Auteur moral

Auteur secondaire

Résumé

"The online workshop "Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning" (4th September 2025) was convened by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) on behalf of the Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB) of the Alpine Convention and supported by the Ecologic Institute. The aim was to address the role of transnational cooperation in implementing the EU Nature Restoration Regulation (NRR) in the Alpine region. The NRR requires Member States to submit National Restoration Plans (NRPs) by September 2026, including a section on cross-border synergies (field 4.2.11). Given the ecological interconnectedness of the Alpine region and its vulnerability to climate and land-use pressures, the workshop was designed to support EU Member States in the Alpine region in drafting coordinated contributions, while also involving and taking account of Alpine countries."

Editeur

Convention alpine

Descripteur Urbamet

Descripteur écoplanete

protection de la montagne ;protection de l'environnement ;plan de restauration ;restauration de terrain ;restauration de site

Thème

Risques ;Ressources - Nuisances ;Environnement - Nature ;Environnement - Paysage

Texte intégral

Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning Online Workshop Results 4th September 2025, 9:00 ? 13:00 CET Teresa Spantzel, McKenna Davis, Dr. Benjamin Kupilas Report 30th September 2025 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report Authors Teresa Spantzel, McKenna Davis, Dr. Benjamin Kupilas Ecologic Institute Pfalzburger Straße 43/44 10717 Berlin E-Mail: teresa.spantzel@ecologic.eu This report was produced on behalf of the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), with contributions from the Core Group Restoration of the Alpine Biodiversity Board of the Alpine Con- vention. September 2025 mailto:teresa.spantzel@ecologic.eu Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report Workshop organizing team The Alpine Convention, particularly with the advisory services of its Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB), provides the regional governance and policy framework for biodiversity in the Alpine region. It facilitates cooperation among Alpine countries, develops strategies and action plans, and fosters dialogue between governments, scientists, and stakeholders to strengthen biodiversity protection and sustainable development in the Alps. During its mandate for 2025-2026, the ABB is charged with the development of an Alpine Biodiversity Action Plan (AB-AP) to 2030 and beyond. Nature restoration is one of the core areas of the ABB?s work and one of the pillars of the AB-AP. The given workshop was a planned initiative under ABB?s 2025-2026 mandate. The Bundesamt für Naturschutz (BfN) is the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation - the government?s scientific authority for national and international nature conservation, supporting applied research, policy advice, and the implementation of conservation measures. The BfN repre- sents the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Climate Action, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMUKN) in the Alpine Biodiversity Board, where it also chairs the Core Group on Restoration. BfN served as the funding institution for organisation of the given workshop. The Ecologic Institute is an independent think tank for environmental policy research, analysis, and consulting. Since its founding in 1995, the institute has promoted sustainable development and contributed new insights and ideas to environmental policy. Its inter- and transdisciplinary research on environmental policy, sustainable development, and socio-ecological issues provides evidence- based analyses and recommendations to decision-makers at national, European, and international levels. A particular concern is to strengthen the European and international dimensions in research, education, and environmental policy discourse. Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report iv Summary The online workshop ?Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning? (4th Sep- tember 2025) was convened by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) on be- half of the Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB) of the Alpine Convention and supported by the Ecologic Institute. The aim was to address the role of transnational cooperation in implementing the EU Na- ture Restoration Regulation (NRR) in the Alpine region. The NRR requires Member States to submit National Restoration Plans (NRPs) by September 2026, including a section on cross-border syner- gies (field 4.2.11). Given the ecological interconnectedness of the Alpine region and its vulnerability to climate and land-use pressures, the workshop was designed to support EU Member States in the Alpine region in drafting coordinated contributions, while also involving and taking account of non- EU Alpine countries. The workshop had two main aims: (1) to refine a common Alpine perspective on restoration for use in field 4.2.11(a) of the NRPs, and (2) to identify opportunities for joint cross-border and transbound- ary measures relevant for sections (b) and (c). The event brought together government representa- tives, experts, and stakeholders from eight Alpine countries as well as from the European Commis- sion, combining plenary presentations, moderated discussions, and breakout sessions. Interactive tools were used to facilitate exchange and collaborative drafting of the NRP text field and generate new ideas for transboundary restoration collaboration. Key outcomes included: ? Creating a shared Alpine perspective: Participants reviewed and refined a draft text for field 4.2.11(a), emphasizing the importance of aligning regional and national targets, strengthening references to existing cooperation mechanisms, addressing climate impacts, and highlighting priority habitats such as peatlands, forests, grasslands, and freshwater eco- systems. ? Prioritising transboundary areas of interest: Breakout discussions identified priority cross-border ecosystems including major lakes (e.g. Lake Constance, Lake Geneva, Lake Maggiore), river systems (Po, Drava, Rhine, Ticino), wetlands, forests, and Alpine pastures. Pressures such as climate change, habitat fragmentation, intensive land use, and tourism were recognized as common challenges. ? Increased awareness of existing initiatives: Participants acknowledged the role of estab- lished cross-border bodies and EU-funded programmes (e.g. Interreg Alpine Space, LIFE projects) as foundations for transnational restoration cooperation. The importance of making better use of existing project repositories was underlined. ? Identification of future opportunities: Participants proposed scaling up peatland restora- tion, improving connectivity of ecological networks, strengthening governance in shared ba- sins, intensifying exchange in methodologies and best practices, and fostering collaboration on monitoring and data interoperability. Engagement of local actors such as farmers, pro- tected area managers, and municipalities was considered critical for implementation. Overall, the workshop demonstrated the added value of cross-border coordination for achieving ecological coherence and resilience in the Alpine region. The consolidated draft text developed during the workshop is intended to serve as a common resource for EU Member States? NRPs and for non-EU Alpine countries? national restoration planning approaches. Participants expressed in- terest in maintaining momentum through continued ABB-led dialogue, integration of workshop re- sults into national planning, and alignment with broader Alpine and international biodiversity initia- tives. Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report v Table of contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 7 2 Aim and agenda of the workshop ................................................................................... 8 3 Results and key takeaways............................................................................................ 11 3.1 Thematic relevance and importance of transboundary cooperation for nature restoration in the Alpine region ........................................................................................... 11 3.2 Proposed text for Field 4.2.11(a) of the National Restoration Plans on synergies with other Member States ..................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Identifying shared actions and designing cross-border proposals for Section (b) and (c) of the National Restoration Plans ........................................................................... 14 3.3.1 Transboundary areas of interest for nature restoration in the Alpine region .............. 