ABSTRACT Natural flood management strategies (NFMs) encompass a variety of measures implemented across catchments to mitigate flood risks while providing multiple benefits. In recent years, NFMs have gained increasing attention from researchers and policymakers. However, despite the growing body of research, there remains a lack of a critical review that quantitatively synthesises the reported performance of different NFMs by analysing their effects on key hydrological parameters. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review of NFMs based on 145 peer‐reviewed papers covering 216 case studies across 37 countries, following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Our analysis moves from a descriptive overview of the evidence base to a novel, quantitative investigation of three critical themes: the characteristics of studied NFM schemes, the methodologies used for their assessment, and their quantitative hydrological performance and its influencing factors. Results indicate that 31% of the studies identified flood peak reduction as the most commonly targeted hydrological objective. A significant positive correlation was found between intervention diversity and intensity (Spearman's ρ = 0.53). Furthermore, our methodological analysis reveals a critical trade‐off in the literature, with empirical monitoring typically used in small catchments over shorter durations, while modelling is used to assess a greater diversity of interventions at larger scales, with truly combined approaches being notably rare (11%). Notably, river and floodplain management (RFM) demonstrated higher effectiveness, achieving an average flood peak reduction of 30%, particularly in larger catchments. Bearing the often multi‐faceted aims of NFMs in mind, this paper provides key suggestions for future research.
Bagheri‐Gavkosh et al. (Mon,) studied this question.