Introduction

Peatlands are among the most valuable ecosystems on Earth and provide a wide range of ecosystem services, including carbon storage, biodiversity protection, the mitigation of water supply problems, recreation, flood risk reduction, and climate change mitigation (Grzybowski and Glińska-Lewczuk 2020). Accordingly, peatlands play a crucial role in reaching international and national goals in the policy fields of climate change, biodiversity conservation, flood protection, and water management. The enormous benefits of undrained peatlands are widely acknowledged, but many European peatlands no longer provide these vital services, or their provision is highly threatened. They have been dramatically altered by drainage in response to government subsidies in the decades after World War II. In Central Europe, more than 90% of all peatlands have been or are utilized for agriculture, forestry, or peat extraction (Joosten 2010). Agricultural uses vary from extensive pastures to intensive cultivations, e.g., vegetable production in the UK and Switzerland, maize grown for fodder and biogas generation in Germany, or grassland for dairy farming in the Netherlands. Drainage of peatlands causes enormous greenhouse gas emissions and loss of the water-holding capacity of the peat. In the EU-27, more than 4 million hectares of drained peatlands are managed as cropland or grassland. This amount represents approximately 2% of the total cropland and grassland area in the EU, but it accounts for 25% of EU-27 agricultural emissions (Tanneberger et al. 2021). Germany, Finland, and Poland are the largest carbon dioxide (CO2) emitters from drained peatlands in the EU (Greifswald Mire Centre 2019). As a result, the EU is globally the third largest emitter of CO2 emissions from drained peatlands, after Indonesia and Russia (Dewitz et al. 2023).

In recent years, a number of European governments and actors have developed national peatland strategies as a basis for coherent peatland management across sectors. These kinds of integrated strategies are relatively novel approaches for governing complex issues that involve several sectors and levels of governance (Rayner and Howlett 2009; Nordbeck and Steurer 2016). They are key tools for fostering not only sustainable development but also environmental policy integration (Casado-Asensio and Steurer 2014). Integrated strategies are “intended to address the perceived shortcomings of previous, more ad hoc, policy regimes” by rationalizing multiple goals and through the systematic use of policy instruments so that multiple sectoral policies “support rather than undermine one another in the pursuit of those goals” (Rayner and Howlett 2009, 100). National peatland strategies that are based on conservation and sustainable management principles strongly support countries in achieving various policy goals, including contributing to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (BfN 2020). By tackling multiple policy challenges together, national peatland strategies can create “win–win” outcomes and efficiencies and provide an opportunity to identify and manage potential trade-offs that might not be addressed if sectoral policies remain separate processes. By undertaking medium-term planning across key policy areas such as biodiversity conservation, climate mitigation and adaptation, and water management, countries can design and implement pathways that account for the interactions, synergies, and trade-offs of national priorities.

The structure and focus of national peatland strategies vary from country to country, but they often provide a comprehensive overview of the main challenges in a country and propose measures for the protection of mires (i.e., peat accumulating or untouched peatlands) and the sustainable use of peatlands. The main objective of this study is to assess the status of and recent developments in national peatland strategies in European countries, which have not yet been systematically compared. The “Method and comparative framework” section describes the data collection methods and the analytical framework used to analyze and compare the different national peatland strategies. The “National peatland strategies in Europe: the current status and recent developments” section provides a brief overview of national peatland strategies in Europe. We then discuss the key issues covered by the national peatland strategies in the following six sections. Finally, we conclude and summarize the results in a number of key findings.

Method and comparative framework

Comparing the national peatland strategies of different countries is challenging because of legislative, political, and cultural differences that are reflected, for example, in the timing, structure, focus, and legal status of the strategies (Biesbroek et al. 2010). These differences determine the methodology used to compare countries and interpret results (Landman and Carvalho 2017). To compare the national strategies, a simple inductive framework of themes common to most of the analyzed national peatland strategies was applied. For a comprehensive comparison in the European context, an initial analysis of the national peatland strategies was conducted, which identified six themes common to all the strategies. The themes were selected after a preliminary analysis of the policy documents and to link with recent discussions in the scientific literature on peatland strategies (BfN 2020):

  1. (1).

    The motivation behind adopting national peatland strategies;

  2. (2).

    A sufficient database and conceptualization;

  3. (3).

    The participation of stakeholders and outreach;

  4. (4).

    Institutional arrangements for cross-sectoral policy coordination and integration;

  5. (5).

    The financial management strategies of national peatland; and

  6. (6).

    How countries ensure that their national peatland strategies are implemented, reviewed and followed up (monitoring, reporting, revision).

