Trending

    The Tale of Three Futures: Conquest, Reverence or Reconciliation?

    Article

    Shermon Cruz 1,2

    1Ph.D. Candidate, Sustainability Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia

    2UNESCO Chair on Anticipatory Governance and Regenerative Cities, Northwestern University, Loaag City, Philippines

    Abstract

    This study investigates the contrasting futures of river governance within urban landscapes through colonial and decolonial lenses. By employing Causal Layered Analysis (CLA), the research unpacks the deep-seated epistemological and ontological frameworks that shape our interactions with rivers. The colonial perspective, rooted in conquest and exploitation, views rivers as mere resources for economic gain. This often leads to long-term environmental degradation and socio-cultural disruption. Conversely, the decolonial approach advocates for reverence, recognizing rivers as living entities with intrinsic rights and spiritual significance. The third space, the transcolonial view seeks for hybridity as rivers are neither pure objects nor solely sacred entities. The research highlights the urgency of shifting from exploitative practices to frameworks that prioritize ecological integrity and cultural respect. By juxtaposing these three narratives, the study calls for a radical rethinking of how we engage with rivers in urban settings, proposing that the future health of both rivers and cities depends on our ability to embrace principles of coexistence and mutual respect.

    Keywords

    Rivers, Coloniality, Decoloniality, Transcoloniality, Urban Landscapes

    Introduction

    This article is the second in a three-part series on river epistemes within urban landscapes, now examining colonial and decolonial perspectives on rivers. It aims to gain insights into how these worldviews shape future interactions between rivers and cities. The author does not provide a comprehensive analysis but sheds light on river-city interactions through multiple epistemic lenses. The intent is to offer a nuanced understanding that embraces diverse perspectives.

    To generate new anticipatory river imaginaries, it employed Causal Layered Analysis (CLA). CLA allows for exploration of issues, revealing deeper insights into dynamics shaping future scenarios (Inayatullah, 2022). The author, from the Global South (Philippines), approaches this work with a commitment to transparency. His perspective is shaped by his ethno-linguistic background and the principles of decolonization—radical sovereignty, epistemic justice, cultural revitalization, plurality, and dismantling oppressive systems. While this positionality may introduce certain biases, his aim is to provide a lens through which river-city interactions are examined.

    The Elephant in the Room

    Colonial systems and values permeate social and governance structures, legal and educational frameworks by default. Its enduring impacts have often been described as the elephant in the room. As futurist and UNESCO Chair Epaminondas Christophilopoulos aptly noted, much of our future, particularly referring to the Global South, remains colonized (S. Cruz, personal communication, June 26, 2024). There is no space uncolonized or Western dominated, including futures studies (Sardar, 1993). The lack of culturally inclusive tools and methods in foresight demands an epistemological inquiry to open discourse for Non-western perspectives in futures practice (Cruz & Parreno, 2024). Nonetheless, there is an ongoing ontological and epistemological shift reexamining colonial legacies and reclaiming local perspectives and knowledge systems. Known in decolonial circles and futures conversations as emancipatory futures, this effort to dismantle entrenched colonial ways of knowing has begun. Walter Mignolo (2016) describes it as the dewesternization of aesthetics and imaginaries – an ongoing process of decentering away from Western-centered ways of knowing and dismantling colonial ideas that position Western concepts of truth, creativity, cultural expressions, and visions of the future as universal standards. Voices previously silenced, marginalized, and oppressed are now demanding epistemic justice and gaining momentum rapidly.

    UNESCO Chair Sohail Inayatullah (2022) articulates this in his monograph Anticipation to Emancipation: Toward a Stage Theory of the Uses of the Future, where perceived social and epistemic injustice, when investigated and understood, can empower those seeking liberation from dominant, oppressive futures. Acknowledging and listening to one’s pain is crucial to empowering individuals or societies “to create justice in their perceived worlds” (Inayatullah, 2022, p. 17). This piece maps and analyzes the hegemony and impact of colonial and decolonial voices in discourse, particularly their influence on the histories and futures of rivers and river-city interactions.

    Colonial Dreams

    “The rape of the environment both natural and human is peculiarly a Western contribution.”

    (Shah, n.d., p. 7)

    The origins of Western civilization, which laid the foundation for colonialism, trace back to the 14th and 16th centuries. The Renaissance marked a crucial moment when the West shaped its narrative of civilization, emphasizing salvation, progress, and economic recovery. Pope Alexander VI divided the world into the Western and Eastern Indies, establishing a framework for global division. The Treaty of Zaragoza in 1529 expanded the territorial division set by the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494, marking the emergence of colonial logic. This framework fueled 500 years of European imperial expansion with lasting geopolitical implications (Mignolo, 2016).

    Colonialism aimed to eradicate indigenous rights and exploit natural resources, justifying practices like slavery and genocide to fuel a capitalist economy. Spain and Portugal connected the world, making Europe central to the colonial matrix of power. This enterprise, rooted in Western metaphysical discourse, was logical, patriarchal, binary, individualistic, and capitalistic. It imposed the belief that rationality, progress, and science were superior to other worldviews, enabling colonialism to persist (Shah, n.d.). Mysticism, the feminine, and the intuitive were silenced in favor of the rational, empirical, and mechanistic.

    Colonial epistemologies are ingrained frameworks that define modernity:

    • Racial and Structural Hierarchies: Colonial powers viewed themselves as racially and intellectually superior, enforcing hierarchies to justify Western governance, education, and social norms (Quijano, 2006).
    • Cultural Hegemony and Christianization: Colonizers imposed their culture, language, and religion, erasing indigenous traditions and portraying colonizers as saviors (Mignolo, 2016).
    • Epistemic Violence: Eurocentric knowledge was deemed universal, marginalizing local knowledge and creating hierarchies that devalued indigenous ways of knowing (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2013).
    • Spatial Control and Technological Superiority: Colonizers reorganized physical spaces, using boundaries, technology, and military power to dominate and reshape landscapes (Hirschfeld, et al., 2023).
    • Political Domination and Economic Exploitation: Colonizers maintained power through governance, legal frameworks, and coercion, extracting wealth while subjugating indigenous populations politically and economically (Mallet, 2017).

    Fig. 1: This hexagonal diagram, created by the author, illustrates coloniality through four interrelated aspects. The central “Coloniality” reflects the interconnectedness of these dimensions, emphasizing their collective role in sustaining colonialism’s legacy.

