Publications (FIS)

Boxes of rain

A systematic review on the classes and frameworks of ecosystem disservices

authored by: Carl Cyrus Anderson, Andreas Metzemacher, Blal Adem Esmail
Abstract: Despite the numerous benefits we derive from ecosystems as ecosystem services (ES), negative impacts on human health and well-being also occur as ecosystem disservices (ED). To study ED, researchers box them into classes and create conceptual frameworks to support their identification, assessment, and communication. It is unclear what classes and frameworks now exist for ED, their relative uptake in the literature, and their potential application across socio-ecological contexts. We conduct a systematic literature review of ED classification systems and frameworks to take stock and synthesize this growing but scattered body of research. We find strong uptake of several influential articles but persisting inconsistency of classifications and oversimplification of ED processes within frameworks. Aggregating existing classifications and frameworks, we draw on lessons learned to propose the Composite Ecosystem Disservices (CED) framework. We call for increased ED research, greater comparability and replicability allowing for transdisciplinarity, and conceptual underpinnings that recognize social-ecological interconnections.
Organisation(s): Institute of Environmental Planning
External Organisation(s): Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Eurac Research
Type: Review article
Journal: AMBIO
Volume: 54
Pages: 1431-1449
No. of pages: 19
ISSN: 0044-7447
Publication date: 09.2025
Publication status: Published
Peer reviewed: Yes
ASJC Scopus subject areas: Geography, Planning and Development, Environmental Chemistry, Ecology
Sustainable Development Goals: SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
Electronic version(s): https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02157-1 (Access: Open)

BibTeX

@article{5f1656fdfc5b4382ac9198ab9feeaaa9,
title = "Boxes of rain: A systematic review on the classes and frameworks of ecosystem disservices",
abstract = "Despite the numerous benefits we derive from ecosystems as ecosystem services (ES), negative impacts on human health and well-being also occur as ecosystem disservices (ED). To study ED, researchers box them into classes and create conceptual frameworks to support their identification, assessment, and communication. It is unclear what classes and frameworks now exist for ED, their relative uptake in the literature, and their potential application across socio-ecological contexts. We conduct a systematic literature review of ED classification systems and frameworks to take stock and synthesize this growing but scattered body of research. We find strong uptake of several influential articles but persisting inconsistency of classifications and oversimplification of ED processes within frameworks. Aggregating existing classifications and frameworks, we draw on lessons learned to propose the Composite Ecosystem Disservices (CED) framework. We call for increased ED research, greater comparability and replicability allowing for transdisciplinarity, and conceptual underpinnings that recognize social-ecological interconnections.",
keywords = "Classification, Ecosystem disservices, Ecosystem services, Framework, Planning and management, Urban green infrastructure",
author = "Anderson, {Carl Cyrus} and Andreas Metzemacher and {Adem Esmail}, Blal",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2025.",
year = "2025",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1007/s13280-025-02157-1",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "1431--1449",
journal = "AMBIO",
issn = "0044-7447",
publisher = "Springer Science and Business Media B.V.",
number = "9",
}