Perceiving Protection: Public Interpretation of Institutions in Managed Flood Settings

Floods rank among the most frequent and widely managed hazards worldwide. While considerable research has examined public perceptions of flood risk, less attention has been paid to how people interpret institutional presence, action, and responsibility in flood‐prone settings shaped by infrastructure and governance systems. This paper presents a systematic review of 35 empirical studies published between 2010 and 2024 that examine the relationship between institutional flood governance and public interpretation across structurally managed flood contexts. The review synthesizes findings across diverse geographies, governance scales, and infrastructure types, identifying common interpretive patterns in how people make sense of institutional roles in flood‐risk management. Thematic analysis reveals six key dynamics: (1) infrastructure as a producer of risk, (2) governance fragmentation and public confusion, (3) preparedness as an interpretive practice, (4) trust and the levee effect, (5) fairness and timing in institutional response, and (6) recognition and communicative legibility. Across these themes, preparedness behavior emerges not solely as a response to risk knowledge or hazard experience, but as a reflection of how institutional action is seen, trusted, or contested. The review contributes to a growing body of research that reframes flood preparedness as a meaning‐making process. It highlights the need for flood governance to move beyond technical protection toward more legible, responsive, and participatory engagement. Institutions are not only evaluated on their capacity to protect but also on their visibility, communication effectiveness, and perceived intent, factors that shape whether people prepare, trust, or withdraw in the face of managed risk.