The study reveals the gap between the actual effectiveness and costs of green and grey flood mitigation measures and how experts and the public perceive them.

Abstract: Increased flooding is becoming more prevalent under an increasingly variable future of weather extremes, highlighting the need for effective mitigation strategies. Different flood mitigation measures are available, ranging from classical structural (grey) solutions to nature-based solutions (NbS). This study assessed and compared the hydrological effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and public perception of green (NbS), grey, and hybrid flood mitigation measures in the Gradaščica River catchment, Slovenia. For the hydrological assessment, a SWAT + model simulated wetland, retention polder, and dam scenarios. Results showed that wetlands had a minimal effect on flood hazard, reducing flood peaks by up to 3 %, while retention polders and dams reduced flood peaks by 51 % and 73 % and flood volumes by 28 % and 58 %, respectively. The economic analysis found wetlands to be less cost-effective than retention polders and dams. However, it should be noted that wetlands provide additional diverse co-benefits. The public perception analysis revealed significant discrepancies in perceived effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of flood mitigation measures across target groups, including the general public, water engineers, researchers, and agricultural advisors. While most groups ranked dams as most effective and wetlands as least effective, aligning with hydrological findings, researchers held a directly opposing view, and the public generally overestimated the performance of green measures. By examining hydrological effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and public perception across flood mitigation measures, the research highlights the need to integrate multidisciplinary approaches to develop robust flood management strategies – an essential lens as communities confront escalating climate-driven flood risks.

Citation: Graham, H. C., Akhtar, F., Šraj, M., Raška, P., Slavikova, L., Louda, J., Macháč, J., Zupanc, V., Bezak, N. (2025). Integrated Evaluation of Flood Mitigation Measures: A Multidisciplinary Approach Combining Hydrology, Economics, and Public Perception. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 105926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105926

The article reveals how vague use of the nature-based solutions concept shapes funding, effectiveness assessments, and the real impact of projects.

Abstract: The use of natural features for hydrometeorological risk reduction has been recently promoted in international strategies and led to an increasing number of actions framed, in particular, as nature-based solutions (NbS). This has sparked a growing debate about the performative role of these concepts in shaping the funding landscape. While several frameworks have been proposed to evaluate the NbS implementation, they can only be effectively applied if NbS and evaluation indicators are clearly defined within and across the individual projects. In this article, we draw upon knowledge representation theory and we provide an evolutionary analysis of the NbS and related concepts and a review of current funding calls in Europe (n = 53) and individual projects globally (n = 342). This allows us to show how NbS have become dominant in recent practical discussions on hydrometeorological risk reduction. While terminological framing as NbS is needed to link individual projects to pre-existing knowledge, our analysis reveals that it can also tend to leverage and legitimise funding. This leads to adverse effects on expert knowledge-building especially in urban settings where hydrometeorological risk reduction necessitates complex approaches, integrating various measures. We assert that too generic NbS framing introduces additional uncertainty in assessments of NbS effectiveness and potentially excludes other viable measures from consideration and implementation. We therefore argue that coherence between the stated NbS and the indicators capturing effectiveness of actual set of measures is critical for gaining evidence from monitoring of hydrometeorological risk reduction projects. For these purposes, we propose a guideline for transparent reporting of aims, concepts, implementation outcomes, and indicators for projects aiming at hydrometeorological risk reduction. Our work highlights the need for global coherence, cross-sectoral knowledge integration, and context-sensitive evaluations to ensure that NbS deliver multiple co-benefits beyond risk reduction.

Citation: Raška, P., Dolejš, M., Zupanc, V., Louda, J., Jakubínský, J., Bezak, N. (2025). Generic ‘nature-based’ framing may distort understanding of the effectiveness of hydrometeorological risk reduction measures. Ecological Indicators, 180, 114364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.114364

Download: ↓ Generic ‘nature-based’ framing may distort understanding of the effectiveness of hydrometeorological risk reduction measures.

