The way that freshwater is accessed, used, consumed, and managed in highly industrialized countries demonstrates our lack of value or respect of water. Consider the adage, “show me your budget and I’ll tell you your priorities” and put it in terms of freshwater: show me how you use water and I’ll tell you how you value it. Show me where and how freshwater is incorporated into your formal education curriculum, and I’ll show you how your society respects freshwater.

Understanding and managing water resources is a social responsibility and activity. However, many societies view water as political power, an economic tool, an engineering exercise. Most peer-reviewed research speaks to water from a scientific perspective, placing humans either outside the problem or as the primary beneficiaries or deterrents of the outcomes [1]. We argue that water research and understandings come from interconnections and should be analyzed through the lens of relationships rather than in selected isolation. Interpretations of data must include a holistic approach, incorporating humans, rather than having humans viewed as a consumer or manipulator of nature and natural resources.

The necessity of bringing to bear the benefits of multidisciplinary critical thinking and problem solving is clear in terms of identifying meaningful and successful approaches to informing societies about the intersecting and interconnected complexities of changing climate, extreme weather events like floods and droughts, and equitable water use and resource management. However, Western approaches to water are human-centric, resource-based approaches that do not consider or forefront ecological needs, functions, and benefits. At a minimum, Western cultures must shift language in science and educational systems from the perfunctory hydrologic cycle (scientific) or hydrosocial (human-centric) view of water to an interconnectedness model described as either a broader hydrorelational approach to valuing freshwater resources requires that formal water science pedagogies are fully integrated with social science and humanities education [1–3].

Both hydrologic and hydrosocial frameworks–and distinctions between the two–have become relatively common in the scientific and social sciences literature [4–7]. The hydrologic framework is well established and accepted for both formal education and scientific purposes. It’s familiar and comfortable, placing water as—independent from and of social systems. It’s readily understandable, focusing on scientific and geographical facts about water, including rote presentations of chemical properties, meteorological processes, physical state changes, and the existence of groundwater.

Hydrosocial perspectives enable us to move toward viewing our perceptions and relationships with water as emergent from social-ecological frameworks [1, 8]. In a hydrosocial framework, water is understood and treated as a resource, mostly for humans and their use. Essentially what UNESCO [9] considers the common good. In relation to freshwater, this implies that an individual’s or society’s consumption of freshwater should not subtract from any other individual’s or society’s consumption of freshwater. It’s attuned to the definitions of sustainable development, but not sustainability per se. However, it continues to place water as a resource in service to humans–at the individual and society level–as something to use, consume, and attempt to tame.

Although most of the current sustainability literature conceptualizes water using the hydrosocial frame as the endpoint [1], we advocate taking a much wider context of rethinking freshwater. This rethinking requires that we shift even further from the current focus on hydrologic and hydrosocial constructs toward viewing water from the hydrorelational lens. Hydrorelationality requires we ‘decenter the human’ and turn our focus to how humanity is enmeshed in ecological systems, moving outside our philosophical comfort zones and taking responsibility within our local contexts [10]. In the formal classroom environment, the hydrorelational framework shifts to promote curiosity with experiences with and politics of water. It connects seamlessly with sustainability (beyond sustainable development) within local contexts that can be translated to regional and broader applications. And it asks us to confront how we think about and live with water. How we learn from water. And what the interconnectedness is with our local communities.

Freshwater is more than just an essential commodity for humanity, but rather it forms a sacred bond between all things, and understanding of water must be shifted towards accepting a deeper embodying of water for all life on this planet. The authors suggest that societies must view and value freshwater and its importance above and beyond how it serves humanity. This requires a paradigm shift toward the hydrorelational perspective to demonstrate how a society respects freshwater. In formal education curriculum, this necessarily and fundamentally shifts how we teach and learn about freshwater.

This is evidenced in scholarly and societal responses to a recent Canadian court decision to confer the legal rights of personhood on the Mutuhekau Shipu (aka Magpie River) highlight the ongoing disconnect between Western views of commodification and consumption with traditional Innu First Nation assignment of sacred value. Much of the early academic literature on the decision has focused on legal interpretations alongside perhaps unsurprising tomes discussing how this change in legal status can be used for human gain, such as in the form of creating new management tools [11] or reinforcing rights to nature [12]. Most scholarly works and public discourse ignore the sacred and inherent value of water that is essential for hydrorelational principles and environmental wellness.

The many important roles that formal education, curriculum, and content design play in advancing knowledge, action, and accountability where humans are involved, impacted, and included in climate change cannot be understated. This is where knowledge and understanding are formed that humans are not separate, insulated, or isolated from the natural environment, but rather are part of the ecosystems in which we exist and interact. Given the complexity of climate change and its wide-ranging implications, integrating climate change education into formal curricula is essential for creating a more informed, responsible, and proactive society. The effects and impacts of changing climate conditions are seen across ecosystems and ecosystem functions, especially in relation to freshwater extremes such as floods and droughts. These incidents are becoming more frequent and intense due to climate change, and they have far-reaching consequences for both natural and built environments, as well as for biodiversity and all forms of life. Formal education and curriculum design can be powerful tools for advancing knowledge, promoting meaningful action, and fostering accountability in the context of climate change. However, these must decouple the Western human-centered view of water and transition to a proactive and ecology-centered view of water relationships and interconnectedness. Societal perceptions of water and their influence on the social constructions of water must be merged to create a critical view and understanding of water as more than a human good.