Primary data were gathered through policy document analysis. Document analysis is a valuable research method that has frequently been an underused approach to qualitative research (Morgan 2022). For our study, we used a systematic approach for document analysis called the READ approach (Dalglish et al. 2020): (1) read the materials, (2) extract the data, (3) analyze the data, and (4) distill the findings. The first step is to set parameters in terms of the nature and approximate number of documents that will be analyzed based on the research question. Since our study focuses on a specific type of policy program, the number of documents included in the review was moderate. Country selection was limited to European countries that had developed a comprehensive national peatland strategy. The data analysis included national peatland strategies, annual progress reports, and evaluation reports. By 2022, eight European states had adopted a national peatland strategy. Other European countries, such as Poland and Sweden, have adopted broader strategies for the protection of wetlands that often include policy goals related to peatlands. Since these broader strategies do not focus specifically on peatlands, they were not analyzed in this study. In addition, the study did not include regional plans or plans that were developed to protect specific mires. In some countries, such plans were inspired by the national peatland strategy. Although we acknowledge their importance, they were not included in this study.

Data can be extracted from policy documents in a number of ways, and the methods selected for doing so depend on the research questions and the nature of the documents. For our study, we chose a simple method involving the use of Excel spreadsheets, where each row is a document and each column is a category of data that we want to extract based on the key themes outlined above as the analytical framework. Simple keywords, such as objectives and goals, participation, coordination, and financing, were used to extract the information from the strategies. During the data analysis, we took a holistic view of the documents’ answers to the analytical categories that we applied during the data extraction phase. What did the documents say about these thematic categories? What variation did we find within and between documents and along which axes? In the final phase, we refined our findings and grouped them according to their analytical categories.

National peatland strategies in Europe: the current status and recent developments

National peatland strategies serve as a basis for identifying peatland-related objectives and peatland management instruments and measures across sectors. They can have a strong impact on preventing further peatland degradation, increasing sustainable use, and coordinating peatland restoration. A number of European governments and actors have developed or are in the process of developing national peatland strategies with the aim to (BfN 2020):

  • Provide a basis for coherent peatland management and respective policymaking;

  • Highlight the important functions and services of peatlands, their use, current threats, and new challenges;

  • Provide an overarching framework to address and bridge gaps in current approaches and to set clear guidelines for planning and implementation at the subnational level; and

  • Launch a debate on the cross-sectoral importance of peatlands, bring stakeholders together, and address conflicts of interest.

Table 1 presents the current state of affairs in Europe regarding national peatland strategies. In total, eight European countries have developed national peatland strategies in the last twelve years. In addition to the early movers, i.e., Finland, Scotland, and Ireland, which developed their national strategies in the period 2011–2015, most activities concerning national peatland strategies started only recently in 2020 and 2021. This finding clearly mirrors the growing importance of peatlands in policy discussions, particularly the role of peatlands in carbon storage.

Table 1 National peatland strategies in Europe
Full size table

In 2011, the proposal for a Finnish national peatland strategy was published by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (FMAF 2011). In addition to sustainability, biodiversity, and conservation goals, the proposed national strategy involved guaranteeing the use of peatlands as agricultural land and for peat extraction. The proposal was used as a background paper for the Government Decision in Principle for the Sustainable and Responsible Use and Conservation of Mires and Peatlands (Finnish Government 2012). The Decision in Principle is a 19-page soft law document guiding Finnish peatland policy development. It suggests that peat should be extracted only from peatland areas that have been drained or otherwise altered from their natural state. A natural state scale comprising classes 0 to 5 is introduced to allow “re-landscaping” of the country’s mires and peatlands. In addition, the Decision in Principle strongly indicates a general need to retrospectively protect mires in their natural state. This protection is ensured by preparing a supplemental mire conservation program and by securing funding.

Ireland published its peatland strategy in 2015 and a management plan for its raised bog special area of conservation (SAC) network in 2017, which set out a roadmap for the long-term management, restoration, and conservation of protected raised bogs. The 10-year strategy consists of 25 principles and 32 action points targeting forestry practices, industrial peat extraction, climate change mitigation, and restoration, among others. It is also committed to an accelerated end to the use of peat for power generation. Progress reports on the strategy were published for 2017 and for 2018/2019, and in 2020, a midterm review was carried out. The review acknowledged how significantly the conversations around peatland use, environmental and biodiversity goals, climate action, and the commercial use of peat have changed over the past 5 years.

Scotland was the first of the UK legislatures to publish a national peatland strategy in 2015, with the overarching principle of protecting, managing, and restoring peatlands to maintain their natural functions, biodiversity, and benefits. Scotland has emerged as a leader in the effort to restore these habitats, which cover more than 20% of the country. The Scottish government has signaled its commitment to peatland restoration and to nature-based solutions to the climate and biodiversity crisis, publishing its budget for 2020/2021, in which 20 million £ is provided for peatland restoration and a commitment is made to invest 250 million £ over the next 10 years. Scotland will probably meet, if not exceed, its 2020 goal of restoring 50,000 ha of drained peatlands, mainly on government-owned nature reserves and forestry land. Additionally, it aims to push that total to 250,000 ha by 2030. Restoring peatlands to health is one of the key ways in which Scotland intends to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045.

