Skip to main content

Table 2 Identified forms of effectiveness, their measurement and relevance to NFM.

From: What approaches exist to evaluate the effectiveness of UK-relevant natural flood management measures? A systematic map protocol

Form of effectivenessWhat does this measure?Relevance to NFM
ProceduralAdherence to standardised processes and best practicesNFM is argued to work best if governance frameworks are attuned to collaboration between diverse actors and knowledges
Development of NFM should be context-sensitive—should not take a ‘cookie cutter’ approach
Decision-making processes need to be altered so that FRM is addressed at a catchment system level
NFM processes should take account of contextually relevant best practices
SubstantiveAchievement of stated goalNFM should contribute to the reduction of flood risk and this should be measurable
TransactiveTime and costs associated with the activityThe time and costs associated with NFM implementation (and maintenance where relevant) need to be made clear to enable cross-comparison
NFM can potentially serve to reduce longer-term costs associated with climate change, particularly if urban development patterns are more sensitive to water as a result, but these savings must be calculated in a way that recognises inherent uncertainties with this type of projection
NormativeContribution to broader idealsNFM—if performed well—can contribute to broader ideals such as climate change mitigation, sustainability, health and wellbeing, and socio-ecological resilience, as well as increasing local cultural value and biodiversity
Within this review we focus specifically on the normative benefits of NFM that relate to climate change mitigation and adaptation