ArticleEnvironmental management2026
Peat cutaway properties define after-use options and capacity for climate regulation.
Article in Environmental management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mitigating climate change and halting biodiversity loss require sustainable after-use strategies for peat extraction sites. This study evaluates the climate regulation potential of post-extraction land use using two peat cutaway sites in South Ostrobothnia, Finland, as case examples. The land use portfolio examined includes afforestation (conventional and short-rotation), peatland restoration, creation of open-water wetlands, conventional agriculture, reed canary grass cultivation and paludiculture. First, we mapped all suitable areas for each land use at the two case study sites, based on detailed spatial data on surface elevation, peat thickness and subsoil characteristics. Second, we calculated the climate warming impact of each land use based on published greenhouse gas flux and biomass estimates using REFUGE4, a climate impact model. Third, we assessed the climate impact of land-use scenarios aligned with five different objectives: climate regulation, ecological restoration, food production, timber production, and peat-replacing biomass production. This allowed us to explore how landowners' preferences or policy choices may influence climate outcomes. The results suggest that various climate-wise land use combinations are feasible after peat extraction, depending on site-specific conditions and landowner and policy preferences. We propose that tailoring land use to site characteristics and using strategic damming and ditching to create a multi-habitat landscape can provide both economic and ecological benefits. However, substantial knowledge gaps remain regarding greenhouse gas fluxes from post-extraction land uses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.