Unintended consequences of public policies in increasing risk: the safe development paradox in the Revólver basin, Brazil

The escalating climate crisis prompts governments to implement adaptation measures to enhance safety. However, these efforts may unintentionally encourage development in high-risk areas, a phenomenon known as the ‘safe development paradox’ (SDP). While the SDP has been studied in relation to structural measures, the influence of non-structural measures remains poorly understood. Here, we examine how public policies and non-intentional disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures contribute to the SDP in the Revólver basin – a region in Brazil affected by a compound hydrological disaster (landslides, debris flow, and flash floods) and COVID-19. Using a mixed methods approach through the lenses of the protection motivation theory – including 151 interviews with community members, 10 stakeholder interviews, policy document analysis, and spatial analysis - we found that responsive measures were predominantly non-protective. A third of the interviewees exhibited a false sense of safety, fostered by their trust in the government and the perception of building permits as safety indicators. Stakeholders indicated that DRR actions were absent, as the study area was considered secure. Inadequate risk mapping, urban expansion into high-risk areas, and the relaxation of riparian regulations facilitated settlement in hazardous regions, reinforcing a false sense of safety and exacerbating the SDP. Therefore, local government policies influenced the SDP, particularly in regions where disasters are not frequent. Our findings suggest that non-structural policies, including those indirectly related to DRR, can unintentionally increase risk. Hence, we propose broadening the SDP concept to include both intentional and non-intentional DRR measures and policies inducing unintended consequences.