In recent decades, recognition of both cultural and natural heritage has grown in the Alps. This tendency illustrates a collective identity building (local, national, alpine), but it also highlights, in the current context of global change, a renewed reflection of man's relationship with the environment. Thus, a fundamental and scientific intrinsic value (as a part of wilderness) tends to be recognized in the natural heritage as a whole. However, geoheritage (and geodiversity) is still often perceived as a secondary natural component, compared with bioheritage (and biodiversity). In this context, we study the geomorphological heritage (landforms and the processes that shape them) of Les Contamines-Montjoie Natural Reserve. Indeed, despite the high geomorphological richness (especially glacial) of the reserve, which covers more than 4000 ha of the Mont-Blanc Massif, local recognition of this heritage is still limited. In order to recognize and protect it, and starting with a scientific study, this research identifies the main local richness and assesses the geotourist and educational potentials. Finally, several tools to educate and promote geoheritage (educational paths and website) are proposed. 13R e search eco.m o n t -Vo l u m e 4 , N u m b e r 1 , J u n e 2 0 1 2 ISSN 2 0 7 3 -1 0 6 X p r i n t v e r s i o n ISSN 2 0 7 3 -1 5 5 8 o n l i n e v e r s i o n : h t t p : / / e p u b . o e a w. a c . a t / e c o . m o n t

<p>The dissemination of Geoheritage research can be reinforced by building solid partnerships between researchers and national and regional stakeholders as practical experience has shown in the Chablais UNESCO Global Geopark. Increasingly, territorial management bodies, particularly those hosting UNESCO designations such as UNESCO Global Geoparks, public agencies with environmental preservation or resource management responsibilities and managers of national or regional geoheritage inventories actively seek to build partnerships with geoheritage researchers.  These entities document and manage geoheritage as part of their overall responsibilities and have wider roles than conservation bodies. The non-academic professional teams responsible for geoheritage documentation, management and awareness raising include experienced geoscientists and highly trained science communicators. Professional geoheritage stakeholders have well-developed dissemination channels with public and private sector decision makers as well as the general public and schools that complete and complement academic geoheritage communication networks.</p><p>Recent examples from the Chablais UNESCO Global Geopark demonstrate how geoheritage professionals from the local development agency have worked in partnership with geoheritage researchers to maximise the impact of new scientific research in the territory.  These examples highlight how collaboration between researchers and professionals embedded in the study region can leverage research results to a wide audience: decision makers, stakeholders, local population and school children.  Three case studies highlight the different partnerships and how collaborations led to improved project robustness and scope.  In addition, the examples underline how early collaboration leads not only to project improvements but also transmission through highly effective embedded communication channels that complement those of geoheritage researchers.</p><p>Each case study addresses a different geosite within the Chablais UGGp with different issues and stakeholders: a retrogressive landslide at Reyvroz, dolines at Nifflon and a series of lakes of varied origin at Saint Paul en Chablais.  The examples demonstrate the scope for the application and recognition of research but also the need of researchers and territorial managers to make connections early on for these projects to achieve their full potential. This permits thorough, structured dialogue between researchers and stakeholders that result in geoheritage issues being recognised, understood and incorporated into territorial management decisions and sustainable policy.  This is a crucial step given that the value of the natural environment from a general public and political standpoint continues to be equated with biodiversity and ecosystemic services to the detriment of geoheritage and geosystem services.</p>