Unravelling stakeholder narratives on nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological risk reduction

Abstract

Despite growing scholarly consensus on the need for nature-based solutions (NBS) as holistic and sustainable alternatives to traditional engineering solutions, stakeholder acceptance and implementation of NBS remain low. This study investigates stakeholder narratives on implementing nature-based solutions (NBS) for mitigating hydro-meteorological risks across five European river basin sites in Eastern and Central Europe. Utilising the Q-methodology and narrative analysis, we identified three ideal–typical narratives: idealist, reformist, and sceptic—each providing distinct perspectives on evidence-based policy formation and NBS integration. Our results demonstrate that: (1) idealists’ optimistic outlook risks overlooking critical engagement with implementation challenges; (2) neglecting sceptic concerns may impede NBS adoption and invite accusations of green-washing, and (3) reformists promote evidence-based approaches and transparent stakeholder engagement to bridge narrative divides. The study underscores the importance of identifying shared values, stakeholder collaboration, and a nuanced understanding of contextual factors in fostering NBS implementation. The study contributes to a practical framework aligning NBS projects with prevailing narratives, offering guidance for navigating the complex landscape of NBS implementation. Future research should prioritize in-depth analysis of agent perspectives, place-specific influences on narratives, and the application of narrative analysis to other emerging technologies and environmental topics (e.g. circular economy), deepening our understanding of the socio-political dynamics shaping the acceptance and implementation of sustainable solutions.