    The Quadrant of Coloniality

    By the late fifteenth century, Europe positioned itself as the central reference for understanding reality, reinforcing hierarchies in knowledge, power, and being. These structures sustained colonial modernity, persisting even after political independence. Post-colonial narratives rebranded colonial power under the guise of freedom, leading to what Anibal Quijano termed “coloniality,” the lasting impact of colonialism beyond political independence (Quijano, 2006). Mignolo (2016) frames coloniality as a Latin American critique of modernity, where colonization was justified first through religious conversion, then economic development. Coloniality reflects the ongoing influence of colonial power, knowledge, and cultural norms on identities and societies (Maldonado-Torres, 2007). It consists of four interconnected dimensions (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2022; Mantz, 2019):

    • Coloniality of Being: Shapes self-perception and future aspirations, influencing personal and collective identities. It penetrates the imagination, affecting how we envision possibilities and futures (Maldonado-Torres, 2007; Mignolo, 2007; Fanon, 1961).
    • Coloniality of Knowledge: The persistence of Western claims to neutral and objective knowledge marginalizes indigenous epistemologies. This epistemological dominance influences how we think, question, and legitimize knowledge, shaping views on progress and development (Nandy, 1987; Mantz, 2019).
    • Coloniality of Power: Formerly colonized societies remain entangled in a matrix controlling race, labor, and gender. Systems aligned with Western capitalism overshadow other ways of knowing and being (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2013).
    • Coloniality of Nature: Colonialism redefined human-nature relationships by treating nature as an extractable resource. It erased spiritual and ancestral connections, promoting human dominance over nature (Hirschfeld et al., 2023). These dimensions sustain power hierarchies, shaping modern discourses and the biopolitics of colonial legacies.

    The Extractive Logic of Colonialism and the Degradation of Nature

    Most waterbodies, like fertile, resource-rich lands, bear scars of a traumatic colonial past. Colonization alienated land, water, and ancestry, diminishing nature’s intrinsic value and manifestations such as rivers and biodiversity. Western colonialism caused massive degradation, exploiting rivers, minerals, and people (Mukaria, 2021). Estates, plantations, and land ownership eroded kinship bonds between indigenous communities and nature. The sacred was desacralized, transcendence dismissed in favor of the universal, objective, and rational (Cubillos et al., 2022). Forests and water reserves were devastated unless integrated into accumulation circuits, reconfigured to fuel the free market economy. Rivers and riverside landscapes were commoditized, privatized, and appropriated for production (Assis & Franco, 2017).

    Naming as a Colonial Act

    The Spanish colonizers envisioned the Philippines as a unified cluster of islands, claiming it as a colonial territory. By naming and mapping these islands, Spain sought to legitimize its claim but faced resistance from diverse cultural, ethnic, and linguistic groups. Challenging terrains and distances complicated governance. Many groups, nature worshippers venerating local gods and ancestors, saw their spiritual traditions suppressed as the Spanish destroyed places of worship and cultural artifacts (Herrera, 2015).

    Colonization also involved conquering the Philippines’ natural world, intensified during the American period under Benevolent Assimilation. This policy enabled colonial state formation, knowledge accumulation, and identity construction. Colonial conquest invaded the territory’s epistemological space. Indigenous knowledge became profit-oriented data, leading to biocolonialism, where traditional practices were commodified. Scholars and corporations claimed ownership, rebranding them for commercial purposes (Pagunsan, 2017). American expeditions disrupted rivers’ spiritual significance, altering flows for trade, mobility, and agriculture, such as tobacco and sugar cane production requiring irrigation (Skowronek, 1998). Renaming rivers disrupted ecosystems and Indigenous practices.

    The Spanish and American periods reshaped the Philippines’ natural and water landscapes, symbolically erasing narratives, spirit, and languages (Norgaard, 2019). Four empires—Britain, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain—redistributed plant and animal species, with colonial settlers hunting many native species to extinction (Lenzner et al., 2022; Raja, 2022). This pattern persists today with monocultures, water privatization, and channel diversion, often displacing locals and restricting Indigenous communities’ access to rivers (Kelly, 2021).

    When Rivers Run Dry

    Despite well-documented environmental impacts, colonialism’s role in governance, especially river management, is often overlooked. It took the IPCC 30 years to recognize colonialism’s impact on climate change and its disproportionate effects on communities (Raja, 2022). The drying of Australia’s Barwon River exemplifies colonialism’s legacy in water management. Western infrastructure prioritized water restrictions and diversions for agriculture and business, worsening the river’s condition amid climate change and droughts, causing agricultural losses, fish kills, and water supply threats (Devanand et al., 2024). Colonial activities like settlements, dams, roads, and deforestation left lasting impacts on rivers (Beaule, 2017). The British constructed dams on the Nile and Ganges, while Spaniards fortified Intramuros along the Pasig River to control floods and protect cities. Churches along these rivers became central to Christian festivals, erasing indigenous river knowledge systems (Verdejo et al., 2014). Colonists treated rivers as resources to control, significantly altering ecosystems and creating new risks. The term “flooding” reflects a colonial mindset viewing river overflows as problems to control (Cioc, 2002).

    In contrast, Indigenous peoples hold spiritual bonds with rivers, adapting to natural cycles. The Turrbal and Jagera people of the Brisbane River saw floods as essential for rejuvenating the land, maintaining balance, and shaping community life (Bonner, 1995). Although colonial authorities sought to manage floods, unpredictability persists (Cook, 2019). Rivers like the Brahmaputra and Indus were crucial for British trade control (Sharma, 2022). In South Africa, colonial disruption of the Kowie River’s cycles exemplifies epistemic injustice, reflecting both genocide and ecocide (Cock, 2018). The history of rivers under colonial rule reveals environmental disruption and cultural dislocation. Indigenous approaches, grounded in respect and adaptation, offer a counterpoint to this legacy, highlighting the need to redefine our relationship with rivers and nature.

    Decolonial Dreamscapes

    The movement toward decolonization gained visibility in the Global South, particularly in Latin America, over a decade ago. It emerged as a framework to counter global coloniality by analyzing its presence in knowledge production and developing strategies to dismantle it (Hirschfield et al., 2023). Decolonization challenges racialized, patriarchal, and epistemic structures, demanding a paradigm shift to disrupt these systems (Adebisi, 2020). Understanding the past is essential, reshaping perceptions of shared histories. Ecological historian David Worster (1994) explains that colonizers erased local histories and imposed their knowledge, framing themselves as benevolent discoverers to justify ownership, legitimized through maps and indoctrination.

    Laura Harjo (2019) proposes “decolonial love” to dismantle colonial structures:

    • Healing trauma caused by colonizers.
    • Reconnecting with devalued cultures.
    • Building relational sovereignties rooted in respect and community.
    • Embracing autonomy and self-determination.

    Decolonial love promotes authentic ways of knowing, prioritizing social justice, revitalizing languages, and Indigenous knowledge. Harjo emphasizes that radical sovereignty does not require nation-state recognition; it is embodied in cultural practices and independent actions. When communities mobilize resources and skills, they shape decolonial futures and open new possibilities.

    Table 1 highlights differences between coloniality and decoloniality, emphasizing the shift from domination to liberation, inclusion, and recognition of diverse ways of knowing and being.

    Decolonizing Rivers: Sovereignty, Rights and Reimagined Relationships

    “As we engineered and developed the river, we also disregarded or disavowed it.”

