English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Earthquake engineering becomes a media issue for the four/six weeks which follow a catastrophic event. These periods of interaction between the societal actors and the topic experts is fruitful in terms of understanding how the scientists should arrange a state of the art. In particular, after the Central Italy event of April 6, 2009, among others, the following items arose: how coarse has to be the seismic hazard analysis? which is the role of microzonation? which is the preferable nature of the structural codes? are existing buildings exempt from retrofit duties? how the interactions in a urban nucleus should be managed? A further topic which belongs to the management of earthquake events rather than to earthquake engineering is seen to play a dominant role in the discussion: should the building owners be obliged to subscribe an insurance? This manuscript does not (and cannot) provide definite answers, but offers a witness of this interaction with the media within the context of a technical journal.

L’Aquila, Central Italy, April 6, 2009: a Further Lesson to Civil Engineers