Background:

Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 2019/818 established the EU interoperability framework to improve information exchange between large-scale EU information systems in the fields of borders, migration, asylum and security. While the Regulations define the technical framework and EU-LISA's responsibilities, Member States remain free to determine their national governance arrangements. Given the cross-cutting nature of interoperability, effective coordination between the relevant national authorities is essential. This ad hoc query aims to map how Member States have organised the governance of interoperability at national level, including the designation, mandate and institutional positioning of any national interoperability authority or coordination body, as well as future plans where such arrangements are not yet in place.

Respondents:

22 EMN Member Countries (including BE)  provided a public answer to this ad hoc query.

Findings:

A preliminary analysis of the results of the ad hoc query shows that:

• The majority of responding EMN Member Countries have designated a national interoperability authority or coordinating body, though the structure varies significantly. While countries like BE, CY, CZ, EE, ES, FI, HR, LT, LU, NL, PT, SI and SK have established formal authorities, others like BG, DE, HU, LV and PL do not have a single designated body, often relying on existing inter-agency mechanisms, steering committees, or distributed responsibilities. IE does not participate in Regulation (EU) 2019/817 because it is based on the Schengen acquis, in which IE does not participate.
   
• Most designated authorities are not independent and typically operate within broader institutional frameworks, such as the Ministry of the Interior (BE, CZ, ES, FI, FR, LT, SK) or the National Police (LU). PT is a notable exception, reporting an independent authority with legal personality and financial autonomy.
   
• Resource allocation for these authorities is diverse. Several EMN Member Countries have dedicated personnel and budgets specifically for interoperability (BE, EE, FI, FR, LU). Conversely, others integrate interoperability tasks into existing IT mandates or share resources and staff within a superior authority (CY, CZ, ES, HR, LT, NL, PL, SI, SK).
   
• The duration of these governance arrangements is split between temporary and permanent structures. In countries like CY, EE, FI, FR, HR, NL and SI, the authority or coordination structure is established on a temporary basis to oversee the implementation phase. In contrast, BE, CZ, ES, LT, LU, PT and SK have designated their authorities on a permanent basis to manage the ongoing operation and future evolution of the framework.

For further details, please read the compilation of answers attached above.