Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Oulu, Finland.
University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland; Finnish Environment Institute (Syke), Joensuu, Finland.
Sci Total Environ. 2023 Jul 15;882:163583. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163583. Epub 2023 Apr 21.
After drainage for forestry and agriculture, peat extraction is one of the most important causes of peatland degradation. When peat extraction is ceased, multiple after-use options exist, including abandonment, restoration, and replacement (e.g., forestry and agricultural use). However, there is a lack of a global synthesis of after-use research. Through a systematic review of 356 peer-reviewed scientific articles, we address this research gap and examine (1) what after-use options have been studied, (2) what the studied and recognized impacts of the after-use options are, and (3) what one can learn in terms of best practices and research gaps. The research has concentrated on the impacts of restoration (N = 162), abandonment (N = 72), and replacement (N = 94), the latter of which consists of afforestation (N = 46), cultivation (N = 34) and creation of water bodies (N = 14). The studies on abandonment, restoration, and creation of water bodies have focused mostly on analyzing vegetation and greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes, while the studies assessing afforestation and cultivation sites mostly evaluate the provisioning ecosystem services. The studies show that active restoration measures speed-up vegetation recolonization on bare peat areas, reduce GHG emissions and decrease negative impacts on water systems. The most notable research gap is the lack of studies comparing the environmental and social impacts of the after-use options. Additionally, there is a lack of studies focusing on social impacts and downstream hydrology, as well as long-term monitoring of GHG fluxes. Based on the reviewed studies, a comparison of the impacts of the after-use options is not straightforward. We emphasize a need for comparative empirical research in the extracted sites with a broad socio-ecological and geographical context.
在林业和农业排水之后，泥炭开采是导致泥炭地退化的最重要原因之一。当停止泥炭开采时，存在多种后续利用选择，包括废弃、恢复和替代（例如，林业和农业用途）。然而，目前缺乏对后续利用研究的全球综合分析。通过对 356 篇同行评议科学文章的系统回顾，我们解决了这一研究差距，并探讨了（1）研究了哪些后续利用选择，（2）研究和认识到的后续利用选择的影响，以及（3）在最佳实践和研究差距方面可以学到什么。研究主要集中在恢复（N=162）、废弃（N=72）和替代（N=94）的影响上，后者包括造林（N=46）、耕作（N=34）和水体创造（N=14）。废弃、恢复和水体创造的研究主要集中在分析植被和温室气体（GHG）通量上，而评估造林和耕作地点的研究主要评估提供生态系统服务。研究表明，积极的恢复措施可以加速裸露泥炭地区的植被再殖民化，减少温室气体排放，并减少对水系统的负面影响。最显著的研究差距是缺乏对后续利用选择的环境和社会影响进行比较的研究。此外，缺乏关注社会影响和下游水文学以及温室气体通量的长期监测的研究。基于回顾的研究，对后续利用选择的影响进行比较并不简单。我们强调需要在具有广泛社会生态和地理背景的已开采地点进行比较性实证研究。
