A philosophical and communication shift is needed in river management if we are to meet sustainable development goals and tackle environmental challenges brought about by ongoing anthropogenic and climate change. In some parts of the world, recovery‐enhancement approaches to river management have been adopted, communicated and used for many years. At the heart of these approaches lies an understanding of the biogeomorphic forms, processes and evolutionary trajectories of rivers that differs philosophically from notions of restoration, rewilding or creation of a utopian natural state. Instead, recovery‐enhancement approaches aim to improve the biogeomorphic condition of rivers, recognising that they are dynamic entities and new evolutionary trajectories and novel ecosystems are being created that are now part of the environment. Accepting shifting baselines and moving targets is inherent as boundary conditions (water, sediment and vegetation interactions) continue to be altered under the influence of anthropogenic and climate change, and the impacts of ‘unprecedented’ wildfires, floods, heatwaves and drought are manifested on the ground. The river management sector has not yet fully adapted to this reality with large amounts of applied science and on‐ground practice still focussed on restoration, re‐engineering and rewilding, words which in themselves produce a false impression of the aims, visions and achievability of river management. Embracing recovery‐enhancement approaches to river management requires a conscious shift in communication strategies and terminology to present more realistic expectations and possibilities for river condition improvement, a responsibility that is incumbent upon us, the scientists and practitioners, who work in the applied science and river management profession. In this Short Communication, I use a case study from eastern Australia to illustrate what biogeomorphic river recovery can look like. I use this to discuss the potential for adoption of a recovery‐enhancement approach to river management more broadly, and call on scientists and practitioners to make a conscious philosophical and communications shift when working in applied science and river management.

中文翻译：

---

利用对生物地貌河流恢复的理解来重新构建河流管理理念和沟通策略

如果我们要实现可持续发展目标并应对持续的人为和气候变化带来的环境挑战，就需要在河流管理方面进行理念和沟通的转变。在世界一些地区，河流管理的恢复增强方法已被采用、传播和使用多年。这些方法的核心在于对河流的生物地貌形式、过程和进化轨迹的理解，这在哲学上不同于恢复、野化或创建乌托邦自然状态的概念。相反，恢复增强方法旨在改善河流的生物地貌状况，认识到它们是动态实体，并且正在创建新的进化轨迹和新的生态系统，这些现在已成为环境的一部分。接受基线变化和目标移动是固有的，因为边界条件（水、沉积物和植被相互作用）在人为和气候变化的影响下不断变化，“前所未有”的野火、洪水、热浪和干旱的影响也体现在环境上。地面。河流管理部门尚未完全适应这一现实，大量的应用科学和实地实践仍然集中在恢复、重新设计和野化上，这些词本身就对河流的目标、愿景和可实现性产生了错误的印象。河流管理。采用增强恢复的河流管理方法需要有意识地转变沟通策略和术语，以提出更现实的改善河流状况的期望和可能性，这是我们，从事应用科学和河流工作的科学家和从业者义不容辞的责任。管理专业。在这篇简短的交流中，我使用澳大利亚东部的案例研究来说明河流生物地貌恢复的样子。我以此来讨论更广泛地采用增强恢复方法进行河流管理的可能性，并呼吁科学家和从业者在从事应用科学和河流管理工作时有意识地转变哲学和沟通方式。