Lyon-Turin High-Speed Rail: The Public Debate and Perception of Environmental Risk in Susa Valley, Italy

When the construction of the Lyon-Turin segment of the new European high-speed rail network was first publicly announced at the beginning of the 1990s, it immediately found fierce opposition from the inhabitants of Susa Valley, Italy, one of the areas to be cut across by such infrastructure. At issu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental management (New York) 2009-05, Vol.43 (5), p.863-875
Hauptverfasser: Marincioni, Fausto, Appiotti, Federica
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:When the construction of the Lyon-Turin segment of the new European high-speed rail network was first publicly announced at the beginning of the 1990s, it immediately found fierce opposition from the inhabitants of Susa Valley, Italy, one of the areas to be cut across by such infrastructure. At issue were the project's potential environmental impact and its consequences on public health. This study intends to clarify environmental risk perception and public debate between the national government, local advocacy groups, and the inhabitants of Susa Valley. Two major phases of public reaction were identified: (1) an initial rebellious period of no real dialog among the project's major stakeholders (exemplified by the popular “No TAV” [No High Speed Train] movement), followed by (2) a yielding period of intense multilateral negotiations centered on the activities of the “Lyon-Turin Environmental Observatory.” The results of a qualitative cross analysis of the residents' perception of the proposed high-speed rail revealed that public acceptance of risk in Susa Valley was influenced by the characteristics of hazards perceived by the residents and by the communicative approach used by the project's various stakeholders. It also emerged that early dialog among all the parties involved was critical in forming a personal viewpoint on risk, which, once consolidated, defied new information and perspectives. Likely, a greater and earlier care taken by the other stakeholders to inform and consult the local population about the railway would have greatly eased the public debate.
ISSN:0364-152X
1432-1009
DOI:10.1007/s00267-009-9271-2