Article

Ancestral Sociohydrology: Transforming Water Research by Learning from Multiple Ways of Knowing, Relating to, and Governing Water

The contemporary scientific concept of the hydrological cycle emerged within a positivist paradigm.

The contemporary scientific concept of the hydrological cycle emerged within a positivist paradigm, historically serving the interests of state-led development and colonial expansion. This legacy positioned water primarily as a resource to be measured, extracted, and controlled – an ontology that has contributed, directly and indirectly, to the planetary crises of climate change and environmental degradation. While sociohydrology has advanced the field by including human and cultural dimensions, it remains largely rooted in positivist onto-epistemology that separate humans from nature. To achieve a sustainable and just coexistence on a living planet, we critically examine the colonial foundations of hydrological knowledge and embrace onto-epistemological pluralism, as a more transformative concept toward equitable relationships with and benefit from water. Drawing from place-based onto-epistemologies and their practices of ancestral hydro-technologies, we propose new ways to re-imagine our understanding of hydrology based on an onto-epistemological pluralism, incorporating multiple values, cultural norms, and identities. With this work, we launch an open reflection to pluralize narratives and corresponding illustrative archetypes of how human-water feedback are conceived, portrayed and known. The goal of this discussion is to develop the foundation for co-creating a more suitable concept of the sociohydrological cycle, which builds on a plurality of ways of understanding and relating to water.

This is an open-access article.

At the heart of modern hydrology lies the concept of the hydrological cycle: a water circulation paradigm first proposed by European naturalists in the XVII century based on what was becoming “Western” Science. The water cycle describes the balance and regularity of evaporation, precipitation, infiltration and runoff dynamics, focusing on cyclicity and constancy in water flows. This epistemological view, having historically situated roots has informed both theoretical and practical hydrological applications worldwide. As a result, a kind of stigmatization of non-temperate, non-European water patterns developed within the scientific community, which could be termed “hydrological orientalism”. This ideological attitude sees especially drylands (and the people who inhabit them) as flawed by chronic scarcity of water in the form of surface flow or accumulation. This view fails to recognize that water dynamics function according to the specific characteristics and ecologies of each place, and peoples’ relationship with water depends on adapting to local hydrological dynamics, not disconnected ideas of what water availability “should” be. This imposed view legitimates the need of engineering interventions that “fix” the local riotous hydrology (and civilize the technical-social context) (Linton, 2008).