The transition can only be radical

Now that the devastating flood in Romania is beginning to reveal itself in all seriousness, the government, having shelled out some money, is taking its time and pressing the idea of ​​a commissioner for “emergency” management. Right and Left they say we should hasten to give back to those who have lost all means to start over, with the notion that this was a rare event – like the fall of a meteorite – that will not happen. You don’t have to worry about “how to protect yourself from meteorites”. We fix the damage and then continue as before.

But it is an idea An emergency that must not pass: however exceptional it may be, this is one of those events that are destined to recur, with a recurrence that, unfortunately, is no longer secular. The main cause is climate change, the effects of which will also increase due to neglect and good land management, but which will have to be increasingly taken into account in the future. Change We Own – With Industrial Civilization.

This catastrophe will leave its mark, for it strikes at its core a rich land, an active population, a method of administration that has created around it at various levels an aura of efficiency, of good governance, to the point of making one believe that only a great catastrophe can corrupt the system.
but not: Like the others, Emilia-Romagna found herself unprepared. And like others, she can only grieve for herself for what she did and didn’t do in these decades.

The editors recommend:

Hydrogeological instability: building “territory guardian” institutions

As noted, exceptional rains caused disasters on two fronts: upriver, with thousands of landslides in the Apennines; Downstream, with overflowing rivers and canals, on a land already saturated with water. But it fell on soils that were already uneven in the mountains and hills, on rivers too narrow and on banks that were too shaky on the plains, and also on soils that were often impermeable to water. Thus, widespread hydrogeological instability and over-building of soils amplified the consequences of runoff.

For a city, Bologna, which prides itself on being “the most progressive in Italy” and “the world’s ecologist” and for a region, Emilia-Romagna, which is one of the most “advanced” cities, being at the top was already a cause for concern for soil consumption ratings and proportion of land exposed to potential hydro-geological hazards. This extreme event only highlights that the area has not been taken care of as it should be. And no matter how “disconnected” the lack of care and abuse may appear with floods and landslides, because they are not. Just as it has nothing to do with the ongoing climate change due to the concentration of greenhouse gases.

region Among the most advanced in Italy and Europe, it pays for the approach of purely productive and extractive exploitation of nature and territory. A model made by both the Democratic Party and the right, since the post-war period, but now delivering the bill. If there is climate change, it is because we, like everyone else, are contributing to it (and if greenhouse gas emissions are proportional to industrial activities and intensive agriculture, Emilia-Romagna is doing its part nicely).

But the region’s government – unlike that of Veneto and Lombardy – has for years been pursuing overbuilding, soil consumption, widening highway arteries and platforms, an incentive for private traffic, rather than counteracting atmospheric warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (not barbecues, of course). Please, but cars, transport and concrete!).
joke Fate, this event now risks being an enemy of the Democratic Party and its system of power in the region. Mountain municipalities, already voting right in the grip of abandonment syndrome, will now demand more attention. Those on the plain and along the “productive axis” of the Via Emilia will be able to be drawn into the right’s narrative about the alleged incompetence of regional government.

As if the logic that inspires them were not the same: the productive logic, i.e. consuming nature in exchange for “luxury”, except for having to escape for cover to repair the damage. Both the Democratic Party and the “brave” green left Eli Schlein promised to reverse course, giving birth to the “Action and Climate Plan,” a document that does not address the substance of the issues.

The environmental issue is now inevitable. And it is a social issue, because whoever has the least resources will pay (who will lose the most, in the flood in Romania, if not those who lost everything?). Nobody wants to hear this slogan, but the time has come to “change the development paradigm” and the shift can only be radical. The Democratic Party and its allies should have taken it long ago: there is still time to avoid confining ourselves to the management of emergencies and to finally begin to live with the territory, respecting its life and its needs.