14 3.3.2 Ongoing and emerging transboundary nature restoration activities in the Alpine region .................................................................................................................................... 15 4 Conclusions and outlook ............................................................................................... 18 5 Annexes ........................................................................................................................... 19 5.1 Annex 1: Survey results (Mentimeter) ....................................................................... 19 5.2 Annex 2: Original draft text for field 4.2.11(a) provided by the organizers ........... 24 5.3 Annex 3: List of participants ...................................................................................... 25 5.4 Annex 4: Results of the discussions and breakout sessions (Miro Boards) ........ 27 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report vi List of Abbreviations ABB Alpine Biodiversity Board AG Action Group BfN Bundesamt für Naturschutz EC European Commission EUSALP EU Strategy for the Alpine Region CIPAIS International Commission for the Protection of Italian-Swiss Waters (Commissione Internazionale per la Protezione delle acque Italo-Svizzere) CIPEL International Commission for the Protection of the Waters of Lake Geneva (Commission Internationale pour la Protection des Eaux du Léman) ICPR International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine IGKB International Commission for the Protection of Lake Constance (Internationale Gewässerschutzkommission für den Bodensee) NRP Nature Restoration Plan NRR Nature Restoration Regulation Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 7 1 Introduction The adoption of the EU Nature Restoration Regulation (NRR, Regulation (EU) 2024/1991) marks a new chapter in European biodiversity policy by introducing legally-binding and time-bound restora- tion targets for all Member States. A key requirement of the NRR is the preparation of National Restoration Plans (NRPs) by September 2026. These plans must not only set out national priorities and measures but also demonstrate synergies across borders in line with the NRPs of other Member States. Article 14(17) explicitly encourages Member States to coordinate restoration efforts where ecosystems extend beyond national boundaries. To this end, the uniform NRP template foresees a dedicated section (field 4.2.11) for documenting cross-border cooperation, coordinated measures, and governance structures. Cross-border cooperation is particularly relevant in the context of strengthening ecological connec- tivity and restoring degraded ecosystems in the Alpine region ? including Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Slovenia, and Switzerland1 ? where ecological processes and habitats transcend political frontiers and demand a cooperative, transnational approach. This region is one of Europe?s most ecologically valuable mountain systems, renowned for its biodiversity, cultural landscapes, and vital ecosystem services, but also highly vulnerable to climate change, land-use pressures, and habitat fragmentation. Nature restoration is a strategic priority for the Alpine Con- vention, directly supporting its long-standing objective of maintaining the ecological integrity and resilience of the Alpine environment. Recognizing that biodiversity does not follow administrative borders, the Alpine Convention has consistently advocated for the inclusion of a transnational di- mension in the NRPs, a recommendation positively taken up by the European Commission through the dedicated section on synergies. As the Alpine region also spans non-EU Alpine countries, effec- tive restoration planning requires identifying and tapping synergies with these neighbouring states as well, even though such coordination is not formally required under the NRR. Against this background, the Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB) of the Alpine Convention has commit- ted to foster Alpine-wide strategic and technical exchange on nature restoration. As part of these efforts, the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), with support from the blue! ad- vancing European solutions, organised a dedicated workshop on 19th November 2024. The event aimed to explore the current state of nature restoration across the Alpine countries as well as the potential for transnational cooperation. As the follow-up step, the BfN, acting on behalf of the ABB, and supported by the Ecologic Institute, convened on 4th September 2025 an interactive online workshop on ?Enhancing Synergies in Al- pine Nature Restoration Planning?. The aim of this workshop was twofold: to facilitate the drafting of a consensual Alpine perspective on restoration and to identify potential for synergies between countries? actions. In light of the ongoing preparations of the NRPs, the workshop supported Alpine EU-member states in jointly developing contributions to field 4.2.11 of their NRPs. It provided a platform to collaboratively shape the overarching description of synergies (field 4.2.11a) and to gather proposals for cross-border and transboundary measures relevant for sections (b) and (c). This report summarizes discussions and key outcomes of the workshop, including: a proposed text for section (a) if field 4.2.11 in the NRPs as well as joint activities relevant for sections (c) and (b), including transboundary areas of interest, ongoing restoration activities, and potential for future collaboration and joint nature restoration measures. 1 Countries - Contracting Parties to the Alpine Convention Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 8 2 Aim and agenda of the workshop The workshop was conceptualised to provide a structured yet interactive platform for Alpine country representatives and stakeholders to exchange knowledge, refine a joint Alpine perspective on res- toration, and identify opportunities for transnational cooperation, catalysed by the EU NRR. The composition of participants reflected the workshop?s transnational and multi-stakeholder char- acter. Representatives from Germany, Italy, Austria, France, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Slove- nia, and the European Commission (EC) took part. The majority were government officials from ministries and agencies responsible for biodiversity and restoration, complemented by experts from research institutes, non-governmental organizations, and European or transnational bodies. This diversity ensured that discussions integrated policy perspectives, technical expertise, and practical experiences, thereby enhancing the relevance and applicability of the workshop?s outputs. The agenda, presented in Figure 1 below, was divided into two main thematic blocks. The first block focused on building a shared vision, with introductory presentations and plenary discussions centred on the draft text proposed for field 4.2.11 (a) of the National Restoration Plans (or for other national restoration strategies in non-EU Alpine countries). The second block concentrated on identifying concrete cross-border restoration actions, with participants engaging in breakout sessions on eco- systems in need of restoration and potential collaborative measures. Plenary sessions at the begin- ning and end of the workshop ensured a common framing and synthesis of results. Figure 1: Agenda of the online workshop Agenda 9:00 ? 9:05 Welcome McKenna Davis, Coordinator Nature-based Solutions, Ecologic Institute Irina Kozban, Coordinator of the Restoration Core Group of the Alpine Biodi- versity Board, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) 9:05 ? 9:15 Introduction and setting the scene Jon Marco Church, Chair of the Alpine Biodiversity Board 9:15 ? 9:20 Opening remarks from the European Commission Florian Claeys, Policy Officer for Nature Restoration Regulation at the Direc- torate-General for the Environment, European Commission 9:20 ? 9:35 Where are we now? Restoration planning processes across the region McKenna Davis, Ecologic Institute Block 1: Building a shared vision - Crafting the Alpine perspective on restoration 9:35 ? 9:45 Synergies in restoration planning: Presenting the draft text for the sec- tion 4.2.11(a) of National Restoration Plans Irina Kozban, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation 9:45 ? 10:00 Joint reflections on how to further develop the text Benjamin Kupilas, Coordinator Biodiversity, Ecologic Institute 10:00 ? 10:30 Zooming in on priority topics, gaps and opportunities Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 9 Benjamin Kupilas, Ecologic Institute 10:30 ? 10:45 Break Block 2: Identifying shared actions ? Designing cross-border proposals 10:45 ? 11:05 Towards transnational restoration: Setting the scene Teresa Spantzel, Biodiversity & Nature Restoration, Ecologic Institute 11:05 ? 