Conflicting interests in flood risk management (FRM) frequently arise, resulting in disputes which are often resolved through mutual agreement. Nevertheless, a small number of cases require legal intervention when negotiation or mediation fails. This can publicly reveal the conflict often hidden in these mutual agreements. The two areas that intersect to create this conflict are spatial planning and flood risk reduction strategies that may impact property rights. This research explores the nature of such conflict in FRM and its possible resolution. Through an analysis of 25 all-UK legal Court transcripts, we investigate the underlying flood-related disputation, dispute types, and how they were resolved. Our findings reveal that certain disputes remain unresolved prior to Court proceedings due to misunderstandings about spatial planning in at-risk areas. In addition, the depiction and the accuracy of flood risk assessments can be a contentious issue. Some FRM disputes remain irresolvable due to the differences in collective and individual aspirations about the use of land by various interests: developers, local authorities, residents, landowners, and farmers. Understanding these FRM disputes and their judicial resolution is valuable in unambiguously revealing who are the ultimate ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in these fiercely contested struggles.

中文翻译：

---

法院在英国洪水风险管理冲突解决中的作用

洪水风险管理（FRM）中的利益冲突经常出现，导致争议，通常通过双方协商解决。然而，少数案件在谈判或调解失败时需要法律介入。这可以公开揭示这些相互协议中经常隐藏的冲突。造成这种冲突的两个领域是可能影响财产权的空间规划和减少洪水风险的策略。本研究探讨了 FRM 中此类冲突的本质及其可能的解决方案。通过对 25 个英国法庭笔录的分析，我们调查了与洪水相关的潜在争议、争议类型以及解决方式。我们的调查结果表明，由于对风险地区空间规划的误解，某些争议在法庭诉讼之前仍未得到解决。此外，洪水风险评估的描述和准确性可能是一个有争议的问题。由于开发商、地方当局、居民、土地所有者和农民等不同利益群体对土地使用的集体和个人愿望存在差异，一些 FRM 纠纷仍然无法解决。了解这些FRM纠纷及其司法解决方案对于明确揭示谁是这些激烈斗争中的最终“赢家”和“输家”非常有价值。