Law, governance and risk: Deconstructing the public-private divide in climate change adaptation

In Australia, as in many other western democracies, a process of social, economic and institutional restructuring of the relationship between the 'private sphere' of socio-economic activity and the 'public realm' of politics and government has had profound implications for law and governance.1 Despite acknowledgement at some levels of the progressive integration that has been occurring between public and private functions, the idea of distinct operational realms between the public and private spheres is a paradigm that has proven remarkably persistent over time. In governance terms, the divide historically has operated as a touchstone for assigning legal roles and responsibilities for state and citizen. Most recently, this idealised division of political, legal and economic responsibilities has re-emerged as a prominent feature of responses to climate change impacts, including extreme events. A 'double movement' has occurred. First, there have been policy moves to inscribe a bright line boundary between the public and the private, but this movement overlies and obfuscates the second movement, where institutional and organisational restructuring is operating to blur previous understandings of that distinction. Adaptation to climate change is a particularly useful example to explore this 'double movement', as it requires pervasive change to legal structures and governance arrangements across many sectors and actors.