Dataset for: Navigating Ecosystem Services Trade-offs: A Global Comprehensive Review

Methods The dataset is the output of a comprehensive literature-based search that aims to collate all the evidence on where ES relationships have been mentioned and addressed. We applied systematic mapping which is based on the “Guidelines for Systematic Review in Environmental Management” developed by the Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation at Bangor University (Pullin and Stewart 2006). The methodological framework followed the standard stages outlined for systematic mapping in environmental sciences (James et al. 2016). Briefly, we defined the scope and objectives: · We comprehensively review and further explore the global evidence of ES trade-offs and synergies focusing on all systems including terrestrial, freshwater, and marine. · We compiled the evidence on trade-offs and synergies among multiple ES interacting across various ecosystems. · We performed a geographical and temporal trend analysis exploring the distribution of studies across the world examining how the focus on various ecosystem types and ES categories has evolved to highlight gaps and biases. Then we set the criteria for study inclusion (Table 1), searched the evidence, coded, and produced the database. Extracted article information including the specific criteria is detailed in Table 1. The first step was to search the ISI Web of Knowledge core collection (http://apps.webofknowledge.com) database, targeting the search on the ecosystem services literature and studies dealing with trade-offs/synergies, win-win outcomes or bundles when managing different ecosystem services in the landscape/seascape. All peer-reviewed journal articles written in English and Spanish have been considered for review. The peer-reviewed literature from 2005 to 2021 was reviewed identifying relevant studies according to specific search terms. The relevant search terms and descriptive words derived from (Howe et al. 2014) adding “bundles” and “co-benefits”. Boolean nomenclatures ‘*’ = all letters were allowed after the *, were used on the root of words where several different endings applied (Figure 1). Search terms used were: (“*ecosystem service*” OR “environment* service*” OR “ecosystem* approach*” OR “ecosystem good*” OR “environment* good*”) AND (“*trade-off*” OR “tradeoff*” OR “synerg*” OR “win-win*” OR “bundle*” OR “cost*and benefit*” OR “co-benefit*”) n=5194 Papers were preliminarily coded with a semantic analysis using the R package Bibliometrix (http://www.bibliometrix.org). In th