• April 24, 2026

Greenhouse gas Baseline Scenario for Peatland Restoration

Restoring peatlands is widely recognized as one of the most effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support long‑term climate action. Yet demonstrating the real impact of restoration requires more than good intentions, it begins with a clear understanding of current emissions. This starting point, known as the baseline scenario, is essential for showing what restoration truly changes.

Within the EU Peat Pals for LIFE project, the team from Wageningen University & Research developed a robust baseline for peatlands undergoing restoration in the Netherlands (the Fochteloërveen raised bog) and Belgium (brook valley peats in Limburg) (Figure 1). These landscapes represent contrasting peatland conditions, shaped by drainage, land use, and water management. To capture this diversity accurately, baseline conditions were mapped using a combination of detailed vegetation surveys, satellite data, and water table depth measurements. Together, these elements form the eco‑hydrological foundation that drives peatland greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide and methane) were estimated using the Greenhouse Gas Emission Site Types (GEST) approach. GEST links vegetation and typical water levels to emission factors, making it possible to translate field observations into emission estimates and systematically scale them from individual sites to the regional level. To ensure confidence in these estimates, GEST‑derived emissions were validated against independent measurements from an eddy covariance tower in the Netherlands. This comparison confirmed that accurate mapping of vegetation and hydrology is critical, and that GEST captures ballpark overall emission patterns while still reflecting site‑specific variability.

The importance of this baseline becomes fully apparent once restoration begins. As water levels are raised and vegetation gradually shifts, follow‑up assessments can be directly compared with baseline conditions. Because the same GEST framework is applied for the current situation and after restoration, changes in emissions can be attributed to restoration actions rather than methodological differences. This consistency allows us to quantify emission reductions, track recovery trajectories, and evaluate climate benefits at a scale that matters for policy and land‑use planning.