The paper introduces a multi-criteria impact assessment tool to preliminarily evaluate how RES projects affect local communities and reduce information asymmetry between investors, mayors, and residents.

Abstract: The ongoing energy crisis, the push for carbon neutrality, and the development of both European and national energy policies are driving significant changes in energy mix strategies. This is further supported by incentives, such as subsidies for operators of renewable energy sources (RES), which place municipalities and their mayors in a position to decide on the support for RES projects. The aim of the paper is to address the information asymmetry that exists among potential investors, mayors, and local residents through the introduction of an impact assessment tool. This tool, based on the multi-criteria analysis, is designed to help mayors and relevant stakeholders better comprehend the implications of RES and to evaluate their effects on local communities. The impacts of RES construction and operation are categorized into four key areas: environmental, social, economic, and innovative. The assessment process takes into account the unique characteristics of the local area, positioning the tool as a preliminary step before engaging in more resource-intensive methods such as feasibility studies and environmental impact assessments (EIA).

The effectiveness of the developed tool is demonstrated through a case study on the impact assessment of a proposed agrivoltaic power plant in the Šluknov region. Notably, compared to traditional photovoltaic power plants, agrivoltaic systems significantly mitigate a range of negative environmental impacts. Consequently, the implementation of such a power plant is anticipated to yield positive economic and social benefits for the micro-region.

Citation: Zaňková, L., Macháč, J. (2025). Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy in the Region: A Case Study of the Šluknov Agrivoltaic Power Plant. Journal of Landscape Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2478/jlecol-2025-0010

Download: ↓ Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy in the Region: A Case Study of the Šluknov Agrivoltaic Power Plant

The article compares farmers’ and residents’ preferences for nature-based solutions on agricultural land and identifies the main barriers to their implementation.

Abstract: Climate change affects both urban areas and rural landscapes, with issues such as drought, soil erosion, and flash floods becoming increasingly prevalent. Although the scientific community has long advocated for nature-based solutions (NBS), their adoption in agricultural practice remains limited. This study explores the preferences of farmers and residents regarding NBS on agricultural land, examines the level of social acceptance, and identifies barriers to NBS implementation from the farmers’ perspective. A questionnaire survey conducted in the Oleška River Basin, Czech Republic, assessed preferences for 12 measures. The results reveal partial agreement between the two groups: for example, grassing along streams and baulks is appreciated aesthetically by both. However, differences exist in perceived functionality. Farmers, drawing from practical experience, evaluate the aesthetics and functionality of measures such as contour tillage and afforestation differently than residents. Both groups perceived measures like retention pools as less effective for flood regulation. The findings highlight that financial constraints and complex landowner-farmer relationships hinder NBS implementation. This research emphasizes the need for land-use strategies that address both stakeholder preferences and practical challenges, enabling more effective adoption of NBS to mitigate climate impacts. As the evaluation of the measures shows, some practices – such as maize cultivation – are considered by both stakeholder groups to be the least aesthetic and least effective for flood regulation, and their support is therefore not justified. In contrast, afforestation is perceived positively by both groups, being seen as both highly aesthetic and effective in flood protection. These insights underline the importance of incorporating stakeholder preferences into policy design, particularly when developing financial incentives for NBS, and avoiding the promotion of agricultural practices that are neither visually appealing nor beneficial in terms of ecosystem services.

Citation: Zaňková, L., Macháč, J., Hekrle, M. (2025). In harmony or against each other? Czech farmers’ and residents’ attitudes towards nature-based solutions on agricultural land. GeoScape, 19(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.2478/geosc-2025-0005

Download ↓ In harmony or against each other? Czech farmers’ and residents’ attitudes towards nature-based solutions on agricultural land

A systematic literature review presents the impacts of the Taxonomy in the area of corporate reporting, as well as the economic impacts at the firm level, the EU level, and the global level.