contextual fit for Slovakia. The “anticipated benefit” column reflects qualitative judgments supported by evidence from national policy evaluations, EU-funded performance audits, and secondary literature, where available. Specific metrics such as procurement cost reductions, deployment speed, and asset utilization rates were used when documented; where quantitative data were unavailable, benefits were scored using expert consensus based on the relevance and maturity of implementation.

The “relevance for Slovakia” rating derives from a three-part feasibility filter: (1) administrative compatibility, (2) regulatory alignment, and (3) operational fit. Each practice was assessed independently by two logistics specialists familiar with the Slovak institutional frameworks, using a rubric to assign qualitative scores (high, medium, low). These scores are not predictions but comparative indicators meant to guide policy adaptation discussions.

The discussion integrates logistics reform theories, such as public value logistics and institutional path dependency. Slovakia’s current logistics model reflects strong path dependency on decentralized procurement with fragmented digital capacity. Comparator countries that adopted whole-of-government logistics frameworks showed better resilience and efficiency. Thus, reforms must consider both technical feasibility and institutional inertia.

While many recommendations may appear standard (e.g., centralization, digital tools), their contextualization and sequencing are critical. Reform strategies must be phased, region-sensitive, and anchored in legal flexibility to ensure uptake.

The prioritization logic is supported by a qualitative Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) lens, which estimates lifecycle costs across four major reform areas. Detailed breakdowns of cost categories, investment horizons, and operational burdens are provided in Appendix C.2.

3.4. Theoretical Alignment

This study’s findings align with and extend the theories of logistics reform, public value creation, and institutional evolution in public administration. The results reinforce insights from logistics maturity models, particularly in their emphasis on centralized procurement, digital integration, and lifecycle cost optimization as indicators of systemic progress. These themes are consistent with the principles of “public value logistics”, which prioritize transparency, efficiency, and long-term societal return over short-term cost minimization.

The persistent fragmentation and procedural inertia observed in the Slovak logistics system reflect strong institutional path dependency—a condition wherein historical policy practices constrain future change options. The benchmarking results further illuminate how comparator countries overcame such constraints by investing in standardized procurement, national-level logistics hubs, and integrated information systems. The TCO analysis substantiates the operational inefficiencies tied to this path dependency, particularly in the form of rising maintenance burdens and procurement inconsistency.

To strengthen contextual grounding, we interpret these findings through three interrelated lenses: (1) organizational reform theory, which emphasizes the role of administrative routines in resisting innovation; (2) institutional adaptation literature, which examines how legal and financial instruments shape modernization efforts; and (3) comparative public management, which evaluates how different governance systems implement reforms under similar EU policy regimes. This framing allows us to situate Slovakia’s logistics challenges within broader reform trajectories observed in post-socialist European countries.

While the recommendations (e.g., centralized procurement, lifecycle-based contracting, LIS implementation) may appear common across reform literature, their effectiveness depends on strategic sequencing, legal anchoring, and political coalition-building. As such, we stress the importance of identifying reform windows, engaging resistance points (e.g., fragmented funding authorities), and ensuring stakeholder alignment across administrative levels.

By triangulating qualitative interviews, benchmarking scores, and cost ratios, this study provides an empirical grounding for these theoretical constructs. It also contributes to the emerging body of literature that connects comparative public management with infrastructure reform and fiscal sustainability. Ultimately, the study supports a reframing of logistics modernization not as a technical upgrade but as a transformative institutional endeavor requiring legal alignment, cultural adaptation, and phased implementation. These insights extend the previous work on EU civil protection [1] by providing operational-level evidence and practical pathways for institutional reforms.

Based on the integrated analysis of interview data, comparative benchmarking, and financial diagnostics,

Table 7. Synthesis and relevance of best practices and lessons for Slovakia.

Distinctive Feature	Country	Benefits
Centralized procurement with regional execution	Austria, the Czech Republic	Balances cost control and flexibility
Lifecycle-based acquisition	The Czech Republic, the Netherlands	Ensures long-term value and reduced maintenance burdens
Modular logistics platforms	Austria, Germany	Support scalable and crisis-responsive resource management
Integrated digital systems	Germany, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands	Enhance transparency, coordination, and predictive planning

synthesizes the most relevant and transferable logistics reform practices identified across comparator countries. The table highlights key features, associated benefits, and contextual fit for the Slovak Fire and Rescue Service.

