Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A collaborative research agenda for restoring free-flowing rivers

  • Twan Stoffers
  • , Katariina E. M. Vuorinen
  • , Sibylle Schroer
  • , Phoebe C. Griffith
  • , Miriam Colls
  • , Tibor Eros
  • , Juergen Geist
  • , Mathias Kuemmerlen
  • , Socrates Schouten
  • , Ruben van Treeck
  • , Maria Alp
  • , Damiano Baldan
  • , Sebastian Birk
  • , Olena Bilous
  • , Florian Borgwardt
  • , Mario Brauns
  • , Anthonie D. Buijse
  • , Viola Clausnitzer
  • , Mayra E. Darre
  • , Jelger Elings
  • Patrick Fink, Teresa Ferreira, Katarzyna Glinska-Lewczuk, Johannes Graupner, Daria Gundermann, Fengzhi He, Thomas Hein, Zeb S. Hogan, Lionel L'Hoste, Paul Meulenbroek, Imanol Miqueleiz, Sathaporn Monprapussorn, Camille L. Musseau, Leopold A. J. Nagelkerke, Joacim Naslund, Paula dos Reis Oliveira, Joachim Pander, Polona Pengal, Marie Pfeiffer, Sebastian L. Rock, Joshua L. Royte, Timo D. Rittweg, Anna Scaini, Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber, Stefan Schmutz, Mathias Scholz, Gabriel A. Singer, Adam Tarkowski, Kimmo T. Tolonen, Jonah Tosney, Martin Tschikof, Jimmy van Rijn, Pieterjan Verhelst, Franziska Walther, Bernhard Wegscheider, Christian Wolter, Chen Xiao, Thomas A. Worthington, Stamatis Zogaris, Sonja C. Jahnig

Publication: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Abstract

Rivers are increasingly fragmented and degraded, yet the European Union Nature Restoration Regulation calls for restoring at least 25,000 kilometres of free-flowing rivers by 2030. Translating this ambition into effective implementation remains challenging because restoration priorities differ across ecological, social, economic, and governance contexts. Here, we synthesize expert knowledge from 45 countries through a structured, multi-step prioritization process to identify research priorities for restoring free-flowing rivers in Europe. We identified 27 priorities and analysed how expert background and spatial context influenced their ranking. Restoration priorities differed systematically depending on whether experts emphasized ecological integrity, community engagement, economic considerations, or governance capacity, revealing clear patterns in how disciplinary and professional perspectives shape implementation pathways. This demonstrates that restoration strategies cannot be universal but must be adapted to local and regional political, institutional, and ecological conditions. Building on these findings, we propose a structured prioritisation framework that links barrier removal, connectivity restoration, governance mechanisms, and policy instruments to context-specific needs. Together, our results provide an empirically grounded and implementation-oriented roadmap to support European Union Member States in delivering ambitious river restoration targets in a context-sensitive and socially robust manner.
Original languageEnglish
Article number303
Number of pages16
JournalCommunications Earth and Environment
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2026

Cite this