Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Active afforestation of drained peatlands is not a viable option under the EU Nature Restoration Law

  • Gerald Jurasinski
  • , Alexandra Barthelmes
  • , Kenneth A. Byrne
  • , Bogdan H. Chojnicki
  • , Jesper Riis Christiansen
  • , Kris Decleer
  • , Christian Fritz
  • , Anke Beate Günther
  • , Vytas Huth
  • , Hans Joosten
  • , Radosław Juszczak
  • , Sari Juutinen
  • , Åsa Kasimir
  • , Leif Klemedtsson
  • , Franziska Koebsch
  • , Wiktor Kotowski
  • , Ain Kull
  • , Mariusz Lamentowicz
  • , Amelie Lindgren
  • , Richard Lindsay
  • Rita Linkevičienė, Annalea Lohila, Ülo Mander, Michael Manton, Kari Minkkinen, Jan Peters, Florence Renou-Wilson, Jūratė Sendžikaitė, Rasa Šimanauskienė, Julius Taminskas, Franziska Tanneberger, Cosima Tegetmeyer, Rudy van Diggelen, Harri Vasander, David Wilson, Nerijus Zableckis, Dominik H. Zak, John Couwenberg
  • University of Greifswald
  • Institute of Botany Lithuanian
  • Poznań University of Life Sciences
  • University of Copenhagen
  • Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research
  • Radboud University Nijmegen
  • University of Rostock
  • University of Helsinki
  • University of Gothenburg
  • University of Göttingen
  • University of Warsaw
  • University of Tartu
  • Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
  • University of East London
  • Nature Research Centre
  • Vytautas Magnus University
  • Partner in the Greifswald Mire Centre
  • University College Dublin
  • Foundation for Peatland Restoration and Conservation
  • Vilnius University
  • University of Antwerp
  • Earthy Matters Environmental Consultants
  • Aarhus University
  • Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The EU Nature Restoration Law (NRL) is critical for the restoration of degraded ecosystems and active afforestation of degraded peatlands has been suggested as a restoration measure under the NRL. Here, we discuss the current state of scientific evidence on the climate mitigation effects of peatlands under forestry. Afforestation of drained peatlands without restoring their hydrology does not fully restore ecosystem functions. Evidence on long-term climate benefits is lacking and it is unclear whether CO2 sequestration of forest on drained peatland can offset the carbon loss from the peat over the long-term. While afforestation may offer short-term gains in certain cases, it compromises the sustainability of peatland carbon storage. Thus, active afforestation of drained peatlands is not a viable option for climate mitigation under the EU Nature Restoration Law and might even impede future rewetting/restoration efforts. Instead, restoring hydrological conditions through rewetting is crucial for effective peatland restoration.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)970-983
Number of pages14
JournalAmbio
Volume53
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2024

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 13 - Climate Action
    SDG 13 Climate Action
  2. SDG 15 - Life on Land
    SDG 15 Life on Land

Keywords

  • Carbon storage
  • GHG emissions
  • Nature based solutions
  • Nature restoration law
  • Peatland forestry
  • Peatland restoration

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Active afforestation of drained peatlands is not a viable option under the EU Nature Restoration Law'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this