12:15 Exploring opportunities for concrete measures: Breakout sessions 12:15 ? 12:30 Break 12:30 ? 12:50 Plenary synthesis: Presentation and discussion of cross-border pro- posals McKenna Davis, Ecologic Institute 12:50 ? 13:00 Closing and next steps Irina Kozban, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) The working formats combined keynote speeches and presentations with interactive methods to maximize opportunities for discussion and co-creation. The text for field 4.2.11(a), previously drafted by the Restoration Core Group of the ABB, had been shared with the participants beforehand and served as the central working document. The drafted section (a) of field 4.2.11 in the uniform format of the NRPs outlines the shared Alpine perspective on the nature restoration in the region. It serves as a common foundation for coopera- tion, highlighting transboundary ecosystems, planned measures, and mechanisms of collaboration. This text was discussed in a plenary session to collect feedback and refine common language. In- corporating an aligned text into all NRPs of EU Alpine countries will ensure that synergistic potential is coherently addressed at the regional level. In the non-EU Alpine countries, this draft proposal could serve, for example, as a preamble or addition to the respective national strategies on restora- tion. In the second half of the workshop, participants joined breakout groups to identify and discuss pri- ority ecosystems and relevant restoration measures. These priorities were based both on inputs provided through a preparatory survey circulated ahead of the event and on issues raised directly during the workshop discussions. The focus included measures that are already planned, are cur- rently being implemented, or which could be developed in the future. An additional focus was to identify potential opportunities for transnational collaboration in restoring the identified priority areas. Two rounds of discussions enabled several country-mixes, with the following groupings: Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 10 Table 1: List of Country Groups in the Breakout Sessions Group Breakout Session 1 Breakout Session 2 1 Italy, Switzerland Germany, Austria 2 France, Germany France, Italy 3 Slovenia, Austria, Italy Italy, Switzerland, France, Slovenia, Austria, Germany The results of this block provided different country representatives with an opportunity to exchange in different constellations with neighbouring countries and to develop concrete ideas to feed in the national restoration planning, particularly, in the optional sections (b) and (c) of field 4.2.11 in the NRPs. In section (b), considerations can optionally be linked to specific articles of the NRR, by selecting one or more articles from the code list and providing a short description (up to 3,000 char- acters). If one or more articles are reported in section (b), then section (c) must also be filled in, providing further detail and elaboration. To foster engagement throughout the workshop, digital tools were integrated in the sessions. Men- timeter was used in a warm-up to learn more about participants? backgrounds and to gain an over- view of the current state of progress in developing NRPs across the EU countries, while Miro boards supported interactive exchanges and documentation in the breakout sessions (see Annex 4 for doc- umentation). Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 11 3 Results and key takeaways 3.1 Thematic relevance and importance of transboundary cooperation for nature restoration in the Alpine region The Alps are one of Europe?s largest mountain regions and are renowned for their rich biodiversity. They host more than 40% of the habitats listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive and numerous species of European importance, many of which are protected under EU legislation. While providing vital ecosystem services, the Alps are highly vulnerable to climate change as well as hu- man pressures which result in land-use changes, habitat fragmentation, pollution and biodiversity loss. As ecological processes and ecosystems transcend national borders, effective nature restoration in the Alps requires a transboundary approach, harnessing the shared ecological, cultural, and eco- nomic values of this unique landscape. This implies coordinated action and cross-border expansion of restoration areas. While the EU Nature Restoration Regulation is not legally binding for all Alpine countries, it can serve as a valuable catalyst in addressing restoration at the pan-Alpine level. To achieve this, the countries sharing the Alps should build on the existing regional mechanisms. The Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB) of the Alpine Convention is a key technical and advisory body which translates biodiversity objectives into concrete, coordinated activities across the Alps. The ABB?s Alpine Biodiversity Action Plan for 2027?2030 and beyond, is expected to include actions on transboundary restoration. The EU Strategy for the Alpine Region (EUSALP), specifically its Action Group on Green and Blue Infrastructure (AG7), promotes ecological connectivity and restoring na- ture within the broader Alpine region. ABB and EUSALP AG7 act as a platform for dialogue among policymakers, NGOs and other stake- holders. They provide technical expertise, facilitate knowledge exchange and foster collaboration. These bodies are well positioned to support the implementation of transnational aspects of National Restoration Plans and to enhance cooperation between EU Alpine Member States (Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Slovenia) and non-EU Alpine countries (Liechtenstein, Monaco, Switzerland), thus enabling concrete cross-border initiatives and projects. Additional existing cross-border cooperation mechanisms and structures as well as affiliated projects can further support the restoration syner- gies, including the Interreg Alpine Space Programme and transboundary river management bodies. In the long-term, and to ensure reaching the overall EU targets, discussions on nature restoration should be extended to other parts of the Alpine biogeographical region, in particular the ecologically linked Carpathian Mountains and Dinaric Alps, as well as the adjacent Continental and Mediterra- nean biogeographical regions. Within the framework of transnational cooperation, the planning and implementation of restoration measures should remain inclusive and participatory, ensuring meaningful involvement of all the rel- evant stakeholders, including for instance farmers, landowners, protected area managers, land- scape conservation associations, and local authorities. Key restoration priorities for the Alps, defined through joint analyses, mapping and projects, include: ? Restoring and enhancing ecological connectivity in the broader Alpine region and with adjacent areas to enable ecological processes, such as the migration of rare and endangered species, the facilitation of genetic exchange, and the strengthening of overall ecosystem resili- ence. Beyond the restoration of habitats with high biodiversity value, additional opportunities exist Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 12 in urban ecosystem areas. An important objective is the strategic planning and implementation of cross-border ecological corridors. ? Restoring high-value terrestrial habitats, such as peatlands, diverse types of forests, subal- pine and alpine grasslands, and traditional pastures, to enhance species? protection and preserve endemism. Joint identification of priority restoration areas, along with exchange of methodologies and best practices, will increase the coherence of measures across borders. Improving soil health should be treated as an integral objective of restoration efforts. ? Restoring floodplains and freshwater ecosystems, to contribute to the target of free-flowing rivers, including through coordinated initiatives across shared basins like the Rhône, Po, Drava, and Danube. One of the objectives in restoration planning can be coordinated dam removal. Alpine countries recognize that data sharing and interoperability of monitoring systems play a key role in ecosystem restoration as they support understanding of the Alpine state of conservation and thus guide the Alpine restoration efforts. Climate change impacts on habitats and species are particularly pronounced in the Alpine region. Consideration of these impacts, for example, applying existing climate scenarios, should be inte- grated into restoration planning. 