Market-based instruments to fund nature-based solutions for flood risk management can disproportionately benefit affluent areas

<p> Market-based instruments, including competitive tenders, are central to funding global environmental</p> <p>restoration and management projects. Recently, tenders have been utilised to fund Nature-based</p> <p>Solutions schemes for Natural Flood Management, with the explicit purpose of achieving co-benefits;</p> <p>flood management and reducing inequities. While multiple studies consider the efficacy of Nature-</p> <p>based Solutions for tackling inequities, no prior research has quantified whether the resource</p> <p>allocation for these projects has been conducted equitably. We analyse two national natural flood</p> <p>management programmes funded through competitive tenders in England to explore who benefits by</p> <p>considering the characteristics of projects, including socio-economic, geographical (e.g. rurality) and</p> <p>flood risk dynamics. Our results suggest that inequity occurs at both the application and funding</p> <p>stages of Nature-based Solutions projects for flood risk management. This reflects wider international</p> <p>challenges of using market-based instruments for environmental resource allocation. Competitive</p> <p>tenders have the potential to undermine the equitable benefits of Nature-based Solutions. </p>