As pressure intensifies to provide enough housing for Australia’s growing population, authorities must resist the urge to build in the wrong places.

Following last week’s land use planning forum, the Insurance Council and the Planning Institute of Australia released a joint communique that lists 13 recommendations to support “appropriate land use planning decisions by governments”.

“Planning can be the most powerful lever to reduce risk,” the groups say, while “building development in high-risk areas will inevitably lead to more homes being exposed to extreme weather events, widening the insurance protection gap”.

Here is a summary of each recommendation:

Delivery of a national standard for adaptation decision-making

ICA and the Planning Institute say they welcome the development of a national standard that considers disaster and climate risk as part of land use planning and building reform processes, as proposed by national cabinet.

Work on the standard began in 2022 when ministers agreed “the days of developing on floodplains need to end”.

“This national standard should include an overarching planning and decision-making framework to guide consistent and considered planning outcomes in response to community vulnerability,” the communique says.

Clearer co-ordination and responsibilities across all levels of government 

The groups say administration of land-use planning is “made more difficult given divided responsibilities between state and local government”.

They say many governments rely on inaccurate or out-of-date data. “In some cases, decisions by local councils are overridden by independent planning panels, creating further complexity.”

Strategic basis for investment in planned retreat

Governments should collaborate to develop “nationally consistent principles” that underpin investment in planned retreat from extreme-risk locations. 

Last week’s forum focused on the growing challenges presented by flooding and storm surge, but the groups say others will focus on bushfires, cyclones and other hazards. 

Integrating climate risk into planning systems

Decision-makers must ensure planning decisions take into account “current and future climate scenarios”. 

To support this, the concept of climate change adaptation should be embedded in jurisdictions’ planning objectives. 

Regional strategic settlement planning

Regional strategic plans, which set the framework, vision and direction for urban growth, “can be significantly uplifted”.

State jurisdictions must align their regional strategic plans with their climate change adaptation strategies to “avoid ad hoc decision-making at the regional level that can lead to poor planning outcomes”. 

Catchment-based approach to planning

Floods, bushfires and coastal hazards “do not respect local government boundaries”, and hazards are usually managed over multiple council areas, with actions in one area potentially impacting another. 

A catchment-based approach to land use planning and hazard management should be adopted to tackle this, the groups say. (For example, using water catchment boundaries rather than local government boundaries). 

Responsive housing targets

The capacity to accommodate new homes in an area should be understood before housing targets for local governments are set. 

Councils should provide input into strategic planning at the catchment level and receive direction from the state on where housing should not be planned as part of the development of regional plans.

Tiered risk-based approach to development

State governments should adopt a risk-based approach that stops development in high-risk extreme weather areas, that requires stronger building codes and standards and/or adequate resilience infrastructure in areas of moderate risk, and that prioritises low-risk areas for development. 

“It would set out the circumstances where alternatives (in addition to prohibition of development) would be considered,” the groups say.

“This would include criteria for planned retreat, buybacks, property and infrastructure defence and building improvements, opportunities to refuge in place, and the notification of risk to owners and residents.”

Improved hazard data collection and use

State and territory governments should continue to work alongside industry and the federal government via the Hazards Insurance Partnership to “update, standardise and make publicly available climate hazard data that considers long-term time horizons and prioritises the high-impact extreme weather perils”.

Fit for purpose building standards

Building ministers have recognised the need to make Australia’s buildings more resilient to extreme weather driven by climate change, and have included climate resilience as a specific objective of the Australian Building Codes Board from next year.

“This will give the [board] a clear mandate to develop future National Construction Code requirements that reduce the impact of extreme weather events on the built environment, which members of this forum should be engaged with,” the communique says.

Fund resilient buildings and communities

In the face of worsening extreme weather, governments need to increase funding to strengthen homes and businesses, helping communities build resilience.

“This increased investment includes funding for retrofitting properties to help them better withstand the impacts of extreme weather events including floods, and would extend to projects such as levees and floodways that protect the community.”

Fund resilient infrastructure

There should be a stronger focus on funding to increase the resilience of public infrastructure and utilities, particularly when building back after an extreme weather event. 

“Damaged infrastructure should be funded and rebuilt in more adaptable and resilient ways rather than replacing damaged infrastructure with ‘like for like’.”

Insurance price signals that recognise adaptation

The groups say insurers provide incentives to help people make their homes more resilient, and they are continuing to incorporate demonstrated risk reduction measures into their premium pricing.