When talking about climate change adaptation, the limitations of the regulatory state are a frequently discussed topic. It is contended that classical regulatory arrangements are too rigid and slow to adapt to the multifaceted challenges posed by climate change. In response, critics have proposed the adoption of more flexible, decentralised and performance-based approaches. While these alternative approaches can be very successful, the redistribution of responsibility can also have negative effects, which can be disastrous when it comes to essential tasks such as ensuring the safety of citizens.
In the paper, the configuration of mechanisms leading to such a fatal consequence in one in-depth case study is identified. It shows how a shift from a regulatory approach to a performance-based approach to land use planning in the state of Victoria in 1997 had the unintended effect of less effective local wildfire prevention in the local municipality of Murrindindi Shire, leading to fatal consequences during the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires.
Causal process tracing as a methodological framework allows to use the extensive available written documentation to identify the specific relevant mechanisms and trace their effects over extended time periods. The primary reason for which local administrators did not implement available land use controls against bushfires is that the previous change in regulatory approach had the unintended effect of increasing the risk of local administrators being blamed for unpopular decisions (which planning restrictions often are), making implementation less likely.
The case analysis demonstrates that, while the described dynamics are context-dependent, it is possible to generalise about which configurations of factors make these kinds of unintended effects more likely. This goal is achieved by bringing together established insights into multi-level dynamics, coordination issues, blame avoidance and reputation with new context-specific empirical insights from the case.