In 2020, Wales published its first national peatland strategy, which outlined the framework and priorities for a 5-year peatland restoration program. The National Peatland Action Programme 2020–2025 (NPAP) aims to deliver between 600 and 800 ha of peatland restoration annually, and it lists six priority areas for action. Under the NPAP, all peatlands with seminatural vegetation are subject to favorable management or restoration (a minimum estimated area of 30,000 ha). The program aims to restore a minimum of 25% (approx. 5000 ha) of the most modified areas of peatland. It includes government funding with an annual capital investment of 1 million £ for the 2021–2025 period. The first 5 years of the NPAP are as much about building capacity within the sector as about peatland restoration delivery itself, with investment in skills, contractor capacity, and infrastructure that are crucial to the future delivery of the peatland program. The ability to increase delivery against carbon targets outlined in the net-zero carbon status by 2030 will be demonstrated as the NPAP progresses and as it reaches the formal review in 2024.

England published the England Peat Action Plan in 2021. The action plan delivers a new ambitious framework for peatland restoration. This peatland restoration intends to enable England’s peatlands not only to meet their net-zero contribution but also to contribute to meeting broader environmental goals. As part of the action plan, the government will develop a more up-to-date and detailed peatland map by 2024, immediately fund at least 35,000 ha of peatland restoration by 2025, develop recommendations for a more sustainable future for lowland agricultural peatlands, and consult on banning the sale of peat and peat-containing products in the horticulture sector. The long-term goals are to bring all peatlands into good condition, restore management or more sustainable management by 2040, and secure peatland carbon stores and ensure their contribution to meeting the net-zero 2050 target.

Northern Ireland also published its first national peatland strategy in 2021. The Northern Ireland Peatland Strategy 2021–2040 consultation document provides an outline of the policy drivers for the development of the strategy and the ecosystem services that seminatural peatlands in Northern Ireland provide, and it details the current factors affecting seminatural peatlands. It also sets out six strategic objectives and 41 actions to ensure that seminatural peatlands are conserved and restored to functioning ecosystems. The overarching aim of the strategy is to ensure that all seminatural peatlands in Northern Ireland are conserved or restored to healthy, functioning ecosystems by 2040.

The most recent national peatland strategies can be found in Austria and Germany. Austria published its Moorstrategie Österreich 2030 + in February 2022. It focuses on three main topics: the conservation of mires, the sustainable use of peatlands, and the reduction of peat use in horticulture. This strategy aims to develop a priority list of peatlands in need of restoration with the goal of rewetting slightly drained peatlands by 2030. The rewetting of heavily drained peatlands should be carried out based on priorities by 2040. The strategy further supports the creation of a carbon offset program to reward climate-smart peatland management and switching to peat substitute products in horticulture.

The German national peatland strategy was adopted in October 2022. The strategy was formulated on the basis of a discussion paper that has been made publicly available to involve the interested public and stakeholders. The strategy aims at the conservation of near-natural peatlands and the rewetting of unused peatlands but also focuses on the rewetting of agricultural and forested peatlands, including sustainable uses, such as paludiculture. It strives to reduce annual CO2 emissions from peatlands by 5 million tons by 2030. The extraction of peat is to be terminated by 2040, and the strategy plans to phase out the use of peat in horticulture in the period 2027–2031.

