Seminario regionale sui rischi naturali:

RAFFORZAMENTO DELLE CAPACIT SOCIALI

PER AFFRONTARE I RISCHI NATURALI NELLE ALPI
Gorizia, 4-5 Aprile 2011
Sala della Torre, via Carducci 2, Gorizia
Con il finanziamento
didi
ed il contributo

Commissione Europea 7

PROGRAMMA
4 aprile 2011
8.45-9.15

Registrazione

9.15 9.45

Saluti delle autorit

9.45-10.00 Presentazione del progetto CapHaz-Net

Annett Steinfhrer/Christian Kuhlicke- Coordinatori progetto CapHaz-Net,
UFZ
10.00-10.15

Presentazione del Workshop sui disastri naturali nelle Alpi

Luigi Pellizzoni - ISIG

10.15- 11.15 Sessione 1 Un panoramica sui disastri naturali nelle Alpi

Moderatore: Annett Steinfhrer, UFZ
Rischi naturali nelle Alpi: lezioni apprese e scenari futuri
Sven Fuchs, Institute of Mountain Risk Engineering, Universit delle
risorse naturali e delle scienze naturali applicate, ,Vienna
Gestione del rischio naturale nelle Alpi: una prospettiva storica
Anne Marie Granet Abisset - Universit di Grenoble 2
11.15-11.30 Coffee break

11.30-13.15 Sessione 2 La gestione dei disastri naturali nelle Alpi

Moderatore:
La gestione dei disastri naturali nelle Alpi del Friuli Venezia Giulia
Guglielmo Berlasso, Protezione Civile FVG
La gestione dei disastri naturali nelle Alpi austriache
Kurt Kalcher, Direttore dellautorit di gestione dei disastri, regione
Stiria
La gestione dei disastri naturali nelle Alpi slovene
Samo Kosma, Amministrazione Protezione Civile, unit di Nova
Gorica

La gestione dei disastri naturali nelle Alpi svizzere

Franziska Schmid, Ufficio Federale Svizzero per lAmbiente
13.15 14.30
14.30- 15.30

Pranzo Buffet

Sessione 3: un focus sul Friuli Venezia Giulia

Moderatore: Chiara Bianchizza- ISIG
Applicazione della direttiva 2007/60 nella gestione dei bacini idrici
nelle Alpi in FVG
Renato Villalta Direttore Autorit di Bacino Regionale FVG
Geografia umana dello spazio alpino. I processi partecipati in FVG.
Mauro Pascolini - Universit di Udine
Vivere lo spazio alpino
Moreno Baccichet - Universit di Ferrara e 'Legambiente'

15.30- 16.30
domande-

Sessione 4: Lavoro di gruppo

Tre gruppi di lavoro, che discuteranno le sessioni precedenti partendo da
guida legate ai temi principali del progetto CapHaz-Net.
Gruppo 1: il ruolo della conoscenza nel rafforzamento delle capacit
sociali di fronte ai disastri alpini
Gruppo 2. il ruolo del capitale sociale nel rafforzamento delle capacit
sociali di fronte ai disastri alpini
Gruppo 3: il ruolo delle strutture istituzionali nel rafforzamento delle
capacit sociali di fronte ai disastri alpini

16.30- 17.00
Sessione plenaria: condivisione dei risultati dei lavori di gruppo
della sessione 4
Moderatore: Matthias Buchecker- WSL

5 aprile 2011
9.00-10.00 Sessione 5 :Presentazione dei casi e introduzione allanalisi SWOT
La mitigazione del rischio idrogeologico a Malborghetto Valbruna:
presentazione del caso e della SWOT preliminare preparata dallISIG
Anna Scolobig, ISIG
La mitigazione del rischio idrogeologico a Vipiteno/Sterzing:
presentazione del caso e della SWOT preliminare preparata dallISIG
Chiara Bianchizza, ISIG
10.00- 12.00

Sessione 6: Lavoro di gruppo

Coordinatore: Chiara Bianchizza, ISIG
[In questa sessione, ogni gruppo di lavoro elabora ulteriormente lanalisi
SWOT proposta dallISIG, del caso in cui sono direttamente coinvolti]
Malborghetto Valbruna
Vipiteno/Sterzing
Membri del consorzio CapHaz-Net ed esperti esterni sviluppano un
modello teorico per la SWOT sui disastri alpini

