Community-centred approaches to peatland use and management: Insights from a rapid evidence synthesis review

Community-centred approaches to peatland use and management: Insights from a rapid evidence synthesis review | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Systematic Review Community-centred approaches to peatland use and management: Insights from a rapid evidence synthesis review Ana Isabel Morais Natálio, Hsu Mon Thein, Tinashe A. Tizifa, Chimela Ochege Uchenna, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 2 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Show more versions Abstract Lowland peatlands are ecosystems of global importance for regulating global climate, as biodiversity hotspots, and for supporting local livelihoods. Despite their significance, the social and economic benefits derived from lowland peatland use and management are poorly studied from the perspective of local and Indigenous communities. To address this, a Rapid Evidence Synthesis methodology was employed to evaluate peer-reviewed papers published between 2000 and 2025. Searches were conducted in two major databases (Scopus and Web of Science) using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria based on geography (tropical and/or temperate), populations (local and/or Indigenous communities), and outcomes (social, economic, ecological, and/or environmental benefits). The searches yielded 265 titles in Scopus and 211 in Web of Science. After merging and removing duplicates, a total of 378 articles remained, which were then screened for relevance. Studies focusing solely on wetlands without mention of peat, boreal, or highland environments were excluded, as well as non-peatland contexts like urban areas and urban farming. Thirty-one articles were selected for full-text review. Findings from this review highlight a diverse range of strategies and interventions that support more equitable socioeconomic outcomes in lowland peatland management. In Southeast Asia, interventions mainly focused on restoring degrading peatlands, whereas in South America, efforts concentrated on the sustainable use of natural resources. Regions such as Africa, the Arctic, Europe, North America, and Oceania were underrepresented in peer-reviewed studies concerning community involvement and perceptions of lowland peatland conservation and management. In summary, the literature underscores the urgent need to promote inclusive restoration and sustainable peatland management by integrating the knowledge of civil societies and local and Indigenous communities, securing community rights, and supporting diversified and adaptive livelihoods. Moreover, strengthening governance and equity, implementing locally tailored measures, and improving market access for peatland-managed products are essential for the long-term conservation of peatlands and livelihoods. Agricultural Economics & Policy Conservation Biology Agroecology Forestry Environmental Policy Agricultural Economics and Policy Social Policy Peat civic communities evidence synthesis sustainable management income culture Figures Figure 1 Introduction Peatlands are globally important ecosystems covering about 3–4% of the Earth’s land surface yet storing around one-third of the world’s soil carbon, making their conservation and management essential for climate mitigation (UNEP, 2019 and 2022 ). The Convention on Wetlands (COP8 VIII.17) defines peatlands as “landscapes with a peat deposit that may currently support a peat-forming vegetation, may not, or may lack vegetation entirely. The presence of peat or vegetation capable of forming peat is the key characteristic of peatlands.” Peatlands form from partially decomposed plant material under water-saturated conditions or cold temperatures, leading to fast accumulation and slow decomposition. The lack of oxygen in water-saturated, logged, or frozen peat soils slows decomposition, allowing dead plant material to amass over thousands of years, resulting in a carbon-rich substrate (UNEP, 2019 and 2022 ). Peatlands play a crucial role in regulating global climate, conserving biodiversity, and supporting local livelihoods (UNEP, 2019 , 2021 and 2024 ). However, peatlands are rapidly disappearing, with an estimated 12% already so degraded globally that they no longer form peat or act as a carbon sink. This level of degradation releases roughly 2,000 Mt CO₂e annually, accounting for around 4% of global human-made greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This significantly impacts the carbon budget needed to keep warming below 2°C, while also increasing fire, erosion, and flood risks (UNEP, 2019 , 2022 and 2024 ). Additionally, the absence of a universal, consistent global definition of peatlands has hampered effective mapping and management, emphasising the need to develop terminology that aligns with the Convention on Wetlands (COP8 VIII.17; UNEP, 2022 ). Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean are estimated to contain two-thirds of peatland species classified as vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered. As competition for land between conserving biodiversity and human needs intensifies, the urgency to restore and preserve these landscapes’ ecological, cultural, and socio-economic integrity grows (UNEP, 2019 , 2021 and 2024 ). Asia contains an estimated 33% of the world’s peatlands, about 13% of which are classified as degraded. Despite covering only one-third of global peatland area, the region accounts for roughly 53% of peatland-related GHG emissions, about 1,021 Mt CO₂e each year, most of which originate in Southeast Asia (UNEP, 2022 and 2024 ). Indonesia and Malaysia rank among the top five countries in the region with the largest mapped peatland areas, where degradation is largely driven by deforestation and the drainage of peat soils for palm oil, pulpwood, and food-crop plantations (UNEP, 2021 , 2022 and 2024 ). Latin America and the Caribbean account for 13% of the world's peatland area, with 3% of it in a degraded state (UNEP, 2022 and 2024 ). Brazil and Peru contain the largest mapped peatland areas in the region. Their 5% share of global GHG emissions from peatlands is estimated at 91 Mt CO₂e annually (UNEP, 2022 and 2024 ). Peatland deforestation and drainage are relatively low in South America's lowlands compared to Southeast Asia; about 65% and 70% of peatlands have been drained in Indonesia and Malaysia, respectively, while less than 5% have been drained in Peru or Brazil (UNEP, 2024 ). Nonetheless, despite the considerable extent of peatlands in South America, pressures from infrastructure projects and increasing demand for Mauritia flexuosa fruit threaten the integrity of these hydrologically pristine ecosystems, diminishing their role in climate change mitigation (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Schulz et al., 2019a b ; UNEP, 2021 ). Programmes integrating civic communities along with peatland protection, restoration and/or sustainable management have alluded to potentially boost livelihoods in the long-term (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga, et al., 2016 ; Carmenta et al., 2017 ; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Carmenta et al., 2021 ; UNEP, 2021 ; Alam et al., 2022 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ; Kamlun et al., 2024 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). This has involved restoring or protecting peatlands’ hydrological properties by raising or maintaining water tables and/or canal/ditch blocking, incentives or deterrents in fire prevention, by the continuous development of ecotourism, and paludiculture, agroforestry and agrosylvofishery systems with market access and demand prospects (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga, et al., 2016 ; Carmenta et al., 2017 ; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Carmenta et al., 2021 ; UNEP, 2021 ; Alam et al., 2022 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ; Kamlun et al., 2024 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). Lowland peatlands not only play a vital role in global climate regulation and biodiversity conservation but also mitigate flood risk by slowing water flow from uplands, providing floodplain storage, reducing fire risk, and thereby protecting community health and livelihoods (UNEP, 2021 , 2022 and 2024 ). However, the social and economic benefits of conserving, restoring, and sustainably managing peatlands are poorly understood from the perspective of local communities and are not always equitably distributed. To ensure these efforts support both environmental and community goals, it is essential to develop mechanisms and approaches that lead to fairer material outcomes, such as improved economic opportunities and access to resources (UNEP, 2021 ). A rapid evidence synthesis was undertaken to explore the question: “Which mechanisms and/or approaches in lowland peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management lead to more equitable material outcomes for local communities?”. To support this, a structured, transparent, and efficient Rapid Evidence Synthesis (RES) methodology, along with a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram, was utilised to gather and synthesise evidence. Methods Given the poorly understood perspective of how civic communities regard the social and economic benefits of lowland peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management, this study employed a systematic review approach, utilising a RES methodology and the modified PRISMA framework (Fig. 1 ) to address the following question: “Which mechanisms and/or approaches in lowland peatland conservation, restoration and sustainable management lead to more equitable material outcomes for local communities?” (Page et al., 2021 ; Booth et al., 2024 ). The literature search focused on tropical and temperate regions, targeting local and Indigenous communities, and considered studies that reported social, economic, ecological and/or environmental benefits. Conversely, studies set in wetlands without the reference to peat, boreal environments, highlands, non-peatland contexts such as urban areas, and urban farming were excluded. A comprehensive search of Scopus and Web of Science databases yielded 476 articles (265 and 211, respectively) from 2000 to 2025. After removing duplicates, 378 articles underwent title and abstract screening, followed by a full-text review of 31 articles that met the lowland peatland and community-centred approach criteria. Ultimately, 22 articles were selected for the study focusing on peatland-centric research. The search for data extraction and synthesis was guided by the inclusion and exclusion of specific words and terms (Table 1 ). There were eight inclusion criteria: geography, populations, outcomes, interventions, timescale, types of literature, language, and literature database. In general, the review focuses on peer-reviewed studies assessing the social, economic, ecological, and environmental benefits of different interventions (e.g, conservation, management, restoration) by local and Indigenous communities in tropical and temperate lowland peatlands. We then excluded studies in boreal environments and highlands, non-peatland contexts, cities, and urban farming. We restricted our search to peer-reviewed papers published since 2000, as this period was considered relevant to policy, available in two relevant search databases, Scopus and Web of Science, and written in English, as this was the common shared language among co-authors. The search on Scopus and Web of Science were conducted within the article titles, abstracts, and keywords, and was defined as follows: ("northern hemisphere" OR "southern hemisphere" OR "global north" OR "global south" OR "tropical" OR "temperate") AND ("community" OR "Indigenous " OR "local" OR "smallholder" OR "landowner" OR "rural") AND ("economic benefit" OR "social benefit" OR "ecological benefit" OR "environmental benefit" OR "knowledge" OR "economic" OR "livelihood" OR "income" OR "equity" OR "benefit") AND ("peat" OR "bog" OR "wetland" OR "mire" OR "lowland peat") AND ("restoration" OR "conservation" OR "sustainable management"). Then, both publication lists, including abstracts, were imported into Rayyan ( https://www.rayyan.ai/ ) for screening and selection, and data extraction. Table 1 Inclusion criteria, rationale, and exclusion criteria. Criteria Category (included) Rationale Exclusion criteria Geography temperate and tropical peatlands Lowland peat, bogs, peat extraction, agricultural land use boreal regions; highland peatlands Populations local communities focus on community dependence and involvement cities; urban farming Populations Indigenous communities focus on community dependence and involvement cities; urban farming Land use peat extraction relevant land use involving peat non-peatland contexts Land use agriculture relevant land use involving peat non-peatland contexts Land use land use change relevant land use involving peat non-peatland contexts Land use peat fire relevant land use involving peat non-peatland contexts Land use deforestation relevant land use involving peat non-peatland contexts Time period since 2000 to August 2024 relevant to policy August 2024 Source type peer-reviewed papers focus on policy relevance reports; grey literature Publication type scientific papers quality assurance example NGO reports: UNEP, IPCC, IUCN, Global Peatland Initiative Language English shared among team members non-English Literature databases Scopus convenience; accessibility inconvenience; inaccessible; time and labour constraints Literature databases Web of Science convenience; accessibility inconvenience; inaccessible; time and labour constraints Results 4.1. Thematic summary of evidence Of the 31 articles that passed full-text screening, only 22 fully met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were concentrated mainly in Southeast Asia (16 papers) and South America (six papers). Notably, research focusing on community involvement and perceptions of lowland peatland conservation and management in Africa, the Arctic, Europe, North America, and Oceania was largely absent from the literature. The 22 included papers describe a wide range of peatland management strategies aimed at achieving more equitable socio-economic outcomes for local communities. In Southeast Asia, interventions emphasised the restoration of degraded lowland peatlands, whereas in South America, the sustainable use of natural resources emerged as a more prominent focus. 