The discussion of data introduced in Table 7 integrates logistics reform theories such as public value logistics and institutional path dependency. Slovakia’s current logistics model reflects strong path dependency on decentralized procurement with fragmented digital capacity. Comparator countries that adopted whole-of-government logistics frameworks showed better resilience and efficiency. Thus, reforms must consider both technical feasibility and institutional inertia.

While many recommendations may appear standard (e.g., centralization, digital tools), their contextualization and sequencing are critical. Reform strategies must be phased, region-sensitive, and anchored in legal flexibility to ensure uptake, such as public value logistics and institutional path dependency. Slovakia’s current logistics model reflects strong path dependency on decentralized procurement with fragmented digital capacity. Comparator countries that adopted whole-of-government logistics frameworks showed better resilience and efficiency. Thus, reforms must consider both technical feasibility and institutional inertia.

While many recommendations may appear standard (e.g., centralization, digital tools), their contextualization and sequencing are critical. Reform strategies must be phased, region-sensitive, and anchored in legal flexibility to ensure uptake.

4. Discussion

This study’s findings align with and extend the theories of logistics reform, public value creation, and institutional evolution in public administration. Specifically, the concept of “public value logistics”—as elaborated by Moore [35] and applied to logistics settings by Olander et al. [36]—emphasizes the need for public services that are not only cost-efficient but also transparent and socially responsive. Our findings demonstrate that Slovakia’s decentralized procurement structures and underdeveloped digital logistics systems inhibit these objectives.

Institutional path dependency, as theorized by Pierson [37], helps explain the persistence of inefficient procurement and planning practices. The qualitative and benchmarking results reveal systemic resistance to change—manifested in fragmented mandates and siloed IT governance—that is consistent with this framework. Countries like Austria and Germany, by contrast, have progressed through institutional layering and policy adaptation [38].

While recommendations such as centralized procurement and LIS development may seem conventional, their operationalization in Slovakia demands nuanced consideration of political feasibility and stakeholder alignment. Reforms must be sequenced strategically: centralized procurement cannot proceed without legislative reform and inter-municipal cooperation; LIS deployment requires regulatory frameworks, training, and phased piloting.

These observations are consistent with the broader public administration literature on reform feasibility (Pollitt and Bouckaert [39]) and change resistance in post-socialist systems (Meyer-Sahling [40]). Reform implementation must anticipate institutional friction and should include enabling levers such as pilot projects, transitional legal mandates, and engagement forums to ensure legitimacy and uptake.

This study avoids generic policy prescriptions by grounding its recommendations in empirical findings and contextual realities. Through the triangulation of interview data, benchmarking outcomes, and cost analyses, it contributes to the literature on institutional reform in logistics. Slovakia’s case typifies reform challenges faced by public logistics systems transitioning toward EU-aligned standards under fiscal and administrative constraints.

Ultimately, the findings position emergency logistics not only as a technical concern but as a governance challenge demanding strategic adaptation, institutional alignment, and long-term investment in public value systems.

5. Conclusions

This study examined the structural and institutional barriers affecting the performance of Slovakia’s emergency logistics system, drawing on qualitative interviews, benchmarking analysis, and financial data. It identified four systemic issues, i.e., fragmented procurement, lifecycle cost blind spots, digitalization deficits, and budget rigidity, each undermining the system’s responsiveness and efficiency.

While inefficiencies in public logistics have been acknowledged in previous audits, this study advances the discussion by integrating institutional reform theory and public value logistics frameworks to explain not only what is failing, but why reform has been elusive. Through triangulated data, the study demonstrates that path-dependent governance structures, under-aligned incentives, and fragmented mandates have created institutional inertia that technical fixes alone cannot resolve.

A key contribution of this research is the formulation of a context-sensitive reform roadmap. Drawing on comparative benchmarking and grounded feasibility analysis, the study presents a phased implementation strategy tailored to Slovakia’s administrative and legal environment. This approach surpasses existing policy reports by offering not only recommendations but also a sequencing logic and institutional preconditions for success.

Furthermore, the study highlights the importance of political feasibility, stakeholder engagement, and adaptive legal frameworks, dimensions often overlooked in purely technical evaluations. By framing logistics modernization as a governance issue, the research invites future studies to explore cross-sectoral synergies and long-term public value creation.

In sum, this work contributes to both logistics reform practice and theory by providing a structured, evidence-based model for operationalizing systemic transformation under real-world constraints.