Key motives for the development of national peatland strategies

Based on the document analysis, we identified several key drivers that motivated countries to develop a national peatland strategy. The motivating factors include any pressure, compelling information, or key events that together persuaded governments to act (Biesbroek et al. 2010). These included international agreements, EU regulations, national climate and biodiversity policies, problem pressure due to the poor ecological status of peatlands, nongovernmental organization (NGO) advocacy, and private sector interests. In practice, it was often a combination of domestic concerns and international policy processes that triggered the development of a national peatland strategy. However, we see an argumentative shift between the early strategies (adopted in 2011–2015) and the more recent strategies. The main driver behind the early strategies was a desire to better balance the economic use and ecological protection of peatlands. The Irish strategy calls for seeking a balance between traditional and hidden benefits. Although the production value of drained peatland in the form of peat (often referred to as turf in Ireland) or as support for agriculture and forestry has long been understood, the role of healthy peatlands in the provision of clean water, climate regulation, and support for unique biodiversity and the associated touristic value has not been widely appreciated. A growing awareness and appreciation among policy-makers and the general public of other values of peatlands and the benefits that they provide were key drivers of national strategy, which centers on balancing the needs and interests of the entire community (DAHG 2015). The Finnish strategy calls this balancing the reconciliation between different uses of peatlands and the protection of the environment in a way that provides significant social, economic and ecological benefits (Finnish Government 2012). The need to balance the use of peatlands and environmental protection was the main line of argumentation in the early peatland strategies. However, this was about to change quickly in the following years. In 2018, the IUCN published its UK Peatland Strategy, in which it recognized “the catastrophic loss of carbon, biodiversity and harm to water systems that will occur unless urgent action is taken. This is reflective of the growing recognition of peatlands as a ‘nature-based solution’ to climate change both internationally and in the UK” (IUCN 2018, p. 3). In 2020, when the Irish strategy had its mid-term evaluation after 5 years, the reviewers noticed that the discussion had changed quite dramatically in the meantime: “the conversations around peatlands use, environmental and biodiversity goals, climate action, and the commercial use of peat have all changed significantly over the past five years” (DHLGH 2020, p. 2). This argumentative shift is reflected in the recent peatland strategies. The key drivers are now “the poor condition of our peatlands” (DAERA 2021a, p. 6) and, in particular, the Paris Climate Agreement. The adoption of a peatland strategy from this new viewpoint “is a direct response to the current condition of the peatland resource” (NRW 2020, p. 18), which aims to face “the twin challenges of climate change and significant biodiversity loss” (DAERA 2021a, p. 10). Accordingly, the Austrian peatland strategy aims to restore disturbed peatlands to all of their ecological functions, thus preserving these valuable habitats and their carbon and water storage functions for future generations (BMLRT 2022). Germany’s peatland strategy also aims to protect peatlands in order to secure their carbon storage function as “the only way to achieve the goal of climate neutrality by 2045” (BMU 2022a, p. 1).

Generating a sufficient database

The first step in developing a peatland strategy is a thorough investigation of the current state and management of peatlands to determine which issues must be addressed most urgently (BfN 2020). The available peatland strategies show the importance of this point. Almost all the strategies struggled with missing data, outdated data, or poor data quality. The Finnish strategy in 2012 stated that it was the first to take a holistic view of all of Finland’s mires and peatlands and that the estimated areas were subject to several uncertainties (Finnish Government 2012). Governments used a variety of different reports to form a solid base for their national peatland strategy, such as the bogland report by the Irish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), reports by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), and the IUCN report on peatlands in Great Britain. In subsequent years, reporting under Article 17 of the EU Habitats Directive has become an important source of information for most countries. However, the Habitats Directive focuses on designated sites, and much less information is often available on the condition of a significant proportion of the peatland resource lying outside the network of designated sites, as the Northern Ireland strategy points out (DAERA 2021a). Accordingly, most peatland strategies have been developed with the participation of scientists from different disciplines to provide the best knowledge and the most up-to-date data. In some countries, e.g., Germany, research projects have been set up with national and international experts to improve the knowledge and database for strategy formulation. Nevertheless, most peatland strategies recognize that further research across a range of disciplines, including the social sciences, is needed to improve the most cost-effective restoration and management practices to secure the full range of services from peatlands, as the Scottish strategy puts it (SNH 2015). The Global Peatland Assessment (UNEP 2022) has recently filled some of the data gaps for Europe.

Strengthening research funding to provide a sound basis for decision-making and implementation is a common goal of most peatland strategies. For instance, the Austrian strategy identifies a number of geographical and thematic research gaps that need to be addressed. The strategy then outlines several measures to close these gaps, particularly the complementary mapping of the extent of peatlands, including greenhouse gas emissions and carbon stocks (BMLRT 2022). As one of its three main goals, the Welsh strategy aims to produce and develop a map and baseline assessment of peatlands in Wales (NRW 2020). The German strategy aims to maintain an efficient research landscape on issues related to peatland protection, particularly concerning biodiversity, climate, and soil and water protection (BMU 2022b). The Scottish strategy lists some of the key issues for researchers to address, including the current state of Scottish peatlands, the extent of restorable peatland and further restoration efforts needed, the impacts on the net greenhouse gas fluxes of different forms of peatland restoration, and the overall contribution of this restoration to meeting Scotland’s carbon reduction targets (SNH 2015). As part of the strategy, a Peatland Research and Monitoring Group was established to ensure that the research activities were focused on delivering effective restoration and management.

