Literature review

An expert-driven narrative literature review of governance options for peatland conservation, restoration and sustainable management in the context of climate change, was facilitated by UNEP’s Global Peatlands Initiative (GPI) as part of its Global Peatlands Assessment [1]. Authors were selected on the basis of their subject specialisms and to represent each of the main UN regions, whilst paying attention to gender balance and ensuring representation of early career researchers. Narrative reviews are expert-driven scholarly summaries that combine interpretation and critique [70,71]. Narrative reviews are better suited than systematic reviews for topics or questions where it is not possible to identify specific interventions or outcomes [71], as was the case for this work. Compared to systematic reviews, the expert-driven approach has the potential to miss important literature, but this risk was minimised by a rigorous and extensive review process as part of the production of the Global Peatlands Assessment. Key findings are summarised in Section 4 (for the full review, see [72]), and were used to supplement pre-workshop survey findings for discussion in workshops (described in the next section), in recognition that there may be relevant innovations in other countries internationally that could be discussed at the workshops, which may be relevant in each national context.

Three horizons

In the Three Horizon workshops, actors from different disciplines, sectors and backgrounds were convened in dialogue, and combined evidence from the past and anticipatory forms of knowledge to map out how systemic pattern shifts could be facilitated [32]. The Three Horizons method structures dialogue about change across three temporal frames. Horizon 1 focuses on the present system, highlighting both its strengths and the problems that need to be addressed. Horizon 2 captures transitional activities, including emerging innovations and contested practices that signal movement away from the current system. Horizon 3 represents longer-term aspirations for fundamentally different ways of working (Fig 3). Facilitated workshops used these three horizons as prompts to enable participants to articulate immediate challenges, identify near-term options, and consider transformative pathways over the longer term.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 3. Visualisation of the Three Horizons framework (adapted from [32]).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324399.g003

In close consultation with in-country collaborators, initial discussions sought to identify a shortlist of 15–20 relevant parties (in each country) with a view to recruiting 6–8 participants from each country to the project. To ensure participants were as representative and diverse as possible, they were selected on the basis of: i) relevance to the goals of the project (based on their level of interest, degree of influence and impact on them of project outcomes; [73]); ii) sectoral interests (public or private sector, academia, NGO, community); iii) balance of interests between environment, economic and social priorities; and iv) organisational level (individual, group or organisations). Prior, informed, written consent was obtained from all survey respondents and workshop participants. Guided by local partners, this was based on the principles that:

• the purpose of the research was clearly understood;
• participation was voluntary with a right to withdraw, without explanation, at any stage;
• findings would inform reports to the funders and for wider publication;
• any quotes used for illustration would not be attributed to individuals;
• the anonymity of participants would be respected; and
• workshop discussions would be recorded for analysis.

Those participating from DRC and Republic of Congo were formally educated stakeholders representing the interests of the organisations they worked for (not members of local communities), and where local communities were engaged in online workshops in Peru, this was managed by local co-authors from IIAP, who maintain long-standing working relationships with these communities.

A letter of introduction and introductory video setting out the background to the project and anticipated terms of engagement was agreed with in-country collaborators and translated from English into Spanish and French. An initial survey was sent with the letter of introduction and video on 22^nd November 2021, to identify challenges and opportunities for tropical peatlands in their region and more widely (the survey closed on 21^st January 2022). Prior permission for the survey was granted by SRUC’s Social Science Ethics Committee (ref. 21–42556052). The survey consisted of open questions structured around the here and now (Horizon 1), the desired future (Horizon 3) and potential for change (Horizon 2):

• Horizon 1
  • What shows peatlands are under strain?
  • What suggests tensions are increasing for peatlands, related to consequences for planetary health?
  • What current aspects can/must be maintained or amplified for future peatland conservation and management?
• Horizon 3
  • In 2031, what would indicate that peatlands are fulfilling the needs of society?
  • In 2031, what would indicate that peatlands are well aligned with the current and emergent needs for planetary health?
• Horizon 2
  • What aspects of the envisioned peatlands future (H3) are already present?
  • What existing initiatives could enable the transition to Horizon 3?
  • What initiatives are needed to enable the transition to Horizon 3?

