Regulatory Sciences, a way of clarifying the roles and responsibilities of researchers in their missions?
Agathe Chirossel 1, Anne Jacquemet-Gauché1, Erwan Thebault2, Olivier Roche2.
Affiliations: 1. Université Clermont Auvergne (Law department), CMH, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 2. Université Clermont Auvergne (volcanological department), LMV, OPGC, IRD, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Presentation type: Poster
Presentation time: Monday 16:30 - 18:30, Room Poster Hall
Poster Board Number: 108
Programme No: 7.2.20
Abstract
Jurists do not have many examples of researchers' liability for natural hazards. This is quite a new topic inside courts and is hardly addressed in legislation. It was only with the 2012 trial following the deadly Aquila earthquake in 2009 that Italian judges recognized such a responsibility. Later, the conviction in New Zealand of the research institute GNS Science on March 1, 2024, following the Whakaari / White Island eruption, confirmed the legal consecration of the responsibility of researchers in matters of natural hazards. These two cases reflect the researcher's role in disseminating scientific information, and the reasons why their liability is recognised in the context of telluric hazards, which are the only natural hazards that give rise to litigation and, therefore, to a legal analysis. In this context, it appears that the respective legal responsibilities of volcanologists, who have a scientific expertise, and of public authorities, that make decisions, do not seem clearly defined. Our work aims to adapt a concept defined in the United-States of America, which allows to take into account those recent evolutions in the practice of research. This is commonly defined as the "regulatory science", which distinguishes fundamental academic research from operational research aimed at producing legal standards. Adopting this system would both protect researchers in the conduct of their research and would ensure a higher level of guarantee in terms of natural hazard prevention.