12.00-13.30 Pranzo buffet

13.30- 15.00

Sessione plenaria: presentazione dei risultati della sessione 6 e

discussione
Moderatore: Luigi Pellizzoni, ISIG

15.00 -15.30Conclusioni
Annett Steinfhrer, UFZ
Alberto Gasparini, Direttore ISIG
15.30 -16. 00

Caff di saluto

3.3 Living the alpine space

Moreno Baccichet, architect
Moreno Baccichet is an architect. He is a researcher in History of Architecture and urban planning, specialized in
the history of the venetian/friulian territory. Since many years he has been teaching at the university of Ferrara and
at the faculty of architecture in Venice. He is volunteer of Legambiente in Friuli Venezia Giulia and in this context he
is particularity involved for what concerns participatory urban planning and landscape conservation.

The perspective of this analysis is related to a long term perspective that takes into account
that the population has been living the issue of natural disasters since the beginning of the
colonisations of the mountains. The historical knowledge we have about Friuli Venezia Giulia
allows us to read the link between colonisations, risk and disasters starting from the medieval time,
through written documents. Some examples concerning the transformation of the territory and
different approaches to it in the past and in the present times are here presented. While in the past
the population had a very empirical, direct relation to the territory, nowadays the information and
the technical management skills come from outside the local communities, which are often not
even asked about the modifications that are going to intervene in their own territory. Barcis, a little
settlement on the Friulian mountain, was initially built in 1100 on clay hills around the little church of
S. Giorgio, after a quick deforestation action. This settlement soon experienced landslide events.
For this reason it was moved around the year 1200 to the area where it still is found today, a much
more stable area than the one chosen before. On the area of the previous settlement a church was
built to signal the danger of landslides and a yearly religious procession to it was established by
the bishop. The community was thus constantly reminded of the peculiarity of the place. The area
were the village was rebuilt was a terrain made of riverine-glacial debris, well suited for a safer
settlement. This choice was done autonomously by the local community, with external intervention
from the bishop, for instance, in the institution of the yearly pilgrimage. In 1951 a dike was built in
this area and the village of Barcis, stable for centuries, was subject to many changes due to this
external intervention. The hydroelectric basin got half filled by debris and the small tributary, the
Varm, started often creating overflowing into the village. The external infrastructure, the dike, thus
created new issues that were previously unknown in the area.
Another interesting example is the case of the village of Erto, destroyed by the great Vajont
catastrophe in 1963. The event has however roots that are far in history. In high medieval period, a
wooden village was built in the S. Martino area. Due to some landslides and avalanche episodes
the village was then moved to a safer location. In 1600, a big landslide moved from the Salta
mountain, but no damage was caused to Erto or Casso, a neighbouring village. The destruction of
1963 was caused by an artificial dike built in the valley, an external element in a landscape safe for
centuries.
This empirical approach made of different settlement attempts became more evident from
the modern age when, starting from scarcely populated settlements of the high mediaeval period,
the colonisation, through deforestation, claimed territories never used before. At this point a conflict
of use emerged between the need for new fields for cattle fodder on the side and the space
needed for housing on the other. In fact, if in the medieval time houses could be located safely on a