A total of 10, 16 and 11 completed responses were received in Peru, Republic of Congo and Democratic Republic of Congo respectively, and translated into English, with translations sense-checked with in-country partners to ensure accuracy. Qualitative analysis was used to identify themes from the open-ended question data, assigned to horizons based on the section of the survey answers appeared in, as these were organised by horizon. These were visualised along each of the three horizons, as illustrated in Fig 4 (from the Republic of Congo workshop), for use in workshops, integrating insights from the literature review where relevant.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 4. Continued.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324399.g004

Participants were then invited to discuss content and placement of material in workshops. Social science ethical approval was granted by SRUC’s Social Science Ethics Committee for the online workshop in Peru (ref. 62–48327985) and verbal, informed consent was obtained from participants at the workshop. SRUC’s Social Science Ethics Committee also gave prior approval to the in-person workshops in Democratic Republic of Congo and Republic of Congo (ref. 62–48327985) and written, informed consent was obtained from participants in these workshops. Two half-day virtual workshops in Spanish were held in Peru on 27 and 28 June 2022 with 12 participants, facilitated from the UK with English translation. One full day, in-person workshop was held on 28 July 2022 in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo, with 17 participants, facilitated locally in French with live English translation via zoom to the UK. One full day, in-person workshop was held on 23 March 2023 in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, with 18 participants, facilitated locally in French without either English translation or zoom link to the UK. All notes from workshops were translated into English for analysis, and the translation and analysis were subsequently discussed/validated/sense-checked with in-country collaborators.

Workshops followed the five steps identified by [32] to put Three Horizons thinking into practice. Discussions began with the present situation in Horizon 1, envisioning an idealised future in Horizon 3 before back-casting to the transitional Horizon 2. This is similar to Theory of Change methods, in which back-casting is the principal method through which intermediate actions are identified to move from the present to the future [74]. As such, Step 1 began by clarifying concerns in the here and now, for example tensions and mismatches between current practice and the wider, evolving context which were identified in the interviews. Step 2 shifted the focus to the future, by refining the aspirations for change. Step 3 acknowledged the oft-blurred boundaries between the present and the future and identified so-called ‘pockets of the future’ already present at the “margins of the mainstream” [32, page 46]. Step 4 addressed the pathway to change, prompting consideration of all that will be involved in realising the transition from the here and now to a desired future. Step 5 captured those features of the present that may usefully be sustained to support the process of change. No further formal analysis was conducted on workshop materials, which were translated to English before being summarised under each Horizon for the results section which follows.

Although it was not possible to get a research permit to extend the Three Horizons research to Indonesia, business-to-business engagement was facilitated via project partner 3Keel with a range of Indonesian businesses affected by peatland subsidence due to drainage [75,76], to explore the feasibility of ideas emerging from research in other countries around landscape-scale ecosystem markets. Activity focussed on the Riau region, which due to an increasing demand for peatland commodities in recent years, and the associated commercial interests, has faced significant issues with land subsidence, as peatlands have been drained for timber production and plantations producing palm oil and rubber. Subsidence driven flood risk is likely to be exacerbated by climate change, which is responsible for both rising sea levels and increasing intensity of rainfall. The region is dominated by a handful of large international commodity traders who source from a combination of industrial plantations and small-scale smallholder farmers. 3Keel conducted interviews with four companies operating within palm oil and pulp, paper and packaging supply chains and purchasing from both large and small scale production units, as well as an industry initiative supporting landscape projects within Indonesia. Interviews focussed on four key questions:

1. What is the level of knowledge of risk from peatland degradation in Indonesia and Riau, Sumatra within companies operating in the region?
2. What actions are being taken to address this risk?
3. Have any actions been particularly effective to date? If not, what have been the barriers to effective action?
4. Is there a desire for an intervention that combines different sectors and industry actors to address risks from peatland degradation?

