Dealing with Floods in Australia: The Politics and Practicalities of Decision-Making About Risks

Abstract

In Australia and elsewhere, our leading strategy in response to climate change is to “build resilience”. Risk management is often presented as the most effective means to that end. Best practice risk management techniques harness scientific risk assessment tools to facilitate evidence based decision-making and, purportedly, encourage some degree of consultation/deliberation to enlarge the inquiry and enhance the ‘acceptability’ of measures to be taken. This is the much favoured analytic-deliberative approach to decision-making. In this approach, the risk management process is essentially an objective one but it is supplemented with a deliberative process to ensure the voice of the community is also considered. This all sounds great on paper but, even at this level of abstraction, there are some tricky questions to be answered. Who, for instance, should risk managers consult with and what role does the development community play in fashioning the acceptable level of risk? This paper examines some of the not-so scientific links in the risk management process. It considers some recent case examples across Australia which demonstrate alternative ways of dealing with these issues.

Keywords: flooding, risks, resilience, planning law, development

JEL Classification: K32