By: Dr. Matevž Tomšič
This summer, we are not being spared from extreme weather events that often turn into real disasters. Last weekend, we experienced floods the likes of which had never been seen in the history of independent Slovenia. Numerous rivers and torrents overflowed, washing away roads, bridges, and houses. Moreover, the rain triggered numerous landslides that buried people’s property, with some still posing a threat to entire settlements.
Such disasters always trigger debates about who is responsible for them. Is it an “act of God” or human negligence? The latter assumes that different actions could have averted the tragic consequences. Some point out poor construction, inadequate river management, and thoughtless development in flood-prone areas. Others highlight insufficient legislation in this field. Various “environmental justice advocates” attribute it to something other than climate change, for which, of course, humans are held responsible.
We must understand that severe floods in Slovenia are not something new. The so-called “century floods” occur much more frequently than every hundred years. Let’s look into more recent history (from the beginning of the 20th century onwards). The most fatalities were caused by the 1954 floods in the wider Celje area, claiming the lives of twenty-two people. The storm in the Polhov Gradec Hills claimed nineteen lives in 1924, and two years later, rising waters in the Ljubljana area and the Poljane Valley took thirteen lives. The current floods, which have claimed five human lives, were not the deadliest – not even in the era of independent Slovenia (six people died during the ravaging of the Selška Sora and Savinja rivers in 2007). However, due to their extent, as they affected most Slovenian regions, they caused the greatest material damage.
No one is truly to blame for floods. They are simply one of the natural phenomena with negative consequences for human life (similarly to earthquakes, hurricanes, droughts, etc.). However, we can discuss responsibility for their aftermath. Such responsibility can be mitigated through thoughtful actions, if not prevented, at least by reducing their impact.
Without the rejected law, there would be less damage
Some have cited the referendum on waters from two years ago as a reason for the lack of preparedness for floods, blaming the organisers of the referendum. Others have accused these accusers of using a natural disaster for political purposes. Regardless, this summer’s heavy rainfall would have occurred with or without the referendum. Flooding would have still taken place in any case. However, the rejected law contained certain systemic solutions for managing watercourses. It is likely that during this time, at least some of the most problematic issues could have been properly addressed, resulting in less damage. Therefore, activists from the Institute March 8th and related organisations cannot entirely escape a certain degree of responsibility.
Interventions in nature are indeed necessary. Without them, people’s lives and property would be significantly more at risk. If Gruber’s Canal had not been constructed in Ljubljana in the 18th century, and if the Ljubljanica River had not been regulated, and the Mali Graben (which diverts a significant portion of water from the Gradaščica River) had not been excavated after major floods in 1926, the southern part of the capital would be submerged during heavy rainfalls. The force of nature can be controlled to some extent. However, this must be done thoughtfully and necessitates investing the required resources – rather than reducing them, as was recently done by Golob’s government. Above all, we must abandon various utopian projects aimed at “fixing climate conditions”. Enormous amounts of money are allocated to these projects, which, instead of technological solutions, are spent on environmental activism and indoctrinating people, without safeguarding a single human life or a single house in the process.