3.2 Proposed text for Field 4.2.11(a) of the National Restoration Plans on synergies with other Member States In the first part of the workshop, participants discussed the draft text provided by the organizers for field 4.2.11(a) of the NRPs (see Annex 2 for the original text proposed by the organizers). The par- ticipants? comments highlighted several areas where the text could be strengthened and refined. Overall, participants stressed the need to better balance the broad Alpine perspective with refer- ences to concrete bilateral or sub-regional cooperation, including existing cross-border commissions and alliances such as the International Commission for the Protection of the Waters of Lake Geneva (Commission Internationale pour la Protection des Eaux du Léman, CIPEL) or the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR). They also emphasized the importance of align- ing national and regional targets, ensuring close coordination with non-EU Alpine countries, and considering links to other mountain regions such as the Carpathians and the Dinaric Alps. In terms of pressures and drivers of change, participants underlined the growing human footprint in the Alps, particularly from tourism and settlement, and the need to find compromises and adapt human activities. Climate change was seen as a critical challenge, with strong calls to highlight impacts on forests, soils, and permafrost, as well as the need for active adaptation measures. The role of Alpine soils as carbon sinks and their vulnerability to degradation was singled out as an issue of particular importance. Thematic input was also given on ecosystems and habitats. Suggestions included clarifying refer- ences to valley forests, explicitly mentioning old-growth forests, peatlands, and pastures as priority habitats, and strengthening the transboundary dimension of terrestrial habitats to match the clear treatment of freshwater ecosystems. Participants further recommended placing greater emphasis on cultural landscapes and high nature value farming, as well as improving the evidence base of the opening section by citing the specific number of Annex I habitats and protected species present in the Alps. In addition to commenting on the draft text, participants were also invited to identify restoration pri- orities in the Alpine region more generally. Participants highlighted the need to strengthen ecological Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 13 connectivity, including the potential of peri-urban and urban areas as ecological corridors, and to link this to the rethinking of infrastructure planning. Further suggestions included explicit references to Interreg projects, such as the Alpine Space Programme (ASP), as examples of transnational cooperation. Connectivity should be framed not only as a current need but also as a future challenge, given the expected shifts of species and fragmentation of habitats under climate change. Finally, a number of comments focused on improving governance and implementation. Stakeholder engagement was seen as central, with calls to involve local actors such as farmers, forest owners, protected areas, and NGOs in cooperative planning and implementation. In addition, monitoring and data sharing should be framed more forcefully as requirements rather than aspirations, with im- proved interoperability and accountability mechanisms. The role of Alpine processes, such as the Alpine Convention and EUSALP, in ensuring collaborative assessments was noted, as was the need to align the Alpine Biodiversity Action Plan with global frameworks and to acknowledge its longer- term perspective beyond 2030. Participants also recommended ensuring consistent terminology with the NRR Annexes, for example by explicitly using terms such as ?free-flowing rivers? and ?Annex I habitats.? The gathered comments helped refine the joint vision of the nature restoration in the Alpine region which bases on transboundary cooperation, as described in section 3.1 of this report. They also helped finalise the proposed text on restoration synergies that can be found below in Figure 2. This text ? a cross-cutting overview - is designed as a common foundation for both EU and non- EU Alpine countries to outline their cross-border cooperation. EU Member States are encour- aged to integrate this text, or its tailored version, into field 4.2.11(a) of their NRPs, while non-EU states can use it to complement their own national strategies on nature restoration. Incorporating this approach across countries would ensure coherent regional action, while still allowing each state to adapt the proposal to its national context and specify relevant partner countries. Further details and links to specific articles of the Regulation can be elaborated in field 4.2.11(b) and 4.2.11(c). Figure 2: Proposed text for field 4.2.11(a) of the NRPs a) Cross-cutting overview The Alps host around 40% of the habitats listed in Annex I. While providing vital ecosystem services, they are highly vulnerable to climate change and human pressures. Effective and coherent nature restoration efforts in the region require coordinated action and cross-border expansion of restoration areas. The Alpine Convention, as an international treaty among all eight Alpine countries and the European Union - including five EU Member States - provides a strong foundation for trans- boundary cooperation. Its technical and advisory body, the Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB), in collaboration with the EU Strategy for the Alpine region (EUSALP) Action Group 7, supports political dialogue, knowledge exchange and stakeholder engagement. It translates biodiversity objectives into action, helps pool resources and provides expertise. The Alpine Biodiversity Action Plan for 2027?2030 and beyond is expected to include transboundary restoration ac- tions, covering both EU Member States and non-EU Alpine countries, which is crucial for re- gional coherence. Other existing support mechanisms in the region include the Interreg Alpine Space Programme and transboundary river basin management bodies. Key restoration priorities for the Alps, based on joint analyses, mapping and projects, include: ? restoring and enhancing ecological connectivity within the Alpine region and to the adjacent regions, inter alia for migration of rare and endangered species; Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 14 ? restoring terrestrial habitats that hold high value at Alpine level, such as peatlands, di- verse types of forests and grasslands ? with due attention to Alpine cultural landscapes like pastures; ? restoring floodplains and freshwater ecosystems, contributing to the target of free- flowing rivers, including coordinated initiatives across shared basins like the Rhône, Rhine, Po, Drava, and Danube. Special attention will be given to cross-border areas. Restoration planning will rely on collabo- rative assessments and decisions within the Alpine Convention, EUSALP and other regional mechanisms, with meaningful involvement of relevant stakeholders. Interoperable monitoring systems and data sharing will be ensured to understand Alpine ecosystems? state of conser- vation and to guide restoration efforts. 3.3 Identifying shared actions and designing cross-border proposals for Sections (b) and (c) of the National Restoration Plans 3.3.1 Transboundary areas of interest for nature restoration in the Alpine region During the breakout sessions, participants identified a wide range of transboundary areas across the Alpine region that are relevant for restoration cooperation. These areas were clustered around key ecosystems and habitats such as lakes, rivers, wetlands, forests, and pastures, reflecting both ecological significance and existing cross-border collaboration. A common set of anthropogenic pressures and threats affecting these ecosystems was highlighted by the participants, including cli- mate change, land-use change and its intensification, the abandonment of traditional land use, hab- itat fragmentation, river regulation, drainage of peatlands, nutrient pollution from agriculture, infra- structure development, tourism, and the spread of alien species. Participants further underlined that two complementary types of transboundary approaches should be distinguished: (1) restoration across delineated borders and (2) restoration of similar habitat types in different parts of the Alps in an aligned manner. The latter requires the sharing of methodologies and best practices as well as the establishment of common approaches to monitoring and assessment. Several large lakes emerged as priority transboundary areas where cooperation is important for ecological connectivity and water quality, as well as to tackle growing anthropogenic pressures from tourism, urbanization, and agriculture. For instance, the region of Lake of Constance, situated at the borders of Austria, Switzerland and Germany, was highlighted for its peatlands, floodplains, or- chards, and grasslands. The area is under severe human pressure due to drainage, intensive land use, fragmentation of habitats, agricultural