What Nature-Based Flood Protection Solutions Are Best Perceived by People? Lessons from Field Research in Czechia

Macháč, Jan; Brabec, Jan; Hekrle, Marek; Vacková, Alena

doi:10.1007/698_2021_763

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…or one broader site‐specific ecosystem or green space (agricultural landscape, low hills, protected area, etc.). Only a few studies (e.g., Ferreira et al, 2021; Macháč et al, 2021; Miller & Montalto, 2019) have investigated individual preferences towards ES for various solutions within one study or in the same area.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…or one broader site-specific ecosystem or green space (agricultural landscape, low hills, protected area, etc.). Only a few studies (e.g., Ferreira et al, 2021;Mach ač et al, 2021;Miller & Montalto, 2019) have investigated individual preferences towards ES for various solutions within one study or in the same area. As shown in Figure 4, individual preferences toward multiple ES were explored in urban areas (n = 95; 62%) and less so in rural landscapes (n = 43, 28%).…”

Section: Nbs Types and Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as shown by many existing studies, how NBS and their ES are perceived by individuals might differ according to different solutions, areas, scales, and people's awareness and knowledge (Chen et al, 2018; Macháč et al, 2021; Sarabi et al, 2020) and multiple qualitative and quantitative preference elicitation methods and data collection techniques are considered. Such heterogeneity in NBS studies to understand preferences has previously resulted in several reviews.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What benefits are the most important to you, your community, and society? Perception of ecosystem services provided by nature‐based solutions

Hekrle

2022

WIREs Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem services (ES) provided by nature-based solutions (NBS) have been examined using various data collection techniques and preference elicitation methods to understand what ES are important to human well-being. This article provides a systematic review of 153 scientific publications, with a focus on data collection techniques and perspectives of well-being used when eliciting preferences toward multiple ES provided by NBS. ES provided by urban parks,urban trees, and community gardens are the most commonly examined; however, generally specified NBS such as "green spaces" or "green infrastructure" prevail. The review further shows that the questionnaire surveys is the dominant technique for bringing evidence about the most preferred ES, followed by semi-structured interviews and workshops. Only a limited number of studies use revealed or stated preference methods as a part of data collection efforts such as a choice experiment or contingent valuation. Additionally, the review defines three different perspectives of well-being considered but rarely discussed in existing studies: individual; community; and society well-being perspectives. As the concept of well-being is hardly discussed in NBS literature and still depends on a large degree of subjectivity, this review highlights the need for future research that looks more deeply at individual, community, and social well-being, which is influenced differently by the implementation of NBS.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nbs Types and Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%