Reducing the social, environmental, and economic impacts of droughts and identifying pathways towards drought resilient societies remains a global priority. A common understanding of the drivers of drought risk and ways in which drought impacts materialize is crucial for improved assessments and for the identification and (spatial) planning of targeted drought risk reduction and adaptation options. Over the past two decades, we have witnessed an increase in drought risk assessments across spatial and temporal scales drawing on a multitude of conceptual foundations and methodological approaches. Recognizing the diversity of approaches in science and practice as well as the associated opportunities and challenges, we present the outcomes of a systematic literature review of the state of the art of people-centered drought vulnerability and risk conceptualization and assessments, and identify persisting gaps. Our analysis shows that, of the reviewed assessments, (i) more than 60% do not explicitly specify the type of drought hazard that is addressed, (ii) 42% do not provide a clear definition of drought risk, (iii) 62% apply static, index-based approaches, (iv) 57% of the indicator-based assessments do not specify their weighting methods, (v) only 11% conduct any form of validation, (vi) only ten percent develop future scenarios of drought risk, and (vii) only about 40% of the assessments establish a direct link to drought risk reduction or adaptation strategies, i.e. consider solutions. We discuss the challenges associated with these findings for both assessment and identification of drought risk reduction measures, and identify research needs to inform future research and policy agendas in order to advance the understanding of drought risk and support pathways towards more drought resilient societies.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognized as sustainable approaches to address societal challenges. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) has benefited by moving away from purely ‘grey’ infrastructure measures towards NbS. However, this shift also furthers an increasing trend of reliance on public acceptance to plan, implement and manage DRR measures. In this review, we examine how unique NbS characteristics relate to public acceptance through a comparison with grey measures, and we identify influential acceptance factors related to individuals, society, and DRR measures. Based on the review, we introduce the PA-NbS model that highlights the role of risk perception, trust, competing societal interests, and ecosystem services. Efforts to increase acceptance should focus on providing and promoting awareness of benefits combined with effective communication and collaboration. Further research is required to understand interconnections among identified factors and how they can be leveraged for the success and further uptake of NbS.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the United Nations in 2015 as part of the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” and aim to address issues ranging from poverty and economic growth to climate change. Efforts to tackle one issue can support or hinder progress towards others, often with complex systemic interactions. Thus, each of the SDGs and their corresponding targets may contribute as levers or hurdles towards achieving other SDGs and targets. Based on SDG indicator data, we create a systems model considering influence among the SDGs and their targets. Once assessed within a system, we find that more SDGs and their corresponding targets act as levers towards achieving other goals and targets rather than as hurdles. In particular, efforts towards SDGs 5 (Gender Equality) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) may accelerate progress, while SDGs 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) are shown to create potential hurdles. The model results can be used to help promote supportive interactions and overcome hindering ones in the long term.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) contrast with grey infrastructure measures to reduce risk from natural hazards. Using natural and sustainable measures (green) or combining green with grey elements (hybrid) can provide important co-benefits beyond risk reduction. Thanks to their co-benefits and flexibility across a range of possible climate change futures, NbS are sometimes referred to as 'win-win' or 'no-regret' measures. The success of NbS and associated projects often relies on the public for co-creation, co-implementation, and long-term sustainable use, monitoring, and management. However, the relative importance of NbS benefits is defined by the perceptions and underlying values of stakeholders with potentially divergent interests. It is unclear what measures at-risk individuals may prefer on the green-hybrid-grey spectrum and what shapes their preferences, including perceived benefits and potential regret. Identifying public (mis)perceptions, expectations, objectives, and what underlies these can inform communication and project framing, engagement, and ultimately increase public acceptance and continued uptake of NbS. We use citizen surveys at three distinct European sites where NbS are being planned and in-depth focus groups as a follow-up in the site at risk of landslides (Catterline, Scotland). Preferences and their drivers for measures on the green-hybrid-grey spectrum are assessed, focusing on public perceptions of NbS effectiveness, risk, and nature. We find that although wildlife habitat and aesthetics as co-benefits are important, reducing risk is of primary concern. Uncertainty in the strength and effectiveness of NbS, as one of 13 qualitative factors we identify, drives public preferences towards hybrid measures - seen as balancing green and grey trade-offs. Misperceptions and a demand for NbS information should be addressed with experiential learning, combined with transparent two-way communication of expectations. We urge caution and further research regarding emphasizing co-benefits and the 'natural' framing of NbS when risk reduction is the primary public objective.

Climate change is one factor increasing the risk of hydro-meteorological hazards globally. The use of nature-based solutions (NbS), and more specifically ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction measures (Eco-DRR), has become a popular response for risk reduction that also provides highly-valued co-benefits. Public acceptance is of particular importance for NbS since they often rely on local collaborative implementation, management, and monitoring, as well as long-term protection against competing societal interests. Although public engagement is a common goal of NbS projects, it is rarely carried out with a sufficient understanding of the (de)motivating factors tied to public perceptions. Successful collaboration demands consideration of societal attitudes and values in relation to risk, nature, and place. However, existing research does not sufficiently explore these themes together, their interactions, and their implications for the public acceptance of NbS. This may lead to misaligned public expectations and failed participatory initiatives, while jeopardizing the success of NbS projects and their continued funding and uptake. We conducted citizen surveys within local NbS “host” communities to determine the degree of pro-NbS attitudes and behavior, associated variables, and how these may be leveraged to increase acceptance. We compared results across sites, relying primarily on correlations and regression models along with survey comments and expert knowledge. Three distinct rural NbS being implemented within the OPERANDUM project aim to reduce risk from (socio-)natural hazards in Scotland (landslides and coastal erosion; n = 66 respondents), Finland (eutrophication and algal blooms; n = 204) and Greece (river flooding and water scarcity; n = 84). Our research thus centers on rural NbS for risk reduction within a large EU project. Trust in implementers is a consistent factor for defining attitudes towards the NbS across the sites, and attitudes are strongly associated with respondents’ commitment to nature and behavioral acceptance (i.e., willingness to engage). Behaviorial acceptance is most consistently predicted by connectedness to place and the extent of expected future impacts. Skepticism of NbS effectiveness leads to high public demand for relevant evidence. To increase public acceptance, we recommend greater framing of NbS in relation to place-based values as well as demonstration of the effectiveness of NbS for risk reduction. However, distinct hazard types, proposed NbS, and historical characteristics must be considered for developing strategies aimed at increasing acceptance. An understanding of these characteristics and their interactions leads to evidence-based recommendations for our study sites and for successful NbS deployment in Europe and beyond.

Adaptation to climate change has become part of national development programs (e.g., National Adaptation Planning). Though communities are adapting to climate change across the world, this perspective argues that understanding social and ecological systems requires greater attention to enhance resilience for achieving and moving beyond the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in response to climate change across the world. In addition, based on a systematic literature review, this perspective identifies key research gaps and addresses relevant key challenges and future research direction for social and ecological systems (SES) adaptation to climate change. Ultimately, this may also help move from the existing limits to adaptation (intolerable risks through adaptive actions) concept to social‐ecological limits to adaptation and offers an opportunity to integrate adaptation to climate change in development planning by considering both SES.