Review of policy options

A narrative review of existing policies identified a range of policy and governance instruments, and broader enabling conditions, that could halt further degradation of tropical peatlands, and facilitate their conservation, restoration and sustainable management. Table 1 summarises the regulatory, financial and market, and co-management policy and governance mechanisms identified in the review. A growing number of these are now being implemented by governments around the world, with evidence of new policies and strategies to protect, restore and sustainably manage peatlands in at least 23 countries, which together are responsible for over half of global peatland emissions [6]. A full review of the global policy and governance options made by [72] are summarised in [77].

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Policy and governance options for conserving, restoring and sustainably managing peatlands identified from the literature by [72].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324399.t001

The review process and broader global priorities [77] highlighted that whilst obvious, priority should be given to protecting peatlands from being converted, drained and/or modified [78]. For tropical peatlands, activities that continue to drain and degrade peatlands need to be phased out. Damaged peatlands need to be rewetted and restored to conserve carbon stores and enable the recovery of ecosystem services. Subsidies that incentivise practices that degrade or convert peatlands to other land uses (e.g., certain agricultural activities, forestry and mining) need to be identified and removed or changed, where possible redirecting savings to pay for and incentivise restoration of degraded sites.

Where relevant, evidence from the narrative review was integrated with pre-workshop survey findings and discussed by participants during in-country workshops. The international policy and governance options described in this section, usefully frame the insights from national workshops, which are presented in the next section. Both national and international insights are then discussed in the subsequent section, considering how recommendations may play out across different time and spatial scales, as well as across different social groups and cultures.

Empirical findings

Findings in this section are sourced from the in-country workshops and presented in the order in which the Horizons were discussed (1-3-2). The language is either directly quoted or paraphrased from the discussions (direct extracts from workshops are represented in quotation marks). Table 2 summarises the key findings from each workshop.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 2. Summary of findings from the three workshops.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324399.t002

Indonesia.

Indonesia’s peatlands are a vital ecosystem, estimated to hold between 55–57 billion metric tonnes of carbon [36]. Key findings from the business-to-business engagement process in Indonesia are outlined below:

• Although invites to interview were sent to companies across different industries operating in Indonesia, only one company outside of the palm sector responded. During discussions with palm oil companies, it also became apparent that despite multiple industries operating within and being reliant upon the same landscape, there were limited cross-sector initiatives working together to address peatland degradation and action is largely driven by the palm sector. Despite this, there were examples of effective collaborations within supply chains at peat dome level on integrated fire management. For example, the Siak Pelalawan Landscape Programme in Riau is driven by downstream private companies such as global food manufacturing companies like Unilever and PepsiCo, as well as upstream actors such as commodity traders, Cargill and Musim Mas. It was felt that this collaboration was largely a product of NGO attention in recent years being focussed specifically toward palm oil production in Indonesia.
• The actors we spoke to within the palm oil industry were primarily focussed on achieving zero-deforestation targets on peatlands. The urgency of meeting these targets was becoming increasingly pressing as target dates approached, and Deforestation Due Diligence legislation was being introduced within the European Union. These policies and commitments mean that palm planted on peatlands converted after 2008 are less likely to enter the supply chains of major traders, and incentives to convert peatland for palm production are therefore diminishing – if not reducing entirely. For companies operating on peat (via plantations or smallholder farms in their value chains), peat degradation will make the largest contribution to their land-based carbon emissions. As such, the narrow focus on net zero deforestation may detract from wider efforts to reduce peat-derived emissions. Given that these emissions are driven by the same factors as subsidence (i.e., by peatland drainage), emissions mitigation measures will also achieve peat subsidence mitigation.
• Whilst companies are focusing on achieving zero-deforestation in their own supply chains, the individuals we spoke to showed limited interest in or awareness of the material risks faced by peatland degradation in the landscapes in which they operate, such as stranded assets or the sinking of coastal peat soils and saltwater intrusion. There is a need to raise awareness not only of the temporal risks associated with peatland degradation and climate change (e.g., until the middle or the end of this century), but also of the spatial risks which will vary across plantation landscapes according to differences in depth of peat, drainage intensity, rate of subsidence, position in the landscape (top of peat dome versus edge of peat dome) and hence proximity to the drainage limit, but also including the spatial reach of their value chains through procuring fresh fruits from smallholders. Spatial risks will also vary with time as degradation and land subsidence proceed alongside the increasing impacts of a changing climate.

