Two decades of seismic risk communication in Europe: a scoping review

Although earthquakes are a threat in many countries and considerable resources have been invested in safety regulations, communities at risk often lack awareness and preparedness. Risk communication is a key tool for building resilient communities, raising awareness, and increasing preparedness. Over the past two decades, risk communication has evolved significantly. This has led to a reorientation from a predominantly “one-way”, top-down communication model to the promotion of “two-way” or “three-way” models in which people, their needs, and their participation in disaster risk management and co-creation are a central element. The reasons for this shift are many. For example, recent disaster experiences and research have highlighted that one-way, passive risk communication is poorly interpreted, often misunderstood, and can even destroy public trust in emergency management authorities. In this paper, we critically explore this transition by conducting a scoping review (n=109 publications) of seismic risk communication in Europe. We analyze the approaches, messages, tools, and channels used for seismic risk communication and how they have changed between 2000 and 2022, emphasizing how public engagement in risk communication has been de facto implemented over the past 20 years. The results reveal that the stated goals of seismic risk communication are, in decreasing order, to share information, raise awareness, change behaviors/beliefs, and increase preparedness. Pupils, students, and citizens are the primary recipients of communication activities. Over the years, two trends have emerged. First, the “two-way” or “three-way” communication models became more prevalent than the “one-way” model. Second, the aims of communication became more proactive than informative. Face to face, hands-on activities, and serious games are key tools to engage with the public. The results also reveal the emerging role of social media as an information and dissemination channel in the efforts to reach audiences that are so diverse in terms of age, culture, and education. Strikingly, only one fifth of the analyzed publications explicitly builds on or tests risk communication theories. Future research must focus particularly on comparing practices across countries and risks (e.g. earthquakes and floods) and on innovating communication theories and methodologies, especially by incorporating the role of information technologies and social media.