This study explores the benefits of combining results of qualitative focus group discussions (FGDs) with a quantitative choice experiment (CE) in a low-income country context. The assessment addresses the compensation needed by local communities in Central Kalimantan to cooperate in peatland restoration programs. The main policy message of the study is that such programs would have to provide arrangements that secure a stable income and food supply, as well as create awareness of the long-term benefits of peatland restoration. The results of this study demonstrate the value of combining qualitative and quantitative methods to improve the reliability and validity of studies assessing the value of ecological services. FGDs prove to be paramount to understanding the underlying attitudes and motives towards the proposed scenarios and its institutional context. FGDs provide the possibility to identify the specific terms and conditions on which respondents would accept land-use change scenarios and help to understand preferences regarding the distribution of costs and benefits over time. Yet the individual CE responses offer important quantitative information about the magnitude of welfare changes associated with restoration. Moreover, the privacy of the elicitation process avoids peer-pressure.