A might be interesting side topic for Agromix target groups, how to deal with natural and close to natural forests' management in climate change crisis to ensure the ecological value of them.

As the initiative is located in the Alps and Carpathians always include a multi-level use approach of forest assets and an active management scheme, which might getting closer to ecosystem services management. This kind of management scheme - in many nomenclature - means a mixed farming system from a forest-oriented aspects, instead of agriculture oriented meaning.

The Alpine Convention (https://www.alpconv.org/en/) in cooperation with the Carpathian Convention (http://www.carpathianconvention.org/) organized a Forum to provide platform to the discussion on:

- Identification of a series of indicators relevant to mountain biodiversity, complementing and updating the indicators of the “Ecological Network” platform. The ABB has already identified 25 indicators, which are not specific for mountain biodiversity, but could be utilized in combination with the available information and studies on the atypical habitats (Carta degli Habitat1).
- To develop a project combining the available cartographic data and the set of indicators identified 

- To assess the impact of climate change on mountain biodiversity
- To organise actions at several institutional levels to urge the importance of a specificity of mountain biodiversity both at international, regional and national strategies.

From forest biodiversity the most important outcomes of the event:

Conclusions of the Forum:

- Natural disturbance regimes will continue to shift with climate change in both the Alps and the
Carpathians. Altered disturbance vulnerabilities, for instance to wind and insects, derive also
from the legacy of historic forest management. This history has simplified species composition,
stand structural conditions, and patch mosaics at landscape scales. Addressing climate and
disturbance vulnerabilities require adaptative responses, such as diversification of landscape
composition and management for plant species with future adapted traits. This is needed both
to conserve forest-dwelling biodiversity and to sustain critical ecosystem services.
- Adaptation to climate change will require a portfolio of forest management strategies, producing trade-offs between the types of habitats favoured (e.g. early vs. late seral) and the mix of ecosystem service co-benefits (e.g. carbon storage, flood control, woods products, etc.). How to best optimize beta diversity in habitats, while also considering ecosystem services, is thus a central challenge for adaptive forest management in the face of climate change.

Recommendations based on the Forum:

- Promote adaptative forest management practices that account for altered natural disturbance regimes, for example by diversifying forest structure and composition at landscape scales.
- Consider forest management practices that increase resilience to climate change, such as management for systems with high functional trait diversity and expanded representation of geophysical diversity within protected areas systems.