    (Ernsten, 2024, p.25)

    A global shift is underway, from Colombia to New Zealand, where laws recognize or debate the rights of nature and rivers. In Bolivia, Ecuador, and Chile, Indigenous groups lead efforts to protect nature from an extractive global economy, challenging the colonial idea of human superiority over nature. These initiatives advocate recognizing rivers as sacred, sentient, and equal to humans, redefining our relationship with nature and affirming that healing the earth heals ourselves (Berge, 2024). Rivers are increasingly seen as platforms for reconciliation, blending customs with modern law to grant rivers cultural, juridical, and political personhood, protecting their natural course (Brara & Berros, 2022).

    Given that rivers are dynamic systems and cross-national borders, a parliament of rivers has been proposed to represent their sovereign interests. Though still underdeveloped, such a body could amplify the voice and personhood of rivers beyond local frameworks (Lehane, 2023). Moving away from a colonial, technoscientific, and capitalist view, how might rivers appear if considered sovereign agents of change?

    The UNESCO International Hydrological Programme and political ecologist Barbara Rose Johnston report that nearly 80% of the world’s population lives in river landscapes under threat (Johnston et al., 2012). Chakraborty (2009) argues that the crisis of river heritage, driven by human activity, reflects a deeper crisis of knowledge. Addressing this requires more than idealized views of nature; it demands actions allowing rivers to heal and reclaim themselves, guided by local knowledge systems prioritizing diversity and intercultural understanding.

    Decolonizing rivers is about relearning how to connect with and care for them. It involves redefining river-human relationships, moving beyond seeing rivers as machines, and embracing ecological, cultural, and spiritual contexts (Ernsten, 2024). Recognizing rivers as living entities means valuing their intrinsic worth and understanding that their well-being is tied to ours. Dutch activist Li An Phoa’s 2018 river walks highlighted this fragility, emphasizing the urgent need for care. Her vision of Drinkable Rivers reflects a hopeful yet challenging future:

    “I long for a world where rivers are drinkable. A few generations ago, all rivers were drinkable. Now almost none are. This is a sign of how we live. The current pollution and destruction reflect how we live and our health. With our care, Drinkable Rivers are possible again” (Phoa, 2019).

    To break free from the colonial grip and envision new river futures, these decolonial practices are proposed:

    • Pluriversal Perspective: Restore natural flows by considering the experiences of all creatures and plants (Escobar, 2018).
    • Sensory Exploration: Engage with sounds and scents that evoke future visions (de Jong et al., 2024).
    • Immersive Connection: Understand a river’s essence by immersing yourself in its presence, creating lasting memories (Jago, 2024).
    • Cultural Reconnection: Rebuild rivers as links to ancestry, learning to metaphorically float or drown within their embrace (Halberstam, 2020).
    • Challenge Colonial Desires: Question sanitized colonialism in wilderness pursuits, like trophy hunting (Denise, 2020).
    • Reciprocal Relationship: Treat rivers as sources of well-being, reciprocating with care and respect.
    • Advocate for Representation: Create river assemblies to ensure rivers have a voice in decision-making.
    • Integrate Oral Histories: Share local stories that highlight relationships with rivers

    Table 1 summarizes some fundamental differences between coloniality and decoloniality.

    Aspect Coloniality Decoloniality
    Worldview Rooted in the belief of Western superiority, rationality, and progress. Sees the world through a Eurocentric lens. Embraces pluriversality, acknowledging the legitimacy of multiple ways of knowing, being, and living.
    Knowledge Systems Promotes Western knowledge as universal, neutral, and superior, marginalizing other epistemologies. Recognizes and values diverse knowledge systems, particularly indigenous and local epistemes, promoting epistemic justice.
    Power Dynamics Centralized power, often hierarchical and exclusionary, perpetuating control by a few over the many. Decentralized and inclusive power structures, emphasizing participation and agency of marginalized communities.
    Cultural Hegemony Imposes Western cultural norms, languages, and religions, erasing and devaluing indigenous traditions. Revitalizes and celebrates indigenous cultures, languages, and spiritual practices, reclaiming cultural sovereignty.
    Human-Nature Relationship Views nature as a resource to be controlled, exploited, and commodified for economic gain. Sees nature as interconnected with humanity, deserving of respect, protection, and stewardship.
    Identity and being Constructs identities based on colonial hierarchies, enforcing racial and structural inequalities. Promotes the decolonization of identity, embracing self-determination, autonomy, and plurality of being.
    Epistemic Violence Enforces a singular narrative of truth and knowledge, suppressing alternative worldviews and experiences. Advocates for the dismantling of epistemic violence, allowing for the coexistence of multiple truths and perspectives.
    Historical Narratives Rewrites history to justify colonial dominance, often erasing or distorting the histories of colonized peoples. Reclaims and reinterprets historical narratives, giving voice to marginalized and oppressed communities.
    Economic Structures Supports extractive economies that benefit the colonial powers at the expense of colonized lands and peoples. Advocates for economic justice, emphasizing sustainable practices and equitable distribution of resources.
    Agency and Sovereignty Denies or limits the agency and sovereignty of colonized peoples, imposing foreign control and governance. Emphasizes radical sovereignty, autonomy, and self-governance for historically marginalized communities.
    Perception and Assumptions about the Future Views the future as a continuation of present power structures, aiming to control it through linear, rational planning. The future is seen as something to be conquered and dominated, often reflecting fear of uncertainty.

    Assumes the future should follow a path of continued progress It frames technological advancement and economic growth as primary markers of a successful future.

    		 Envisions the future as open, diverse, and shaped by multiple possibilities. It emphasizes co-creation, adaptability, and inclusion, viewing the future as a space for healing and transformation.

    Assumes the future should be built on principles of equity, justice, and sustainability. It values indigenous knowledge systems and emphasizes the need to repair relationships with nature and each other.

    Opposing Futures and A Retuned Worldview

    Coloniality and decoloniality represent opposing epistemes regarding knowledge, power, culture, and identity. Coloniality is rooted in Western superiority, imposing European norms and structures as universal. It marginalizes indigenous knowledge, enforces hierarchical power, and views nature as a resource to exploit. Identities are constructed within rigid racial hierarchies, imposing a singular narrative of truth that suppresses alternative perspectives. The future is often perceived as a linear extension of the present, driven by a fear of the unknown and the replication of power structures, progress is narrowly defined as economic and technological advancements.

    Decoloniality seeks to dismantle these oppressive systems. It recognizes multiple knowledge systems, and advocates for decentralized power, giving marginalized communities a voice. Decoloniality respects nature as interconnected with humanity and promotes cultural sovereignty. It challenges colonial narratives and aims to restore agency and self-governance. The future is envisioned as diverse and inclusive, built on equity, sustainability and justice. It views uncertainty as a chance for creativity and collaboration. While coloniality seeks to homogenize and dominate, decoloniality seeks to liberate and diversify, cultivating a future shaped by a multitude of perspectives and shared possibilities.

    A Transcolonial View for River Futures?

