Risk tolerance as a complementary concept to risk perception of natural hazards: A conceptual review and application.

There is a longstanding assumption that if people perceive a risk as high, they will act to reduce it. In fact, research has shown a lack of consistently strong causal relations between risk perception (RP) and mitigative behavior-the so-called "risk perception paradox." Despite a recent increase in research on RP, individuals' risk tolerance (RT; or demand for risk reduction) only rarely appears as a consideration for explaining behavioral response to natural hazards. To address this research gap, we first systematically review relevant literature and find that RT has been directly assessed or operationalized using perceived thresholds related to costs and benefits of risk reduction measures, risk consequences, hazard characteristics, behavioral responses, or affective reactions. It is either considered a component or a result of RP. We then use survey data of individuals' RP, RT, and behavioral intention to assess relations among these variables. Comparing across three European study sites, "behavioral intention" is assessed as the public's willingness to actively support the implementation of nature-based solutions to reduce disaster risk. A series of tests using regression models shows RT significantly explains variance in behavioral intention and significantly contributes additional explanatory power beyond RP in all three sites. In two sites, RT is also a significant partial mediator of the relation between RP and behavior. Taken together, our findings demand further conceptual and empirical research on individuals' RT and its systematic consideration as a determinant for (in)action in response to natural hazards.

A nature-based solution selection framework: Criteria and processes for addressing hydro-meteorological hazards at open-air laboratories across Europe.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) can be beneficial to help human communities build resilience to climate change by managing and mitigating related hydro-meteorological hazards (HMHs). Substantial research has been carried out in the past on the detection and assessment of HMHs and their derived risks. Yet, knowledge on the performance and functioning of NbS to address these hazards is severely lacking. The latter is exacerbated by the lack of practical and viable approaches that would help identify and select NbS for specific problems. The EU-funded OPERANDUM project established seven Open-Air Laboratories (OALs) across Europe to co-develop, test, and generate an evidence base from innovative NbS deployed to address HMHs such as flooding, droughts, landslides, erosion, and eutrophication. Herein, we detail the original approaches that each OAL followed in the process of identifying and selecting NbS for specific hazards with the aim of proposing a novel, generic framework for selecting NbS. We found that the process of selecting NBS was overall complex and context-specific in all the OALs, and it comprised 26 steps distributed across three stages: (i) Problem recognition, (ii) NbS identification, and (iii) NbS selection. We also identified over 20 selection criteria which, in most cases, were shared across OALs and were chiefly related to sustainability aspects. All the identified NbS were related to the regulation of the water cycle, and they were mostly chosen according to three main factors: (i) hazard type, (ii) hazard scale, and (iii) OAL size. We noticed that OALs exposed to landslides and erosion selected NbS capable to manage water budgets within the soil compartment at the local or landscape scale, while OALs exposed to floods, droughts, and eutrophication selected approaches to managing water transport and storage at the catchment scale. We successfully portrayed a synthesis of the stages and steps followed in the OALs' NbS selection process in a framework. The framework, which reflects the experiences of the stakeholders involved, is inclusive and integrated, and it can serve as a basis to inform NbS selection processes whilst facilitating the organisation of diverse stakeholders working towards finding solutions to natural hazards. We animate the future development of the proposed framework by integrating financial viability steps. We also encourage studies looking into the implementation of the proposed framework through quantitative approaches integrating multi-criteria analyses.

Green, hybrid, or grey disaster risk reduction measures: What shapes public preferences for nature-based solutions?

Nature-based solutions (NbS) contrast with grey infrastructure measures to reduce risk from natural hazards. Using natural and sustainable measures (green) or combining green with grey elements (hybrid) can provide important co-benefits beyond risk reduction. Thanks to their co-benefits and flexibility across a range of possible climate change futures, NbS are sometimes referred to as 'win-win' or 'no-regret' measures. The success of NbS and associated projects often relies on the public for co-creation, co-implementation, and long-term sustainable use, monitoring, and management. However, the relative importance of NbS benefits is defined by the perceptions and underlying values of stakeholders with potentially divergent interests. It is unclear what measures at-risk individuals may prefer on the green-hybrid-grey spectrum and what shapes their preferences, including perceived benefits and potential regret. Identifying public (mis)perceptions, expectations, objectives, and what underlies these can inform communication and project framing, engagement, and ultimately increase public acceptance and continued uptake of NbS. We use citizen surveys at three distinct European sites where NbS are being planned and in-depth focus groups as a follow-up in the site at risk of landslides (Catterline, Scotland). Preferences and their drivers for measures on the green-hybrid-grey spectrum are assessed, focusing on public perceptions of NbS effectiveness, risk, and nature. We find that although wildlife habitat and aesthetics as co-benefits are important, reducing risk is of primary concern. Uncertainty in the strength and effectiveness of NbS, as one of 13 qualitative factors we identify, drives public preferences towards hybrid measures - seen as balancing green and grey trade-offs. Misperceptions and a demand for NbS information should be addressed with experiential learning, combined with transparent two-way communication of expectations. We urge caution and further research regarding emphasizing co-benefits and the 'natural' framing of NbS when risk reduction is the primary public objective.

A systems model of SDG target influence on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the United Nations in 2015 as part of the "2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development" and aim to address issues ranging from poverty and economic growth to climate change. Efforts to tackle one issue can support or hinder progress towards others, often with complex systemic interactions. Thus, each of the SDGs and their corresponding targets may contribute as levers or hurdles towards achieving other SDGs and targets. Based on SDG indicator data, we create a systems model considering influence among the SDGs and their targets. Once assessed within a system, we find that more SDGs and their corresponding targets act as levers towards achieving other goals and targets rather than as hurdles. In particular, efforts towards SDGs 5 (Gender Equality) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) may accelerate progress, while SDGs 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) are shown to create potential hurdles. The model results can be used to help promote supportive interactions and overcome hindering ones in the long term. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-021-01040-8.

A review of public acceptance of nature-based solutions: The 'why', 'when', and 'how' of success for disaster risk reduction measures.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognized as sustainable approaches to address societal challenges. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) has benefited by moving away from purely 'grey' infrastructure measures towards NbS. However, this shift also furthers an increasing trend of reliance on public acceptance to plan, implement and manage DRR measures. In this review, we examine how unique NbS characteristics relate to public acceptance through a comparison with grey measures, and we identify influential acceptance factors related to individuals, society, and DRR measures. Based on the review, we introduce the PA-NbS model that highlights the role of risk perception, trust, competing societal interests, and ecosystem services. Efforts to increase acceptance should focus on providing and promoting awareness of benefits combined with effective communication and collaboration. Further research is required to understand interconnections among identified factors and how they can be leveraged for the success and further uptake of NbS.