Blind spots in ecosystem services research and implementation

Ecosystem service research has gained attraction, and the topic is also high on the policy agenda. Projects such as TEEB have generalized results of individual case studies to provide guidelines for policy makers and stakeholders. Seppelt et al. (2011) raised critical questions about four facets that characterize the holistic ideal of ecosystem services research: (i) biophysical realism of ecosystem data and models; (ii) consideration of trade-offs between ecosystem services; (iii) recognition of off-site effects; and (iv) comprehensive but shrewd involvement of stakeholders within assessment studies. An extended and updated analysis of ecosystem service case studies showed that the majority of these facets were still not addressed by the majority of case studies. Whilst most indicators did not improve within the span analyzed (1996–2013), we found a tendency for an increasing geographical spread of the case studies. Moreover, we incorporated an additional facet, namely the relevance and usability of case study results for the operationalization of the ecosystem service concept. Only a minority of studies addressed this facet sufficiently with no significant trend for improvement over time.