    Given the entanglements within the discourse of decoloniality—specifically how it coexists with coloniality (coloniality-in-decoloniality) and how decolonial practices operate within colonial structures (decoloniality-in-coloniality)—the blending of these epistemes in liminal or in-between spaces is possible (Mignolo, 2020; Anzaldúa, 1987; Bhabha, 1994; Nandy, 1987). The emergence of a third space, where traditions, legacies, and new meanings converge, is referred to as transcoloniality. Here, river futures are neither purely colonial nor decolonial but plural realities that coexist, converge, and evolve. Transcoloniality sees reality as fluid, recognizing that opposing worlds are interwoven and constantly negotiated (Okeke & Dimonye, 2024). Transcolonial futures embrace the messiness of transformation and the hybrid nature of realities (Bhabha, 1994; Inayatullah & Fitzgerald, 1999).

    An example is P.R. Sarkar’s Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT), merging spiritual, indigenous, and cooperative values with economic transformation. While PROUT supports wealth generation, it resists the extractive, exploitative logic of capitalism by promoting cooperative, spiritually centered models. PROUT integrates scientific advancement to enhance social and spiritual well-being, reshaping economic structures without dismantling them. Sarkar’s concept of planetary humanism in Neo-Humanism: Liberation of the Intellect (1982) transcends binaries such as coloniality vs. decoloniality, tradition vs. modernity, and science vs. indigenous knowledge, exemplifying transcoloniality through adaptation, hybridity, and coexistence.

    Some Core Tenets of Transcoloniality

    • Coexistence of Colonial and Decolonial Perspectives: These frameworks blend in complex ways, transforming conflict into creative solutions (Agbakoba, 2019).
    • Negotiation at the Level of Practice: Colonial experiences and pre-colonial traditions shape decolonial critiques, innovations, and transformations (Lukaszyk, 2020).
    • Context-Specific Solutions with Global Impact: Knowledge systems must be meaningful to local communities while addressing planetary challenges (Sarkar, 1982).
    • Transformation through Dialogue and Respect: Tensions are navigated through mutual respect and negotiation (Galtung, 2000).
    • Hybridity and Collaboration for Healing: Embraces co-evolution, healing historical wounds, and fostering mutual care (Anzaldúa, 2012).
    • Reconciliation as Transformation: Futures are shaped by questioning and transforming past legacies, building adaptive systems that honor diverse ways of knowing.

    In river futures, transcoloniality suggests that rivers are more than water; they are contested spaces were diverse epistemic frameworks and truth regimes shape river imaginaries. Rivers become subject to negotiation and contestation (de Jong, Veldwisch, Melsen & Boelens, 2024). A reconciled view treats rivers as multi-functional systems, integrating elements from colonial, decolonial, and transcolonial paradigms, recognizing that alternative futures emerge through continuity, discontinuity, and adaptation.

    Rivers Epistemes: A Causal Layered Analysis

    The Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) was employed to examine and dissect contrasting narratives of colonial and decolonial epistemes across different layers—litany, systems, worldviews, and myth/metaphors. CLA synthesized the river’s past, present, and anticipated futures, including key insights from the literature review. Moreover, CLA was used to construct scenarios depicting potential outcomes of maintaining a colonial approach, shifting to a decolonial one, or adopting a transcolonial perspective. How these three different futures could unfold is presented and discussed.

    Colonial: City Expands Riverfront, Ignores Environmental Concerns

    In this envisioned future, the expansion of the city’s riverfront is praised as an important economic achievement, creating more employment opportunities and boosting commerce. However, this advancement comes at a substantial price: the riverbanks and natural habitats are harmed. Environmental threats and natural systems are undervalued and neglected, turning the river into mere instruments for urban development.

    Litany

    The city is filled with anticipation as it unveils its plan to transform the riverfront into a vast industrial hub. Headlines tout this as a significant advancement, promising an expanded industrial foundation. The mayor asserts that “progress is inevitable,” highlighting the river’s role in the city’s economic development. Cranes fill the skyline, and construction proceeds along the riverbanks. Large concrete walls rise, replacing the natural riverbanks with docks, warehouses, and factories. The smell of the river is replaced by asphalt and exhaust fumes. Discontent is growing as communities and environmental activists’ express concerns about permanent harm to the river’s ecosystem. Fish populations are declining, and the water is tainted with construction debris. The developers’ spokesperson dismisses these concerns, stating, “we cannot afford to stop progress for a few fish.” In this pursuit of modernity, the intrinsic value of the river is overlooked.

    Table 2. presents a comparison between the colonial, decolonial and transcolonial perspectives on rivers.

    Concepts, Relationships and Roles Colonial View Decolonial View Transcolonial View
    Basic definition of rivers Rivers are controlled and used for economic benefit and territorial growth. Rivers are sentient beings with inherent value and rights, interconnected with nature, spirit, and culture. Rivers are crucial relational entities that support cultural, spiritual, ecological, and economic needs.
    Root assumptions Rational, scientific, and economic views are prioritized over spiritual and relational understanding of nature, and rivers are seen as resources for human exploitation. Nature is intertwined with human life, forming a collective existence. It emphasizes the importance of indigenous knowledge systems, spirituality, and the mutual connection between humans and rivers. Rivers are not just objects or sacred; they symbolize an evolving relationship between humans and nature. Their meanings span multiple systems, both scientific and spiritual.
    Human relationship with rivers A domination and extraction relationship serves colonial interests, heavily engineering rivers and altering landscapes and natural systems. Relationship is based on respect, stewardship, and understanding of natural cycles. Rivers are partners, not to be controlled. Rivers and humans need mutual care and balance for co-evolution, requiring negotiation between control and freedom.
    Key notions of rivers Rivers are key assets for resource extraction and control, redirected for agriculture and industry. Rivers are vital for the well-being of humans and ecosystems. Preserve their health for future generations and restore their natural, cultural, and spiritual importance. Rivers serve many purposes, supporting culture and ecosystems while offering economic benefits. Economic activities should align with ecological sustainability and cultural respect.
    Key metaphors Commerce arteries and progress channels Veins of the Earth: Community’s Lifeblood Interwoven sovereignties form multiple flows.
    River Futures within Urban Landscapes Strict control and manipulation of natural landscapes involve constructing dams, bridges, and canals to redirect water flow for trade, transport, and resource extraction, all while using linear designs to straighten rivers, maximizing land use and settlements. Allow the river’s natural flow. Use flooding to replenish ecosystems. Develop buffer zones, wetlands, and green corridors to integrate rivers into urban areas. Incorporate indigenous knowledge for cultural and spiritual revitalization. Rivers function as adaptive and integrated ‘turquoise systems’ in urban areas, aligning with natural rhythms like flooding and seasons, and enhancing communities’ cultural, ecological, and spiritual life.

    Systems

    In this system, a small group of elites maintains power, making decisions about land and water while neglecting the needs of communities that rely on the river for their well-being and survival. The city devised legal frameworks to enable privatization and commercialization, ignoring indigenous customs, laws, and traditions that have long governed the river and its vicinity. Rivers are considered only for their economic potential, with their flow regulated and altered to satisfy industrial and agricultural needs. Dams and canals, slicing through ecosystems, have displaced individuals, ruined homes, livelihoods, and disrupted biodiversity. The priorities of the few are placed above the welfare of the many, and the natural environment is seen as a resource to be exploited instead of revered.

