## 4 Discussion
Removing the topsoil before rewetting can reduce eutrophication by 80-95% and DOC mobilisation by 60% [70]. Using topsoil removal, it is possible to reduce CH\({}_{4}\) emissions by 99% in comparison to emissions without topsoil removal [40; 70]. It is estimated that the rewetting of peatland in combination with paludiculture using sphagnum farming [34] can have a positive impact on climate change mitigation [125]. Recent studies have shown that among restoration methods, the highest rate of sequestration of CO\({}_{2}\) > 1000 kg carbon ha\({}^{-1}\) y\({}^{-1}\) is from paludiculture practices [34]. According torecent studies, peatland restoration should include a hydrology restoration regime. On the other hand, afforestation should not be defined as restoration [34; 86]. According to the literature, some sustainable land practices might reduce peat loss, including zero tillage in agriculture and cover cropping on fields [30]. Cover cropping combined with a higher water table may result in the reduction of GHG emissions and reduce nutrient inputs. However, there is essential indeterminacy regarding the long-term effect of cover cropping on peatlands [30]. In Finland, several solutions are used, including increasing vegetation, reducing soil tillage, avoiding peatland cutting, and converting land into paludiculture or peat forests [127]. Zero tillage combined with increasing water table seasonally could reduce GHG emissions [30]. This contradicts studies that determined that these practices might have the minimum effect on reducing GHG emissions [30]. To promote sustainable peatland management, peatland national strategies based on peatland conservation and promotion of the achievement towards sustainable development goals are crucial, which is not only in countries with great peatland areas [31]. In recent years, several European countries have developed their national peatland strategies, and other countries that still need to develop their strategies can gain common knowledge from other strategies [31]. For the establishment of national strategies, the absence of proper data can be an issue for correct evaluations [31]. According to earlier scientific studies, there is potential and necessity for improvements regarding peatland restoration strategies and methods [50]. Some of the recommendations are related to the opportunity to combine ecological and hydrological methods in peatland restoration [18; 50]. National peatland policy aims should be more precise and specific, linking requirements with international principles in peatland restoration [50]. Peatland restoration success is affected by the gaps in restoration targets, a lack of detail, and the inability to determine the measurability of the results of the defined goals [50]. Peatland restoration can be negatively affected by policies that are too generic without specific, measurable outcomes regarding the quality of water [49]. Recommendations based on previous studies implementing more precise protocols for measuring data [49]. To select the right instrument among the substantial number of policies, one must consider environmental and socioeconomic factors, as well as landowner rights [112; 116; 127] Landowners and farmers can implement publicly available best practices in peatland management even if specific government regulations are not established [53]. Previous studies show that there is still a gap in knowledge regarding the estimation of carbon sequestration and storage possibilities among policymakers and ecosystem managers [50; 53]. According to previous studies, on the path to sustainability, it is crucial to investigate innovative practices in peatland management [53].