How far have management practices come in ‘working with the river’?

Abstract

The philosophy of 'working with nature' and 'working with the river' is increasingly embedded in global management practice. However, what does this mean? Has real progress been made in operationalizing what is known, how scientists and practitioners work and how rivers are conceptualized as integral parts of landscapes, culture and society? The first sections of this commentary outline what this philosophy means to us (the authors) and briefly summarize the evolution of associated concepts and principles in recent decades. In the final section, we comment on what we believe needs to be done to 'work with the river' in practice. We are communicating to both river scientists and practitioners as a collective when we ask: Will we be brave enough to hold the course in the face of many global challenges, be ready to respond when called upon, and commit to creation of diverse, inclusive and open access communities of practice in geoethical programmes that 'work with the river'?

Identifying corridors of river recovery in coastal NSW Australia, for use in river management decision support and prioritisation systems

“…To achieve these targets, the river management and restoration industry, globally, will need to work at much larger scales if the cumulative impacts of rehabilitation and restoration are to be manifest. Proactively maintaining or building corridors of river recovery, and working with the river to assist self-healing is one mechanism by which this can occur [ 11 , 14 ]. However, such work cannot commence until corridors are identified and priorities set for their conservation or rehabilitation.…”

“…Globally, nature-based approaches and solutions (NBS), which seek to mimic or use natural processes to preserve, rehabilitate or create a range of ecosystems, have been integrated into regulatory policy and decision-making across a broad range of environmental concerns [ 8 ] and organisations [ 9 , 10 ]. Concurrently, in many parts of the world, river management philosophy has shifted from an engineering based approach to an ecosystem based approach to rehabilitation and restoration [ 11 , 12 ] with preferred rehabilitation strategies being process-based, self-healing, and recovery-based [ 13 – 20 ]. Working with recovery in this ‘era of NBS’ shifts the emphasis from treating the most degraded parts of river systems to concentrating rehabilitation efforts where river recovery is already occurring or can be enhanced and assisted to trigger positive feedbacks beyond the reach scale [ 13 , 15 ].…”

Geoethical futures: A call for more-than-human physical geography

“…social-ecological and institutional memory). A key premise of inherently place-based (catchment-specific) applications is the imperative to 'respect diversity', applying nature-based solutions that 'work with' each and every river (Fryirs and Brierley, 2021).…”

Planning for Climate Change Impacts on Geoheritage Interests in Protected and Conserved Areas

“…Such assessments can also provide pointers for scenario modelling of future responses, landscape trajectories and identification of pressure points and areas at risk, and improve understanding of how geomorphological systems will adapt to the speed and scale of projected climate changes (Gray et al 2013;Hansom et al 2017;Skirrow et al 2021). However, while indicative, the past may not provide exact geomorphological analogues for the future (Fryirs and Brierley 2021). For example, sea-level rise combined with reduced sediment availability and space constraints may be too rapid to allow existing coastal landforms to fully adapt in their present forms and locations, resulting in widespread coastal reorganisation (Orford and Pethick 2006;Cooper et al 2020).…”