Causes, figures, responsibilities and the limits of a phenomenon that returns every summer to burn the country
Every summer, right on time, wildfires return to dominate the Italian news cycle. Hectares burned, evacuations, devastated landscapes. And each time, the same question: why does it happen?
The most immediate answer — “because of arsonists” — is also the simplest. And, as often happens, the least accurate.
To truly understand wildfires in Italy, a broader perspective is needed: one that looks at data, causes, geographic distribution, and legislation. But above all, one that considers the structural limits that make this phenomenon so difficult to prevent and manage.
Let’s start with the numbers. According to the most recent analyses by ISPRA, based on European EFFIS data, more than 50,000 hectares of land burned in Italy in 2024. A decrease compared to the worst recent years, but one that confirms a reality: wildfires are not an exception — they are a constant.
In the most critical years, such as 2021 and 2022, the burned areas were significantly larger, with peaks that particularly affected southern regions and the islands. This is not an occasional problem, but a structural one, linked to deep climatic, environmental and social dynamics.
The data clearly show a geography of fire. As early as 2020, as noted by then Minister for Ecological Transition Roberto Cingolani, 55% of fires were concentrated in four regions: Campania, Puglia, Calabria and Sicily. In these areas, over 51,000 hectares burned out of a total of 62,000.
This remains relevant today. Southern Italy and the major islands present a combination of factors that are particularly conducive to wildfire development:
But this is not only about climate. It is also about land management, legality, and the institutional capacity of local authorities.
The most critical period remains summer, between June and September, with a peak in July and August. Increasingly frequent and intense heatwaves reduce soil moisture and make vegetation highly flammable. In these conditions, even a minimal ignition — natural or human — can trigger a fire.
In recent years, however, the wildfire season has been lengthening. Significant events are now also recorded in spring and early autumn, a sign of climate change reshaping the behavior of fire.
Moreover, wildfires themselves contribute to climate change, releasing large amounts of CO₂ into the atmosphere and reducing ecosystems’ capacity to absorb it.
This creates a vicious cycle: more heat leads to more fires, and more fires lead to more emissions.
Wildfires can have different origins:
Public narratives tend to focus on the last category, often overusing the figure of the “arsonist.” While common in public discourse, the term can distort the real nature of the problem.
The word “arsonist” is often incorrectly associated with pyromania — a psychological impulse-control disorder. A person affected by pyromania feels an irresistible attraction to fire and a sense of relief or pleasure in setting fires, without motives such as profit or revenge.
The idea that intentional wildfires in Italy are mainly caused by psychological disorders is therefore misleading, and rooted in the misuse of language.
So let’s clarify. Available data show that negligent and intentional fires represent a significant share of the phenomenon.
In 2020, for example, more than 4,200 such fires were recorded, with over 62,000 hectares burned, 552 people reported, and 18 arrests.
But the point is not only how many fires are intentional.
The point is why they continue to occur.
Italian law, with Law 353/2000, introduced important tools to counter the phenomenon, including a ban on changing the land use of burned areas for at least 15 years. A rule specifically designed to discourage fires linked to speculative interests.
And yet, more than twenty years after its introduction, intentional fires have not disappeared. Why?
One possible answer lies in the weaknesses of the law itself. Municipalities are responsible for mapping burned areas and enforcing the restrictions. This is a complex task, not always carried out promptly or thoroughly, and potentially exposed to local pressures and interests that are not always legitimate.
In practical terms, if a municipality fails to correctly register an area as burned, that land may escape the restrictions. This can open the door to changes in land use — potentially aligned with the interests of those who may have had a role in the fire.
In other words: the deterrence mechanism exists, but it does not always work as intended.
This creates a grey area in which fires can continue to be used as a tool, not just as impulsive acts. In some cases, it is not about “arsonists” in the psychological sense, but about actors with concrete interests operating in a context where the risk of being identified and sanctioned is relatively low.
From a legal standpoint, Italy has a far from weak system of penalties. Article 423 of the Criminal Code punishes intentional arson with imprisonment from 3 to 7 years, rising to 4 to 10 years in the case of wildfires (Article 423-bis). Penalties can increase further in the presence of aggravating circumstances, exceeding 15 years.
These are accompanied by civil liabilities for environmental and economic damages.
The issue, however, is not the severity of the penalties. It is their enforceability.
Identifying with certainty the causes of a fire and assigning responsibility is extremely difficult. Fire rapidly destroys evidence, and investigations require technical expertise, time, and resources.
Available data show significant investigative activity over the past twenty years, but also a structural difficulty in turning fires into clearly established and sanctioned responsibilities.
If there is one point on which data, experience and analysis converge, it is this: prevention is decisive.
And prevention does not only mean extinguishing fires before they spread. It means:
In other words, it means reducing the conditions that make fires possible.
After a wildfire, the instinct is often to intervene immediately, planting new trees. But reality is more complex.
Reforestation is not always immediate nor always appropriate. As we have seen, there are also legal constraints to consider. It requires technical assessments, long timelines, and often years before effective action can be taken.
Fire destroys in a few hours. Rebuilding takes time.
Wildfires in Italy are not only an environmental issue. They are also a cultural and social one.
They concern how we manage land, the relationship between communities and the environment, the ability of institutions to enforce rules, and that of citizens to recognize the value of ecosystems.
For this reason, reducing wildfires also means working on awareness, responsibility and widespread prevention.
Wildfires do not have a single cause, and they do not have a single solution. They are the result of a combination of factors: climatic, environmental, human and institutional.
To truly understand them means going beyond simplifications, reading the data, recognizing the limits of the system, and identifying where action is needed.
Because fire returns every summer.
But the way we respond can make the difference.