SMOKE ON WATER

Table 4. Mechanisms to support peatland conservation

Peatland examples • Staatsbosbeheer, The Netherlands • State Forestry Service, Malaysia

Description Public ownership of land, with areas managed by public bodies. Government regulation includes prohibited activities, licenses and permits, planning, implementation and monitoring requirements and delivery of conservation objectives. A payment to deliver agreed work. Can be from government, charitable body or other organization. Financial aid provided by the government for an activity that promotes policy.

Instrument Direct state control

• Law of the Republic Indonesia No. 32: Regarding Environmental Protection and Management – requires environmental permit for industrial activities and Environmental Impact Assessments to be carried out • UK Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) – protected by law to conserve wildlife • EU LIFE Programme • Government of Canada – National Wetland Conservation Fund

Legal regulations

Grant / Contract

• EU Common Agricultural Policy

Government subsidy

• Peatlands Park, Ireland

Visitor entrance fees e.g. national parks.

User fee or visitor permit

• Member of the Burns Bog Conservation Society, Canada

Sum of money given to deliver charitable purpose.

Voluntary donation

• Utility company – investment in peatland restoration to reduce the cost of drinking water treatment, the United Kingdom

Private company or individual providing payment usually in return for a benefit. Reduction or exemption from a tax normally liable in return for delivering a service.

Private investment

Tax incentive

• REDD+ mechanism • UK Peatland Code, German MoorFutures, Katingan peatland restoration project, etc.

Financial incentive for managing land in a certain way.

Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES)

Creating a market to finance peatland management

Public policies need to develop funding mechanisms to ensure the restoration and sustainable management of peatlands, which in turn will maintain their ecosystem services long into the future (Bain et al., 2011). There is also a need to explore new ways of tackling the core issue of funding large peatlands, especially in developing countries, given public expenditure constraints. Governments need to be able to consider the options, and cost effectiveness needs to be considered against perceived economic opportunity costs. Some of the traditional and more experimental fiscal mechanisms to support peatland conservation are described in Table 4.

Given the scale involved, private financing and access to capital resources are necessary to enable governments to rise to the challenges they face. In the United Kingdom, the development of the Peatland Code looks to facilitate a market where private investors, motivated by corporate social responsibility, are given assurance that their investment in peatland restoration will return verifiable climate benefits, as assessed by an independent validation and verification body. Funding obtained provides cost-effective peatland restoration

47