One of the first things we have to note, and your question puts that very clearly in perspective, is that we can address water management-related issues via other access points, for example environmental impact assessment or biodiversity impact studies. We can also consider the management and protection of water itself as a unit. At present, the problem is that we are coming at it from different angles when we address water-related access points rather than having a much more holistic vision of water management and the associated mechanisms.
If I understand your question correctly, you want to know whether we could have much more radical legal tools, such as legal personality. That may be an option, yes. I think the legal personality of water, the rights of nature, or the mere fact of giving water existence as an actor, for example if we have a committee composed of persons who are there to represent water, will protect us from ourselves, in a way, and enable us to move forward in our interaction with the environment.
That said, there are legal problems, not to mention that developing strategies like that would take time. The important thing, however, is to change our perspective. We are realizing that things as they are today are no longer working. I believe that tools like those would allow for a radical change of perspective that would help us move forward. Would it radically change political relationships and force political cooperation? That might not be the case. It depends on what form of the tool were to be adopted. In a context of cooperative federalism, imposing some things is always complicated.