GNGTS 2024 - Atti del 42° Convegno Nazionale

Session 2.3 GNGTS 2024 Why - The stated goals of seismic risk communicaton (multple responses) are to share informaton (62%), raise awareness (47%), change behaviours (27%), change beliefs (16%), and increase preparedness (4%). Over tme, communicaton has become more proactve than informatve (Fig. 3c). How - Interactve and visual language tools were mentoned most frequently, regardless of the temporal distributon (Fig. 3d). Serious games and augmented reality have only appeared in our data sample since the beginning of 2016. Personal communicaton (face-to-face, 39 %) far outperformed the internet (7 %) and even the mass media (4 %). However, the evoluton of communicaton techniques is clearly evident in the use of social media, which enables rapid interpersonal communicaton and collaboraton even during disasters (e.g., Saraò et al., 2023). The methods used for communicaton practces were mostly surveys (18%) and classroom actvites (16%), while focus groups, outreach events and interviews were the least used. However, multple methods were reported in 24% of publicatons. Risk communicaton research and practce is mainly funded by public internatonal (29%) and natonal (26%) insttutons. Only about half of the publicatons report on the evaluaton of the efciency/performance of seismic risk communicaton. The majority of publicatons (80%) do not explicitly formulate their theoretcal basis. When theories are mentoned, defcit and behavioural models are the most frequently cited. Where - Seismic risk communicaton started at the local level with the documentaton of practces implemented in diferent countries and then took on an increasingly internatonal character over the years. Seismic risk communicaton in Europe is unevenly distributed across countries, with Italy having the highest number of documents in the analysed dataset, followed by Portugal, Iceland, Romania, Turkey, France and Greece (Fig. 3e). This could be related to our criteria for the selecton of documents and does not necessarily indicate a lack of interest in seismic risk communicaton. However, with regard to Italy, we menton two earthquakes that had a strong impact on seismic risk communicaton in Italy. These are the 2002 earthquake in San Giuliano di Puglia (Mw=5.7), which led to the collapse of a school and the death of 26 children and their teacher, and the 2009 earthquake in L’Aquila (Mw=6.3) and the well-known legal dispute associated with it. Conclusions Although earthquakes are a threat in many countries and considerable resources have been invested in safety regulatons, communites at risk ofen lack awareness and preparedness. In this study, we reviewed the literature on earthquake risk communicaton in Europe published since 2000. We analysed the approaches, messages, tools and channels used for communicaton and how they have changed over tme. The main objectves of seismic risk communicaton over the last two decades were to share informaton, raise awareness, change behaviours/beliefs and increase preparedness. Communicaton has mainly taken place in the pre-crisis phase of a disaster's life cycle, when risk awareness and the ability to cope with hazards can be efectvely built. Pupils, students and citzens were the main recipients of the communicaton actvites. Over the years, two-way, transdisciplinary and botom-up communicaton models have prevailed over the one-way model. In additon, communicaton has increasingly aimed at encouraging proactve behaviour rather than simply informing the public. Face-to-face conversatons, hands-on