Comparative analysis of Community-Based wildfire management: A systematic review of Australian approaches and implications for California

Abstract Rising incidence and severity of climate-induced wildfires test traditional top-down fire governance regimes worldwide. This systematic review assesses Australian Community-Based Bushfire Management (CBBM) initiatives, critiquing their framework, implementation, and efficacy to draw out transferable features for California’s wildfire management regime. Based on 38 empirical studies (2000–2025) in Victoria, NSW, and Western Australia, we established that Australian CBBM initiatives successfully reconcile centralized coordination with local autonomy through multi-level government management, constructive community engagement, and formalized indigenous knowledge incorporation. Such initiatives demonstrably lowered property damage, elevated community preparedness, produced ecological dividends, and fortified social capital. Although California’s unique regulatory and institutional profile warrants judicious adaptation over literal duplication, promising transferable features comprise multi-stakeholder deliberative forums, neutral brokerage, participatory risk analysis, and formalized Traditional Ecological Knowledge incorporation. Implementation hinges on regulatory recalibration, resource shifting, and institutional investment. This research contributes to the academic literature on adaptive and collaborative government in natural disaster risk management in the face of galloping climate change.