    Worldview

    Human beings are perceived as distinct from and superior to the natural world, leading rivers to be valued purely for their usefulness. These rivers are turned into commodities and standardized, viewed as mere machines. The resources beneath and surrounding them are considered raw materials. Indigenous and local knowledge systems and traditions, seen as simple and outdated, are suppressed, viewed as barriers to the city’s relentless pursuit of growth. As a result, rivers and nature are treated as forces to be controlled or improved upon, as they are assumed to be wild and untamed. Floodplains are viewed as threats. The dominant worldview adheres to Cartesian dualism, contrasting humans with nature, order with chaos, land with water, and conquest with reverence (Cook, 2019; Escobar, 2018).

    Myth/Metaphors

    At the heart of this narrative lies the domination of nature, where the natural environment, seen as wild, is depicted as something to be controlled for the sake of progress. Rivers are envisioned as commercial arteries—essential channels for continuous economic expansion. This concept meshes with wider stories of civilizing efforts and manifest destiny, in which settlers regarded Indigenous knowledge and communities as primitive, thus necessitating modernization and enlightenment. The obligation to “rescue” was perceived as a predetermined mission. Rivers and their floodplains are considered untamed elements that must be controlled. As essential conduits for commerce, rivers must remain consistent to ensure an uninterrupted supply of crucial resources needed to support and drive urban growth (Warner & Childress, 2020; Scott, n.d.).

    Decolonial: Rivers Recognized as Living Beings, Protected by New Laws

    The leaders of the city have made a groundbreaking decision by giving legal rights to rivers, significantly altering their function in urban settings. This pioneering initiative is influenced by a global river personhood movement and a coalition of urban planners motivated by pluriversality and indigenous knowledge traditions.

    Litany

    The riverbank was alive with celebration, where elders shared their songs and prayers. Rivers have been acknowledged as living beings with legal personhood, giving them inherent rights. This transformation redefines rivers not simply as environmental resources but as cultural and spiritual entities. Laws now safeguard them as sentient beings, prohibiting exploitation with legal ramifications. Indigenous communities have a crucial role in managing these waterways (Berge, 2022). This success is not only legal but also a reaffirmation of cultural and spiritual values. The city now prioritizes the welfare of the rivers over immediate economic benefits (Edirisinghe & Pearson, 2024). The river’s rights are embedded in legislation, guarding it against unnecessary extraction, diversion, and pollution. Traditional knowledge is vital for maintaining the river’s ecological and cultural integrity for future generations (Cardenas & Turp, 2023).

    Systems

    Within a decolonial governance framework, authority is spread out to empower communities to have a significant role in river management. The decision-making process is inclusive, drawing on traditional wisdom to maintain the river’s flow. The river is regarded as sacred, meriting protection and careful management (Clark, Emmanouil et al., 2019). Indigenous rights are woven into river policies, safeguarding their customs. Communities along the riverbanks serve as custodians, ensuring its vitality (Mucina, 2019). This approach addresses injustices by guaranteeing marginalized communities access to clean water. The river is shielded from damage, with stringent rules to prevent pollution and over-extraction. Its well-being is a reflection of the community’s well-being. Honored as an ancestor, it forms a sacred connection between the land, people, and animals (Edirisinghe & Pearson, 2024; Spaeder & Feit, 2005).

    Worldviews

    Rivers are esteemed as sacred routes linking the earth, sky, and spiritual realms. As independent entities, their waters intertwine land, people, flora, and fauna into a unified whole (Wilson & Inkster, 2018). Adopting a pluriversal perspective, it appreciates diverse ways of understanding and opposes a singular comprehension of the world. Instead of exerting control over nature, it acknowledges the interconnection of all life, viewing environmental health as integral to human well-being. Its cycles, such as flooding, nurture and renew the earth, mirroring the world’s condition and our relationship with nature. Rivers are a source of life (Sepulveda, 2018; Gruffydd, 2006).

    Myth/Metaphor

    With profound respect for the natural world, rivers are regarded as the Earth’s veins— sacred channels within the complex web of life. Their currents symbolize the stages of creation, enriching the land and connecting communities over expansive areas. Rivers form relationships in a delicate equilibrium that supports all living beings (Montgomery, 2012). Floodplains, instead of being hindrances, are essential elements of a river’s cycle. Flooding is a natural event, not a catastrophe, that revitalizes the land, augments the soil, and sustains ecosystems. The cyclic nature of rivers reflects the wider patterns of life, death, and renewal in the natural realm (Cook, 2019; Padhi, 2017). To imagine the future of rivers with respect is to acknowledge them as a source of life, as forebears, as relatives, and the Earth’s unending melody.

    Transcolonial: ReciproCity– The Metropolis meets Ancestral Stewardship

    The river is no longer just a conduit for water; it is now a living being. Its banks illustrate the harmonious coexistence and flourishing of science, native traditions, pluriversality, and modernity. The city’s flexible riverfront embodies a new urban idea called adaptive urbanism, seamlessly integrating cosmopolitan industrial advancement with traditional and relational guardianship (de Jong, Veldwisch, Melsen & Boelens, 2024).

    Litany

    Once heavily polluted, the river is now thriving as the city implements eco-friendly technologies and builds infrastructure for restoring waterways and wetlands (Carrasco, 2024). Business taxes fund a regenerative economy, fostering environmental reconnection. Floating markets and eco-parks host festivals honoring the river and its cycles, including annual flood rituals. Floods, seen as opportunities for renewal, are embraced (Floodmar.org, 2024; Choi, 2024). Art installations by public and indigenous artists inspire reflection on the river’s spiritual and ancestral significance. Community-driven economic hubs flourish as industries adopts sustainable practices. Seasonal flooding and water flow variations are recognized, prompting adaptive urbanism.

    Systems

    Decision-making is distributed across levels, with the central government setting guidelines and local river councils customizing policies. These councils include diverse stakeholders and ensure participation in governance. Central and local bodies collaborate to update the Riverfront Ecological Economic Zones (REEZ) Act, promoting sustainable water systems and ecological zones that foster biodiversity and support cultures (Lawn & Williams, 2021). Adaptive infrastructure and risk management combine science and tradition for river management, while regenerative economic models replace extractive practices, enabling commerce within ecological limits (Frey, Ramos et al., 2021).

    Worldview

    In this future city, progress is measured by well-being, ecological health, and cultural vitality, not just economics. The river is a partner, influencing and responding to human needs. This mutual relationship involves community care as the river sustains them. Embracing pluriversality, polycentric governance brings diverse perspectives for adaptive solutions. Intertwined knowledge and science guide policymaking through dialogue and ecological balance. Rivers evolve as adaptive systems with changing roles and meanings, challenging local and global norms. Future river paths are flexible (Thoms & Sheldon, 2019). Like turquoise harmonizing blue (water) and green (ecology), turquoise systems integrate rivers into urban landscapes, acknowledging them as vital, dynamic entities.

