Do Public and Farmer Preferences for Natural Flood Management Align?

ABSTRACT The demand for catchment‐based flood management to adapt to climate change is growing, with natural flood management (NFM) receiving increasing attention. NFM has implications for the ‘providers’ of land for measures upstream (the farmers) and the ‘beneficiaries’ of flood reduction downstream (the public). The misalignment of interests from these stakeholder groups may pose a challenge for flood risk managers during the delivery of NFM at the catchment scale. Considering this, a rapid evidence assessment (REA) of 60 peer‐reviewed articles was undertaken. This REA provides an overview of catchment perspectives, compares farmer and public preferences for NFM design, and explores key determinants of scheme acceptance. The public expressed positive perceptions and willingness to pay for NFM, with preferences for measures with large water storage capacity that deliver co‐benefits alongside flood management objectives. For farmers, NFM schemes that contributed to on‐farm conditions, for example, soil stability, were seen as positive, but overall, their willingness to adopt measures was limited. Nevertheless, knowledge of NFM among both groups strongly determined its acceptance. This suggests that resolving misaligned values will require policymakers and practitioners to work with these stakeholders on NFM design and farmer incentives to secure the delivery of future schemes.