Published in PLOS One on 2026-03-25, this study is presented as an attributed evidence briefing. The excerpts below are the original researchers’ words, reproduced under their Creative Commons Attribution licence. Health Signal has selected the abstract and, where needed, opening background paragraphs; the complete methods, results, limitations and references remain in the linked paper.
Original authors: Obroma O Agumagu, Robert Marchant, Lindsay C Stringer
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0345583
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
Combating climate change, flood risk, managing land use, and developmental change need cohesive policy action. Analysing policies is essential to assess whether there is a coherent approach where various sectors support each other, or at least do not conflict. This study analyses policy documents addressing hydrological hazards in the Niger Delta region, Nigeria using Qualitative Document Analysis, content analysis, keyword analysis and frequency counts. These insights were used to examine: 1) the types of hydrological hazards and their drivers recognised in six national policy documents across environment, climate change, agriculture, water, forest, and petroleum policy sectors, 2) the measures outlined to reduce the risks from these hazards, and 3), how well aligned the measures are across sectors for management of the Niger Delta region. Results reveal that the policies across the Environment and Climate Change directly address hydrological hazards and their climatic drivers. In contrast, Agriculture, Water, and Forest policies demonstrate sector-specific approaches, while the Petroleum policy stands out for its very limited consideration of hydrological hazards and their drivers. Hydrological hazards were considered as high rainfall, river floods, sea level rise, storm surges, and warming trends as key hydrological hazards. Climate variability and human activity arising from urbanisation, deforestation, industrialisation, agriculture, and population are identified as drivers that can exacerbate the hazards and their impacts. Measures across the policies consider flood defence structures, preparing comprehensive hazard maps and vulnerability analysis to strengthen smart water management to reduce risk and build adaptive capacity across the region. Overall alignment of the six national policies is found to be low, indicating limited attention to the interactions between sectors and stakeholders. This pattern indicates horizontal misalignment. For Nigeria to better manage climate change impacts, all hydrological hazards and their drivers must be recognised. There is a need for the policy framework to be more joined-up so that a multi-sector approach can reduce risks from hydrological hazards.
1. Introduction
Governments worldwide have begun implementing measures to address the causes and impacts of climate change. Despite the commitments made under the 2015 Paris Agreement, global progress remains insufficient. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has highlighted this inadequate progress, emphasizing the urgency of the challenge for nations across the Global South [1]. The consequences of climate change are particularly acute in Africa due to the continent’s high dependence on the environment for subsistence, limited adaptive capacity, widespread poverty, and rapid population growth [2]. Furthermore, Africa faces significant climate data limitations and inequities in research funding and leadership, which further constrain its adaptive capacity [3]. Simultaneously, public climate literacy remains low; analysis of Africa’s largest representative public opinion survey indicates that climate change literacy ranges from 23% to 66% across 33 countries, with even greater subnational variation (e.g., 5–71% among Nigerian states) [4].
Reading this evidence
Use the full paper to check the study design, participant selection, comparator and outcome definitions before drawing a practical conclusion. An association does not by itself show cause and effect. A reported performance measure needs its denominator and uncertainty. A finding from a particular facility, sample or time period should retain that scope when it is discussed elsewhere.
This briefing makes the source accessible within the wider research & evidence desk. It does not assess an individual patient or certify a product. When considering relevance to another health system, examine the original authors’ account of context and limitations, then seek local implementation evidence. The related reporting below provides other studies to read alongside this one; it is a topic connection, rather than a claim that their results are directly comparable.
© 2026 Obroma O Agumagu, Robert Marchant, Lindsay C Stringer. Excerpts reproduced under CC BY. Selection, formatting and contextual notes by Health Signal. The researchers are the authors of the source study, not members of Health Signal’s staff.
Explore connected evidence
- Evidence brief: Leveraging GIS-based multi-criteria analysis for flood-prone area detection in Nsanje District, Malawi
- Evidence brief: Stakeholder priorities and conceptualization of One Health: Insights from fuzzy cognitive mapping and grounded theory
- Evidence brief: Business-as-usual and fantasy planning – an analysis of equity within climate adaptation planning for sanitation in Nairobi