Participation of stakeholders and outreach

The goal of stakeholder engagement in the formulation and implementation of national peatland strategies is to create a sense of participation and ownership, which in turn will help stakeholders understand key issues and priorities (Clarke and Rieley 2019). Participation, accompanied by communication and awareness raising, is therefore crucial. A successful strategy should ensure the participation of all relevant government agencies and involve all relevant stakeholders (land users, landowners, water management, nature conservation, climate mitigation, tourism, and the wider public) (BfN 2020). However, the extent to which stakeholders are actually involved in peatland strategy processes, in terms of timing, institutionalization, and breadth, varies across European countries. Regarding timing, participation is most common in the formulation phase and often ceases afterward, although a few countries also intend to set up stakeholder forums in the implementation phase. Several countries organize stakeholder participation as a multistage process. Here, the process starts with a prephase for orientation. For example, the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry invited various stakeholders to submit their views on the need for a national peatland program, its objectives, and possible means and measures to promote the diverse and sustainable use of peatlands. Based on the responses, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry subsequently established a working group to draft a proposal for a national strategy for peatlands (FMAF 2011). In England, the process began with an online consultation based on a short policy document and a survey asking five specific questions concerning key issues, accompanied by targeted stakeholder roundtables (DEFRA 2021). An initial period of public consultation regarding the scope of the strategy was also undertaken in Ireland (DAHG 2015). In Germany, the Federal Ministry for the Environment (BMU) prepared a discussion paper as a first step to involve the interested public and stakeholders (BMU 2020). Considering the responses received, a draft of the peatland protection strategy was then prepared (BMU 2021a). In all these countries, a second round of public consultation was held based on the draft strategy.

Other countries moved directly into the second phase. Doing so involved submitting a draft strategy for consultation and holding stakeholder workshops. In Austria, for example, workshops and information events were organized in several federal states to discuss draft versions of the strategy with a wide range of stakeholders. The participation process culminated in a peatland dialog forum to discuss the final draft. Scotland and Wales held public consultations based on their draft strategies to collect written responses from stakeholders (NRW 2020; SNH 2015). In Northern Ireland, a consultation process using Citizen Space was organized to collate responses from various stakeholders (DAERA 2021a). The results of the consultation were analyzed and published in a summary document (DEARA 2021b). An advanced draft of the strategy was then submitted for an equality impact assessment consultation (DAERA 2022). Other countries, such as Germany, have also published summaries of stakeholder responses (BMU 2021b) and reports from their stakeholder workshops (Zebralog and IfLS 2021).

Countries have used a variety of tools to maintain stakeholder engagement during the implementation of these strategies. Most governments rely on information tools and awareness-raising activities. The Austrian strategy proposes promoting awareness-raising through consensus-based exchanges with all stakeholders and developing a joint communication strategy (BMLRT 2022). The German strategy notes that there is already a wide range of media offerings and activities that can be used, but it suggests that public outreach should be improved (BMU 2022b). The Irish strategy aims to promote peatland awareness and educational materials through a variety of media and to use peatlands as a teaching tool to convey aspects of the school curriculum (DAHG 2015). The Welsh program goes a step further and aims to develop a communication toolkit to promote public and cross-sector understanding of the benefits of peatlands. Local peatland action groups are also considered important tools for raising public awareness (NRW 2020). Only two strategies plan to establish an institutionalized stakeholder forum. The England Peat Action Plan proposes holding biannual stakeholder strategy meetings, and the Northern Ireland strategy proposes developing a knowledge exchange network to share best practices among peatland stakeholders and convene a stakeholder forum with representative membership to advise the department (DAERA 2022). It also proposes developing a long-term peatland communications campaign in partnership with other stakeholders to raise awareness of peatlands and their role in providing ecosystem services.

Addressing cross-sectoral policy coordination and integration

In terms of and signaling integrated approaches, almost all peatland strategies refer to international agreements, conventions and strategies, and/or European directives and strategies as well as national strategies and regulations relevant for the implementation of peatland strategies. For example, the Austrian peatland strategy explicitly refers to the UN Agenda 2030 (SDGs), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), the EU Green Deal and Biodiversity Strategy, the Alpine Convention, and several EU directives, such as the Birds and Habitats Directives (Natura 2000), the Water Framework Directive and the EU Floods Directive, as well as to a list of national strategy documents (e.g., the Austrian Riparian Areas Strategy 2030 + , the Biodiversity Strategy 2030, the Forest Strategy 2020 + , the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, the National CAP Strategy 2023–2027, and the Austrian Climate and Energy Strategy 2030). The German peatland strategy also points to the relevance of numerous international and national strategies and programs as well as to EU directives and regulations. All the other national peatland strategies analyzed in this paper tend to focus on references to relevant national strategies and regulations, some of which are closely related to EU documents and address policy areas such as nature conservation, agriculture and forestry policy, water protection and flood risk reduction, and climate and energy policy.