runoff, nutrient pollution, pesticides, and hydropower pro- duction. In addition, Lake Geneva and Lake Maggiore face growing anthropogenic pressures from tourism, urbanization, and agriculture. River ecosystems were frequently mentioned as critical areas for cross-border cooperation. The Po Basin, covering Italy, Switzerland, Austria, and Slovenia, was underlined for its ecological func- tionality and pressure from urbanization. Key threats to fragmentation of habitats and biodiversity loss include agricultural use, nutrient pollution, and alien species, highlighting the need for coordi- nated action. In addition, the Ticino River was highlighted as it presents the main ecological corridor connecting the Alps to the Apennines. Other important transboundary river areas include the Lower Inn, and within the transboundary Po basin, the river Lambro, which faces high anthropogenic pres- sure, disconnection from floodplains, and ecological fragmentation in one of the most urbanized Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 15 areas of Northern Italy near Milan. Moreover, the Upper Drava and Mur River systems (spanning Austria, Slovenia and Italy) and the Rhine-related Alpine rivers were also mentioned, with river con- nectivity, floodplain restoration, and ecological flows seen as pressing challenges. Wetlands and peatlands were repeatedly named as ecosystems of concern, given their biodi- versity value and role as carbon sinks. Peatland restoration and rewetting were emphasized in the wetlands of the Mercantour National Park (Italy and France) and the Isel, Mur, and Drava River systems (Austria, Slovenia, Italy). Participants highlighted threats such as land-use change, drain- age, mineralisation of peat soils due to climate change, and poorly managed value chains. The need to improve land use practices and value chains for peatland products was also discussed. Forests, including old-growth and UNESCO World Heritage Beech Forests, were highlighted as important transboundary ecosystems. Specific areas of focus included the northern Alpine forests in Germany and Austria, as well as forest ecosystems linked to biosphere reserves such as Julian Alps and adjacent areas (Slovenia, Italy, Austria). Threats discussed included fragmentation of for- est patches, lack of ecological corridors, climate change, alien species, and pressures from tourism. Concerns related to climate change impacts and the need for adaptive management were strongly underlined. Alpine pastures and grasslands were identified as particularly important ecosystems under transboundary management. The Rhaetian Triangle (Switzerland, Austria, Italy) was noted for its alpine pastures, meadows, peatlands, and floodplains. Pressures include climate change, intensive land use, tourism, transport infrastructure, loss of biodiversity, and habitat fragmentation. High-alti- tude grasslands were also mentioned in the context of the Mont Blanc massif and other high moun- tain areas affected by climate change. Participants further noted threats of land abandonment, in- tensification of agriculture, and loss of traditional pastoral practices, which undermine connectivity and cultural landscapes. 3.3.2 Ongoing and emerging transboundary nature restoration activities in the Alpine region The breakout discussions showed that a broad range of cooperative initiatives and governance frameworks already exist in the Alpine region that can serve as a foundation for restoration under the EU NRR and also beyond. At the same time, participants identified a number of concrete measures that are already underway, as well as opportunities to strengthen cooperation further. Existing cooperative frameworks Several international commissions are already active in transboundary water and ecosystem man- agement and provide important precedents for coordinated basin-level restoration. Examples in- clude the International Commission for the Protection of Italian-Swiss Waters (Commissione Inter- nazionale per la Protezione delle acque Italo-Svizzere, CIPAIS), which brings together national and regional actors to jointly address water quality, ecosystem restoration, and governance challenges and which includes Lake Maggiore and Lake Lugano. Since its establishment in 1978, the Commis- sion has successfully achieved a decrease in external load of phosphorus in the waters, reducing the nutrient levels in the lake2. Similarly, the nine states and regions in the Rhine watershed closely co-operate through the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR)3 to harmo- nize the many interests of use and protection in the Rhine area. Moreover, the International Com- mission for the Protection of the Waters of Lake Geneva (Commission internationale pour la 2 https://www.cipais.org/web/lago-maggiore/il-lago 3 https://www.iksr.org/en/icpr/about-us https://www.cipais.org/web/lago-maggiore/il-lago https://www.iksr.org/en/icpr/about-us Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 16 protection des eaux du Léman, CIPEL)4 works as a Franco-Swiss cross-border commission with the objective to maintain or restore the waters of the Lake Geneva watershed to a good quality to safe- guard ecosystem services and enhance resilience. Finally, the members of the International Com- mission for the Protection of Lake Constance (Internationale Gewässerschutzkommission für den Bodensee, IGKB)5 from Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein6 have been working to- gether since 1959 to document the development of the lake and identify sources of pollution. These cooperative frameworks for transboundary water management could be particularly helpful for ad- vancing actions to restore free-flowing rivers in the region. Cross-border initiatives and EU projects Participants emphasised cross-border initiatives and EU-funded projects as important vehicles for practical cooperation. For example, the Interreg Alpine Space Programme is an EU-funded trans- national cooperation initiative across seven Alpine countries. Its first priority is dedicated to fostering a climate-resilient and green Alpine region, addressing the strong impacts of climate change on natural, economic, and societal systems and responds to the urgent pressures facing the Alps? rich biodiversity.7 In addition, several national LIFE projects tackle the wider Alpine region, including AMooRe which supports large-scale peatland restoration in Austria as part of implementing the na- tional Peatland Strategy 2030+, the LIFE ARTISAN project in France that promotes nature-based solutions for climate adaptation through wetland and ecosystem restoration, and the LIFE Ticino Biosource project that aims to preserve and enhance the biodiversity heritage of Ticino Park by restoring areas that sustain priority species and other species of community interest.8 In addition, the Ticino Landscape Restoration Plan (2021-2031) provides a collaborative effort between Italy and Switzerland to restore the ecological corridor of the Ticino River, encompassing 75 restoration actions. Lastly, the Terra Raetica (Rhaetian Land), covering regions in the border triangle of Austria, Switzerland, and Italy, established an initiative in 2007 to strengthen cooperation by providing a joint management structure and greater integration of Interreg projects across the participating regions.9 Concrete restoration measures Restoration planning is already translating into tangible measures. The Po River renaturation pro- gramme targets a 37 km reduction of riverbed artificiality by 2026, while peatland rewetting is un- derway in the Lake Constance region. In Northern Italy, the LIFE SNAP NatConnect2030 project is strengthening ecological networks across much of the Po Basin. These examples illustrate how restoration strategies are being implemented in practice through cross-border and multi-country co- operation. Opportunities for scaling up Beyond these ongoing measures, participants identified promising opportunities to expand and rep- licate successful approaches. One example is to build on the I-SWAMP methodology for wetlands and adapt it to other Alpine contexts. The RE-PEAT Alpine Space project (currently in preparation) seeks to coordinate peatland restoration across borders by engaging landowners, governments, and stakeholders. Broader international frameworks, such as UNESCO and WMO International 4 https://www.cipel.org/en/ 5 https://www.igkb.org/ 6 Although Liechtenstein does not border Lake Constance directly, it is connected with it hydrologically. Liechtenstein is a member of the IGKB and is thus an integral part of cooperative management of the lake. 7 https://www.alpine-space.eu/priority-overview/priority-1-climate-resilient-and-green-alpine-region/ 8 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE15-NAT-IT-000989/enhancing-biodiversity-by- restoring-source-areas-for-priority-and-other-species-of-community-interest-in-ticino-park 