Implications of legal scrutiny processes (including the L'Aquila trial and other recent court cases) for future volcanic risk governance

摘要: Discourse about the L’Aquila trial in Italy has overlooked many different roles that laws play within risk governance. For volcanic governance, not only create duty holders, beneficiaries and relationships between them (the stakeholders) duties rights stakes) but also dictate acceptable standards of safety wellbeing ultimate rewards). Within any legal regime, certain court cases will attract a high public profile. They can serve very helpful role by opening black box societal management so robust candid scrutiny past lead to better future. With such cases, goal competent observer is advance beyond debate contested factual details noise what happened) and, process induction, identify wider issues principle precedent upon which make reasoned improvements signal guide should happen differently future why). The generic characteristics law-based regulatory regimes are identified because they be treated as ‘constants’ do change, or slowly over time. Accordingly, these aspects highly relevant long-term More ephemeral case-specific often remain accordingly, receive less attention here. Significant recent including L’Aquila, framed deduction generalised infrastructure order root causes apparent status quo This forensic approach vital responsibilities managers managerial risks face their consider possible mitigation strategies. We critical issue vulnerability related ‘standard equivocality’ absence commonly recognised for hazard communications decision makers. may result from lack regulation practices practitioners. offer some recommendations fuel those science groups reacted case scientific community whole. Finally, we argue checklists represent rational methodical way develop practice focussed difficult choices made civil protection authorities at-risk individuals.