4.2 Peatland Management and Community Involvement in Southeast Asia Evidence from studies across Southeast Asia shows that peatland management is deeply intertwined with the livelihoods, well-being, and social resilience of local communities. These communities' dependence on peatland resources, through agriculture, forestry, fisheries, non-timber forest products, and customary land use, shapes the uptake and sustainability of management interventions (Ramakrishna et al., 2005; Dinomika et al., 2024 ). Historically, tropical peatlands have supported diverse livelihood activities. Yet, large-scale drainage for oil palm and timber plantations, combined with population pressures and commercial overexploitation, has accelerated ecological degradation, increased fire incidence, and reduced the availability of natural resources essential for household security (Page and Hooijer, 2016 ; Sumarga et al., 2016 ). Poorly regulated conversion and hydrological disturbance have also heightened greenhouse gas emissions and exacerbated subsidence, contributing to climate and economic vulnerabilities (Page and Hooijer, 2016 ; Sumarga et al., 2016 ). These environmental changes, alongside limited income diversification and restricted access to alternative livelihood opportunities, constrain communities’ ability to adopt sustainable practices and amplify their exposure to environmental and economic shocks. The catastrophic 2015 peat fires across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore underscored the need to integrate ecological restoration with livelihood security, ultimately prompting major policy responses such as Indonesia’s Government Regulation No. 57/2016 and national-scale restoration commitments (Wulandari et al., 2023 ). Evidence consistently demonstrates that conventional drainage-based oil palm monoculture on peat is economically and ecologically unsustainable, with social costs far exceeding private benefits after 25–50 years due to irreversible subsidence and increasing flood risk (Sumarga et al., 2016 ). In contrast, mixed land-use strategies that combine oil palm on adjacent mineral soils, undrained Jelutung (Dyera polyphylla ) cultivation, and peat-forest conservation yield higher long-term profitability while maintaining carbon stocks and biodiversity (Sumarga et al., 2016 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ). Agroforestry systems, particularly those integrating native species and paludiculture, have emerged as the most promising community-based option, supporting income generation without drainage and reducing fire vulnerability through improved canopy cover and soil moisture retention (Jaya et al., 2024 ; Sakuntaladewi et al., 2022 ; Wulandari et al., 2023 ). Successful interventions share common characteristics: (i) zoning by peat depth and landscape position (intensive agriculture on mineral soils, agroforestry on shallow peat, and conservation/honey production on deep rewetted peat); (ii) use of low-cost adaptive technologies such as polybags, raised beds, and soil ameliorants that smallholders can adopt incrementally; (iii) integration of high-value perennial species (Jelutung, Tengkawang, stingless-bee honey) that become profitable over time; and (iv) strong institutional support through training, market linkages, and financial incentives (Applegate et al., 2022 ; Sakuntaladewi et al., 2022 ; Wulandari et al., 2023 ). Fire-free village programmes further illustrate that bundled interventions combining sanctions, health-awareness campaigns, and community monitoring are more effective than reward-only schemes, though equity concerns arise when sanctions disproportionately affect poorer households (Carmenta et al., 2021 ). 4.3 Peatland management and community livelihoods in South America Across South America, peatland ecosystems and resources are used for both subsistence and income generation providing key social, economic, and cultural benefits to local and Indigenous communities living within and around peatlands. Evidence from these studies highlight the importance of these ecosystems for livelihoods as well as their broader cultural significance. In Peru, research in the Pastaza-Marañón foreland basin explored human interactions with peatlands through qualitative studies in one Indigenous Urarina community and one riverine Mestizo community (Schulz et al., 2019a ). The key findings indicated that peatlands provide resources such as palm fruits and timber, while these are also culturally seen as spaces linked with mythical creatures. For instance, Urarina women use Mauritia flexuosa palm fiber to produce traditional textiles that are central to their culture and cosmology, making this species a potential cultural keystone (Schulz et al., 2019b ). Local management practices mainly involve restricting outsider access and some individual efforts like palm planting, though concerns about overuse persist, especially among the larger Mestizo community (Schulz et al., 2019a ). The two communities also hold distinct cultural perceptions of peatlands: Indigenous Urarina communities view them as sacred sites associated with guardian spirits and cultural practices, whereas the Mestizo community often perceives them as 'dead lakes' connected to irritable spirits, focusing more on resource depletion and economic integration. Conservation strategies such as limiting resource use or planting trees face challenges due to past development failures. Highlighting how contrasting cultural and ecological perspectives on peatlands shape management and conservation approaches (Schulz et al., 2019a ). Further evidence from the Imiria region of Ucayali in Peru, where peatlands overlap with Indigenous Shipibo-Conibo territories, used participatory methods with local communities and revealed how multiple overlapping pressures place both peatlands and Indigenous sovereignty at risk (Cadillo and Bennett, 2024). Threats include the rapid expansion of Mennonite colonies, illegal coca cultivation, and extractive activities, all of which drive deforestation, pollution, and land conflicts. Governance challenges include shifting legislation, weak land tenure enforcement, poorly aligned conservation policies, and insufficient peatland-specific strategies. The creation of the Imiria Regional Conservation Area aimed to protect ecosystems but has often undermined Indigenous livelihoods, generating mistrust and social fragmentation. These combined threats (environmental, social, and political) are increasing the vulnerability of peatlands to degradation and deforestation. Whereas gaps between Western scientific definitions of peatlands and Indigenous ecological knowledge have been identified. Shipibo communities recognise and value peatlands for cultural, subsistence, and spiritual purposes, though not in the carbon-storage terms emphasised by researchers and policymakers (Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, 2024 ). In central Brazil, swamp forests dominated by Mauritia flexuosa palms are heavily used by rural communities for fruit harvesting, agriculture, cattle, and pig farming. A study surveying 75 swamp forests found high levels of use across all socioeconomic groups, suggesting these ecosystems are under pressure from multiple activities that threaten regeneration, soil integrity, and water quality (Sampaio et al., 2012 ). Fruit harvesting is an important seasonal source of income, with households able to earn several times the monthly minimum wage during the harvest season. However, it is often secondary to agriculture and cattle farming. Agricultural expansion and cattle grazing are widespread, leading to soil compaction, vegetation clearance, and increased fire frequency. Pigs, although crucial for the food security of poorer households, further reduce palm fruit availability. Market access emerged as the main factor influencing fruit harvest intensity, with proximity to markets and participation in cooperatives enabling higher commercial returns. Property regimes (private vs collective use) did not affect harvest intensity, suggesting that informal management rules among users may help prevent resource depletion (Sampaio et al., 2012 ). Fruit harvesting of Mauritia flexuosa is also an activity that generates income to rural communities in Peru. Destructive commercial harvesting practices, especially felling palms to harvest fruit, have halved Mauritia flexuosa fruit production in peatlands in northern Peru, with the greatest depletion near urban markets such as Iquitos (Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ). Recent interventions, however, demonstrate pathways to reverse these losses. Communities that replaced felling with climbing-based fruit harvesting maintain healthier palm populations, with more female palms and higher yields than those felling palms. For instance, stands in climbing sites average 10% more female palms and, in long-established cases, exceed natural sex ratios of 50% females. This recovery translates into a potential 51% increase in fruit production and annual market values rising from US $ 41 million to over US $ 62 million regionally (Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ). While community-led associations with secure tenure show the effectiveness of sustainable management, weak regulation and monitoring remain challenges. In conclusion, suggestions that expanding climbing training, equipment access, and market development, while ensuring benefits remain with local communities, could transform Mauritia flexuosa fruit harvesting into a climate and livelihood friendly alternatives, protecting biodiversity and the carbon-rich peatlands critical to Peru’s climate commitments (Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ). Evidence from northern Peru further demonstrates that community-based management can successfully align ecological restoration with improved livelihoods. In the Pastaza-Marañón foreland basin, communities such as Parinari and Veinte de Enero replaced Mauritia flexuosa felling with climbing-based harvesting, supported by conservation and development projects that provided training, equipment, and legal guidance. These locally adapted governance systems emerged two decades ago: Parinari allocated family-managed plots under early management plans, while Veinte de Enero adopted collective management of palm swamps. Both models incorporated surveillance to prevent felling, protection of natural regeneration, and reforestation initiatives. These interventions restored healthier palm populations, boosted household incomes, with aguaje now contributing over 70% of family earnings, improved access to education and healthcare, and strengthened participation in decision-making, particularly among women, fostering stronger stewardship of peatlands. Discussion This rapid evidence synthesis demonstrates that although lowland peatlands provide critical ecological functions and underpin the livelihoods