Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to reflect on what can be learned about disaster risk reduction (DRR) from the L’Aquila trial of scientists. The court case was initiated because of a controversial meeting on 31 March 2009 of the Major Risks Committee (MRC), held under the auspices of the Italian Department of Civil Protection. The purpose of the meeting was to consider (prior to the fatal earthquake of 6 April 2009) disaster risk in the L’Aquila area, which was being affected by an earthquake swarm since October 2008. Design/methodology/approach The authors undertook a document analysis of trial materials, and a review of academic and media commentary about the trial. Findings The legal process revealed that disaster governance was inadequate and not informed by the DRR paradigm or international guidelines. Risk assessment was carried out only in a techno-scientific manner, with little acknowledgement of the social issues influencing risks at the local community level. There was no inclusion of local knowledge or engagement of local people in transformative DRR strategies. Originality/value Most previous commentary is inadequate in terms of not considering the institutional, scientific and social responsibilities for DRR as exposed by the trial. This paper is unique in that it considers the contents of the MRC meeting as well as all trial documents. It provides a comprehensive reflection on the implications of this case for DRR and the resilience of peoples and places at risk. It highlights that a switch from civil protection to community empowerment is needed to achieve sustainable outcomes at the local level.

Highlights

  • The 6 April 2009 earthquake in L’Aquila, Italy, drew the attention of scientists all over the world for various reasons

  • The purpose of this paper is to reflect on what can be learned about disaster risk reduction (DRR) from the L’Aquila trial of scientists

  • The various phases of the legal process identified many issues and had differing interpretations of them. These related to the status of the meeting held in L’Aquila, the public duty the Department of Civil Protection (DCP) and Major Risks Committee (MRC) had for precaution and prevention of disaster risks, the risk assessment conducted and the communication implemented

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The 6 April 2009 earthquake in L’Aquila, Italy, drew the attention of scientists all over the world for various reasons. The trial established that late in the evening of 31 March, Barberi and Dolce independently phoned Bertolaso to inform him how the meeting went, each saying that it “went as instructed” and that they made the Abruzzo councillor (Stati) happy by saying that there were no tools for earthquake forecasting (Tribunale di L’Aquila, 2012). This suggests that the meeting was a political stunt involving stooges rather than professional advice from independent scientists. The 169-page decision statement (Corte di Cassazione, 2016) repeated key facts and articulated various high level principles, some of which are discussed below

Key issues in the legal process
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call