ArticleAmbio2024
Nature-based solutions potential for flood risk reduction under extreme rainfall events.
Article in Ambio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Climate change will substantially increase extreme rainfall events, especially in the Tropics, enhancing flood risks. Such imminent risks require climate adaptation strategies to endure extreme rainfall and increase drainage systems. Here, we evaluate the potential of nature-based solutions by using an ecosystem service modeling approach, evaluating the impact of extreme rainfall events on flood risks in a large urban area and with a real-world land recovery plan. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four different land recovery scenarios and associated co-benefits, based on a gradient increase in area recovered and cost of implementation. Although the scenarios reveal increasing flood risk reduction and co-benefits along with greater proportion of land recovery, the most cost-effective scenario was the one with an intermediate land recovery where 30% of the study area would be reforested. We emphasize the striking benefits of nature-based solutions for flood risk reduction in cities, considering landscape scale and stakeholders' needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.