and cultural identities of millions of people, the social and economic dimensions of their management remain unevenly understood across global regions. Most peer-reviewed evidence originates from Southeast Asia and, to a lesser extent, South America, with marked gaps in Africa, Oceania, and the northern latitudes. This geographic skew limits the generalisability of current knowledge and highlights an urgent need for more inclusive research efforts that capture the heterogeneity of lowland peatland dependent civic communities, governance systems, and ecological and environmental conditions. Across regions, the findings show that interventions are most successful when they integrate community priorities, reinforce local and Indigenous governance systems, and provide tangible livelihood benefits. Where ecological degradation and fire risk are particularly acute, the literature consistently emphasises that drainage-based monocultures are neither socially nor ecologically sustainable (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga, et al., 2016 ; Carmenta et al., 2017 ; Schulz el al., 2019a; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Carmenta et al., 2021 ; UNEP, 2021 ; Alam et al., 2022 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ; Kamlun et al., 2024 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). Instead, diversified land-use strategies such as paludiculture, mixed agroforestry, agrosylvofishery, rewetting, and fire-free management programmes offer pathways to long-term resilience. These interventions perform best when supported by market access, technical training, and governance arrangements that recognise customary tenure and incentivise collective stewardship (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga, et al., 2016 ; Carmenta et al., 2017 ; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Carmenta et al., 2021 ; UNEP, 2021 ; Alam et al., 2022 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ; Kamlun et al., 2024 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). Evidence from South America underscores the importance of cultural values, identity, and Indigenous ecological knowledge in shaping peatland management (Schulz et al., 2019a ; Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, 2024 ). Mauritia flexuosa , in particular, emerges as a social-ecological keystone species across multiple studies. The transition from destructive fruit-felling to climbing-based harvesting illustrates how community-led innovations can simultaneously restore ecosystem function, increase income, and strengthen social cohesion (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Schulz et al., 2019a ; Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, 2024 ). However, these successes occur within broader contexts of land conflict, weak enforcement, insufficient recognition of Indigenous rights, and policy frameworks that prioritise carbon and biodiversity outcomes over cultural and livelihood concerns. These mismatches between Western scientific framings and Indigenous worldviews highlight the need for more pluralistic, co-produced approaches to peatland governance (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Schulz et al., 2019a ; Hidalgo Pizango et al., 2022 ; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, 2024 ). Across regions, secure land and resource rights emerge as a foundational determinant of equitable outcomes. Weak or contested tenure not only undermines conservation effectiveness but also amplifies social inequities by enabling land grabbing, external exploitation, and exclusion from decision-making processes. Conversely, where rights are formalised, communities demonstrate strong capacity to manage peatlands sustainably, adapt local rules, and develop market-oriented livelihood strategies that align with ecological restoration (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga, et al., 2016 ; Carmenta et al., 2017 ; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Carmenta et al., 2021 ; UNEP, 2021 ; Alam et al., 2022 ; Applegate et al., 2022 ; Kamlun et al., 2024 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). At the intervention level, no single strategy alone ensures equitable or sustainable outcomes. Instead, the evidence points to the effectiveness of bundles of interventions combining ecological restoration (e.g. rewetting), livelihood diversification (e.g. agroforestry, non-timber forest products), institutional support (e.g. tenure security, community committees), and market development (e.g. cooperatives, value-chain improvements) (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga et al., 2016 ; Schulz et al., 2019a ; Schulz et al., 2019b ; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Sakuntaladewi et al., 2022 ; Suwito et al., 2022; Wulandari et al., 2023 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). These multifaceted approaches recognise that peatland degradation is a socio-ecological problem embedded in governance, cultural norms, and economic structures. They also align with broader calls for landscape-level strategies capable of reconciling conservation, climate mitigation, and community well-being (Sampaio et al., 2012 ; Sumarga et al., 2016 ; Schulz et al., 2019a ; Schulz et al., 2019b ; Budiman et al., 2020 ; Sakuntaladewi et al., 2022 ; Suwito et al., 2022; Wulandari et al., 2023 ; Yunus et al., 2024 ). Nevertheless, this synthesis also reveals important limitations. The majority of studies use qualitative or case-study methods with limited long-term monitoring, constraining the ability to assess sustained ecological and socio-economic impacts. Many studies focus on promising pilot projects rather than scaled, policy-backed programmes, thereby providing insights into feasibility but not necessarily into long-term sustainability or national-level integration. Additionally, the lack of consistent peatland definitions and mapping in several regions continues to impede both research comparability and policy uptake. Overall, the evidence underscores that equitable lowland peatland management is achievable, but only when ecological objectives are coupled with governance reforms, rights recognition, and livelihood-focused strategies tailored to local contexts. Conclusion Lowland peatlands hold extraordinary ecological, cultural, and economic value, yet remain highly vulnerable to degradation driven by drainage-based agriculture, weak governance, and competing land-use pressures. This rapid evidence synthesis shows that effective and equitable peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management hinge on the meaningful integration of local and Indigenous knowledge, secure land rights, and the development of diversified livelihood options that do not depend on peatland drainage. The literature from Southeast Asia demonstrates that community-centred restoration and paludiculture-based systems can reduce fire risk, enhance carbon storage, and support long-term income generation. In South America, community governance of Mauritia flexuosa and other non-timber forest products illustrates how culturally grounded management strategies can recover ecological integrity while strengthening livelihoods and social cohesion. Across contexts, community-led approaches when supported by strong institutions, market access, and rights-based frameworks consistently outperform top-down or extractive land-use models. However, substantial regional knowledge gaps persist, particularly in Africa, Oceania, and northern hemisphere lowland peatland regions. Addressing these gaps is essential for building robust, globally relevant evidence that reflects the full diversity of peatland socio-ecological systems. Future research should prioritise longitudinal studies, participatory and co-produced methodologies, and cross-scale governance analyses capable of linking community-level innovations to national and international policy frameworks. To meet global climate, biodiversity, and sustainable development goals, peatland policies must move beyond carbon-centric approaches and embrace holistic strategies that place communities at the centre. Strengthening governance, securing rights, promoting community-driven restoration and conservation, and supporting markets for peatland-friendly products are essential steps toward ensuring that peatland conservation delivers equitable, long-lasting benefits for both people and ecosystems. Declarations Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the organisers of the Evidence Synthesis Training Programme. By being involved in this programme, it permitted the write-up and publishing of this preprint along with its respective policy brief. The Evidence Synthesis Training Programme has been delivered by the Institute for Methods Innovation, SRUC and University of St Andrews on behalf of the UNEP Global Peatlands Initiative and the British Academy. References Alam MJ, Rengasamy N, bin Dahalan MP, Halim SA, Nath TK (2022) Socio-economic and ecological outcomes of a community-based restoration of peatland swamp forests in Peninsular Malaysia: A 5Rs approach. Land Use Policy 122:106390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106390 Applegate G, Freeman B, Tular B, Sitadevi L, Jessup TC (2022) Application of agroforestry business models to tropical peatland restoration. Ambio 51(4):863–874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01595-x Booth A, Sommer I, Noyes J, Houghton C, Campbell F (2024) Rapid reviews methods series: guidance on rapid qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Evidence-Based Med 29(3):194–200. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112620 Budiman I, Bastoni, Sari EN, Hadi EE, Asmaliyah, Siahaan H, Januar R, Hapsari RD (2020) Progress of paludiculture projects in supporting peatland ecosystem restoration in Indonesia. Global Ecol Conserv 23:e01084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01084 Carmenta R, Zabala A, Daeli W, Phelps J (2017) Perceptions across scales of governance and the Indonesian peatland fires. Glob Environ Change 46:50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.001 Carmenta R, Zabala A, Trihadmojo B, Gaveau D, Salim MA, Phelps J (2021) Evaluating bundles of interventions to prevent peat-fires in Indonesia. Global Environ Change 67:102154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102154 Convention on Wetlands (2002) Guidelines for Global Action on Peatlands (GAP) (COP8 Resolution VIII.17, 2002), Wetlands: water, life, and culture – 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Valencia, pp. 1–10. https://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/guide/guide-peatlands-e.pdf Dinomika AHB, Deti, Graham L, Rawluk A (2024) Exploring communities’ values and uses of intact and degraded forest areas in Central Kalimantan. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science , 1315(1), p. 012044. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1315/1/012044 Elia A, Yulianti N (2022) The socioeconomic conditions of tropical Peat Farmers: A case study in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Pol J Environ Stud 31(5):4603–4610. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/150047 Felipe Cadillo FMM, Bennett A (2024) Navigating Socio-Political Threats to Amazonian Peatland Conservation: Insights from the Imiria Region. Peru Sustainability 16(16):6967. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166967 Jalilov SM, Lestari S, Winarno B, Yuwati TW, Sakuntaladewi N, Mendham D (2024) Why is tropical peatland conservation so challenging? Findings from a livelihood assessment in Sumatra, Indonesia. Mires Peat 30(3):20. https://doi.org/10.19189/MaP.2022.OMB.Sc.1985391 Jaya A, Elia A, Antang EU, Octora M, Ichriani GI, Dohong S, Sulistiyanto Y (2022) A study of agroforestry farming for tropical peatland conservation and rehabilitation in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Mires Peat 28:34 Jaya A, Dohong S, Page SE, Saptono M, Supriati L, Winerungan S, Sutriadi MT, Widiastuti L (2024) Agroforestry as an approach to rehabilitating degraded tropical peatland in Indonesia. J Degraded Min Lands Manage 11(2):5453–5474. https://doi.org/10.15243/jdmlm.2024.112.5453 14, Haddaway NR, Page MJ, Pritchard CC, McGuinness LA (2022) PRISMA2020 : An R package and shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and open synthesis. Campbell Systematic Reviews , 18 (2), p. e1230. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1230 15, Pizango H, Honorio Coronado CG, del Águila-Pasquel EN, Flores Llampazo J, de Jong G, Córdova Oroche J, Reyna Huaymacari CJ, Carver JM, del Castillo Torres SJ, Draper D, Phillips FC, Roucoux OL, de Bruin KH, Peña-Claros S, van der Zon M, Mitchell M, Lovett G, García J, Mendoza G, Gatica Saboya L, Pacaya I, Brañas J, Ramírez MM, Paredes E, Baker TR (2022) Sustainable palm fruit harvesting as a pathway to conserve Amazon peatland forests. Nat Sustain 5(6):479–487. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00858-z Kamlun KU, Bürger-Arndt R, Fatah FA (2024) Mapping the Demand for Ecosystem Services in Human-Dominated Topical Forest of Sabah, Malaysia. For Soc 8(1):218–248. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v8i1.31485 Medrilzam M, Dargusch P, Herbohn J, Smith C (2013) The socio-ecological drivers of forest degradation in part of the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forestry , 0, p. 11. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpt033 Octifanny Y, Norvyani DA, Pramulya M (2025) Actors, spatiotemporal changes, and (un)sustainable practices in community peatland management: A case study from West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Singap J Trop Geogr 46(1):44–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjtg.12579 Page SE, Hooijer A (2016) In the line of fire: the peatlands of Southeast Asia. Philosophical Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 371(1696):20150176. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0176 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 Ramakrishna SR (2005) Conservation and sustainable use of peat swamp forests by local communities in South East Asia. Suo , 56, pp. 27–38. https://cabidigitallibrary.org by 86.187.229.106 Sakuntaladewi N, Rachmanadi D, Mendham D, Yuwati TW, Winarno B, Premono BT, Lestari S, Ardhana A, Ramawati, Budiningsih K, Hidayat DC, Iqbal M (2022) Can We Simultaneously Restore Peatlands and Improve Livelihoods? Exploring Community Home Yard Innovations in Utilizing Degraded Peatland. Land 11(150):22. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11020150 Sampaio MB, Ticktin T, Seixas CS and dos, Santos FAM (2012) Effects of socioeconomic conditions on multiple uses of swamp forests in Central Brazil. Human Ecology , 40(6), pp. 821–831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-012-9519-y Schulz C, Martín Brañas M, Núñez Pérez C, del Aguila Villacorta M, Laurie N, Lawson IT, Roucoux KH (2019a) Uses, cultural significance, and management of peatlands in the Peruvian Amazon: Implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 235:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.005 Schulz C, Brañas MM, Pérez CN, Del Aguila Villacorta M, Laurie N, Lawson IT, Roucoux KH (2019b) Peatland and wetland ecosystems in Peruvian Amazonia. Ecol Soc 24(2):12. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10886-240212 Sumarga E, Hein L, Hooijer A, Vernimmen R (2016) Hydrological and economic effects of oil palm cultivation in Indonesian peatlands. Ecol Soc 21(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08490-210252 Suwito D, Poedjirahajoe E (2022) The Effects of Canal Blocking on Hydrological Restoration in Degraded Peat Swamp Forest Post-Forest Fires in Central Kalimantan. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 1018:012027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1018/1/012027 Thornton SA, Setiana E, Yoyo K, Harrison ME, Page SE, Upton C (2020) Towards biocultural approaches to peatland conservation: The case for fish and livelihoods in Indonesia. Environ Sci Policy 114:341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.08.018 Toumbourou TD, Grover S, Arifanti VB, Budiningsih K, Idrus NI, Lestari S, Rachmanadi D, Sakuntaladewi N, Salminah M, Treby S, Winarno B, Yuwati TW, Ramawati, Rawluk A (2024) Identifying a shared vision for peatland restoration: adapting the Delphi method to enhance collaboration. Mires Peat 30(2):24 Wulandari C, Iswandaru D, Novriyanti N (2023) Progress of paludiculture projects in supporting peatland ecosystem restoration in Indonesia). Agroforestry as Rehabilitation Strategy System in Orang Kayo Hitam Peat Swamp Park Forest, Jambi-Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science , 1145, p. 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1145/1/012006 Yunus M, Pagdee A, Baral H (2024) Economics of Peatland Ecosystem Services: A Study of Use and Non-Use Values and People Interplays in Sumatra. Indonesia Land 13(866):21. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13060866 Yuwati TW, Pratiwi D (2022) Paludiculture: Peatland utilization for food security. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 1107:012075. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1107/1/012075 UNEP (2019) Conservation and sustainable management of peatlands - Resolution adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly on 15 March 2019 (UNEP/EA.4/Res.16). http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25329/Brazzaville%20D%C3%A9claration%20FR%20an UNEP (2021) Economics of Peatlands Conservation, Restoration and Sustainable Management - A Policy Report for the Global Peatlands Initiative. Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess. p. 53. https://wedocs.unep.org/rest/api/core/bitstreams/a508a4dc-3539-4df4-919a-e8845632a996/content UNEP (2022) Global Peatlands Assessment - The State of the World’s Peatlands: Evidence for action toward the conservation, restoration, and sustainable management of peatlands. Main Report. Global Peatlands Initiative. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi. p. 425. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/41222 UNEP (2024) Global Peatland Hotspot Atlas: The State of the World’s Peatlands in Maps. Visualizing global threats and opportunities for peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi. p. 21. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/46635 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 2 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Show more versions Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8496541","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Systematic Review","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":569258812,"identity":"ea863cb9-ec35-4a16-ac22-fceaee6dde29","order_by":0,"name":"Ana Isabel Morais Natálio","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3175-9047","institution":"Harper Adams University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ana","middleName":"Isabel Morais","lastName":"Natálio","suffix":""},{"id":569258813,"identity":"0a104351-08b1-4e91-942c-4cb24618f5de","order_by":1,"name":"Hsu Mon Thein","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hsu","middleName":"Mon","lastName":"Thein","suffix":""},{"id":569258814,"identity":"b127aa3e-7f97-45a0-aed6-06917600689b","order_by":2,"name":"Tinashe A. Tizifa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tinashe","middleName":"A.","lastName":"Tizifa","suffix":""},{"id":569258815,"identity":"be018948-5b29-4b5d-b788-01d60fb9048a","order_by":3,"name":"Chimela Ochege Uchenna","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Chimela","middleName":"Ochege","lastName":"Uchenna","suffix":""},{"id":569258816,"identity":"f75113a1-572d-4e61-b07f-e7c07348b2c6","order_by":4,"name":"Eurídice N. Honorio Coronado","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eurídice","middleName":"N. Honorio","lastName":"Coronado","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-01 17:46:10","currentVersionCode":2,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":101260215,"identity":"853ed3db-dcfe-44bf-b31e-c840edfec320","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-27 20:15:54","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":86685,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram showing the literature screening and selection process (Adapted from \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?WChMRP\"\u003eHaddaway et al.. 2022\u003c/a\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?WChMRP\"\u003e)\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8496541/v2/306b0a250c57c42140a885bf.png"},{"id":101260216,"identity":"19bb2dd2-07df-40c0-837e-8bd15dbe9308","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-27 20:15:58","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":631862,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8496541/v2/7dd0efb4-cc4e-4ac9-8372-b8ce120f8e4f.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"Community-centred approaches to peatland use and management: Insights from a rapid evidence synthesis review","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003ePeatlands are globally important ecosystems covering about 3\u0026ndash;4% of the Earth\u0026rsquo;s land surface yet storing around one-third of the world\u0026rsquo;s soil carbon, making their conservation and management essential for climate mitigation (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The Convention on Wetlands (COP8 VIII.17) defines peatlands as \u0026ldquo;landscapes with a peat deposit that may currently support a peat-forming vegetation, may not, or may lack vegetation entirely. The presence of peat or vegetation capable of forming peat is the key characteristic of peatlands.\u0026rdquo; Peatlands form from partially decomposed plant material under water-saturated conditions or cold temperatures, leading to fast accumulation and slow decomposition. The lack of oxygen in water-saturated, logged, or frozen peat soils slows decomposition, allowing dead plant material to amass over thousands of years, resulting in a carbon-rich substrate (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeatlands play a crucial role in regulating global climate, conserving biodiversity, and supporting local livelihoods (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, peatlands are rapidly disappearing, with an estimated 12% already so degraded globally that they no longer form peat or act as a carbon sink. This level of degradation releases roughly 2,000 Mt CO₂e annually, accounting for around 4% of global human-made greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This significantly impacts the carbon budget needed to keep warming below 2\u0026deg;C, while also increasing fire, erosion, and flood risks (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the absence of a universal, consistent global definition of peatlands has hampered effective mapping and management, emphasising the need to develop terminology that aligns with the Convention on Wetlands (COP8 VIII.17; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfrica, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean are estimated to contain two-thirds of peatland species classified as vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered. As competition for land between conserving biodiversity and human needs intensifies, the urgency to restore and preserve these landscapes\u0026rsquo; ecological, cultural, and socio-economic integrity grows (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAsia contains an estimated 33% of the world\u0026rsquo;s peatlands, about 13% of which are classified as degraded. Despite covering only one-third of global peatland area, the region accounts for roughly 53% of peatland-related GHG emissions, about 1,021 Mt CO₂e each year, most of which originate in Southeast Asia (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Indonesia and Malaysia rank among the top five countries in the region with the largest mapped peatland areas, where degradation is largely driven by deforestation and the drainage of peat soils for palm oil, pulpwood, and food-crop plantations (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLatin America and the Caribbean account for 13% of the world's peatland area, with 3% of it in a degraded state (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Brazil and Peru contain the largest mapped peatland areas in the region. Their 5% share of global GHG emissions from peatlands is estimated at 91 Mt CO₂e annually (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Peatland deforestation and drainage are relatively low in South America's lowlands compared to Southeast Asia; about 65% and 70% of peatlands have been drained in Indonesia and Malaysia, respectively, while less than 5% have been drained in Peru or Brazil (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Nonetheless, despite the considerable extent of peatlands in South America, pressures from infrastructure projects and increasing demand for \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e fruit threaten the integrity of these hydrologically pristine ecosystems, diminishing their role in climate change mitigation (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003eb\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eProgrammes integrating civic communities along with peatland protection, restoration and/or sustainable management have alluded to potentially boost livelihoods in the long-term (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Alam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kamlun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This has involved restoring or protecting peatlands\u0026rsquo; hydrological properties by raising or maintaining water tables and/or canal/ditch blocking, incentives or deterrents in fire prevention, by the continuous development of ecotourism, and paludiculture, agroforestry and agrosylvofishery systems with market access and demand prospects (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Alam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kamlun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLowland peatlands not only play a vital role in global climate regulation and biodiversity conservation but also mitigate flood risk by slowing water flow from uplands, providing floodplain storage, reducing fire risk, and thereby protecting community health and livelihoods (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, the social and economic benefits of conserving, restoring, and sustainably managing peatlands are poorly understood from the perspective of local communities and are not always equitably distributed. To ensure these efforts support both environmental and community goals, it is essential to develop mechanisms and approaches that lead to fairer material outcomes, such as improved economic opportunities and access to resources (UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). A rapid evidence synthesis was undertaken to explore the question: \u0026ldquo;Which mechanisms and/or approaches in lowland peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management lead to more equitable material outcomes for local communities?\u0026rdquo;. To support this, a structured, transparent, and efficient Rapid Evidence Synthesis (RES) methodology, along with a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram, was utilised to gather and synthesise evidence.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eGiven the poorly understood perspective of how civic communities regard the social and economic benefits of lowland peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management, this study employed a systematic review approach, utilising a RES methodology and the modified PRISMA framework (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to address the following question: \u0026ldquo;Which mechanisms and/or approaches in lowland peatland conservation, restoration and sustainable management lead to more equitable material outcomes for local communities?\u0026rdquo; (Page et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Booth et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The literature search focused on tropical and temperate regions, targeting local and Indigenous communities, and considered studies that reported social, economic, ecological and/or environmental benefits. Conversely, studies set in wetlands without the reference to peat, boreal environments, highlands, non-peatland contexts such as urban areas, and urban farming were excluded. A comprehensive search of Scopus and Web of Science databases yielded 476 articles (265 and 211, respectively) from 2000 to 2025. After removing duplicates, 378 articles underwent title and abstract screening, followed by a full-text review of 31 articles that met the lowland peatland and community-centred approach criteria. Ultimately, 22 articles were selected for the study focusing on peatland-centric research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe search for data extraction and synthesis was guided by the inclusion and exclusion of specific words and terms (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). There were eight inclusion criteria: geography, populations, outcomes, interventions, timescale, types of literature, language, and literature database. In general, the review focuses on peer-reviewed studies assessing the social, economic, ecological, and environmental benefits of different interventions (e.g, conservation, management, restoration) by local and Indigenous communities in tropical and temperate lowland peatlands. We then excluded studies in boreal environments and highlands, non-peatland contexts, cities, and urban farming. We restricted our search to peer-reviewed papers published since 2000, as this period was considered relevant to policy, available in two relevant search databases, Scopus and Web of Science, and written in English, as this was the common shared language among co-authors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe search on \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eScopus\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eWeb of Science\u003c/span\u003e were conducted within the article titles, abstracts, and keywords, and was defined as follows: (\"northern hemisphere\" OR \"southern hemisphere\" OR \"global north\" OR \"global south\" OR \"tropical\" OR \"temperate\") AND (\"community\" OR \"Indigenous \" OR \"local\" OR \"smallholder\" OR \"landowner\" OR \"rural\") AND (\"economic benefit\" OR \"social benefit\" OR \"ecological benefit\" OR \"environmental benefit\" OR \"knowledge\" OR \"economic\" OR \"livelihood\" OR \"income\" OR \"equity\" OR \"benefit\") AND (\"peat\" OR \"bog\" OR \"wetland\" OR \"mire\" OR \"lowland peat\") AND (\"restoration\" OR \"conservation\" OR \"sustainable management\"). Then, both publication lists, including abstracts, were imported into Rayyan (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.rayyan.ai/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.rayyan.ai/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan type=\"Underline\" class=\"Underline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003e)\u003c/span\u003e for screening and selection, and data extraction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria, rationale, and exclusion criteria.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory (included)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRationale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExclusion criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeography\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003etemperate and tropical peatlands\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLowland peat, bogs, peat extraction, agricultural land use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eboreal regions; highland peatlands\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePopulations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003elocal communities\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efocus on community dependence and involvement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ecities; urban farming\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePopulations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndigenous communities\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efocus on community dependence and involvement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ecities; urban farming\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epeat extraction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant land use involving peat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-peatland contexts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eagriculture\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant land use involving peat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-peatland contexts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eland use change\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant land use involving peat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-peatland contexts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epeat fire\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant land use involving peat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-peatland contexts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLand use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edeforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant land use involving peat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-peatland contexts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime period\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003esince 2000 to August 2024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erelevant to policy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;2000; \u0026gt;August 2024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epeer-reviewed papers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efocus on policy relevance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ereports; grey literature\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublication type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003escientific papers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003equality assurance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eexample NGO reports: UNEP, IPCC, IUCN, Global Peatland Initiative\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnglish\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eshared among team members\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enon-English\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiterature databases\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScopus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003econvenience; accessibility\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003einconvenience; inaccessible; time and labour constraints\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiterature databases\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeb of Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003econvenience; accessibility\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003einconvenience; inaccessible; time and labour constraints\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1. Thematic summary of evidence\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOf the 31 articles that passed full-text screening, only 22 fully met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were concentrated mainly in Southeast Asia (16 papers) and South America (six papers). Notably, research focusing on community involvement and perceptions of lowland peatland conservation and management in Africa, the Arctic, Europe, North America, and Oceania was largely absent from the literature. The 22 included papers describe a wide range of peatland management strategies aimed at achieving more equitable socio-economic outcomes for local communities. In Southeast Asia, interventions emphasised the restoration of degraded lowland peatlands, whereas in South America, the sustainable use of natural resources emerged as a more prominent focus.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Peatland Management and Community Involvement in Southeast Asia\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from studies across Southeast Asia shows that peatland management is deeply intertwined with the livelihoods, well-being, and social resilience of local communities. These communities' dependence on peatland resources, through agriculture, forestry, fisheries, non-timber forest products, and customary land use, shapes the uptake and sustainability of management interventions (Ramakrishna et al., 2005; Dinomika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Historically, tropical peatlands have supported diverse livelihood activities. Yet, large-scale drainage for oil palm and timber plantations, combined with population pressures and commercial overexploitation, has accelerated ecological degradation, increased fire incidence, and reduced the availability of natural resources essential for household security (Page and Hooijer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Poorly regulated conversion and hydrological disturbance have also heightened greenhouse gas emissions and exacerbated subsidence, contributing to climate and economic vulnerabilities (Page and Hooijer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). These environmental changes, alongside limited income diversification and restricted access to alternative livelihood opportunities, constrain communities\u0026rsquo; ability to adopt sustainable practices and amplify their exposure to environmental and economic shocks. The catastrophic 2015 peat fires across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore underscored the need to integrate ecological restoration with livelihood security, ultimately prompting major policy responses such as Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s Government Regulation No. 57/2016 and national-scale restoration commitments (Wulandari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence consistently demonstrates that conventional drainage-based oil palm monoculture on peat is economically and ecologically unsustainable, with social costs far exceeding private benefits after 25\u0026ndash;50 years due to irreversible subsidence and increasing flood risk (Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, mixed land-use strategies that combine oil palm on adjacent mineral soils, undrained Jelutung \u003cem\u003e(Dyera polyphylla\u003c/em\u003e) cultivation, and peat-forest conservation yield higher long-term profitability while maintaining carbon stocks and biodiversity (Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Agroforestry systems, particularly those integrating native species and paludiculture, have emerged as the most promising community-based option, supporting income generation without drainage and reducing fire vulnerability through improved canopy cover and soil moisture retention (Jaya et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Sakuntaladewi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Wulandari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSuccessful interventions share common characteristics: (i) zoning by peat depth and landscape position (intensive agriculture on mineral soils, agroforestry on shallow peat, and conservation/honey production on deep rewetted peat); (ii) use of low-cost adaptive technologies such as polybags, raised beds, and soil ameliorants that smallholders can adopt incrementally; (iii) integration of high-value perennial species (Jelutung, Tengkawang, stingless-bee honey) that become profitable over time; and (iv) strong institutional support through training, market linkages, and financial incentives (Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sakuntaladewi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Wulandari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Fire-free village programmes further illustrate that bundled interventions combining sanctions, health-awareness campaigns, and community monitoring are more effective than reward-only schemes, though equity concerns arise when sanctions disproportionately affect poorer households (Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Peatland management and community livelihoods in South America\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross South America, peatland ecosystems and resources are used for both subsistence and income generation providing key social, economic, and cultural benefits to local and Indigenous communities living within and around peatlands. Evidence from these studies highlight the importance of these ecosystems for livelihoods as well as their broader cultural significance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Peru, research in the Pastaza-Mara\u0026ntilde;\u0026oacute;n foreland basin explored human interactions with peatlands through qualitative studies in one Indigenous Urarina community and one riverine Mestizo community (Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e). The key findings indicated that peatlands provide resources such as palm fruits and timber, while these are also culturally seen as spaces linked with mythical creatures. For instance, Urarina women use \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e palm fiber to produce traditional textiles that are central to their culture and cosmology, making this species a potential cultural keystone (Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019b\u003c/span\u003e). Local management practices mainly involve restricting outsider access and some individual efforts like palm planting, though concerns about overuse persist, especially among the larger Mestizo community (Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e). The two communities also hold distinct cultural perceptions of peatlands: Indigenous Urarina communities view them as sacred sites associated with guardian spirits and cultural practices, whereas the Mestizo community often perceives them as 'dead lakes' connected to irritable spirits, focusing more on resource depletion and economic integration. Conservation strategies such as limiting resource use or planting trees face challenges due to past development failures. Highlighting how contrasting cultural and ecological perspectives on peatlands shape management and conservation approaches (Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurther evidence from the Imiria region of Ucayali in Peru, where peatlands overlap with Indigenous Shipibo-Conibo territories, used participatory methods with local communities and revealed how multiple overlapping pressures place both peatlands and Indigenous sovereignty at risk (Cadillo and Bennett, 2024). Threats include the rapid expansion of Mennonite colonies, illegal coca cultivation, and extractive activities, all of which drive deforestation, pollution, and land conflicts. Governance challenges include shifting legislation, weak land tenure enforcement, poorly aligned conservation policies, and insufficient peatland-specific strategies. The creation of the Imiria Regional Conservation Area aimed to protect ecosystems but has often undermined Indigenous livelihoods, generating mistrust and social fragmentation. These combined threats (environmental, social, and political) are increasing the vulnerability of peatlands to degradation and deforestation. Whereas gaps between Western scientific definitions of peatlands and Indigenous ecological knowledge have been identified. Shipibo communities recognise and value peatlands for cultural, subsistence, and spiritual purposes, though not in the carbon-storage terms emphasised by researchers and policymakers (Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn central Brazil, swamp forests dominated by \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e palms are heavily used by rural communities for fruit harvesting, agriculture, cattle, and pig farming. A study surveying 75 swamp forests found high levels of use across all socioeconomic groups, suggesting these ecosystems are under pressure from multiple activities that threaten regeneration, soil integrity, and water quality (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Fruit harvesting is an important seasonal source of income, with households able to earn several times the monthly minimum wage during the harvest season. However, it is often secondary to agriculture and cattle farming. Agricultural expansion and cattle grazing are widespread, leading to soil compaction, vegetation clearance, and increased fire frequency. Pigs, although crucial for the food security of poorer households, further reduce palm fruit availability. Market access emerged as the main factor influencing fruit harvest intensity, with proximity to markets and participation in cooperatives enabling higher commercial returns. Property regimes (private \u003cem\u003evs\u003c/em\u003e collective use) did not affect harvest intensity, suggesting that informal management rules among users may help prevent resource depletion (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFruit harvesting of \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e is also an activity that generates income to rural communities in Peru. Destructive commercial harvesting practices, especially felling palms to harvest fruit, have halved \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e fruit production in peatlands in northern Peru, with the greatest depletion near urban markets such as Iquitos (Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Recent interventions, however, demonstrate pathways to reverse these losses. Communities that replaced felling with climbing-based fruit harvesting maintain healthier palm populations, with more female palms and higher yields than those felling palms. For instance, stands in climbing sites average 10% more female palms and, in long-established cases, exceed natural sex ratios of 50% females. This recovery translates into a potential 51% increase in fruit production and annual market values rising from US\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e41\u0026nbsp;million to over US\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e62\u0026nbsp;million regionally (Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). While community-led associations with secure tenure show the effectiveness of sustainable management, weak regulation and monitoring remain challenges. In conclusion, suggestions that expanding climbing training, equipment access, and market development, while ensuring benefits remain with local communities, could transform \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e fruit harvesting into a climate and livelihood friendly alternatives, protecting biodiversity and the carbon-rich peatlands critical to Peru\u0026rsquo;s climate commitments (Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from northern Peru further demonstrates that community-based management can successfully align ecological restoration with improved livelihoods. In the Pastaza-Mara\u0026ntilde;\u0026oacute;n foreland basin, communities such as Parinari and Veinte de Enero replaced \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e felling with climbing-based harvesting, supported by conservation and development projects that provided training, equipment, and legal guidance. These locally adapted governance systems emerged two decades ago: Parinari allocated family-managed plots under early management plans, while Veinte de Enero adopted collective management of palm swamps. Both models incorporated surveillance to prevent felling, protection of natural regeneration, and reforestation initiatives. These interventions restored healthier palm populations, boosted household incomes, with aguaje now contributing over 70% of family earnings, improved access to education and healthcare, and strengthened participation in decision-making, particularly among women, fostering stronger stewardship of peatlands.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis rapid evidence synthesis demonstrates that although lowland peatlands provide critical ecological functions and underpin the livelihoods and cultural identities of millions of people, the social and economic dimensions of their management remain unevenly understood across global regions. Most peer-reviewed evidence originates from Southeast Asia and, to a lesser extent, South America, with marked gaps in Africa, Oceania, and the northern latitudes. This geographic skew limits the generalisability of current knowledge and highlights an urgent need for more inclusive research efforts that capture the heterogeneity of lowland peatland dependent civic communities, governance systems, and ecological and environmental conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross regions, the findings show that interventions are most successful when they integrate community priorities, reinforce local and Indigenous governance systems, and provide tangible livelihood benefits. Where ecological degradation and fire risk are particularly acute, the literature consistently emphasises that drainage-based monocultures are neither socially nor ecologically sustainable (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz el al., 2019a; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Alam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kamlun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Instead, diversified land-use strategies such as paludiculture, mixed agroforestry, agrosylvofishery, rewetting, and fire-free management programmes offer pathways to long-term resilience. These interventions perform best when supported by market access, technical training, and governance arrangements that recognise customary tenure and incentivise collective stewardship (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Alam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kamlun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidence from South America underscores the importance of cultural values, identity, and Indigenous ecological knowledge in shaping peatland management (Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e; Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e, in particular, emerges as a social-ecological keystone species across multiple studies. The transition from destructive fruit-felling to climbing-based harvesting illustrates how community-led innovations can simultaneously restore ecosystem