A review of ecosystem services research in Australia reveals a gap in integrating climate change and impacts on ecosystem services

Figures & data

Figure 1. (a) Number of journal articles since 1993 using the search terms ecosystem service (s) and Australia in title, abstract and keywords in Scopus in July 2013 (*until July 2013). (b) Distribution of publications reviewed in the present study (*until July 2013).

Table 1. Features of inventory, searched databases and terms and the elaboration of categories used in analysis.

Features/categories	Description
Features of inventory
Searched databases	ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar
Searched words	Title, Keywords and Abstract search in Scopus: ecosystem service (s), Australia (additional field) Title search in ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar: ecosystem service (s), ecosystem valuation, ecological service (s), environmental service (s), Australia (additional field)
Elaboration of categories used in analysis
Scale of the study	Local: study based on a project level; catchment: study based on a single catchment; regional: study based on more than one catchment, region or state; national: study based on more than one state, policy, approaches and theoretical analysis without mentioning any particular territory.
Studied ecosystem	Categorised according to dominant land uses; other: review articles, approaches and theoretical studies
Offsite effects	Local decision can effect ES supply of another place
Trade-off analysis	Change in different ES as well as change in same ES between present and future; other: review articles
Stakeholder involvement	Active involvement of stakeholder in research process; other: review articles
Scenarios	Land use: plausible land use/management options in future; political: plausible policy/planning options; other: review articles, approaches and theoretical studies
Indicators used	Biophysical: publications assessed the distribution and attributes of ES; economic: publications analysed monetary value of ES; social: publications reflected community perceptions, social preferences to ES and community evaluated interrelationship among ES; policy: publication used different existing policies to frame ES as well as discussed possible future policy issues related with ES; combined: publication used more than one above categorical indicator; other: publication described theories and approaches of ES assessment.
Data source	Primary: direct data collection and measurement of ES; secondary: proxy presentation of ES by map; other: publications discussed theoretical and analytical approach

Figure 2. Spatial distribution of ecosystem services research across Australia which are reviewed in the present study.

Figure 3. The percentage of ecosystem services research according to different factor levels analysed.

Figure 4. The number of ecosystem services considered in each study.

Figure 5. Representation of studied ecosystem services. In figure: agriculture production includes crop yields, food & fibre production, forage production, improved grazing; climate regulation includes carbon emission reduction, carbon sequestration, carbon stock; recreation includes improved recreation, recreational fisheries; nutrient cycling includes nitrogen supply, nutrient management.

Figure 6. Focus of issues of ecosystem services research in publications.

Figure 7. Climate change across Australia for IPCC SRES B1 and A1F1 emission scenarios for 2030 and 2050 (output from OzClim climate model) with inserted location of most ES researches, size of circle indicates the relative no. of ES research, B = Goulburn Broken Catchment (n = 5), E = Wheat belt (n = 2), G = Gwydir catchment (n = 2), H = Glenelg Hopkins Catchment (n = 2), L = Lachlan catchment (n = 2), M = Murray Darling Basin (n = 13), P = Myponga River Catchment (n = 2), Q = South East Queensland Region (n = 4), S = Tropical savannah (n = 3), T = Tully Murray catchment (n = 2), W = Wet Tropics (n = 2).