These results suggest considerable scope for landscape-scale initiatives involving both companies and communities and other actors with a stake in the management of peatland landscapes both now and over the coming decades. Whilst the primary engagement was with companies, these landscapes are also occupied and used by local communities, many of whom farm oil palm. In contrast, large-scale plantation businesses usually hold concessions on the shallow peat, as deep peat has been closed for plantation development since 1991 when all peat over 3 m was protected [80]. Given that smallholder expansion is driven by distance to roads and mills, better location of mills, design of transportation networks and government policies governing the locations and boundaries of concessions and migration settlements could slow, and even avoid, smallholder oil palm expansion into peat swamp forests. Improved enforcement of existing forestry laws could further conserve the remaining peat swamp forests. These findings present an opportunity for a landscape initiative that brings together different industries with a shared interest in peatlands in the Riau landscape, or indeed in other peat landscapes in Southeast Asia, with a focus on identifying and addressing material supply chain risks linked to peatland degradation. There would, however, be challenges in informing companies about these risks and generating interest in such a programme.

Cross-country comparison

Across all regions, the Three Horizons method identified a need for integrated, multi-level governance approaches that recognize the value(s) of peatlands and involve local communities and other relevant parties in decision-making processes. In the Republic of Congo, the lack of specific legal protections for peatlands beyond Ramsar designations highlighted a significant governance gap. The Horizon 3 vision for a more positive future, where peatlands are better understood and protected, helped identify a need for enhanced national and transboundary legislation, cross-border cooperation, and the integration of local and scientific knowledge in both policy and governance of forested peatlands. The pathway through Horizon 2 emphasised ongoing investments in data collection, sustainable management, and the importance of collaboration and coordination between the Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of Congo, as called for by others at the Congo Basin level, e.g., [81,82].

Similarly, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the challenges of extractive industries and the tension between economic development and peatland protection helped identify a need for comprehensive land use management plans, c.f. [82]. This is consistent with findings from [83] who demonstrated that logging concessions with an approved forest management plan have lower levels of deforestation in the Congo Basin. The Horizon 3 vision called for closer collaboration between the government and local communities, with an emphasis on recognizing the value of peatlands through national strategic planning. The pathway identified in Horizon 2 suggested the importance of land reform, community empowerment, and leveraging carbon markets for sustainable management. Although some commentators have suggested that there may be a conflict between REDD+ markets in the Congo Basin and community empowerment [84,85], others suggest that, managed appropriately, these markets may strengthen Congolese state legitimacy if coupled with land reform, enhancing community governance and capacity [86,87].

Many of these themes were echoed in Peru, where the distinction between Amazonian and Andean peatlands pointed to the need for tailored governance approaches that consider ecological, social, and economic differences between these regions. The envisioned future in Horizon 3 highlighted the importance of security of land tenure in effective governance, and multisectoral approaches that value the social, ecological, and cultural significance of peatlands. The transformational pathway through Horizon 2 focussed on more participatory approaches to peatland governance including educational approaches that capture different perspectives from within communities and facilitate intergenerational transmission of knowledge. There is a growing recognition of the need to foster epistemic justice in environmental governance, validating diverse knowledge systems and gaining valuable insights into environmental stewardship that are often overlooked by dominant Western epistemologies. For example, [88] and [89] argued for the recognition and integration of indigenous knowledge and voices into environmental governance as a way of addressing and redressing the historical marginalisation of non-Western forms of knowing. [90] further critiqued the extraction of Indigenous knowledge, challenging existing hierarchies that perpetuate environmental injustices and marginalise the epistemic contributions of local communities. Building on [91] call for a new “knowledge governance” framework, [90] advocated instead for Indigenous leadership in research, respecting the inherent sovereignty and rights of Indigenous peoples. For environmental governance to be just, equitable, and effective, it needs to be restructured around Indigenous voices and wisdom as autonomous and leading rather than ancillary and subordinate [92]. This shift is not only about integrating Indigenous knowledge into environmental governance but redefining knowledge governance itself to respect and protect Indigenous epistemologies and ways of being [93].

