Flood risk policies in Italy: a longitudinal institutional analysis of continuity and change

Figures & data

Figure 1. Politicized institutional analysis and development framework.

Note: Grey boxes correspond to the variables added by Clement (2010) to the original institutional analysis and developed framework by Ostrom (2005).

Table 1. Overview of the consulted policy documents.

Year	Policy documents
1952	Legge 19 marzo 1952,n. 184. Piano orientativo ai fini di una sistematica regolazione delle acque e relazione annua del Ministero dei lavori pubblici [Law 19 March 1952, no. 184: Illustrative Plan for Water Control and Annual Report of the Ministry of Public Works]
1962	Legge 25 gennaio 1962,n. 11. Piano di attuazione per una sistematica regolazione dei corsi d’acqua naturali [Law 25 January 1962, no. 11. Implementation Plan for Natural Watercourses Management]
1970	Atti della Commissione Interministeriale per lo studio della sistemazione idraulica e della difesa del suolo [Proceedings of the Interministerial Committee for the Study of Hydraulic Works and Soil Defence]
1977	Decreto del Presidente della Repubblica 24 luglio 1977, n. 616. Attuazione della delega di cui all’art. 1 della legge 22 Luglio 1975, n. 382 [Decree of the President of the Italian Republic, 24 July 1977, no. 616. Implementation of Art. 1, Law 22 July 1975, no. 382]
1986	Legge 8 luglio 1986,n. 349. Istituzione del Ministero dell’ambiente e norme in materia di danno ambientale [Law 8 July 1986, no. 349. Establishment of the Ministry of Environment and Regulations Concerning Environmental Damage]
1989	Legge 18 maggio 1989,n. 183. Norme per il riassetto organizzativo e funzionale della difesa del suolo [Law 18 May 1989, no. 183. Regulations Concerning Organizational and Functional Aspects of Soil Defence]
1992	Legge 24 febbraio 1992,n. 225. Istituzione del servizio nazionale della protezione civile [Law 24 February 1992, no. 225. Establishment of the National Civil Protection Service]
1998	Legge 3 agosto 1998,n. 267. Conversione in legge, con modificazioni, del decreto-legge 11 giugno 1998,n. 180, recante misure urgenti per la prevenzione del rischio idrogeologico ed a favore delle zone colpite da disastri franosi nella regione Campania [Law 3 August 1998, no. 267. Conversion into Law with Modification of the Decree-Law 11 June 1998, no. 180 Concerning Urgent Measures for Landslide and Flood Risk Prevention and in Support of the Areas Affected by Landslides in Campania Region]
2000	Legge 11 dicembre 2000,n. 365. Conversione in legge, con modificazioni, del decreto-legge 12 ottobre 2000,n. 279, recante interventi urgenti per le aree a rischio idrogeologico molto elevato ed in materia di protezione civile, nonché a favore delle zone della regione Calabria danneggiate dalle calamità idrogeologiche di settembre ed ottobre 2000 [Law 11 December 2000, no. 365. Conversion into Law with Modification of the Decree-Law 12 October 2000, no. 279 Concerning Urgent Measures for Very-High Landslide and Flood Risk Areas and on Matters Concerning the Civil Protection and in Support of the Areas Affected by Landslides and Floods in Calabria Region in September and October 2000]
2006	Decreto legislativo 3 aprile 2006,n. 152. Norme in materia ambientale [Legislative decree 3 April 2006, no. 152. Regulations Concerning Environmental Matters]
2010	Decreto legislativo 23 febbraio 2010,n. 49 Attuazione della direttiva 2007/60/CE relativa alla valutazione e alla gestione dei rischi di alluvioni [Legislative decree 23 February 2010, no. 49. Transposition of the Floods Directive 2007/60/EC Concerning Flood Risks Assessment and Management]
2012	Carta Nazionale dei Contratti di Fiume [National Charter for the River Contracts]
2015	Strategia Nazionale di Adattamento ai Cambiamenti Climatici [National Strategy for Climate Change Adaptation]
2017	Italia Sicura. Il piano nazionale di opere e interventi e il piano finanziario per la riduzione del rischio idrogeologico [Italia Sicura. National Plan of Measures and Interventions, and Financial Plan for Landslide and Flood Risk Mitigation]
2018	Piano Nazionale di Adattamento ai Cambiamenti Climatici [National Plan for Climate Change Adaptation]
2019	ProteggItalia. Piano nazionale per la mitigazione del rischio idrogeologico, il ripristino e la tutela della risorsa ambientale [ProteggItalia. National Plan for Landslide and Flood Risk Mitigation, Restoration and Protection of the Environment]

Table 2. Overview of the analysis of flood risk policies in Italy between 1952 and 2020.