    Myth/Metaphor

    Envisioned as interwoven streams, rivers represent the varied meanings and functions within human communities. Therefore, they can be viewed as venues for intercultural dialogue, healing, and restoration (Nandy, 1987). They function as channels of exchange, symbolize interstitial authority where power is diverse, and governance is a shared responsibility among the community, the city, and the state. As keepers of memories and transformation, rivers influence the lives of individuals, businesses, and communities. Each river thread bears unique timelines and narratives—cultural, economic, spiritual, and ecological. Rivers and cities are continually evolving, shaped by the interaction of power, histories, ancestries, and collaborative new opportunities.

    Rivers Futures within Urban Landscapes

    The choice between strict control, natural integration and reconciliation reflects broader societal values. The colonial view seeks to dominate and exploit natural resources for economic gain, often causing long-term environmental damage. Urban planners and engineers, following this mindset, see flooding as a problem to be controlled through gray infrastructure like dams, levees, and canals. This approach confines rivers to predictable paths, maximizing land use at the expense of ecological integrity, leading to biodiversity loss, disrupted water cycles, and increased vulnerability to extreme weather.

    The decolonial approach emphasizes restoring and integrating rivers into urban environments. It views flooding as a natural process that maintains ecological balance, distributes nutrients, and supports life. Preserving meanders, wetlands, and floodplains allows rivers to perform vital functions like filtering pollutants and recharging groundwater. Urban planners create buffer zones, wetlands, and green corridors that act as flood controls while enhancing biodiversity, improving air and water quality, and providing recreational spaces.

    Transcoloniality recognizes the fluid coexistence of colonial and decolonial frameworks, blending traditions, innovations, and diverse worldviews. It embraces hybridity and negotiation, acknowledging that transformation arises through the interplay of overlapping and conflicting perspectives. The concept of the turquoise system emerged as a synthesis that views rivers as living systems and as vital functional entities essential for sustaining progress within urban environments.

    Table 3. A comparative analysis of rivers from a colonial, decolonial and transcolonial perspectives across CLA’s four key layers.

    Layers of Reality Colonial Decolonial Transcolonial
    Litany City Expands Riverfront for Industrial Hub Despite Environmental Concerns Communities and Indigenous leaders unite to grant rivers legal personhood, protecting sacred waterways. ReciproCity: Metropolis Meets Ancestral Stewardship. Adaptive riverfronts serve as ecological economic zones, utilizing ecological functions to promote regenerative economics and river-friendly infrastructure.
    Systems Centralized control with little local input allows privatization and exploitation of resources, ignoring indigenous laws.

    Settlers control rivers and lands, depriving indigenous populations of resources.

    Western laws regulate rivers for colonial interests, building dams and canals that displace ecosystems and communities.

    		 Decentralized power enables local and indigenous communities to manage rivers, using traditional knowledge to uphold ecological and cultural integrity.

    Participatory decision-making honors ancestry, acknowledges river sovereignty, and incorporates indigenous rights into policies.

    Legal personhood and rights protection encourage stewardship, providing marginalized communities access to clean water and environmental protection while addressing historical injustices.

    		 Polycentric governance combines centralization and decentralization, promoting a strong center and participatory governance.

    River management councils, with members from indigenous groups, businesses, municipal governments, and industry, align economic goals with cultural and ecological needs.

    All stakeholders are heard.

    Ancestral stewardship informs modern urban planning. Cultural continuity and ecological care reshape sustainable industries and minimize extractive commerce practices.

    River-friendly infrastructures are created.
    Worldview Based on Western conception of superiority, rationality, and progress.

    Cartesian dualism elevates humans over nature. A universalist view informed by a monocultural perspective and associated with modernity.

    Rivers are exploitable resource for human use.

    		 Address coloniality through decolonization and decoloniality.

    Pluriversality values diverse knowledge, cultures, and worldviews, recognizing their legitimacy.

    Central are relationships between humans, non-humans, and nature, respecting their autonomy.

    Different realities are valid.

    Rivers embody various meanings—sentient, sacred, living, and more—each complementary.

    		 Progress intertwines with relational knowledge systems, integrating science, commerce, and spirituality.

    Pluriversality fosters coexistence of multiple truths, essential for life-making.

    Reconciliation leads to transformation and negotiated partnership.

    Progress extends beyond economics, embracing ecological and spiritual dimensions, remaining fluid.

    Understanding river flows highlights their sacredness and value.

    Adaptive rivers embody holistic systems centered on well-being, ecology, and spirituality.
    Myth/Metaphor Civilizing missions depict indigenous communities and knowledge as backward.

    Views land conquest as a divine mission and nature as chaotic requiring control.

    Rivers and floodplains as obstacles and threats.

    		 Sacred beings sustaining life

    Rivers are pathways linking earth, sky, and spirit, connecting land, people, plants, and animals.

    They are honored ancestors, purifying forces restoring natural balance.

    Rivers’ cycles and floods naturally replenish, mirroring our relationship with nature as Earth’s songs.

    		 Rivers are adaptable ecological systems, constantly flowing and evolving in meaning and function.

    They are lifelines of reciprocity, sharing stories of interconnected futures.

    Conclusion

    The scenario presents three contrasting tales of river futures: conquest, reverence, and reconciliation, exploring how different epistemes engage with nature and futures.

    The tale of conquest describes a mighty river controlled through dams to prevent floods, regulate flow, and generate power—symbolizing human triumph over nature. Disrupting the river’s flow leads to downstream desolation, and eventually, the dam breaks under pressure, revealing that nature cannot be tamed without consequence. This mindset of domination often results in chaos and destruction.

    The tale of reverence offers an alternative. The river is honored as a lifeline, with its natural cycles respected. People adapt by building on higher ground and creating wetlands to support its flow. The river, in turn, provides abundance, and the community thrives through a deep connection with it. Floods are celebrated as renewal, reflecting humility, sustainability, and coexistence with nature.

    The third path, the tale of reconciliation, envisions a future embracing complexity and multiple ways of knowing. In this vision, rivers are adaptive, living systems with evolving meanings. Cities and communities dependent on rivers align with natural cycles. This transcolonial approach acknowledges colonial trauma while reimagining structures for equity and sustainability, fostering healing through dialogue, co-creation, and reciprocity. Will we perpetuate the colonial mindset of domination and control? Or will we embrace reverence, living in harmony with nature’s forces? Or might we blend traditions with innovation that fosters reconciliation?

    As Dator (2005) argues in De-colonizing the Future, the future is shaped not by technology but by values rooted in inclusivity and humanity. The mindset we adopt—whether conquest, reverence, or reconciliation—will define the cities, rivers, and world we leave for future generations.

    Acknowledgements

    I sincerely thank the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia, and the UNESCO Chair on Anticipatory Governance and Regenerative Cities at Northwestern University, Philippines, for their invaluable support in this work. This endeavor would not have been possible without the mentorship of Marcus Bussey and Sohail Inayatullah, the editorial support of Anisah Abdullah, and the unwavering dedication and commitment of Ferdinand Nicolas to advancing futures research and regenerative city futures.

    References

    Agbakoba, J. C. A. (2019). Development and modernity in Africa: An intercultural philosophical perspective. Germany: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.

