I Introduction, Newson and Sear (1998) define fluvial geomorphology as the science that seeks to investigate the complexity of behaviour of river channels at a range of scales from cross-sections to catchments; it also seeks to investigate the range of processes and responses over a very long timescale but usually within the most recent climatic cycle. In a previous review of fluvial geomorphology, Rhoads (1994: 588) argued that fluvial geomorphology was in danger of becoming a backward science and suggested that ‘the most critical challenge confronting fluvial geomorphologists today is to devise strategies for integrating a diverse assortment of research that spans a broad range of spatial and temporal scales’. Rhoads (1994) further suggests that interdisciplinary collaboration may be the key to successful variable-scale research initiatives. Rhoads (1994) notes that, where collaboration does occur, it is amongst fluvial geomorphologists working on similar issues or at similar scales. In recent years, however, fluvial geomorphologists have made a considerable contribution to river management. In the past the dominant approach to river management has been an engineering one which has focused on controlling rivers rather than managing them in sympathy with their natural operation. Rhoads (1994: 601) suggested that if fluvial geomorphology is to grow as a science it must ‘demonstrate its value by contributing either to fundamental scientific issues that transcend boundaries or to the solution of pressing societal problems’. The focus of this review will be on the role, successes, limitations and contribution of fluvial geomorphology to river management. Given the current political climate, and as river management timescales and perceptions change, it is now much easier to convince river managers of the need for geomorphological knowledge in the managing of fluvial systems (Newson and Sear, 1998). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]