1. Introduction
This paper is a response to questions posed by River Research and
Applications concerning what relationships humans can develop with
rivers in the twenty-first century. This is an entirely reasonable query
given the importance of river systems, spatially and temporally, to the
development of human communities, society, and well-being is undeniable
(Schönach, 2017; Wantzen et al.,
2016). Historically the relationships humans have developed with rivers
have not produced entirely balanced or mutually beneficial outcomes
(Gurnell et al., 2016; Tockner & Stanford, 2002). Overwhelmingly the
benefits to humans through the development of, for example,
urbanisation, industry and agriculture have been at severe cost/s to the
river system and associated environment (Albert et al., 2021; Dunham et
al., 2018; Schönach, 2017). The historical evidence clearly points to
this. This as Wantzen et al., (2016) suggest led to river cultures
emerging which included learning how to exploit rivers in ways that
underpin the building of communities and social systems as well as
fuelling economic development. Based on attitudes that humans can take
whatever they want from river systems and their environments without
significant consequences from these actions a “separation” of the
river-human connectivity further distanced the health of river systems
and their environments from society’s gaze and concern (Albert et al.,
2021; Pereira et al., 2020; Mazur, 2021). This is a historical lesson we
need to be reminded of regularly so as not to forget the past
over-exploitation and degradation of the environment to prevent
continuously repeating disrespectful relationships with river system
environments.
Viewing our relationships with rivers through the lens of economic
development and market forces will lead to diminished, if not
destructive, outcomes for river systems and society (Alexandra &
Riddington, 2007; Dunham et al., 2018). Furthermore, the negative trends
associated with climate change, for example more intensive droughts,
foreshadows an impending ugly divorce if we do not re-assess and
re-configure our relationships with rivers towards a more harmonious
coexistence (Alexandra, 2019). Humans cannot continue a
“business-as-usual” approach to river-human relationships concerning,
for example, the exploitative use of rivers and excessive water
allocations, which may lead to degradation of the ecological conditions
of river systems (Brierley et al., 2013; Carton et al., 2017;
Kortelainen, 1999) or chemical pollution from agricultural runoff
(Pretty, 2008). Furthermore, the consequences of direct human actions
even if implemented in good faith, for example river restoration (Mant
et al., 2012), can lead to unintentionally detrimental impacts due to
disruption or interference with the river system’s functionality. As
Palmer et al. (2007, p. 478) state, the “… restoration outcome
depends on the nature of the project within the context of the larger
watershed and the site-specific understanding of the geomorphic,
hydrologic, and ecological history and future of the river segment.” In
shifting away from such anthropocentric perspectives and taking guidance
from new materialism in which nature, including river systems, is
understood as a collective of active agents in (re)shaping of the
environmenl, ecological systems, and human lives can offer opportunities
to develop and build harmonious coexistent river-human relationships.
This means understanding river systems as key agents in harmonious
coexistent river-human relationships. As Arias-Maldonado (2013, p. 444)
argues, “… the separation between society and nature is
increasingly untenable”.
Consequently, this paper presents new ways of thinking from new
materialism to re-conceptualise what potentially more harmonious
coexistent river-human relationships moving throughout the twenty-first
century may look like. In this endeavour, humans and human agency are
de-centred as the dominant actors or agents influencing river systems
and the environment. That is, river systems are acknowledged as active
agents as well with capacities in influencing and (re)shaping river
systems and environments and, human systems and communities.
Perspectives from new materialism commence the following conceptual
rethink. This is followed by outlining two potential frameworks, the
Nature Futures Framework (NFF) and the Human-River Encounter Sites
(HRES), which are presented as aligning with new materialist thought
allowing development of harmonious coexistent river-human relationships.
A brief conclusion closes this paper’s attempts to rethink river-human
relationships in the twenty-first century whilst endeavouring to address
the questions posed by this special issue.