    Alimonda, H. (2019). The Coloniality of Nature: An Approach to Latin American Political Ecology. Alternautas. Vol. 6 – Issue 1 July. http://dx.doi.org/10.31273/alternautas.v6i1.1094

    Anzaldúa, G. (2012). Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza (4th ed.). Aunt Lute Books.

    Assis, W. F. T., & Franco, S. H. R. (2018). Coloniality in the Appropriation of Nature: Agrofuel Production, Dependency, and Constant Primitive Accumulation in the Periphery of Capitalism. Latin American Perspectives, 45(5), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X17707924

    Beaule, C. D. (Ed.). (2017). Frontiers of colonialism (1st ed.). University Press of Florida.

    Berge, C. (2022). These rivers are now considered people. What does that mean for travelers? National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/these-rivers-are-now-considered-people-what-does-that-mean-for-travelers

    Bhabha, H. K. (2004). The location of culture. Routledge.

    Brara, R. & Berros, M.V. Maria (20202). A World Parliament of Rivers. Springs: The Rachel Carson Center Review, no. 1. https://doi.org/10.5282/rcc-springs-1468

    Bonner, N. (1995). Transcript of interview by Robyn Buchanan, Ipswich City Council, pp. 2–3.

    Carrasco, M. (2024). Revitalizing Urban Ecosystems: Four Projects Reconnecting Cities with their Water Heritage. Archdaily. https://www.archdaily.com/1020725/revitalizing-urban-ecosystems-4-projects-harnessing-water-for-sustainable-urban-development

    Chan, S. (2023). My decoloniality is not your decoloniality: the new multiverse – an opinion piece. Social Dynamics, 49:2, 369-375, https://doi.org/10.1080/02533952.2023.2240151

    Choi, S. (2024). Why turning into ‘sponges’ could help fight flooding. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/13/style/china-sponge-cities-kongjian-yu-hnk-intl/index.html

    Cioc, M. (2002). The Rhine: An eco-biography, 1815–2000. University of Washington Press.

    Clark, C., Emmanouil, N., Page, J., & Pelizzon, A. (2019). Can You Hear the Rivers Sing? Legal Personhood, Ontology, and the Nitty-Gritty of Governance. Ecology Law Quarterly, 45(4), 787–844. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z388S4JP7M

    Cock, J. (2018). Writing the Ancestral River: A Biography of the Kowie. Wits University Press.

    Cook, M. (2019). A river with a city problem: a history of Brisbane floods. University of Queensland Press.

    Cruz, S. & Mendoza, H. (2023). From Power to Foresight: Reimagining Pathways of Land Use and Water Governance Futures. Journal of Futures Studies. https://jfsdigital.org/articles-and-essays/2023-2/from-power-to-foresight-reimagining-pathways-of-land-use-and-water-governance-futures/

    Cruz, S. O., & Kahn-Parreño, N. A. (2024). Awakening the unconscious imagination and igniting ethical aspirations: the case of Hiraya Foresight via the engaged foresight approach. Foresight (Cambridge), 26(4), 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-11-2021-023

    Dator, J. (2005). De-Colonizing the Future. Journal of Futures Studies, 9(3), 93-104. https://jfsdigital.org/articles-and-essays/2005-2/vol-9-no-3-feb/essays/de-colonizing-the-future/

    de Jong, L., Veldwisch, G. J., Melsen, L. A., & Boelens, R. (2024). Making Rivers, Producing Futures: The Rise of an Eco-Modern River Imaginary in Dutch Climate Change Adaptation. Water (Basel), 16(4), 598-. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16040598

    Denise M, N. (2020). Decolonizing Rivers. In Unsettling Spirit. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

    Devanand, A., Falster, G.M., Gillett, Z.E., Hobeichi, S., Holgate, C.M., Jin, C., Mu, M., Parker, T., Rifai, S.W.,

    Rome, K.S., Stojanovic, M., Vogel, E., Abram, N.J.,Abramowitz, G., Coats, S., Evans, J.P., Gallant, A.J.E., Pitman,

    A.J., Power, S.B., Rauniyar, S.P., Taschetto, & A.S., Ukkola, A.M., (2024). Australia’s Tinderbox Drought: An extreme natural event likely worsened by human-caused climate change. Science Advances 10, eadj3460. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adj3460

    Edirisinghe, A., & Pearson, S. (2024). Nature as a sentient being: can rivers be legal persons? Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12529

    Ernsten, C. (2024). River Love: Decolonizing Heritage along the Meuse. In Rethinking Heritage in Precarious Times (1st ed., pp. 73–89). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188438-7

    Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.

    Floodmar.Org (2024) Celebrating Five Years of Flood-MAR: Reflecting on a Creative Climate Adaptation Strategy. Floodmar.https://floodmar.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/20240102-Celebrating-Five-Years-of-Flood-MAR_final.pdf

    Frey, K., Ramos R.M., Anjos, L.A.P., Milz B., & Pedro, R.J. (2021). Polycentric Water Governance in the Urban Global South. World Sustainability Series. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-76624-5_4

    Galtung, J. (2000). Conflict Transformation through Peaceful Means. United Nations Disaster Management Training Programme. https://www.transcend.org/pctrcluj2004/TRANSCEND_manual.pdf

    Gibson, C. (2020). When the river runs dry: Leadership, decolonisation and healing in occupational therapy. New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67(1), 11-20.

    Gruffydd Jones, B. (2006). Decolonizing international relations. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Harjo, L. (2019). Spiral to the stars: Mvskoke tools of futurity. University of Arizona Press.

    Halberstam, Jack. 2020. Wilde Things. The Disorder of Desire. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Herrera, D. (2015). The Philippines: An Overview of the Colonial Era. Southeast Asia in the Humanities and Social Science Curricula. https://www.asianstudies.org/publications/eaa/archives/the-philippines-an-overview-of-the-colonial-era/

    Hirschfeld, M. N. C., Faria, L. R. R., & Fonseca, C. R. (2023). Avoid the reproduction of coloniality in decolonial studies in ecology. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 7(3), 306–309. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01971-0

    Inayatullah, S. (2022). Anticipation to Emancipation: Toward a stage theory of the uses of the future. Journal of Futures Studies. https://jfsdigital.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Anticipation_to_Emancipation_Inayatullah-Final.pdf

    Inayatullah, S., Mercer, R., Milojevic., Sweeney, J. (Eds.). (2022). CLA 3.0 Thirty Years of Transformative Research. Tamkang University Press.