Accordingly, the national peatland strategies explicitly refer to policy sectors that are important for the effective implementation of the strategy and that should therefore be considered for mutual coordination. Common policy sectors identified for intersectoral coordination include agriculture, horticulture and forestry, peat production, biodiversity conservation, soil protection, climate policy, and water and flood risk management (Table 2). Put simply, we find two approaches. Some countries take a rather narrow approach to intersectoral coordination, focusing essentially on four policy sectors (agriculture, forestry, biodiversity conservation, and climate change), while other countries refer to a broader range of sectors.

Table 2 References to policy sectors for coordination in peatland strategies
Full size table

The strategies reviewed refer to the following approaches to cross-sectoral policy coordination and integration during strategy implementation. In the case of Austria, the “Peatland Strategy Working Group,” established to develop the national peatland strategy, will be continued for the implementation phase. The members of this working group represent the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management; representatives of each of the federal provinces; the National Ramsar Committee; the Austrian Environmental Agency; and a well-established national environmental NGO (ENGO). However, many decisions and processes that influence the implementation of the national peatland strategy take place at a higher level, e.g., in the fields of biodiversity conservation, climate protection, agriculture, forestry, water management, or regional planning. The “Peatland Action Plans” of the federal states, which are based on the national peatland strategy, are the bridge from strategy to implementation. These action plans are the responsibility of the respective nature conservation departments in the federal states in cooperation with the federal ministries (Ministry of Agriculture, Regions and Tourism and Ministry for Climate Action, Environment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and Technology) and other concerned departments, institutions, and relevant actors.

Working groups were also set up to monitor the implementation of the Irish and Scottish strategies. The Peatlands Strategy Implementation Group (PSIG), a cross-departmental group that has already contributed to the Irish strategy, oversees the implementation process and is required to submit annual progress reports to the government. The aim is to ensure an integrated and coherent approach across government departments. In addition, the PSIG was required to lead the mid-cycle review of the strategy’s progress in 2020. Scotland’s National Peatland Plan also refers to a working group to support effective implementation, the National Peatland Group (NPG), supported by the National Peatland Research and Monitoring Group (NPRMG). The Welsh NPAP also emphasizes the need for cross-sectoral support for peatland restoration and calls for cross-sectoral collaboration. In this vein, the Welsh Peatland Action Group (WPAG) has supported stakeholders. In 2022, the WPAG was replaced by the new Strategic Peatland Delivery Partnership Group (NRW 2022).

In the cases of Northern Ireland, England, and Finland, peatland strategies or action plans also emphasize the cross-cutting nature of the respective objectives and, thus, the need for cross-sectoral coordination and policy alignment. The Northern Ireland strategy assigns responsibility to the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) for working with and supporting partners to ensure that future policies are consistent with the actions taken to implement the strategy. The England Peat Action Plan refers to the Tree Action Plan and other nature plans and strategies, as well as cross-sectoral financial instruments for peatland management and restoration, i.e., the sustainable agriculture incentive, local nature and landscape recovery schemes, and a flood and coastal resilience program.

Financial management strategies

Peatland strategies need to provide sufficient funding to implement measures and incentivize the expected change. The funding mechanisms should avoid high transaction costs and eliminate conflictual financial incentives. The long-term continuity of funding enables confidence building and sustainable success (BfN 2020). The analysis of peatland strategies shows that governments typically combine several public–private funding mechanisms to enable a partnership approach, as exemplified by the English strategy: government funding will be instrumental in advancing peatland conservation and restoration, “but unlocking private finance will be a key means of ensuring that our peatlands are managed sustainably or under restoration management” (DEFRA 2021, p. 13). While the government has a clear role as a key investor in many peatland strategies, private finance is often regarded as vital for meeting restoration ambitions.

EU funding plays an important role in several national peatland strategies. The most important funding programs are under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the second pillar of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (see Table 3). Equally important is the EU LIFE program as a funding mechanism for peatland restoration projects. Since its creation in 1992, 363 projects to conserve and restore peatland have been cofunded, targeting 13 habitat types, namely, raised bogs, mires, fens, and bog woodlands. Twenty-eight percent of these projects focus primarily on peatlands, while others include peatland restoration and associated habitats as part of a larger landscape approach (European Commission 2020).

Table 3 Funding sources for national peatland strategies in Europe
Full size table

The peatland strategies point to a broad spectrum of national funding schemes that emphasize the importance of government funding for strategy implementation. In addition to national grants and funds, there is a trend in the more recent strategies to provide “core funding” for the peatland. Such funding provides stability and continuity over a longer period, guarantees strategy implementation, and gives other funders and funding mechanisms confidence that their investment contributes to genuine national priorities within the context of a strategic coordinated program. The best example is the core-funded Welsh NPAP, which is funded by the government with an annual capital investment of 1 million £ for the 2021–2025 period. In addition, several peatland strategies try to mobilize private funding. Most often, this happens through privately funded restoration projects that bring together communities, businesses, and landowners. The England Peat Action Plan will set up two investment funds, including public seed money, to leverage private finance into new natural capital markets. Carbon finance can also provide a significant revenue stream from private investors by issuing carbon certificates that give value to the greenhouse gas emissions that are reduced or removed by a project. Currently, only a few voluntary standards are active, most prominently the Peatland Code, which provides a consistent approach for UK peatland restoration projects wishing to attract carbon finance.

