Peatland rewetting has been proposed as a vital climate change mitigation tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to generate suitable conditions for the return of carbon (C) sequestration. In this study, we present annual C balances for a 5‐year period at a rewetted peatland in Ireland (rewetted at the start of the study) and compare the results with an adjacent drained area (represents business‐as‐usual). Hydrological modelling of the 230‐hectare site was carried out to determine the likely ecotopes (vegetation communities) that will develop post‐rewetting and was used to inform a radiative forcing modelling exercise to determine the climate impacts of rewetting this peatland under five high‐priority scenarios (SSP1‐1.9, SS1‐2.6, SSP2‐4.5, SSP3‐7.0 and SSP5‐8.5). The drained area (marginal ecotope) was a net C source throughout the study and emitted 157 ± 25.5 g C m⁻² year⁻¹. In contrast, the rewetted area (sub‐central ecotope) was a net C sink of 78.0 ± 37.6 g C m⁻² year⁻¹, despite relatively large annual methane emissions post‐rewetting (average 19.3 ± 5.2 g C m⁻² year⁻¹). Hydrological modelling predicted the development of three key ecotopes at the site, with the sub‐central ecotope predicted to cover 24% of the site, the sub‐marginal predicted to cover 59% and the marginal predicted to cover 16%. Using these areal estimates, our radiative forcing modelling projects that under the SSP1‐1.9 scenario, the site will have a warming effect on the climate until 2085 but will then have a strong cooling impact. In contrast, our modelling exercise shows that the site will never have a cooling impact under the SSP5‐8.5 scenario. Our results confirm the importance of rapid rewetting of drained peatland sites to (a) achieve strong C emissions reductions, (b) establish optimal conditions for C sequestration and (c) set the site on a climate cooling trajectory.

Ecosystem accounting is a tool to integrate nature into decision-making in a more structured way. Applying the use of nationally available datasets at catchment scale and following the System of Environmental Economic Accounting-Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) framework, we present results from a catchment case study in Ireland, highlighting findings specifically in relation to the development of ecosystem extent and condition accounts. In the absence of a national ecosystem map, CORINE landcover mapping formed the basic data for extent and type of ecosystems, distinguishing woodlands and forest, peatland and heathland, grasslands and cropland and urban areas, with limited coverage of linear freshwater rivers, hedgerows and coastal ecosystems. Additional remote sensing data provided higher resolution at catchment scale, while limited site-level survey data were available. Condition data gathered for reporting under the EU Water Framework Directive were available at sub-basin level for surface waterbodies. Data were available at national level for habitats reported for the EU under the Habitats Directive (59 habitats reported), covering ~ 25% of the study area. Data for ecosystem types outside of these reporting frameworks were in the form of ancillary data only, providing information on pressures, threats and intensity of use. Our findings in Ireland reflect work across the European region, highlighting the role of data gathering and stakeholder engagement. We outline some of the data gaps to provide information for future research and alignment of data for the purpose of NCA, both at catchment and national scale.

The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration offers a vital opportunity to advance scaled‐up, integrated approaches that reverse ecosystem degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate disruption and deterioration. Combining tools across disciplines is essential to addressing these interwoven, global crises through inclusive, equitable strategies with demonstrable socio‐economic benefits. Tools and initiatives described here, including the EcoHealth Network, the System of Environmental Economic Accounting Ecosystem Accounting and its application through the INCASE project in Ireland, and the Natural Capital Project, present ready‐made approaches to engage with policymakers and stakeholders in a transparent way. These examples are working to yield accurate indicators revealing the true costs and benefits of restoration policies and projects in both environmental and social terms. We highlight that collaborative efforts, particularly engagement between ecologists, economists, and other stakeholders, are essential to inform the ongoing development of fit‐for‐purpose natural capital approaches, and that synergies between natural capital and restoration approaches can be further strengthened to raise awareness of, and progress, restoration projects on the scale the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration envisages. We also reflect on the term “natural capital,” which is often misunderstood as implying that monetary metrics should take preference over non‐monetary arguments or considerations, thereby presenting a barrier to engagement for some ecologists, environmentalists, and stakeholders. Natural capital approaches offer us opportunities to track and support the necessary changes to expand and embed the culture of restoration into decision‐making across sectors, highlighting multiple benefits for society and economy.

The COVID-19 pandemic and related social and economic emergencies induced massive public spending and increased global debt. Economic recovery is now an opportunity to rebuild natural capital alongside financial, physical, social and human capital, for long-term societal benefit. Yet, current decision-making is dominated by economic imperatives and information systems that do not consider society’s dependence on natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides. New international standards for natural capital accounting (NCA) are now available to integrate environmental information into government decision-making. By revealing the effects of policies that influence natural capital, NCA supports identification, implementation and monitoring of Green Recovery pathways, including where environment and economy are most positively interlinked.

The United Nations System of Environmental and Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) is a geospatial approach, whereby existing data on ecosystem stocks and flows are collated to show changes over time. The framework has been proposed as a means to track and monitor ecosystem restoration targets across the EU. Condition is a key consideration in the conservation assessment of habitats protected under the EU Habitats Directive and ecosystem condition accounts are also integral to the SEEA EA. While SEEA EA accounts have been developed at EU level for an array for ecosystem types, condition accounts remain the least developed. Collating available datasets under the SEEA EA framework, we developed extent and rudimentary condition accounts for peatland ecosystems at catchment scale in Ireland. Information relating to peatland ecosystem sub-types or habitat types was collated for peatland habitats listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive, as well as degraded peatlands not included in EU nature conservation networks. While data relating to peatland condition were limited, understanding changes in ecosystem extent and incorporating knowledge of habitat types and degradation served as a proxy for ecosystem condition in the absence of more comprehensive data. This highlighted the importance of the ecosystem extent account, which underpins all other accounts in the SEEA EA framework. Reflecting findings at EU level, drainage, disturbance and land conversion were identified as the main pressures affecting peatland condition. We highlighted a number of options to gather data to build more robust, time-series extent and condition accounts for peatlands at varying accounting scales. Overall, despite the absence of comprehensive data, bringing information under the SEEA EA framework is considered a good starting point, with the integration of expert ecological opinion considered essential to ensure development of reliable accounts, particularly when working at ecosystem sub-type (habitat type) and catchment scale.

Combining natural capital accounting tools and ecosystem restoration approaches builds on existing frameworks to track changes in ecosystem stocks and flows of services and benefits as a result of restoration. This approach highlights policy‐relevant benefits that arise due to restoration efforts and helps to maximize opportunities for return on investment. Aligning the System of Environmental Economic Accounting–Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) framework with risk assessment tools, we developed a risk register for peatlands in two contrasting catchments in Ireland, based on available information relating to peatland stocks (extent and condition) and flows (services and benefits), as well as knowledge of pressures. This approach allowed for identification of areas to target peatland restoration, by highlighting the potential to reduce and reverse negative trends in relation to provisioning, regulating, and cultural services, flows relating to non‐use values, as well as abiotic flows. We also highlighted ways to reduce and reverse the effects of historical and ongoing pressures through restoration measures, aligning our approach with that outlined in the SER International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration. Building on the synergies between the SEEA EA and the SER Standards is highlighted as a means to develop transdisciplinary collaboration, to assist in setting and achieving targets set out under the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration as well as integrating regional policy targets set under the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and the related EU Habitats and EU Water Framework Directives.