8/3/2019 Nature Earth Quake

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nature-earth-quake 1/1

Scientists who assessed earthquake risk at L’Aquila could be indicted on manslaughter charges.

Italy puts seismology in the dock

ROME

The deadly earthquake that struck the centralItalian city of L’Aquila on 6 April 2009, has hada bizarre aftershock: some of Italy’s top seismol-ogists could face charges of manslaughter fornot alerting the population before the disaster.The indictment has outraged experts aroundthe world, who note that earthquakescannot be predicted and who say thatthe Italian government neglected toenforce building codes that could

have reduced the toll.The indictments, issued on 3 June

by the L’Aquila public prosecutor’soffice, name six scientists as beinginvestigated for manslaughter in rela-tion to the earthquake. In Italy, thisstep usually precedes a request for acourt trial, and is meant to allow theaccused time to prepare their defence.The list comprises Enzo Boschi, presi-dent of the National Institute for Geo-physics and Vulcanology (INGV) inRome, the main institute in charge of seismic monitoring; Giulio Selvaggi,

director of the National Earthquake Centerbased at INGV; Franco Barberi, a volcanologistat the University of ‘Roma Tre’; Claudio Eva, aprofessor of earth physics at the University of Genoa; Mauro Dolce, head of the seismic risk office in the Italian government’s Civil Protec-tion Agency; and Gian Michele Calvi, director of the European Centre for Training and Researchin Earthquake Engineering in Pavia. A govern-ment official, Bernardo De Bernardinis, deputy technical head of the Civil Protection Agency, isalso under investigation.

Assigning blame

On 31 March 2009, all seven were in L’Aquilaat a meeting of the Major Risks Committee, anexpert group that advises the Civil ProtectionAgency on the risks of natural disasters. Frequenttremors had been recorded in the surroundingAbruzzo region, culminating in a magnitude-4.0earthquake on 30 March. The meeting was con-

 vened by the service to ask the scientists whethera major earthquake was on its way.

Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardi-nis and Barberi, acting president of the commit-tee, held a press conference in L’Aquila, whereDe Bernardinis told reporters that “the scientificcommunity tells us there is no danger, because

there is an ongoing discharge of energy. Thesituation looks favorable”. No other members

of the committee were at the press conference.But on 6 April a magnitude-6.3 earthquake

struck L’Aquila, killing 308 people, leavingabout 1,600 injured and more than 65,000homeless. A group of local citizens later saidthat many of the earthquake’s victims hadbeen planning to leave their homes — but had

changed their minds after the committee’sstatements. In August 2009 they filed a for-mal request asking a prosecutor to investigate.L’Aquila’s chief prosecutor, Alfredo Rossini, toldthe Italian press on 3 June that this had left himno choice but to proceed with an investigationand that his office had now gathered enoughinformation to indict the individuals named.

The minutes of the 31 March meeting,though, reveal that at no point did any of thescientists say that there was “no danger” of abig quake. “A major earthquake in the area isunlikely but cannot be ruled out,” Boschi said.Selvaggi is quoted as saying that “in recent

times some recent earthquakes have been pre-ceded by minor shocks days or weeks before-hand, but on the other hand many seismicswarms did not result in a major event”. Evaadded that “because L’Aquila is in a high-risk zone it is impossible to say with certainty thatthere will be no large earthquake”. Summingup the meeting, Barberi said, “there is no rea-son to believe that a swarm of minor eventsis a sure predictor of a major shock”. All theparticipants agreed that buildings in the areashould be monitored urgently, to assess theircapacity to sustain a major shock.

“These are the only sensible statements any 

scientist could make at that point,” says SusanHough, a geophysicist at the US Geological

Survey in Pasadena, California. But Hough doesdisagree with some of the things said at the pressconference. “The idea that minor earthquakesrelease energy and thus make things better isa common misperception. But seismologistsknow it’s not true,” she says. “I doubt any scien-tist could have said that.”

De Bernardinis, Boschi and Sel- vaggi said that they were unable tocomment on the case because of theongoing investigation. Before the

indictment, Boschi had criticized theCivil Protection Agency’s handling of the 31 March meeting. “Such a meet-ing”, he stated in a letter on 16 Sep-tember 2009 to Guido Bertolaso, thehead of the Civil Protection Agency,“should have lasted hours if the CivilProtection Agency really wanted toconsider all the data. Instead it only lasted one hour, and it was not fol-lowed by a joint statement but by apress conference about which wewere not informed.”

The Civil Protection Agency 

responded by asking Boschi why he waitedsix months before objecting to the nature of the meeting, and stated that Boschi “neverexplained what specific actions” the depart-ment should have taken to reduce the risksfrom a potential earthquake.

SolidarityStaff at INGV have signed a letter of solidar-ity with Boschi and Selvaggi. Seismologistsworldwide have also rallied to the defence of the scientists, with almost 4,000 researchersfrom 100 different countries signing a letter toGiorgio Napolitano, Italy’s president, urging

decision-makers to concentrate on “earthquakepreparedness and risk mitigation rather than onprosecuting scientists for failing to do somethingthey cannot do yet — predict earthquakes”.

Barry Parsons, at the department of earth sci-ences at the University of Oxford, who signedthe letter, says that Italy’s maps of seismic risk are of the highest possible standard, and clearly show that Abruzzo is a very high-risk area. “Theproven and effective way of protecting popula-tions is by enforcing strict building codes,” hesays. “Scientists are often asked the wrong ques-tion, which is ‘when will the next earthquakehit?’ The right question is ‘how do we make sure

it won’t kill so many people when it hits?’”■

Nicola Nosengo

Citizens blame scientists for not warning of the L’Aquila earthquake.

    A .

    T    A    r    A    n

    T    i    n    o    /    A    P    P    h    o    T    o

992

Vol 465|24 June 2010

NEWS

© 20 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved10