This article reevaluates the definition of rivers, advocating for interdisciplinary understanding amidst climate challenges.
This article poses a simple but deceptive question – what is a river – and, equally, what is it not. It starts from an interrogation of James C. Scott’s In Praise of Floods: The Untamed River and the Life It Brings, and proceeds by recasting river research as a form of concept mediation between the social and the environmental sciences. This requires exposing inherited cognitive biases and the damage they have caused. The ensuing clarification of terms and categories then allows the crafting of interdisciplinary alternatives, such as the notion of moving saturated waterland, as a tool for thinking about rivers across disciplines. In an era of accelerating climate change, rethinking and retheorizing rivers is not an academic luxury but a political and ethical imperative for those seeking to understand rivers and their inhabitants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luisa Cortesi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: