Active afforestation of drained peatlands is not a viable option under the EU Nature Restoration Law
Author:
Jurasinski GeraldORCID, Barthelmes Alexandra, Byrne Kenneth A., Chojnicki Bogdan H., Christiansen Jesper Riis, Decleer Kris, Fritz Christian, Günther Anke Beate, Huth Vytas, Joosten Hans, Juszczak Radosław, Juutinen Sari, Kasimir Åsa, Klemedtsson Leif, Koebsch Franziska, Kotowski Wiktor, Kull Ain, Lamentowicz Mariusz, Lindgren Amelie, Lindsay Richard, Linkevičienė Rita, Lohila Annalea, Mander Ülo, Manton Michael, Minkkinen Kari, Peters Jan, Renou-Wilson Florence, Sendžikaitė Jūratė, Šimanauskienė Rasa, Taminskas Julius, Tanneberger Franziska, Tegetmeyer Cosima, van Diggelen Rudy, Vasander Harri, Wilson David, Zableckis Nerijus, Zak Dominik H., Couwenberg John
Abstract
AbstractThe 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.
Funder
Horizon 2020 Universität Greifswald
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference100 articles.
1. Artz, R.R.E., S.J. Chapman, M. Saunders, C.D. Evans, and R.B. Matthews. 2013. Comment on “Soil CO2, CH4 and N2O fluxes from an afforested lowland raised peat bog in Scotland: implications for drainage and restoration” by Yamulki et al. Biogeosciences 10: 7623–7630. 2. Bārdule, A., L. Gerra-Inohosa, I. Kļaviņš, Z. Kļaviņa, K. Bitenieks, A. Butlers, A. Lazdiņš, and Z. Lībiete. 2022. Variation in the mercury concentrations and greenhouse gas emissions of pristine and managed hemiboreal peatlands. Land 11: 1414. 3. Beaulne, J., M. Garneau, G. Magnan, and É. Boucher. 2021. Peat deposits store more carbon than trees in forested peatlands of the boreal biome. Scientific Reports 11: 2657. 4. Billett, M.F., D.J. Charman, J.M. Clark, C.D. Evans, M.G. Evans, N.J. Ostle, F. Worrall, A. Burden, et al. 2010. Carbon balance of UK peatlands: Current state of knowledge and future research challenges. Climate Research 45: 13–29. 5. Bjarnadottir, B., G.A. Sungur, B.D. Sigurdsson, B.T. Kjartansson, H. Oskarsson, E.S. Oddsdottir, G.E. Gunnarsdottir, and A. Black. 2021. Carbon and water balance of an afforested shallow drained peatland in Iceland. Forest Ecology and Management 482: 118861.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|