Perception of flood and landslide risk in Italy: a preliminary analysis

Abstract

Abstract. Inundations and landslides are widespread phenomena in Italy, where they cause severe damage and pose a threat to the population. Little is known about the public perception of landslide and flood risk. This is surprising, as an accurate perception is important for the successful implementation of many risk reduction or adaptation strategies. In an attempt to address this gap, we have conducted two national surveys to measure the perception of landslide and flood risk amongst the population of Italy. The surveys were conducted in 2012 and 2013, and consisted of approximately 3100 computer-assisted telephone interviews for each survey. The samples of the interviewees were statistically representative for a national-scale quantitative assessment. The interviewees were asked questions designed to obtain information on (i) their perception of natural, environmental, and technological risks, (ii) direct experience or general knowledge of the occurrence of landslides and floods in their municipality, (iii) perception of the possible threat posed by landslides and floods to their safety, (iv) general knowledge on the number of victims affected by landslides or floods, and on (v) the factors that the interviewees considered important for controlling landslide and flood risks in Italy. The surveys revealed that the population of Italy fears technological risks more than natural risks. Of the natural risks, earthquakes were considered more dangerous than floods, landslides, and volcanic eruptions. Examination of the temporal and geographical distributions of the responses revealed that the occurrence of recent damaging events influenced risk perception locally, and that the perception persisted longer for earthquakes and decreased more rapidly for landslides and floods. We explain the difference by the diverse consequences of the risks. The interviewees considered inappropriate land management the main cause of landslide and food risk, followed by illegal construction, abandonment of the territory, and climate change. Comparison of the risk perception with actual measures of landslide and flood risk, including the number of fatal events, the number of fatalities, and the mortality rates, revealed that in most of the Italian regions, the perception of the threat did not match the long-term risk posed to the population by landslides and floods. This outcome points to a need to foster an understanding of the public towards landslide and flood hazards and risks in Italy.

Impact of event landslides on road networks: a statistical analysis of two Italian case studies

“…In Italy, geohydrological hazards, including landslides, cause serious economic damage and represent a severe threat to the population (Salvati et al 2014). In this country, rich information exists on landslides, their physical characteristics and consequences, while little is known on their economic impact.…”

Landslide risk perception: a case study in Southern Italy

“…Perception of exposure to landslide risk As reported in the introduction, an interesting study was recently carried out to assess the perception of risk in relation to landslides and flooding in Italy (Salvati et al 2014). The most relevant question of this study in relation to our study is the following: BTo what extent do you think you are personally exposed to the risk of flooding or landslides?^ (Fig.…”

“…Fig. 7 Some results of a national survey conducted in 2013 in Italy (Salvati et al 2014); answer to question: BHow much do you think you may be exposed to flood and landslide risk?^9 Evaluation of adopted strategies for risk management Paton and Johnston (2001) stress the importance, within an allhazard management framework, of assimilating and coordinating the perspectives/needs derived from community consultation within a strategic context and seeking, as far as possible, to provide the information and resources necessary to sustain empowerment, self-help and resilience. They also state that whilst perception of a threat remains a pertinent precursor of riskreducing behaviour, the key factors are action-outcome expectancies (consideration of whether risk may be reduced) and selfefficacy (whether the required actions are within the capabilities of the individual) judgements.…”

“…Along the same line, Scolobig et al (2011) defined and tested a deliberative stakeholder procedure for selecting landslide risk mitigation measures, taking technical as well as economic, environmental and social factors into account. Recently, in Italy, two national surveys were conducted to assess the perception of risk in relation to landslides and flooding in the respondent's area of residence, in comparison with other kinds of risks (CNR-IRPI 2013;Salvati et al 2014). These revealed that Italians fear technological risks more than natural risks, whilst earthquakes were considered more dangerous than floods, landslides and volcanic eruptions.…”

Mapping social vulnerability to natural hazards in Italy: A suitable tool for risk mitigation strategies

“…Considering the hydrogeological hazard, over the last 50 years (1964-2013) landslide and flood events affected 2034 municipalities (25% of the total), causing 2007 dead, 87 missing and at least 2.578 injured in (Guzzetti et al, 2005;Guzzetti et al, 2013;Salvati et al, 2014). According to the Italian Landslide Inventory IFFI, an important landslides database used as tool for Civil Protection Plans, 528.903 are the landslides surveyed in Italy (7.3% of the total national area) (Ispra, 2014).…”