9 https://www.terraraetica.eu/de/terra-raetica/willkommen.html https://www.cipel.org/en/ https://www.igkb.org/ https://www.alpine-space.eu/priority-overview/priority-1-climate-resilient-and-green-alpine-region/ https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE15-NAT-IT-000989/enhancing-biodiversity-by-restoring-source-areas-for-priority-and-other-species-of-community-interest-in-ticino-park https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE15-NAT-IT-000989/enhancing-biodiversity-by-restoring-source-areas-for-priority-and-other-species-of-community-interest-in-ticino-park https://www.terraraetica.eu/de/terra-raetica/willkommen.html Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 17 Years, were seen as opportunities to raise the visibility of restoration, while scientific tools such as BirdLife?s Alpine-wide map of climate refugia could help prioritise measures for high-elevation spe- cies. Strengthening governance in the Po Basin and linking local restoration contracts to national strategies were also identified as avenues for deepening alignment across countries. Cross-cutting enablers Effective transboundary restoration depends on stakeholder engagement and robust monitoring. Participants highlighted the importance of involving farmers, forest owners, landscape managers, protected areas, and municipalities to ensure implementation on the ground. In Ticino, for instance, stakeholder mapping has already been used to identify key actors. Emerging practices such as paludiculture and multi-country cooperation frameworks like biosphere reserves were noted as cat- alysts and platforms for exchange and innovation. In addition, participants underlined the importance of cross-border restoration of terrestrial ecosystems to ensure ecological connectivity, particularly through the establishment of wildlife corridors that link fragmented habitats across national bound- aries. Monitoring and data-sharing were also emphasised as critical to success. Suggestions in- cluded aligning monitoring of Annex I habitats between Germany and France, building on peatland monitoring in Austria, and further developing digital tools such as the AlpsLife restoration map. Na- tional forest inventories in Germany and Austria were highlighted as valuable baselines that could be better linked, while Interreg projects, particularly within the Alpine Space Programme, were seen as frameworks to improve data comparability. Participants agreed that making better use of existing repositories of best practice, such as the EUSALP AG7 Nature Restoration Project Database10 (with more than 150 projects already mapped), would help avoid duplication, strengthen knowledge ex- change, and position the Alps as a model region for ecological restoration and transition. 10 https://www.alpine-region.eu/action-groups-publications/ag7-nature-restoration-project-database https://www.alpine-region.eu/action-groups-publications/ag7-nature-restoration-project-database Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 18 4 Conclusions and outlook The workshop made a valuable contribution to demonstrating how restoration planning across Al- pine countries can generate synergies under the EU NRR. By bringing together representatives from both EU Member States and non-EU Alpine countries, it provided a platform to jointly discuss res- toration challenges, identify areas of common interest, and gather inputs for field 4.2.11 of the NRPs. The consolidated ?common text? developed during the workshop is intended as a resource that can be adapted by all Alpine countries, thereby ensuring greater consistency and strengthening trans- boundary collaboration beyond the formal requirements of the Regulation. Participants further un- derlined the importance of integrating these results into national planning processes, including the reflection of identified transboundary areas and ecosystem types, explicit consideration of cross- border coordination, and references to shared governance platforms, ongoing initiatives, and repos- itories of best practices. This approach helps embed national measures within a broader Alpine perspective and enhances coherence across the region. In addition, the workshop clearly demonstrated the added value of cross-border synergies. By align- ing actions across shared ecosystems such as rivers, forests, wetlands, and pastures, Alpine coun- tries can achieve greater ecological coherence, pool expertise and resources, and avoid duplication of efforts. This cooperative approach can also enhance resilience against common pressures such as climate change, land-use change, and biodiversity loss, while positioning the Alps as a model region for ecological restoration and green transition. Looking ahead, participants expressed interest in maintaining the momentum through follow-up pro- cesses and exchanges. The list of participants has been shared among workshop participants and can be found in the Annex 3 of this report, providing a practical basis for following up on ideas generated during the workshop. The ABB expressed readiness to facilitate continued dialogue, whether on general issues or through more focused, topic-specific exchanges; this can be done in cooperation with other processes at Alpine and European level, e.g., the European Biodiversity part- nership, IUCN Europe and the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Moreover, the outcomes of the workshop can serve as an important input into the ongoing development of the Alpine Biodiver- sity Action Plan, ensuring that the discussions contribute not only to the implementation of the Nature Restoration Regulation but also to the long-term vision of biodiversity conservation in the Alps. Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 19 5 Annexes 5.1 Annex 1: Survey results (Mentimeter) *Two participants from Liechtenstein. Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 20 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 21 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 22 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 23 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 24 5.2 Annex 2: Original draft text for field 4.2.11(a) provided by the organizers a) Cross-cutting overview The Alps are one of Europe?s largest mountain regions, renowned for their rich biodiversity and vital ecosystem services, but highly vulnerable to climate change and human pressures. Strengthening the effectiveness and coherence of nature restoration efforts in the region re- quires coordinated action and cross-border expansion of restoration areas. The Alpine Convention, as an international treaty among all the eight Alpine countries, including five EU Member states, provides a solid foundation for transboundary cooperation. Primarily through its technical and advisory body - the Alpine Biodiversity Board (ABB), and in collabo- ration with the EU Strategy for the Alpine region (EUSALP), specifically its Action Group 7, the Convention enhances regional political dialogue and knowledge exchange. It translates biodi- versity objectives into action, provides expertise, helps pool resources and facilitates stake- holder engagement. The Alpine Biodiversity Action Plan for 2027?2030 is expected to include actions on transboundary restoration across the Alpine region. Key restoration priorities for the Alps, defined through joint analyses, mapping and projects, include: ? restoring and enhancing ecological connectivity within the Alpine region and be- tween this and the surrounding areas, inter alia for migration of rare and endangered species; ? restoring high-value terrestrial habitats, such as high-altitude peatlands, subalpine and alpine grasslands ? with due attention to periglacial environments, as well as pastures and diverse types of forests ? including those in the valleys ? restoring floodplains and freshwater ecosystems, promoting natural river dynamics, including coordinated initiatives across shared basins like the Rhône, Po, Drava, and Dan- ube. Special attention will be given to cross-border areas, relying on collaborative assessments and decisions of the Alpine Conferences. Data sharing and interoperability of monitoring systems will be further improved. Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 25 5.3 Annex 3: List of participants11 11 Affiliation presented in line with information provided in the registration forms Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 26 Enhancing Synergies in Alpine Nature Restoration Planning ? Workshop Report 27 5.4 Annex 4: Results of the discussions and breakout sessions (Miro Boards) 1. Area of interest Room 1: Italy, Switzerland Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? Rhaetian Triangle Area of interest: Ticino Landscape (ticino Canton, Lombardy and Piedmont regions). It corresponds to the river basin and beyond, as it includes also the areas irrigated by the canals coming from the Ticino Countries involved: Inn- Po:an ongoing project: INNsieme connect... 