Filtering the contradictions: interpreting events regulation by local government public servants as an activity system in the Hunter Region, NSW 2012-2016

This research investigates the complexities, inconsistencies and contradictions in the way events are regulated by individual decision-makers in the cultural and historical context of local government in the New South Wales (NSW) Hunter Region. The research investigates 11 Local Government Authorities (LGA) in the Hunter Region of NSW, Australia, between 2012 and 2016 to explore the event regulation process. This qualitative research draws primary data from 38 interviews of legislators, local government public servants, and independent event organisers, as well as secondary data from regulatory documents and government and industry reports. This research employs Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) as a sensitising analytical framework to explain the dynamics of decision-making processes. Both state and local governments use events in their economic development plans and visitor economy strategies in NSW. As part of a broader suite of land use planning regulation changes that commenced in 2006, the NSW Government adopted a top-down standardised process for land use regulation by LGAs by 2016. Included in the changes were standardised event regulations. The NSW Visitor Economy Taskforce (VET) (2012) identified confusion, uncertainty, and limited transparency within LGAs (2010) for the regulation of events. These complex environments foster variable and selective decision-making by the LGA regulators involved. These regulators navigate a landscape shaped by tensions and contradictions among and between rules, tools, community dynamics, divisions of labour, and their respective motives, all of which significantly influence decision-making outcomes. The findings show that the Hunter Region LGAs have many rules, practices, regulations, definitions, community expectations and contradictions. Despite the contradictions, the Hunter LGAs continue their existing practices, favouring events on LGA-owned or controlled locations with a pro-event approach. More importantly, the Hunter LGA regulators filter out the adverse impacts of the regulatory contradictions by applying their discretion based on the perceived benefits and limited impacts of events to make consistent decisions. CHAT helped describe the event regulation process and provided a model for deconstructing and unpacking located in a broader context of the tension between bureaucracies and the neoliberal world. The research will provide additional insights to promote a more democratic event regulation system rather than accepting the current public servant decisions as a foregone conclusion.