No abstract

Temporal aspects of ecosystem services have gained surprisingly little attention given that ecosystem service flows are not static but change over time. We present the first systematic review to describe and establish how studies have assessed temporal patterns in supply and demand of ecosystem services. 295 studies, 2% of all studies engaging with the ecosystem service concept, considered changes in ecosystem services over time. Changes were mainly characterised as monotonic and linear (81%), rather than non-linear or through system shocks. Further, a lack of focus of changing ecosystem service demand (rather than supply) hampers our understanding of the temporal patterns of ecosystem services provision and use. Future studies on changes in ecosystem services over time should (1) more explicitly study temporal patterns, (2) analyse trade-offs and synergies between services over time, and (3) integrate changes in supply and demand and involve and empower stakeholders in temporal ecosystem services research.

English is widely recognized as the language of science, and English‐language publications (ELPs) are rapidly increasing. It is often assumed that the number of non‐ELPs is decreasing. This assumption contributes to the underuse of non‐ELPs in conservation science, practice, and policy, especially at the international level. However, the number of conservation articles published in different languages is poorly documented. Using local and international search systems, we searched for scientific articles on biodiversity conservation published from 1980 to 2018 in English and 15 non‐English languages. We compared the growth rate in publications across languages. In 12 of the 15 non‐English languages, published conservation articles significantly increased every year over the past 39 years, at a rate similar to English‐language articles. The other three languages showed contrasting results, depending on the search system. Since the 1990s, conservation science articles in most languages increased exponentially. The variation in the number of non‐English‐language articles identified among the search systems differed markedly (e.g., for simplified Chinese, 11,148 articles returned with local search system and 803 with Scopus). Google Scholar and local literature search systems returned the most articles for 11 and 4 non‐English languages, respectively. However, the proportion of peer‐reviewed conservation articles published in non‐English languages was highest in Scopus, followed by Web of Science and local search systems, and lowest in Google Scholar. About 20% of the sampled non‐English‐language articles provided no title or abstract in English; thus, in theory, they were undiscoverable with English keywords. Possible reasons for this include language barriers and the need to disseminate research in countries where English is not widely spoken. Given the known biases in statistical methods and study characteristics between English‐ and non‐English‐language studies, non‐English‐language articles will continue to play an important role in improving the understanding of biodiversity and its conservation.

No abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.