Towards Integrated Ecosystem Assessments: A literature review on linking ecosystem condition indicators to ecosystem services

Ecosystem services (ES) fundamentally depend on ecosystem condition (EC), yet many ES assessments still rely on land-cover proxies, risking biased assessment results as well as weak uptake, meaning limited application of results in decision-making contexts. This review provides a comprehensive overview of how EC indicators are used in ES assessments published between 2018 and 2022. In total, 128 publications have been included in the review, from which 929 EC indicators with a direct or implicit link to one or more ES and 707 ES indicators have been documented. The recorded EC indicators were reclassified according to the Ecosystem Condition Typology (ECT) provided by the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) and supplementary classes (ECT+). Our analysis identified a focus on terrestrial ecosystems, with under-representation of marine and less intensively managed ecosystems. Within the reclassified ECT and ECT+ indicators, chemical state EC indicators were prevalent, while landscape state and functional state metrics remained under-operationalised. Besides, the share of spatially explicit indicators was limited. Moreover, we found that a significant share of indicators, labelled as EC, were not EC indicators in the strict sense, but instead related to ecosystem extent, ES or stable environmental characteristics, leading to a conceptual blurring between condition, pressure, extent and service indicators. Analysing the link between EC and ES revealed that EC indicators were: (1) primarily quantitatively compared to ES or integrated into ES assessments and (2) most frequently linked to regulating ES. The reviewed literature showed a predominance of positive EC–ES relationships, confirming that ecosystems in better condition tend to support a higher supply of ES. In summary, our review identified progress towards integrated ES assessments, highlighted persistent gaps and stressed the importance of continued efforts to achieve the widespread implementation of EC-enabled ES assessments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
One Ecosystem
Published
2026-02-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.11.e184299
Primary Topic
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Towards Integrated Ecosystem Assessments: A literature review on linking ecosystem condition indicators to ecosystem services

Paula Rendón, Małgorzata Stępniewska, Daniela Ribeiro, Vince van ‘t Hoff et al.
One Ecosystem
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
article

Towards Integrated Ecosystem Assessments: A literature review on linking ecosystem condition indicators to ecosystem services

Paula Rendón, Małgorzata Stępniewska, Daniela Ribeiro, Vince van ‘t Hoff, Iwona Zwierzchowska, Jarumi Kato-Huerta, Joana Seguin, Ioannis Kokkoris, Nicolas Grondard, Sabine Lange, Helena Duchková, Ildikó Arany, Victoria Guisado Goñi, Isabel Nicholson Thomas, Mark D.C. Mansoldo, Miguel Inacio, Solen Le Clec'h, Bálint Czúcz, Davide Geneletti, Chiara Cortinovis, Joana Vincente, Paulo Pereira, Mateja Šmid Hribar, Piotr Lupa, Eliška Tichopádová
article en

Abstract

Ecosystem services (ES) fundamentally depend on ecosystem condition (EC), yet many ES assessments still rely on land-cover proxies, risking biased assessment results as well as weak uptake, meaning limited application of results in decision-making contexts. This review provides a comprehensive overview of how EC indicators are used in ES assessments published between 2018 and 2022. In total, 128 publications have been included in the review, from which 929 EC indicators with a direct or implicit link to one or more ES and 707 ES indicators have been documented. The recorded EC indicators were reclassified according to the Ecosystem Condition Typology (ECT) provided by the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) and supplementary classes (ECT+). Our analysis identified a focus on terrestrial ecosystems, with under-representation of marine and less intensively managed ecosystems. Within the reclassified ECT and ECT+ indicators, chemical state EC indicators were prevalent, while landscape state and functional state metrics remained under-operationalised. Besides, the share of spatially explicit indicators was limited. Moreover, we found that a significant share of indicators, labelled as EC, were not EC indicators in the strict sense, but instead related to ecosystem extent, ES or stable environmental characteristics, leading to a conceptual blurring between condition, pressure, extent and service indicators. Analysing the link between EC and ES revealed that EC indicators were: (1) primarily quantitatively compared to ES or integrated into ES assessments and (2) most frequently linked to regulating ES. The reviewed literature showed a predominance of positive EC–ES relationships, confirming that ecosystems in better condition tend to support a higher supply of ES. In summary, our review identified progress towards integrated ES assessments, highlighted persistent gaps and stressed the importance of continued efforts to achieve the widespread implementation of EC-enabled ES assessments.

One EcosystemVol. 11
Leibniz University Hannover (DE), Mykolas Romeris University (LT), University of Patras (GR), Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SI), Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (ES), Universidade do Porto (PT), University of Trento (IT), Charles University (CZ), ETH Zurich (CH), Czech Academy of Sciences, Global Change Research Institute (CZ), Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology (MT), HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research (HU), Institute for Sustainable Development (ET), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NO), Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (PL), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
European Commission
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.