Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > A restatement of the natural science evidence c...

Electronic data

  • Floods_Restatement_Final

    Accepted author manuscript, 434 KB, PDF document

    Embargo ends: 1/01/50

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

A restatement of the natural science evidence concerning catchment-based “natural” flood management in the United Kingdom

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
  • Simon J. Dadson
  • Jim Hall
  • Anna Murgatroyd
  • Mike Acreman
  • Paul D. Bates
  • Keith John Beven
  • Ann Louise Heathwaite
  • Joseph Holden
  • Ian P. Holman
  • Stuart N. Lane
  • Enda O'Connell
  • Edmund Penning-Rowsell
  • Nick Reynard
  • David A. Sear
  • Colin Thorne
  • Rob L. Wilby
Close
Article number20160706
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>03/2017
<mark>Journal</mark>Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Issue number2199
Volume473
Number of pages19
Publication statusPublished
Early online date15/03/17
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Flooding is a very costly natural hazard in the UK and is expected to increase further under future climate change scenarios. Flood defences are commonly deployed to protect communities and property from flooding, but in recent years flood management policy has looked towards solutions that seek to mitigate flood risk at flood-prone sites through targeted interventions throughout the catchment, sometimes using techniques which involve working with natural processes. This paper describes a project to provide a succinct summary of the natural science evidence base concerning the effectiveness of catchment-based ‘natural’ flood management in the UK. The evidence summary is designed to be read by an informed but not technically specialist audience. Each evidence statement is placed into one of four categories describing the nature of the underlying information. The evidence summary forms the appendix to this paper and an annotated bibliography is provided in the electronic supplementary material.