Abstract
AbstractA growing number of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) has been advocated for urban flood risk management (FRM). However, whether NbS for FRM (NbS-FRM) achieves both social and ecological co-benefits remains largely unknown. We here propose and use a conceptual framework with a coupled social-ecological perspective to explore and identify such “win-win” potential in NbS-FRM. Through a scoping-review we find that ecological FRM measures are unevenly distributed around the world, and those solely targeting flood mitigation may have unintended negative consequences for society and ecosystems. In elaborating this framework with evidence from the reviewed studies, we find that NbS-FRM has the potential to provide both social and ecological co-benefits, with remaining gaps including a lack of resilience thinking, inadequate consideration of environmental changes, and limited collaborative efforts to manage trade-offs. The proposed framework shows how to move forward to leverage NbS for equitable and sustainable FRM with improved human well-being and ecosystem health.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference90 articles.
1. WMO. Atlas of Mortality and Economic Losses from Weather, Climate and Water Extremes (1970–2021), https://wmo.int/publication-series (2021).
2. Arnell, N. W. & Gosling, S. N. The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale. Clim. Change. 134, 387–401 (2016).
3. Hemmati, M., Kornhuber, K. & Kruczkiewicz, A. Enhanced urban adaptation efforts needed to counter rising extreme rainfall risks. Npj Urban Sustain. 2, 1–5 (2022).
4. Milner, A. M., Robertson, A. L., McDermott, M. J., Klaar, M. J. & Brown, L. E. Major flood disturbance alters river ecosystem evolution. Nat. Clim. Change. 3, 137–141 (2013).
5. Fekete, A. Critical infrastructure and flood resilience: Cascading effects beyond water. WIREs Water 6, e1370 (2019).
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献