riverine terrace, the colonisation of the modern time, stimulated by Venetian territorial concessions,
from around 1500 moved especially towards the mountain sides. Here wooden stables were built
for cattle were built at first. Later on, in the second half of the 17th century, the population started
settling there permanently. A map of 1606 testifies this progressive colonisation.
The building of all these settlements was possible only due to a high degree of knowledge
of the territory and of the natural hazards by the local population. Due to deforestation, some of
these settlements literally collapsed and these events became part of the local culture. An example
of this is the case of Borta, in the valley of the river Tagliamento. Here in 1692 an avalanche
destroyed a whole village. The difficult relationship between people and their territory was captured
in local folk tales to keep the attention of people always awake to this fragile equilibrium. The new
village of Borta was then built in a area safe from avalanches. Territorial taboos related to the
difficult relationship with the territory are very popular. In the village of Tramonti, still in the Friulian
mountains, a folk tale was passed on from one generation to another. The girls who brought
supplies to the stables located high on the mountain side, were always reminded that next to the
erosion they would find long the path there was an ogre that could kill them. In this way it was
made sure that the girls would always pay attention in that part of the path that was often eroded.
There are also other literary experiences, collected by writers in the Friulian mountains.
One example is Li striis di Germanie, by Caterina Percoto, a writer of the 19th century. She
writes about a man destroying the mountain near the rio Moscardo, a torrent that still nowadays
erodes often the surrounding territory. The patriarch of Aquileia, in the 13 th century, wanted a town
built exactly near the river; however, due to the local knowledge of the territory, embodied in this
story, the settlement was never built on this unstable soil and only a tower (torre Moscarda, from
the name of the river) was erected. The local culate of these periods was related to the direct
experience of the community which adapted to the territorial circumstances. Nowadays the
mountain became a system of networks that are external to the local communities, but relate
instead to lager scales: we talk then of networks connecting Italy, Northern Europe etc. The
dimension of infrastructures built in the mountain territory that we have to defend from natural
hazards is much larger than the local scale. Often local communities see these infrastructures as a
threat to their settlements. This is the case of the electro-duct that should be built in Carnia, the
mountainous part of Friuli (a region that produces already more energy that what is needed in the
whole of its territory). The local communities strongly opposed to this choice that they felt was
exogenous. Episodes like this make people feel stranger to their own valleys. During events such
as floods these infrastructures become symbols of the difficult relationship between the local
population and the choices imposed from the outside. We complain about floods; yet, if we look for
instance at the map of Moggio in 1804 we can see the village was the far from the river bed. Since
1930s when the fascist government built a paper mill at the meeting point between the rivers Fella
and Aupa, the settlement moved progressively towards the watercourse with predictable
consequences. However, since this settlement now exists, it needs to be protected from floods.
This also keeps happening nowadays. The industrial area of Zuglio and Cedarchis, for instance,
has been built inside the river bed. These settlements are always guaranteed and certified by
experts, and funded. The material excavated from the construction of part of the railways is being
cumulated since ten years in the bed of the river Fella. No one questioned if this might create an
hydraulic problem. There is a real need to move away from water and to stop building on and in the
proximity of river beds.

The highway Udine-Tarvisio has been built for all its length on top of the river bed. The river
has been reduced in certain areas to a third of its previous space. It seems obvious that some
steps back need to be taken. It is not enough to convince the local population, the whole region
needs to be convinced that some of these infrastructures have to be moved to different areas.
Space need to be left to the river to expand, or we will just keep complaining against evil nature.
Currently it is often the case that infrastructures are built to protect other infrastructures.
These protection measures are not always well adapted and merged in the territory.
Currently there are two main examples of infrastructures planned in the mountain area, without any
involvement of the local population. One is the case of the highway Carnia-Cadore, that will cross a
part of the river Tagliamento valley where there are currently no geological issues, no risks. The
abandonment of the fields has caused a total reforestation of the area, thus leading to the
stabilisation of the mountain sides. There are no human settlements in this area, so even if 600
mm of rain fall in one day, there is no structure or population that is exposed to risk. The highway
will cross this area as well as the area where the avalanche of Borta (see above) is located. This is
an extremely geologically unstable territory.
Another case is the highway that has been planned by some private firms to connect
Gemona to Sequals. This stretch of land is characterised by clay soil that easily slides and moves
with rainfall. These hills will be crossed by the road and excavated to make tunnels. The population
is not involved at any degree into this decision; even worst, its not a public authority that
intervenes, but a private company that wants to make money creating an infrastructure for which
people will have to pay a toll.
To conclude, few points that might be helpful for the debate:
The experience made with communities on the drafting of community maps might be
helpful. In this case people are asked to define the places of greatest interest and value. Asking
communities to identify places that they think are at risk could be a starting point when planning
infrastructures (rather than imposing the decision from the outside).
Another opportunity could be the application of Agenda 21 processes as a chance to create
participation. The only regional case in which this happened proved to be very effective when
difficult choices had to be made for territorial planning.