In all three countries where the Three Horizons method was applied, community empowerment and payments for ecosystem services emerged as key themes. For example, in DRC there was a focus on community engagement to shape and implement peatland science and policy, in the Republic of Congo there was an interest in engaging local communities in transboundary policy development and enforcement. In Peru discussions focussed around the potential for payment for ecosystem services schemes to fund local communities to manage peatlands more sustainably. This is consistent with scepticism reported by [43] about previous failed development interventions among peatland communities in the Loreto Region of the Peruvian Amazon, who were focussed more on pathways to economic empowerment, for example by developing markets for sustainable peatland products such as the M. flexuosa palm fruit (see also [47]).

Payment for ecosystem services was also a key theme emerging from interviews in Indonesia, although due to the focus of this work on businesses, there was a focus on corporate engagement at landscape scales to overcome free-rider effects and stimulate investment, rather than community engagement. There has been growing interest in community engagement in peatland restoration in recent years, with Indonesia’s “4R approach” to rewetting drained peat, revegetation of fragmented peatland, revitalization of local livelihoods [94,95] and reducing fire [96] being adapted to embed community engagement in each “R” whilst providing accountability via a fifth “R”, reporting and monitoring [97]. Community engagement in Indonesia has been driven in part by the need to tackle peat fires leading to transboundary pollution, which has required engagement with communities to modify traditional farming practices driving wildfire [98].

Lessons from the three horizons method

As a theory-based approach to evaluating transformational future policy and governance pathways (c.f. [99]), Three Horizons has the capacity to identify causal pathways between actions, recognising, valuing and integrating diverse knowledge systems. For example, the DRC workshop identified the need to empower and engage local communities to shape and implement peatland policies in Horizon 3, which led to the identification of a number of near-term policy actions in Horizon 2, including the development of a national strategic plan to give local communities a platform to define and protect their rights, with policy support for land tenure reform and subsidies for sustainable management funded in part via carbon markets, which communities could be supported to access collectively through the creation of community-run forest reserves (see section 4.2.2).

The specificity and credibility of these policy proposals were in large part due to the engagement of both policy actors and local community representatives in the workshop, but the Three Horizons method provided a mechanism for structuring discussion and integrating ideas in a causally coherent transformation pathway. The integration of evidence from literature alongside pre-workshop survey findings helped workshop participants build on existing evidence, for example social science evidence of the different types of carbon markets applicable to DRC peatlands (reviewed in section 4.1) and natural science evidence of the location of forested peatlands that could be protected by REDD+ schemes [37,46].

The application of the Three Horizons method to the governance of tropical peatlands has identified options for addressing not just the visible, but also the conceptual and existential risks posed to peatlands by climate change, like the loss of peatlands to wildfire and subsidence (e.g., [75]). This approach, as applied across diverse contexts in Peru, the Congo Basin, and Indonesia, underscores the necessity of transcending conventional risk management strategies to contemplate deeper, systemic transformations in peatland governance. The findings advocate for a shift in focus from merely reacting to immediate threats, to proactively shaping resilient, sustainable futures for both peatlands and the communities that depend on them. As such, the Three Horizons methods may be applied in a range of environmental policy planning and evaluation contexts, where those formulating policy wish to value and manage complexity, and integrate multiple forms of formal and informal knowledge. However, integrating Indigenous knowledge into peatland policy and management remains challenging, and there is a need to recognize epistemological diversity and redistribute power to non-Eurocentric forms of wisdom [100,101].

There were also a number of challenges of implementing the Three Horizons method simultaneously in multiple countries and languages, in some cases involving online and/or remote engagement. The extent to which the evidence from the literature that was discussed during workshops differed between countries, with some focussing more on new inputs from participants. For example, in Peru, workshops focussed more on insights from previous social science fieldwork by the research team. Workshops were also significantly delayed, first due to the COVID-19 pandemic which made it too risky for researchers to travel to the field and facilitate gatherings in the Congo Basin. Further delays were caused by challenges transferring research funding to RoC and DRC and the global energy crisis which caused regular power cuts, disrupting email communication. As a result, workshops were held in capital cities in RoC and DRC, which limited representation from outlying regions.