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.