Phase 1: 1952–89	Phase 2: 1990–2006	Phase 3: 2007–20
Physical/material conditions
Building boom Rivers straightened and channelled Increased flood risk Deteriorating water quality	Urbanization continues Floodplain occupancy exacerbates flood exposure	Urbanization continues at a slower pace Floodplain occupancy further exacerbates flood exposure
Politico-economic context
Dominant centralistic approach State funding rather discontinuous and mostly geared towards post-disaster management	Progressive empowerment of regions on flood risk management European Union (EU) as a new actor in water management policies (EU directives and EU funding) State–regional funding mostly geared towards hard control infrastructure	Devolution of power versus recentralization attempts State–regional funding mostly geared towards hard control infrastructure
Attributes of the community and discourses
Dominant paradigm: control over nature Standards-based approach: focus on flood probability-reduction measures State-centred attitude Involvement of hydraulic engineers Dominant engineering resilience discourse	New paradigm: soil protection Attempts towards a risk-based approach State–regional allocation of competencies Involvement of hydraulic engineers, spatial planners and the department of civil protection River contracts initiated as bottom-up voluntary planning processes Attempts towards ecological and socio-ecological discourses of resilience	New paradigm: flood risk governance Standards-based versus risk-based approach Broadened set of actors and measures Failed transition towards the operationalization of ecological and socio-ecological resilience discourses
Position rules
Central government responsible for hydraulic risk and soil protection (Ministry of Public Works and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry), first aid (Ministry of Domestic Affairs), and water management (Ministry of Environment) Regions entrusted with the design and implementation of flood protection infrastructure and post-disaster management River basin authorities established as state–regional organizations	Central government responsible for hydraulic risk and soil protection (Ministry of Environment) Regions entrusted with the design and implementation of flood protection infrastructure, first aid management and spatial planning choices Hydrographical district authorities replace the river basin authorities Hydrographical district authorities (under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Environment) as state–regional organizations	Ministry of Environment and regions arrange programme agreements for the implementation of flood risk measures Ministry of Environment, regions and hydrographical district authorities decide on the measures to enclose in the programme agreements Regions entrusted with the implementation of flood protection infrastructure, and first aid management Civil protection department for emergency management Prime minister directly responsible for national plans of measures (e.g., Italia Sicura and Proteggi Italia) Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Infrastructure, Ministry of Forestry, and Ministry of Domestic Affairs involved with different tasks in Proteggi Italia
Boundary rules
Action arena remains relatively closed until the 1970s, when a process of institutional decentralization occurs	River basin manager, spatial planners and civil protection department are invited to join the action arena; hydrographical district authority as planning but not implementing agency	Action arena is considerably widened but the central state still determines which actors are allowed to enter the action arena, how funding is allocated, and the most important decisions regarding measures implementation
Authority rules/aggregation rules
Central government decides on the river basin plans (via the Presidency of the Council of the Ministers) Triennial programmes of measures drafted by the river basin authority and implemented by the Ministry of Public Works and the regions Water pollution and wastewater disposal up to the Ministry of Environment	Central government decides on the hydrographical district plans (via Presidency of the Council of the Ministers), first approved by the steering committee of the hydrographical district authority (made by representatives of ministries and regions) Ministry of Environment deals with soil protection (a former task of the Ministry of Public Works)	The role of the presidents of the regions is strengthened, becoming responsible for project implementation and monitoring Central government ultimately decides on hydrographical district plans, programme agreements and national plans of measures
Scope rules
Post-disaster management and structural measures for flood probability reduction	Attempts made towards better coordination of river basin planning, spatial planning and emergency measures	Better coordination of river basin planning, spatial planning and emergency measures, but state/regional funding is mostly dedicated to flood protection measures
Information rules
Limited information sharing	Programmatic conferences are arranged to gather all the actors for shared decision-making processes; limited participation of local communities	Limited participation of local communities
Payoff rules
No payoff rules are identified	Central government acts in case of non-compliance	Central government controls the implementation of the measures and withdraw the financing in case of non-compliance
Outcomes
Flood control infrastructure programmes for hazard reduction	Attempts towards a better combination of flood control infrastructure, building restrictions and spatial development choices	Strong focus on hard control infrastructure for hazard reduction in the latest national plans

Figure 2. Hydrographical districts in Italy according to Law 221/2015.

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on national spatial data.

Clement, F. (2010). Analysing decentralised natural resource governance: Proposition for a ‘politicised’ institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Sciences, 43(2), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-009-9100-8

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press.

 Google Scholar