Hill Bartholomew, Marjoribanks Tim, Moore Harriet, Bosher Lee, Gussy Mark
School of Natural Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK.
School of Architecture, Building, and Civil Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Commun Earth Environ. 2025;6(1):714. doi: 10.1038/s43247-025-02706-2. Epub 2025 Aug 28.
Market-based instruments, including competitive tenders, are central to funding global environmental restoration and management projects. Recently, tenders have been utilised to fund Nature-based Solutions schemes for Natural Flood Management, with the explicit purpose of achieving co-benefits; flood management reducing inequities. While multiple studies consider the efficacy of Nature-based Solutions for tackling inequities, no prior research has quantified whether the resource allocation for these projects has been conducted equitably. We analyse two national natural flood management programmes funded through competitive tenders in England to explore by considering the characteristics of projects, including socio-economic, geographical (e.g. rurality) and flood risk dynamics. Our results suggest that inequity occurs at both the application and funding stages of Nature-based Solutions projects for flood risk management. This reflects wider international challenges of using market-based instruments for environmental resource allocation. Competitive tenders have the potential to undermine the equitable benefits of Nature-based Solutions.
包括竞争性招标在内的基于市场的工具,对于为全球环境恢复和管理项目提供资金至关重要。最近,招标已被用于为基于自然的自然洪水管理解决方案计划提供资金,其明确目的是实现共同效益;洪水管理减少不平等现象。虽然多项研究考虑了基于自然的解决方案在解决不平等问题方面的有效性,但此前没有研究量化这些项目的资源分配是否公平。我们分析了通过英格兰竞争性招标资助的两个国家自然洪水管理计划,通过考虑项目的特征,包括社会经济、地理(如农村地区)和洪水风险动态来进行探索。我们的结果表明,基于自然的洪水风险管理解决方案项目在申请和资金阶段都存在不平等现象。这反映了使用基于市场的工具进行环境资源分配面临的更广泛的国际挑战。竞争性招标有可能破坏基于自然的解决方案的公平效益。