No abstract

Fluvial geomorphic risks are rarely incorporated into and mitigated by river flood management in the United States. Identifying where such risks exist is difficult and there is much scholarly debate on how best to do it. We incorporate this debate into a stakeholder‐driven process to assess its viability in translational fluvial geomorphology. Focusing on Massachusetts, USA we describe a decade‐long, stakeholder‐driven project that sought to better manage flood risks across the state. We found that even if a diverse group of expert stakeholders agrees on the science, politics complicate the transfer of science into policy in highly participatory settings. Stakeholders agreed that fluvial geomorphic risk mapping should result in a “river corridor” that must be process‐based, variable‐width, and based on readily available, easily measured data sources. However, without an agreed‐upon sense of how to resolve the geographic mismatch between an expansive scientifically defined corridor and one constrained by social and economic practicalities, stakeholders struggled to determine what a fluvial geomorphology‐informed river corridor would be used for, and by whom.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract