Paludiculture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Paludiculture is wet agriculture and forestry on peatlands.[1] Paludiculture combines the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from drained peatlands through rewetting with continued land use and biomass production under wet conditions.[2] "Paludi" comes from the Latin "palus" meaning "swamp, morass" and "paludiculture" as a concept was developed at Greifswald University.[3] Paludiculture is a sustainable alternative to drainage-based agriculture, intended to maintain carbon storage in peatlands. This differentiates paludiculture from agriculture like rice paddies, which involve draining, and therefore degrading wetlands.[4]
Impact of peatland drainage and rewetting
Peatlands store an enormous amount of carbon. Covering only 3% of the Earth's land surface, they store more than 450 gigatonnes of carbon – more than stored by forests (which cover 30% of the land surface).[5][6] Drained peatlands cause numerous negative environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emission, nutrient leaching, subsidence and loss of biodiversity. Although only 0.3% of all peatlands are drained, peatland drainage is estimated to be responsible for 6% of all human greenhouse gas emission.[7] By making soils waterlogged when re-wetting peatlands, decomposition of organic matter (~50% carbon) will almost cease, and hence carbon will no longer escape into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.[8][9] Peatland rewetting can significantly reduce environmental impacts caused by drainage by restoring hydrological buffering [10] and reducing the water table's sensitivity to atmospheric evaporative demand.[11] Because of the drainage of soils for agriculture in many areas, the peat soil depth and water quality has dropped significantly over the years. These problems are mitigated by re-wetting peatlands. As such, they can also make installations against rising sea levels (levees, pumps)[12] unnecessary. Wet bogs act as nitrogen sinks, whereas mineralisation and fertilisation from agriculture on drained bogs produces nitrogen run-off into nearby waters.[3]
Arguments for cultivating crops on wet peatlands
- Cultivating peatland products sustainably can incentivise the rewetting of drained peatlands, while maintaining similar land use in previously drained agricultural areas.[13]
- Paludiculture systems can contribute to landscape water management, storing water during floods and releasing it during droughts.[14]
- Raw materials can be grown on peatlands without competing with food production for land in other areas.[15]
- The growing of crops extracts phosphate from the land, which is important in wetlands; it also helps to extract other nutrients from water, making it suitable for post-water treatment purposes.[16]
- In many tropical countries, cultivating semi-wild native crops in peat swamp forests is a traditional livelihood which can be sustainable.[4]
- Paludicultures can obstruct nitrogen and phosphorus run-off from agriculture higher up in the river system and so protect lower waters.[17]
- Paludiculture areas can support wetland- or peatland-specialist species,[14] and act as habitat corridors and ecological buffer zones between traditional agriculture and intact peatlands[3]
- Paludiculture could improve the quality of landscapes, for example by adding structural diversity in the form of novel crops.[14]
Arguments against cultivating crops on wet peatlands
- Paludiculture areas may require water inputs to keep them wet, potentially competing for water with other human and natural land uses.[14]
- Conversion of drained peatland to paludiculture could displace the production of food crops to other areas.[14]
- Paludiculture areas may create water pollution, for example due to release of nutrients when drained peat is rewetted, or if agrochemcials (fertilizers, perticides etc.) are used.[14]
- Paludiculture areas could act as ecological traps for wildlife, for example if harvesting destroys bird nests, and do not necessarily support the same biological communities as near-natural peatlands.[14]
- Paludiculture could alter landscape quality and character, whether it takes place in areas traditionally used for dryland farming or in near-natural peatland areas that were previously not used productively.[14]
Debates around the sustainability of paludiculture
The application of the term "paludiculture" is debated as it is contingent on whether different peatland agricultural practices are considered sustainable. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, how sustainable a paludiculture practice is deemed to be depends on the greenhouse gas measured, the species of plant and the water table level of the peatland.[4] "Paludiculture" been used to refer to cultivating native and non-native crops on intact or re-wetted peatlands. In the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, it is defined as the productive land use of wet and rewetted peatlands that preserves the peat soil and thereby minimizes CO2 emissions and subsidence.[18] A 2020 review of tropical peatland paludiculture[4] from the National University of Singapore evaluated wet and re-wetted management pathways in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration and concluded that commercial paludiculture is only suited to re-wetted peatlands, where it is carbon negative or neutral, as opposed to intact peatlands, where it increases emissions.[4] After decades of re-wetting, can still contribute to global warming to a greater extent than intact peatlands.[19] Exceptions where paludiculture on intact peatlands may be sustainable are some traditions of cultivating native crops semi-wild in intact peat swamp forest, or gathering peatland products without active cultivation. The review also suggests that, to be sustainable, paludiculture should only use native vegetation to restore peatlands whilst producing biomass, as opposed to any wetland plants which have the possibility of surviving. This is because using non-native species may create negative peatland conditions for other native plants, and non-native plants tend to have a lower yield and lifespan in undrained or re-wetted peatlands than when grown in their native habitats or drained wetlands.[4]
Paludiculture and ecosystem services
Assessments of the sustainability of paludiculture should take into account ecosystem services besides carbon sequestration and how paludiculture can be integrated with traditional farming practices.[4] Peatlands can provide a number of other ecosystem services e.g. biodiversity conservation and water regulation. It is therefore important to protect this areas and restore degraded areas. To conserve, restore and improve management of peat lands is a cost efficient and relatively easy way to maintain ecosystem services. However, these the ecosystem services are not priced in a market and do not produce economic profit for the local communities. The drainage and cultivation, grazing, as well as peat mining on the other hand give the local communities short-term economic profits. It has therefore been argued that conservation and restoration, which has a significant and common value, needs to be subsidized by the state or the world at large.[7]
Paludiculture is not focused on nature conservation but on production, but paludiculture and conservation may complement each other in a number of ways. 1) Paludiculture can be the starting point and an intermediate stage in the process of restoring a drained peatland. 2) Paludiculture can lower the cost of the conservation project by e.g. decrease the costs of biomass removal and establishment costs. 3) Areas with paludiculture practice can provide buffer zones around the conserved peat areas. 4) Areas with paludiculture in between conservation areas can provide corridors facilitating species migration. 5) Paludiculture may increase the acceptance by the affected stakeholder to rewet once drained peatland. The support of the local communities in rewetting project are often crucial.[3]
The effect on greenhouse gas emissions of paludiculture is complex. On the one hand a higher water table will reduce the aerobic decomposition of peat and therefore the carbon dioxide emissions. But on the other hand the increased ground water table may increase anaerobic decomposition of organic matter or methanogenesis and therefore increase the emission of methane (CH4), a short-lived but more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. The emissions emanating from rewetted peatland with paludiculture will also be affected by the land-use in terms of type of use (agriculture, forestry, grazing etc.), but also in terms of used species and intensity. Traditional use of peatland has often less impact on the environment than industrial use has, but need not be sustainable in the long run and if used at a larger scale.[4]
Management
The most obvious way to maintain the ecosystem services that peatland provides is conservation of intact peatlands. This is even more true given the limited success of restoration projects especially in tropical peatlands. The conserved peatland still holds value for humans and hence provides a number of ecosystem services e.g. carbon storage, water storage and discharge. Conserving peatlands also avoids costly investments. Conservation is suggested to be a very cost-effective management practice for peatlands. The most obvious ecosystem services that the conservation management provides – i.e. carbon storage and water storage – are not easily priced on the market. Therefore, peatland conservation may need to be subsidised.[7]
To rewet peatland and thereby restore the water table level is the first step in the restoration. The intention is to recreate the hydrological function and processes of the peatland. This takes a longer time than may be expected. Studies have found that rewetted previously drained peatland had the hydrological functions – e.g. water storage and discharge capacity – somewhere between a drained and an intact peatland six years after the restoration.[4]
Undrained peatlands are recommended to be left for conservation and not used for paludiculture. Drained peatlands, on the other hand, can be rewetted and used for paludiculture often using traditional knowledge together with new science. However local communities, especially in the tropics, maintain their livelihood by draining and using the peatland in various ways e.g. agriculture, grazing, and peat mining.[7] Paludiculture can be a way to restore degraded and drained peatlands as well as maintaining an outcome for the local community.[4] For example, studies of Sphagnum cultivation on re-wetted peat bogs in Germany shows a significant decrease of greenhouse gas emission compared to a control with irrigated ditches.[20] The economic feasibility of Sphagnum cultivation on peat bogs are however still unclear.[21] The basis for paludiculture is however very different in the south, among other things because of higher population and economic pressure on peatland.[4]