As climate change intensifies flood risk, adaptation strategies must address not only physical exposure but also the social inequities that shape vulnerability and recovery. This thesis project evaluates how equity is conceptualized and operationalized in two flood adaptation plans in Louisiana: the Greater New Orleans Urban Water Plan, which emphasizes nature-based solutions (NBS), and the East Baton Rouge Stormwater Master Plan, which relies primarily on traditional flood control infrastructure (FCI). Using a qualitative coding approach, this study applies a ten-dimensional equity framework to systematically assess each plan’s treatment of equity. Findings reveal that the two plans prioritize and define dimensions of equity differently. The Urban Water Plan emphasizes equity associated with outcomes, highlighting the co-benefits of NBS such as improved water quality, ecosystem restoration, and expanded recreational spaces across multiple communities. In contrast, the Stormwater Master Plan prioritizes equity associated with process through structured stakeholder engagement and the integration of social vulnerability metrics into risk assessment and planning. Despite these strengths, both plans demonstrate significant gaps, particularly in addressing epistemic equity, Indigenous sovereignty, and other considerations. This comparative analysis underscores that while NBS are often associated with more equitable outcomes, equity is not inherent to any single adaptation strategy. Instead, equitable flood adaptation requires the intentional integration of multiple equity dimensions across both planning processes and outcomes. The findings suggest that future flood adaptation efforts should combine the distributive strengths of NBS alongside equitable planning processes while expanding recognition of diverse knowledge systems and communities. By doing so, adaptation planning can better avoid reinforcing existing inequalities and instead contribute to more just and resilient flood management systems.