function, increase income, and strengthen social cohesion (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e; Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, these successes occur within broader contexts of land conflict, weak enforcement, insufficient recognition of Indigenous rights, and policy frameworks that prioritise carbon and biodiversity outcomes over cultural and livelihood concerns. These mismatches between Western scientific framings and Indigenous worldviews highlight the need for more pluralistic, co-produced approaches to peatland governance (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e; Hidalgo Pizango et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Felipe Cadillo and Bennett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross regions, secure land and resource rights emerge as a foundational determinant of equitable outcomes. Weak or contested tenure not only undermines conservation effectiveness but also amplifies social inequities by enabling land grabbing, external exploitation, and exclusion from decision-making processes. Conversely, where rights are formalised, communities demonstrate strong capacity to manage peatlands sustainably, adapt local rules, and develop market-oriented livelihood strategies that align with ecological restoration (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz el al., 2019; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Carmenta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; UNEP, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Alam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Applegate et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kamlun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the intervention level, no single strategy alone ensures equitable or sustainable outcomes. Instead, the evidence points to the effectiveness of bundles of interventions combining ecological restoration (e.g. rewetting), livelihood diversification (e.g. agroforestry, non-timber forest products), institutional support (e.g. tenure security, community committees), and market development (e.g. cooperatives, value-chain improvements) (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019b\u003c/span\u003e; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sakuntaladewi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Suwito et al., 2022; Wulandari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These multifaceted approaches recognise that peatland degradation is a socio-ecological problem embedded in governance, cultural norms, and economic structures. They also align with broader calls for landscape-level strategies capable of reconciling conservation, climate mitigation, and community well-being (Sampaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sumarga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019a\u003c/span\u003e; Schulz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019b\u003c/span\u003e; Budiman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sakuntaladewi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Suwito et al., 2022; Wulandari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Yunus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, this synthesis also reveals important limitations. The majority of studies use qualitative or case-study methods with limited long-term monitoring, constraining the ability to assess sustained ecological and socio-economic impacts. Many studies focus on promising pilot projects rather than scaled, policy-backed programmes, thereby providing insights into feasibility but not necessarily into long-term sustainability or national-level integration. Additionally, the lack of consistent peatland definitions and mapping in several regions continues to impede both research comparability and policy uptake. Overall, the evidence underscores that equitable lowland peatland management is achievable, but only when ecological objectives are coupled with governance reforms, rights recognition, and livelihood-focused strategies tailored to local contexts.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eLowland peatlands hold extraordinary ecological, cultural, and economic value, yet remain highly vulnerable to degradation driven by drainage-based agriculture, weak governance, and competing land-use pressures. This rapid evidence synthesis shows that effective and equitable peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management hinge on the meaningful integration of local and Indigenous knowledge, secure land rights, and the development of diversified livelihood options that do not depend on peatland drainage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe literature from Southeast Asia demonstrates that community-centred restoration and paludiculture-based systems can reduce fire risk, enhance carbon storage, and support long-term income generation. In South America, community governance of \u003cem\u003eMauritia flexuosa\u003c/em\u003e and other non-timber forest products illustrates how culturally grounded management strategies can recover ecological integrity while strengthening livelihoods and social cohesion. Across contexts, community-led approaches when supported by strong institutions, market access, and rights-based frameworks consistently outperform top-down or extractive land-use models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, substantial regional knowledge gaps persist, particularly in Africa, Oceania, and northern hemisphere lowland peatland regions. Addressing these gaps is essential for building robust, globally relevant evidence that reflects the full diversity of peatland socio-ecological systems. Future research should prioritise longitudinal studies, participatory and co-produced methodologies, and cross-scale governance analyses capable of linking community-level innovations to national and international policy frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo meet global climate, biodiversity, and sustainable development goals, peatland policies must move beyond carbon-centric approaches and embrace holistic strategies that place communities at the centre. Strengthening governance, securing rights, promoting community-driven restoration and conservation, and supporting markets for peatland-friendly products are essential steps toward ensuring that peatland conservation delivers equitable, long-lasting benefits for both people and ecosystems.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgments:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to thank the organisers of the Evidence Synthesis Training Programme. By being involved in this programme, it permitted the write-up and publishing of this preprint along with its respective policy brief. The Evidence Synthesis Training Programme has been delivered by the Institute for Methods Innovation, SRUC and University of St Andrews on behalf of the UNEP Global Peatlands Initiative and the British Academy.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlam MJ, Rengasamy N, bin Dahalan MP, Halim SA, Nath TK (2022) Socio-economic and ecological outcomes of a community-based restoration of peatland swamp forests in Peninsular Malaysia: A 5Rs approach. Land Use Policy 122:106390. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106390\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106390\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eApplegate G, Freeman B, Tular B, Sitadevi L, Jessup TC (2022) Application of agroforestry business models to tropical peatland restoration. Ambio 51(4):863\u0026ndash;874. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01595-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13280-021-01595-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBooth A, Sommer I, Noyes J, Houghton C, Campbell F (2024) Rapid reviews methods series: guidance on rapid qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Evidence-Based Med 29(3):194\u0026ndash;200. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112620\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112620\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBudiman I, Bastoni, Sari EN, Hadi EE, Asmaliyah, Siahaan H, Januar R, Hapsari RD (2020) Progress of paludiculture projects in supporting peatland ecosystem restoration in Indonesia. Global Ecol Conserv 23:e01084. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01084\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01084\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarmenta R, Zabala A, Daeli W, Phelps J (2017) Perceptions across scales of governance and the Indonesian peatland fires. Glob Environ Change 46:50\u0026ndash;59. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarmenta R, Zabala A, Trihadmojo B, Gaveau D, Salim MA, Phelps J (2021) Evaluating bundles of interventions to prevent peat-fires in Indonesia. Global Environ Change 67:102154. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102154\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102154\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConvention on Wetlands (2002) Guidelines for Global Action on Peatlands (GAP) (COP8 Resolution VIII.17, 2002), Wetlands: water, life, and culture \u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;8th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Valencia, pp. 1\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/guide/guide-peatlands-e.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/guide/guide-peatlands-e.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDinomika AHB, Deti, Graham L, Rawluk A (2024) Exploring communities\u0026rsquo; values and uses of intact and degraded forest areas in Central Kalimantan. \u003cem\u003eIOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science\u003c/em\u003e, 1315(1), p. 012044. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1315/1/012044\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1755-1315/1315/1/012044\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eElia A, Yulianti N (2022) The socioeconomic conditions of tropical Peat Farmers: A case study in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Pol J Environ Stud 31(5):4603\u0026ndash;4610. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/150047\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15244/pjoes/150047\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFelipe Cadillo FMM, Bennett A (2024) Navigating Socio-Political Threats to Amazonian Peatland Conservation: Insights from the Imiria Region. Peru Sustainability 16(16):6967. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su16166967\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su16166967\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJalilov SM, Lestari S, Winarno B, Yuwati TW, Sakuntaladewi N, Mendham D (2024) Why is tropical peatland conservation so challenging? Findings from a livelihood assessment in Sumatra, Indonesia. Mires Peat 30(3):20. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.19189/MaP.2022.OMB.Sc.1985391\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.19189/MaP.2022.OMB.Sc.1985391\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJaya A, Elia A, Antang EU, Octora M, Ichriani GI, Dohong S, Sulistiyanto Y (2022) A study of agroforestry farming for tropical peatland conservation and rehabilitation in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Mires Peat 28:34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJaya A, Dohong S, Page SE, Saptono M, Supriati L, Winerungan S, Sutriadi MT, Widiastuti L (2024) Agroforestry as an approach to rehabilitating degraded tropical peatland in Indonesia. J Degraded Min Lands Manage 11(2):5453\u0026ndash;5474. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15243/jdmlm.2024.112.5453\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15243/jdmlm.2024.112.5453\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e14, Haddaway NR, Page MJ, Pritchard CC, McGuinness LA (2022) \u003cem\u003ePRISMA2020\u003c/em\u003e: An R package and shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and open synthesis. \u003cem\u003eCampbell Systematic Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(2), p. e1230. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1230\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/cl2.1230\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e15, Pizango H, Honorio Coronado CG, del \u0026Aacute;guila-Pasquel EN, Flores Llampazo J, de Jong G, C\u0026oacute;rdova Oroche J, Reyna Huaymacari CJ, Carver JM, del Castillo Torres SJ, Draper D, Phillips FC, Roucoux OL, de Bruin KH, Pe\u0026ntilde;a-Claros S, van der Zon M, Mitchell M, Lovett G, Garc\u0026iacute;a J, Mendoza G, Gatica Saboya L, Pacaya I, Bra\u0026ntilde;as J, Ram\u0026iacute;rez MM, Paredes E, Baker TR (2022) Sustainable palm fruit harvesting as a pathway to conserve Amazon peatland forests. Nat Sustain 5(6):479\u0026ndash;487. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00858-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41893-022-00858-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKamlun KU, B\u0026uuml;rger-Arndt R, Fatah FA (2024) Mapping the Demand for Ecosystem Services in Human-Dominated Topical Forest of Sabah, Malaysia. For Soc 8(1):218\u0026ndash;248. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v8i1.31485\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.24259/fs.v8i1.31485\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMedrilzam M, Dargusch P, Herbohn J, Smith C (2013) The socio-ecological drivers of forest degradation in part of the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eForestry\u003c/em\u003e, 0, p. 11. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpt033\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/forestry/cpt033\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOctifanny Y, Norvyani DA, Pramulya M (2025) Actors, spatiotemporal changes, and (un)sustainable practices in community peatland management: A case study from West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Singap J Trop Geogr 46(1):44\u0026ndash;66. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/sjtg.12579\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/sjtg.12579\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePage SE, Hooijer A (2016) In the line of fire: the peatlands of Southeast Asia. Philosophical Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 371(1696):20150176. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0176\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1098/rstb.2015.0176\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePage MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hr\u0026oacute;bjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:71. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmj.n71\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRamakrishna SR (2005) Conservation and sustainable use of peat swamp forests by local communities in South East Asia. \u003cem\u003eSuo\u003c/em\u003e, 56, pp. 27\u0026ndash;38. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://cabidigitallibrary.org\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://cabidigitallibrary.org\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e by 86.187.229.106\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSakuntaladewi N, Rachmanadi D, Mendham D, Yuwati TW, Winarno B, Premono BT, Lestari S, Ardhana A, Ramawati, Budiningsih K, Hidayat DC, Iqbal M (2022) Can We Simultaneously Restore Peatlands and Improve Livelihoods? Exploring Community Home Yard Innovations in Utilizing Degraded Peatland. Land 11(150):22. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/land11020150\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/land11020150\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSampaio MB, Ticktin T, Seixas CS and dos, Santos FAM (2012) Effects of socioeconomic conditions on multiple uses of swamp forests in Central Brazil. \u003cem\u003eHuman Ecology\u003c/em\u003e, 40(6), pp. 821\u0026ndash;831. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-012-9519-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10745-012-9519-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchulz C, Mart\u0026iacute;n Bra\u0026ntilde;as M, N\u0026uacute;\u0026ntilde;ez P\u0026eacute;rez C, del Aguila Villacorta M, Laurie N, Lawson IT, Roucoux KH (2019a) Uses, cultural significance, and management of peatlands in the Peruvian Amazon: Implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 235:189\u0026ndash;198. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchulz C, Bra\u0026ntilde;as MM, P\u0026eacute;rez CN, Del Aguila Villacorta M, Laurie N, Lawson IT, Roucoux KH (2019b) Peatland and wetland ecosystems in Peruvian Amazonia. Ecol Soc 24(2):12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10886-240212\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5751/ES-10886-240212\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSumarga E, Hein L, Hooijer A, Vernimmen R (2016) Hydrological and economic effects of oil palm cultivation in Indonesian peatlands. Ecol Soc 21(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08490-210252\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5751/ES-08490-210252\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSuwito D, Poedjirahajoe E (2022) The Effects of Canal Blocking on Hydrological Restoration in Degraded Peat Swamp Forest Post-Forest Fires in Central Kalimantan. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 1018:012027. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1018/1/012027\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1755-1315/1018/1/012027\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThornton SA, Setiana E, Yoyo K, Harrison ME, Page SE, Upton C (2020) Towards biocultural approaches to peatland conservation: The case for fish and livelihoods in Indonesia. Environ Sci Policy 114:341\u0026ndash;351. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.08.018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.envsci.2020.08.018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eToumbourou TD, Grover S, Arifanti VB, Budiningsih K, Idrus NI, Lestari S, Rachmanadi D, Sakuntaladewi N, Salminah M, Treby S, Winarno B, Yuwati TW, Ramawati, Rawluk A (2024) Identifying a shared vision for peatland restoration: adapting the Delphi method to enhance collaboration. Mires Peat 30(2):24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWulandari C, Iswandaru D, Novriyanti N (2023) Progress of paludiculture projects in supporting peatland ecosystem restoration in Indonesia). Agroforestry as Rehabilitation Strategy System in Orang Kayo Hitam Peat Swamp Park Forest, Jambi-Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eIOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science\u003c/em\u003e, 1145, p. 012006. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1145/1/012006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1755-1315/1145/1/012006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYunus M, Pagdee A, Baral H (2024) Economics of Peatland Ecosystem Services: A Study of Use and Non-Use Values and People Interplays in Sumatra. Indonesia Land 13(866):21. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/land13060866\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/land13060866\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYuwati TW, Pratiwi D (2022) Paludiculture: Peatland utilization for food security. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 1107:012075. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1107/1/012075\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1755-1315/1107/1/012075\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNEP (2019) Conservation and sustainable management of peatlands - Resolution adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly on 15 March 2019 (UNEP/EA.4/Res.16). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25329/Brazzaville%20D%C3%A9claration%20FR%20an\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25329/Brazzaville%20D%C3%A9claration%20FR%20an\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNEP (2021) Economics of Peatlands Conservation, Restoration and Sustainable Management - A Policy Report for the Global Peatlands Initiative. Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess. p. 53. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://wedocs.unep.org/rest/api/core/bitstreams/a508a4dc-3539-4df4-919a-e8845632a996/content\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://wedocs.unep.org/rest/api/core/bitstreams/a508a4dc-3539-4df4-919a-e8845632a996/content\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNEP (2022) Global Peatlands Assessment - The State of the World\u0026rsquo;s Peatlands: Evidence for action toward the conservation, restoration, and sustainable management of peatlands. Main Report. Global Peatlands Initiative. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi. p. 425. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/41222\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.59117/20.500.11822/41222\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNEP (2024) Global Peatland Hotspot Atlas: The State of the World\u0026rsquo;s Peatlands in Maps. Visualizing global threats and opportunities for peatland conservation, restoration, and sustainable management. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi. p. 21. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/46635\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.59117/20.500.11822/46635\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"UNEP","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Peat, civic communities, evidence synthesis, sustainable management, income, culture","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eLowland peatlands are ecosystems of global importance for regulating global climate, as biodiversity hotspots, and for supporting local livelihoods. Despite their significance, the social and economic benefits derived from lowland peatland use and management are poorly studied from the perspective of local and Indigenous communities. To address this, a Rapid Evidence Synthesis methodology was employed to evaluate peer-reviewed papers published between 2000 and 2025. Searches were conducted in two major databases (Scopus and Web of Science) using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria based on geography (tropical and/or temperate), populations (local and/or Indigenous communities), and outcomes (social, economic, ecological, and/or environmental benefits). The searches yielded 265 titles in Scopus and 211 in Web of Science. After merging and removing duplicates, a total of 378 articles remained, which were then screened for relevance. Studies focusing solely on wetlands without mention of peat, boreal, or highland environments were excluded, as well as non-peatland contexts like urban areas and urban farming. Thirty-one articles were selected for full-text review. Findings from this review highlight a diverse range of strategies and interventions that support more equitable socioeconomic outcomes in lowland peatland management. In Southeast Asia, interventions mainly focused on restoring degrading peatlands, whereas in South America, efforts concentrated on the sustainable use of natural resources. Regions such as Africa, the Arctic, Europe, North America, and Oceania were underrepresented in peer-reviewed studies concerning community involvement and perceptions of lowland peatland conservation and management. In summary, the literature underscores the urgent need to promote inclusive restoration and sustainable peatland management by integrating the knowledge of civil societies and local and Indigenous communities, securing community rights, and supporting diversified and adaptive livelihoods. Moreover, strengthening governance and equity, implementing locally tailored measures, and improving market access for peatland-managed products are essential for the long-term conservation of peatlands and livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Community-centred approaches to peatland use and management: Insights from a rapid evidence synthesis review","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":2,"date":"2026-01-27 20:15:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v2","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}},{"code":1,"date":"2026-01-05 06:02:47","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8496541/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"257bfdda-093e-40a7-8c39-5b76bfad59b0","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 27th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":60568178,"name":"Agricultural Economics \u0026 Policy"},{"id":60568179,"name":"Conservation Biology"},{"id":60568180,"name":"Agroecology"},{"id":60568181,"name":"Forestry"},{"id":60568182,"name":"Environmental Policy"},{"id":60568183,"name":"Agricultural Economics and Policy"},{"id":60568184,"name":"Social Policy"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-05T06:02:47+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-01-27 20:15:49","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v2","identity":"rs-8496541","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8496541","identity":"rs-8496541","version":["v2"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}