Monitoring and reporting

Most peatland strategies are seen as the beginning of a process rather than an end in themselves. Accordingly, flexible mechanisms for monitoring, reporting, and revising peatland strategies are required to evaluate measures and communicate progress and policy effectiveness. Monitoring and progress reports are provided for almost all of the strategies or action plans that we examined. The responsible and supporting organizations differ between the states based on the respective national institutional structure and actors.

The German strategy defines a 5-year cycle for publishing progress reports on the status of implementation. The federal departments have to support the reporting and recording of the respective progress of implementation in their areas of responsibility. The national strategy is regularly reviewed concerning any need for adjustment. By 2025, at the latest, the process of rewetting peatlands should be evaluated for the first time. Based on the results thereof, a target path for the phasing-out of peatland drainage up to 2045 should be determined, including greenhouse gas reduction targets. Overall, the extent to which the general approach of the national peatland protection strategy has proven effective should also be examined.

In Finland, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, the Ministry of the Environment, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment are responsible for monitoring the implementation of the Council of State’s Decision in Principle within their own areas of responsibility. In addition, the implementation of the Decision was monitored along with the implementation of the government’s program so that any necessary follow-up measures could be assessed by the end of 2014. In 2015, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry published a progress report (FMAF 2015).

The Northern Ireland DAERA established senior-level, inter-, and cross-departmental governance structures to monitor the implementation of the peatland strategy. This Senior Group has to oversee the implementation of the peatland strategy and to report at least every 3 years on progress to the minister and Northern Ireland Executive, whose members are the first minister, deputy first minister, and eight departmental ministers. Furthermore, by 2023, the Senior Group must develop an implementation plan and a reporting framework, including implementation schedules.

The Irish strategy is subject to ongoing monitoring and progress reports (delivered in 2017 and 2018/19) on the achievement of the objectives. A mid-term review was published in 2021. The cross-departmental PSIG was commissioned to oversee the implementation and to provide progress reports to the government on an annual basis. It has to ensure a whole-government approach, and it complements the work of the Peatlands Council, which includes the following member organizations: the Irish Peatland Conservation Council, the Irish Farmers Association, the Irish Environmental Network, the Irish Rural Link, Bord na Móna, and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The PSIG may also recommend certain actions that it considers necessary to meet the objectives of the strategy. Furthermore, departments, agencies and semistate bodies regularly report on how and when strategy-based actions relevant to them are completed.

In Scotland, the NPG (chaired by the SNH) was established to promote, facilitate, and monitor effective implementation; publish a work program; support the development of a national network of peatland advisors; facilitate regional partnerships; and promote awareness among land managers. The NPG is supported by a Research and Monitoring Group, which ensures that research is conducted and that monitoring focuses on delivering effective restoration and management.

The Welsh government maintains overall responsibility for the NPAP and decides on annual budgets and any program amendments. A core project delivery team was established to facilitate the delivery, coordination, and monitoring of actions. Monitoring activity is undertaken by a range of organizations (NRW 2020). The NPAP also aims to assess baseline conditions for priority peatland bodies across Wales and to develop a national peatland monitoring scheme to capture information on restoration activities and the effectiveness of program actions. Annual progress reports are provided to the Capital Projects Oversight Board of Natural Resources Wales (NRW). The first two progress reports were published in 2021 and 2022 (NRW 2021, 2022). Finally, within one and a half years of the end of the 5-year program, the NRW will undertake a review, focusing on the delivery of the program’s priority themes. It will furthermore consider the experiences and draw recommendations as to whether a second NPAP should be commissioned.

England’s 25-Year Environment Plan (HM Government 2018; DEFRA 2019) and the Environmental Improvement Plan (HM Government 2023) provide a set of metrics through which progress can be measured, including greenhouse gas emissions; the quantity, quality and connectivity of habitats; and the health of soils. The Environmental Improvement Plan aims to consider whether further steps are needed to more effectively improve the natural environment, including peatland. In addition, Natural England, an executive non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and acting as the government’s advisor, will publish an implementation plan, which will provide a detailed trajectory to recovery by 2050.

