No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Abstract The social sciences and humanities have become increasingly critical of the anthropocentrism that supports exploitative relations with the non‐human domain. This shift in positionality recognises that non‐human beings and ecosystems are not humankind's passive subjects but the co‐creators of shared lifeworlds. A logical consequence is a greater appreciation of the rights and interests of non‐human beings and ecosystems, both in law and in the decision‐making processes that shape human‐environmental relations. This requires some form of pan‐species democracy that simultaneously respects biocultural diversity. Drawing on ethnographic research on the River Stour in Dorset, this paper considers how we might reimagine the notion of community to encompass human and non‐human inhabitants in river catchment areas. It considers what ‘speaking for the river’ would entail, and what a river might want to say. Employing anthropological approaches to art and material culture, examining ‘what things do’, and the multi‐species ethnography that illuminates interspecies relations, this requires an imaginative leap, not into faux animism, but into serious consideration of the river as an active partner in human‐non‐human relations. This requires us to understand the river's properties and behaviours, and how it acts both creatively and destructively upon all of the living kinds that depend upon it—and vice versa. What does a river need to ensure its own flourishing and that of its dependent communities? This paper considers how ‘listening to the river’ enables the representation of its needs and interests in decision‐making processes.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.