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Ticino: lakes, river and wetland but also many protected habitats Ecosystems or habitats: Rhaetian triangle:: alpine pastures, dry meadows and pastures, peatland and wetland and floodplains, glaciers, rivers Ticino:the habitats already mentioned + large farmland area and several connectivty areas and riverine forests, little remains of the original heathlands Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: In the Ticino Landscape: significant human pressure, one of the most industrialized and densely inhabited areas in Europe and strongest economy. Highways, railways, Malpensa airport international hub, intensive and extensive farmland Rhaetian triangle: climate change, land- use change and intensive use, intensive tourism, transport infrastructure, loss of biodiversity (drainage, pesticides...), habitat fragmentation Ticino / Rhaetian: new big infrastructures (airports,Highwa ys) Ticino/Rhaetian: river fragmentation, water level regolation in lake, agricolture, high level of urban areas Ticino: a transboundary governance already exists with about 30 stakeholders + a2 International Commission specifically dealing with Lake Maggiore and other water bodies in this area. Rhaetian triangle: strenghten knowledge exchange between research institutions, administrations and practicioners, coordinate adaptation strategies and implementation measures (p.ex. reduce pesticides, strengthen orchard cultivation, rewetting of peatlands...), showcase good practice for safeguard alpine habitats, awareness- raising initiatives transboundary Ticino: a transboundary Ticino Landscape Restoration Plan 2021-2031 already exists, with a long- term vision, 5 General Objectives, 12 specific objectives and 75 actions identified to restore the entire corridor landscape ticino /Rhaetian:co operation in governance and planning Rhaetian triangle: CH- A- I CH IT( many regions and stricly connected with Po basin) CH- I- A- D 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? revitalisation of floodplains (CH- AT); CH- I Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): aboutticino there is a restoration plan, and some project focused in different topics related enhancement of biodiversity in orchards (CH- I) Ticino: 1. Strenghthen transboudary governance. 2. Restoration of ecosystems to strengthen ecosystem services. 3. restoration of ecological corridors/connectivity areas. 4 Establish reproductive populations of locally- extinct species and good conservation status of threatened species. 5. Foster climayte resilience of ecosystems Restoration measures already addressed by national restoration instruments: Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): Terra Raetica (Interreg Projects) Ticino: International Commission for the Protection of Italian- Swiss Waters LIFE Project Ticino Biosource Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: Interreg I- CH, planned project for orchards Ticino: 75 measures already planned. Ticino: One interregt IT- CH project explores the feasibility of a transnational river contact Not clear what CH is formally doing in terms of nature restoration, whether they will develop a national plan or strategy, or whether one already exists. Need to understand this Ticino: No direct link yet between the Italian NRP and the Ticino Initiative, but there is interest from the Ticino side to establish one Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders ticino initiative has a actors map that can be shared (sorry I'm new and at the moment I don't have data) Ticino/Rhaetian: several projects converge on this area, including 3 new Interreg IT- CH macroregion al strategies (in theory) Have a shared vision on nature conservation 1. Area of interest Room 2: France, Germany Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? region: Biosphere reserve Julian Alps (Prealpi Giulie and Triglav National Park) and its extension to Austria (Dobratch Nature Park) Area of interest: Wetlands Countries involved: Forests Peatlands (rewetting, land use, value chains 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Ecosystems or habitats: assessing favorable reference area with a common methodology Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: change in land use and its intensification --> landscape fragmentation as a threat to ecological connectivity (agriculture, infrastructure development) Exchange good practices and knowledge Slovenia, Italiy, Austria France - LIFE Artisan project 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): French project on monitoring - managing existing monitoring schemes French Life Project Artisan (Wetland nature- based solutions) Restoration measures already addressed by the national restoration instruments (NRPs or others): Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: Build on I- SWAMP approach for wetlands to develop a similar approach Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders align monitoring of Annex I habitats between Germany and France, and help improving it Question: Are there any actions planned in the context of UNESCO World Heritag Beech Forest? 1. Area of interest Room 3: Slovenia, Austria, Italy Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? Higher mountain areas because of climate change Area of interest: Triglav (SI) +Julian Prealps (IT) + Daubrach/Dobrat sch Nature park (AT) Countries involved: transbounda ry Carnic Alps Geopark (IT- AT) Transbounda ry Monviso Biosfhere Reserve 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Glaciers Ecosystems or habitats: Peatlands Karst systemPastoralism Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: Tourism - economical and biodiversity implications --> but also opportunitiy to increase ecosystem services delivery Climate change Hydrological alterations as riverine pressures Habitat fragmentation / lack of connectivity and land use changes Shared cross- border instruction (?) Economic opporutunities for providing ecosystem services (tourism?) Cooperation with Julien Alps to build common tourism strategy to mutually help Collaborative management tools (eg. water contracts) 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? Restoring the amazon of Europe (LIFE) Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): restoration of a wild rooster habitat in Pokljuka (Triglav National Park) Restoration measures already addressed by the national restoration instruments (NRPs or others): Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: ASPAlpsLife project (Interreg ASP) Julian Alps MAB and Carnic Alps UGGp International Years UNESCO/WM O Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders AlpsLife project (Interreg ASP) AlpsLife UTAAs - restoration map Upper Drava region with Gail confluence (floodplain, riverine restoration) Rhaetian Triangle (AT, IT, CH) Unesco System "Amazon of Europe" -Isel, Mur and Drava river systems (AT, SI, IT) Karawanken Geopark and surrounding (AT- SI) - also the i- Swamp project was piloted here Exchanging a preliminary list of priority habitata and species, with the goal of agreeing on common restoration trgets Foster cooperation between protected areas in the regions close to the common boundaries, to have a common strategy Abandonme nt of pastures Intensification of agriculture; lack of forest patches --> fragmentation; lack of corridors/connectivity with wide enough corridors for movement and with appropriate land use (has to do with farmers, appropriate land use, e and forest management type and owners, etc) Stakeholders involved in different land uses Alien species 1. Area of interest Room 1: Germany, Austria Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? Nördl. Alpenvorland Area of interest: Peatland Countries involved: Lower Inn 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Peatlands Ecosystems or habitats: Forest ecosystems Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: drainage and climate change lead to mineralisation of peat soils establish corridor system/fores t patches DE, AT 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? Peatland monitoring Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): Bund- Länder- Agreement in D for "climate change mitigation by peat soil maintenance and restoration" R&D projects for agricultural paludicultures on rewetted peatlands accomplished or ongoing; also for developping industrial products; challenges: - motivating farmers for change - establishing economically viable value chains operative programs of German Regions (i.a. Bavaria) to maintain and to rewetpeatlands ongoing; new program of the federal level ("Palu") in preparation Restoration measures already addressed by the national restoration instruments (NRPs or others): Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): Peatlands: LIFE project AMOORE Interreg A- project WINAlp 21 for identifying appropriate tree species on concrete forest sites in the Alps https://www.hswt.de/forsc hung/projekt/1929- winalp- 21 Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: common Alpine Space project RE- PEAT- it to support all relevant actors (from landowners to governments) in peatland restoration issues (in application) stakeholder connection needed Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders NEED: link stakeholder across boarders Exchange of experience on paludiculture (Bundes-)wal dinventuren AT: Peatland monitoring https://www.hswt.de/forschung/projekt/1929-winalp-21 https://www.hswt.de/forschung/projekt/1929-winalp-21 https://www.hswt.de/forschung/projekt/1929-winalp-21 1. Area of interest Room 2: France, Italy Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? Mont Blanc (IT- FR- CH) Area of interest: Alps Marittime /Mercantour (It- Fr) Countries involved: Monviso 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Peatlands Ecosystems or habitats: River connectivity Glaciers (can it be considered restoration?) Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: Climate change Bilateral Meeting between countries Alpine Convention Framework 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): Restoration measures already addressed by the national restoration instruments (NRPs or others): Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: Bilateral Meeting Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders 1. Area of interest Room 3: Italy, Switzerland, France, Slovenia, Austria, Germany Which transboundary area (e.g. lake, region, basin) is of particular interest to focus on in our discussion today? For which countries is this area particularly relevant? Lake of Constance Region Area of interest: Mont- Blanc massif Countries involved: Higher altitudes areas because of climate change Alpi marittime - Mercantour transboundary area 2. Restoration challenges Which specific ecosystems and habitats are most relevant for this area (e.g. alpine pastures, grasslands, forests, wetlands, rivers and lakes), and what are the main restoration challenges they face across borders (e.g., ecological connectivity)? Alpine grasslands Ecosystems or habitats: Lake Constance: peatland, floodplains, orchards, grassland glaciers and periglacial ecosystems --> but really considered as restoration? or more conservation? alpine wetlands Main pressures / threats: Opportunities of transboundary cooperation to address these pressures: Intensive pasture / land abandonment Tourism Lake Constance: drainage, intensive land use, tourism, biodiversity loss, fragmentation, nutrient pollution, agricultural runoff, pesticides Po basin/whole Apline region: Alien species - important to coordinate actions to avoid that removal of a species from one country is jeopardised if not removed from other countries (freshwater and other ecosystems) - e.g. butterflies, insects, etc --> need Alpine approach po basin: some projects from Autorità di bacino del fiume po (life, intterreg) Lake constance: International Commission of Lake Constance (IGKB) is existing... shared governace systems likeriver contracts active (eg Adda River Contract) as governance tools - especially for addressing conflicts and fragmentation (e.g. relating to planning) The Ticino Initiative (CH- IT) focuses on the Ticino River which is a tributary of the Po Basin. The Ticino is a corridor connecting the Alps to the Po river and the Apennines and , through the Po river, also to the Adriatic Sea Lake of Constance: AT- CH- LI- DE Po Basin: different river basins (Inn, Danube) it ch fr and part of Reno, Danubio, Roia Alpi marittime regional park (IT) - Mercantour national park (FR) 3. Restoration measures What concrete restoration measures are already being implemented (or planned) in these areas, and where do you see potential to align or coordinate them with neighboring countries? Lake constance: rewetting of peatlands in CH and Vorarlberg...), projects for pollinators... Ongoing restoration measures (national and/or cross- border): po river plan for restoration and biodiversity conservation (AdB Po & Others) lambro: river contract, ReLambro ecological connection study, Best practice of governance and local intervention, EPL project to recreate transversal connection (1st experiment in metropolotilan area in Italy) Po river Renaturation project (RRF funding). First target achieved: 13 km of reduction of the artificiality of the riverbed. Restoration measures already addressed by the national restoration instruments (NRPs or others): Planned measures (national and/or cross- border): could be EPL (lambro basin) (financed by pre PNNR) Po river Renaturation project (RRF funding). Second target ongoing: 37km of reduction of the artificiality of the riverbed scheduled by March 2026. Existing attempts to create synergies with nature restoration instruments (inside and outside the EU): New opportunities for cross- boundary restoration measures: po basin different project output and results - puncutual situation (eg subjects, Delta Po valli di Argenta, ticino inititive, Stelvio Park - ife natconnect 2030, life green4blue, life climax po) Within the Po Basin, the Ticino Initiative already has a Ticino Landscape restoration Plan 2021-2031. Ticino is a sub- basin within the larger Po Basin Rhine revitalisation projects (CH- AT) and LIE rewetting of peatlands in the lake constance region Common repositories for NBS projects. Guidelines for uploading project provided by Biodiversa+. List of repositories here:https://www.biodiversa.eu /wp- content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiv ersa_MS188_Guidelines- for- NbS- case- study- repositories.pdf AdaPT Mont- Blanc AlpsLife project, resp. UTAAs maps, restoration map Life projects as p.ex. Amore International Commission for the Protection of Lake Constance national restoration plans! There exist s a Po River District Authority BirdLife has prepared a map of climate refugia in the entire Alps for high- elevation species . If some of these areas are in need of restoration, this is where international efforts could converge Other considerations for discussion Potential for stakeholder engagement in upcoming restoration activities Alignment of data and monitoring efforts across borders LIFE project AlpsLife project (ASP) Transbounda ry Monviso Biosphere Reserve Transboundary Monviso Biosphere Reserve - FR and IT Po basin Po basin: fragmentation of governance and biodiversity management agricolture Land use change Agriculture runoff, nutrient pollution Fragmentation (roads, ski infrastructures) Alpine rivers Hydropower production peatlands Northern Italy: ecological networks of the Northern regions (Southern Alps) are being connected with each other through the LIFE SNAP NatConnect2030 project. It tousches a great part of the Po River New ice- free areas ecosystems Repositories exist which are collecting information, e.g. restoration projects, NbS, etc --> would be good to keep these connected and not duplicating data collection ... Landscape mapping of what is available would be good as a basis for cooperation. Not needed to always make new Alpine- specific repositories. Guidelines can help to use these in a consistent way. Important to consider which types of restoration measures we wish to promote (vs conservation), and if e.g. glaciers can be considered passive restoration? need for collection and propagation of germplasm for restoration actions through shared protocols, identifying common source areas interreg project D- A: INNsieme connect river Lambro within Po basin exreme interest cross one of the most populatated metropolitan areas in Milano lambro river/basin ecological funztionaiity Lambro: high antropological pressure and disconnectionfrom the floodplain fragmentation of ecological connnection lambro: high level of cooperation at territorial level experimentede to be open in a transboudary perspective (po subbasin) life Natconnect project 2030 https://www.biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiversa_MS188_Guidelines-for-NbS-case-study-repositories.pdf https://www.biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiversa_MS188_Guidelines-for-NbS-case-study-repositories.pdf https://www.biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiversa_MS188_Guidelines-for-NbS-case-study-repositories.pdf https://www.biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiversa_MS188_Guidelines-for-NbS-case-study-repositories.pdf https://www.biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Biodiversa_MS188_Guidelines-for-NbS-case-study-repositories.pdf