The connection between the Austrian peatland strategy and its implementation is state-level “action plans” or “strategies.” The Peat Strategy Working Group continues to ensure transnational cooperation, including the exchange of knowledge and project results. The respective nature conservation departments of the federal states and the federal ministries (BML, BMK) are responsible for monitoring the implementation of these regional strategies in cooperation with other affected departments and relevant actors. They shall ensure that the national strategy is actually implemented up to 2030 and beyond. In addition, the action plans of the federal states provide for monitoring and reviewing the success of implemented measures.

Discussion and conclusion

We have analyzed the status and recent developments of national peatland strategies in Europe. At present, national peatland strategies have been adopted mainly in countries with large peatland areas. Each strategy was formulated in its specific national context in terms of cultural norms, the characteristics of the political system, the socioeconomic relevance of agricultural and forested peatlands, and environmental pressures, which resulted in some variability in the approaches. Nevertheless, the strategies show great similarity in terms of procedural aspects and the topics addressed. National peatland strategies across Europe recognize the cross-cutting effect of sustainable peatland management to achieve national commitments to EU regulations and international agreements. Typically, all relevant peatland types and management practices are considered. Often, the strategies use a mix of qualitative and quantitative objectives. Various instruments and funding schemes have been proposed to meet these goals and secure a long-term perspective. All the national strategies are accompanied by monitoring and reporting schemes to support the implementation of the proposed measures. Our analysis also pointed to the issue of timing. The frontrunner strategies formulated in the period 2011–2015 have a distinctively different approach compared to the recent strategies developed after 2018. The discussion on peatland strategies has shifted from balancing peatland use and environmental protection to considering peatlands a nature-based solution to climate change in particular.

By comparing the six cross-cutting themes, several common challenges for all peatland strategies in Europe can be identified when considering the three core functions of integrated strategies: (i) policy integration, (ii) capacity building, and (iii) awareness raising and communication (Nordbeck and Steurer 2016). The main purpose of peatland strategies is to coordinate multiple objectives and to orchestrate the systematic use of policy instruments so that different sectoral policies support rather than undermine each other in pursuit of these objectives. As policy documents, integrated strategies aim to construct a multisectoral policy domain through key principles, values, and policy objectives. Our study shows that policy integration is a major challenge for all peatland strategies, with few measures yet in place to ensure the effective coordination of peatland policies across governmental departments. Indeed, most strategies can be seen as the beginning of a policy integration process rather than its culmination. In some countries, interministerial working groups have been institutionalized as a central mechanism for policy coordination. However, several strategies still lack concrete proposals or processes to ensure that policy integration actually takes place. The goals of national peatland strategies might be contradicted by other policies. Nevertheless, many governments have included ambitious quantitative targets for peatland restoration in their strategies, not only to meet climate goals but also to contribute to meeting broader environmental goals.

In addition, integrated strategies represent capacity-building efforts. Based on insights gained through cyclical monitoring and reviewing, this function mainly aims to build a policy-relevant knowledge base and establish policy networks. Our comparative analysis shows that there are still many knowledge gaps and uncertainties related to peatlands. Strategy development has often been hampered by a lack of data and poor data quality. Several of the countries we reviewed have developed research projects and programs to address this challenge. However, the situation could be further improved with a carefully designed science–policy interaction mechanism that links peatland research to local, regional, and national policy needs. Nevertheless, capacity building in terms of policy networks has been quite successful. Several countries have established monitoring and advisory networks at the national, regional, or local level.

The third function of integrated strategies is awareness raising and communication. In addition to communicating the issue of sustainable peatland management internally within public administrations, peatland strategies could aim to popularize the concept externally across society by involving nonstate stakeholders. Most strategies have been successful at raising awareness among different peatland stakeholders and have succeeded in placing peatlands on the national policy agenda through a wide range of media offerings and activities. Stakeholder participation has also greatly contributed to raising awareness and discussion of peatland issues among stakeholders. To keep stakeholders informed, some strategies have established specific communication programs as part of strategy implementation.

The rapid development of national peatland strategies across Europe in recent years is a very valuable first step in guiding the sustainable management and restoration of peatlands at the national level. Moreover, recent developments at the European level, such as the better integration of peatlands in the CAP for the funding period 2023–2027, support these developments and specify the need for more research and knowledge exchange on peatland strategies. This may also lead to the development of an EU peatland strategy as a common framework. Based on our comparative analysis of eight national strategies, we conclude that the strategies are currently doing well in terms of raising awareness and building capacity. The main challenge for effective implementation is the issue of policy integration. However, other European countries that do not yet have a national peatland strategy can learn from the experiences of pioneers. In addition, knowledge sharing between European and other developed and developing countries—as demonstrated by the Global Peatland Assessment (UNEP 2022)—would provide opportunities to learn from each other’s experiences in a broader international context. This could also support the implementation of the ASEAN Peatland Management Strategy and national peatland strategies in Asian countries, such as Indonesia and the Philippines.