Institutional communication of natural hazards: gli early warning systems

The necessity of addressing the effects of climate change, the awareness of the natural risks to which certain territories are constantly exposed, as well as the complex systemic consequences arising from the increasing availability of knowledge and information by public decision-makers regarding the state and evolution of these territories, make the administrative law of risk a particularly interesting and dynamic field of research. Within this field, indeed, it is possible to observe, in the management of specific issues, the evolution of the general categories of the legal system.

An example of this dynamic can be clearly seen in the influence that new technologies exert on classical models of public management of natural risks. These models increasingly rely on the large volume of environmental and territorial information that can be acquired through various available environmental monitoring methods, the forecasting models based on this information, and, finally, the communication tools (including automated ones) used to convey risks to the public.

This research specifically focuses on the latter aspect, delving into the sensitive issue of institutional communication of natural risks: the tools dedicated to this purpose, the organizational models that can be employed, and the conditions for their effectiveness.

In particular, based on the “operational guidelines for the issuance of public warning messages for volcanic events and related tsunamis” (adopted by the Department of Civil Protection pursuant to Article 5 of the Directive of the President of the Council of Ministers of October 23, 2020, as amended

and supplemented by the Directive of the Minister of Civil Protection and Maritime Policies of February 7, 2023), some legal considerations will be made regarding early warning systems (including with specific reference to the recently introduced IT-Alert system), framing them within the classical principles of risk law, with particular attention to the relationship with the precautionary principle.

Having defined the scope of the discussion, and based on the analysis of the precautionary model, the potential administrative legality consequences of institutional communication of natural risks will be analyzed, with particular emphasis – following the doctrine that has dealt with the topic – on the role that public involvement and participation play in making communication measures effective, ensuring that these measures are actually integrated into a “social process” of continuous risk management, rather than being, ultimately, another fragmented emergency response.