    Jago, Marianne (Ria), Exploring sensory ethnography in open inquiry: what does River want me to know? (2024). Talking Heads Seminar Series. 2.
    https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/nulungu_talkingheads/2024/schedule/2

    Jiménez Verdejo, J. R., Cabeza-Lainez, J. M., Pulido-Arcas, J. A., & Rubio-Bellido, C. (2014). Spanish fortifications in Asia: A case study of Intramuros district in Manila – Current situation and future prospects. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 143, 331-341. https://doi.org/10.2495/DSHF140331

    Johnston, B.; Hiwasaki, L.; Klaver, I.; Castillo, A. eds (2012). Water, Cultural Diversity and Global Environmental Change. Emerging Trends,Sustainable Futures? Paris: Springer. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-94-007-1774-9

    Kelly, S.H., (2021). Mapping hydropower conflicts: a legal geography of dispossession in Mapuche-Williche Territory, Chile. Geoforum, 127, 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.11.011

    Lehane, C. (2023). Experts call for a World Parliament of Rivers. Democracy without Borders. https://www.democracywithoutborders.org/26589/experts-call-for-a-world-parliament-of-rivers/

    Lenzner, B. et al. (2022). Naturalized alien floras still carry the legacy of European colonialism. Nature Ecology & Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01865-1

    Cubillos, J. J., Trujillo Quintero, H. F., & Lugo Perea, L. J. (2023). Extractive Logic of the Coloniality of Nature: Feeling-Thinking Through Agroecology as a Decolonial Project. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 34(1), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2022.2127416

    Lübken, U. (2012). Rivers and risk in the city: The urban floodplain as a contested space. In S. Castonguay & M. Evenden (Eds.), Urban rivers: Remaking rivers, cities, and space in Europe and North America, 131-153. University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Łukaszyk, E. (2020). Ondjaki’s Classmates Read Honwana. Towards a Transcolonial Theory. World Literature and the Postcolonial: Narratives of (Neo) Colonialization in a Globalized World, 171-180.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61785-4_11

    Maldonado-Torres, N. (2007) On the Coloniality of Being, Cultural Studies, 21:2-3, 240-270, https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162548

    Mallet V. (2017). River of Life, River of Death: The Ganges and India’s Future. Oxford University Press.

    Mantz, F. (2019). Decolonizing the IPE syllabus: Eurocentrism and the coloniality of knowledge in International Political Economy. Review of International Political Economy, 26:6, 1361-1378, https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1647870

    Mignolo, W. (2007). Delinking, Cultural Studies, 21:2-3, 449-514, https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162647

    Mignolo, W. (2016, December 6). Symposium: Coloniality and Western Modernity. Guggeinhein Museum [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap3nqffXK3Y&t=3108s

    Montgomery, D. (2012). The Erosion of Civilizations. University of California Press.

    Knowles, S.G., & Moritz, M.A. (2016). Coexisting with Wildfire. American Scientist, 104, 220.

    Mucina, D. D. (2019). Ubuntu relational love: decolonizing Black masculinities. University of Manitoba Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780887555886

    Mukaria, A. (2021). Western colonialism: the genesis of the degradation of nature. Academia Letters, Article 1737. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1737

    Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. 2022. Coloniality of Power in Postcolonial Africa: Myths of Decolonization. Dakar: CODESRIA. https://doi.org/10.57054/codesria.pub.539

    Norris, J. (2021). The Naming of the Yarra River as an Act of Colonialism. Agora 56:3, 59-67

    Norgaard, K. M. (2019). Salmon and Acorns Feed Our People : Colonialism, Nature, and Social Action (1st ed.). Rutgers University Press. https://doi.org/10.36019/9780813584225

    Okeke, N.M. & Dimonye, S. (2024). The African Experience of Transcoloniality: A Case Study of the Republic of Niger. Advance. https://advance.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.31124/advance.171682087.75813557/v1

    Padhi, B. (2017). Rivers. Indian Literature, Vol. 61, No. 4 (300), pp. 73-74. P. 74. Sahitya Academy. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26791453

    Pagunsan, R. (2017). Colonizing the Philippine Environment: Natural History, Science and the Nation. Doctroal Dissertation. University of the Philippines, Diliman. http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/136159

    Pelizzon, A., O’Donnell, E., & Poelina, A. (2021). Australia’s rivers are ancestral beings. Pursuit. https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/australia-s-rivers-are-ancestral-beings

    Phoa, L. (2019). If we have drinkable rivers, it means that all relations in the watersheds are healthy. https://drinkablerivers.org/

    Phoa, L. (2020). Meuse 2018–results. https://drinkablerivers.org/what-we-do/river-walks/meuse-2018/meuse-2018-people-led-research-results/

    Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America, Nepantla: Views from South, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 533-580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002005

    Raja, N. B. (2022). Colonialism shaped today’s biodiversity. Nature Ecology & Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01903-y

    Rara, R., & Berros, M. V. (2022). A world parliament of rivers. Springs: The Rachel Carson Center Review, (1). https://doi.org/10.5282/rcc-springs-1468

    Sarkar, P.R. (1982). Liberation of the Intellect. Ananda Marga Publications.

    Sarkar, P.R. (1992). PROUTIST Economics – Discourses on Economic Liberation. Ananda Marga Publications.

    Scott, D. M. (n.d.). The religious origins of Manifest Destiny. National Humanities Center. https://www.nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/nineteen/nkeyinfo/mandestiny.htm

    Sepulveda, C. (2018). Our Sacred Waters: Theorizing Kuuyam as a Decolonial Possibility. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society Vol 7., No 1, 2018, pp. 40-58. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348848955_Our_Sacred_Waters_Theorizing_Kuuyam_as_a_Decolonial_Possibility

    Shah, M. (n.d.). Colonialism and Postcolonialism: A Perennialist Point of View. https://www.academia.edu/457707/Colonialism_and_Postcolonialism_A_Perennialist_Point_of_View

    Skowronek, R. (1998). The Spanish Philippines: Archaeological Perspectives on Colonial Economics and Society. International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Vol. 2, No. 1. P. 45-71. Plenum Publishing Corporation.

    Spaeder, J. J., & Feit, H. A. (2005). Co-management and Indigenous Communities: Barriers and Bridges to Decentralized Resource Management. Anthropologica, 47(2), 147-154.

    Thoms, M., & Sheldon, F. (2019). Large rivers as complex adaptive ecosystems. River Research and Applications, 35(5), 451–458. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.3448

    Jimenez Verdejo, J. R., Pulido-Arcas, J. A., Rubio-Bellido, C., & Shuji, F. (2017). Spanish fortifications in the Philippines: Inception, evolution and current state of the fortified city of cavite. International Journal of Heritage Architecture (Print), 1(2), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.2495/HA-V1-N2-133-143

    Sharma, N. (2022). Commodities trade, river transport and colonialism: The Brahmaputra river valley in the nineteenth century. The Indian Economic & Social History Review, 59(1), 75-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/00194646211065355

    Vega Cárdenas, Y., & Turp, D. (2023). A legal personality for the St. Lawrence River and other rivers of the world. Éditions JFD.

    Warner, M., & Childress, J. (2020). The Civilizing Mission: European Dominance to 1914. In: The Use of Force for State Power. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45410-4_3

    Wilson, N. J., & Inkster, J. (2018). Respecting water: Indigenous water governance, ontologies, and the politics of kinship on the ground. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618789378

    Worster, D. J. (1994). Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.

    Sardar, Z. (1993). Colonizing the future: the ‘other’ dimension of futures studies. Futures, 25(2), 179-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(93)90163-N