Systematic review finds 42 studies of wild edible plants and mushrooms as ecosystem services

A systematic review identified 42 original studies that examined wild edible plants and mushrooms within the ecosystem services framework. The analysis found that these resources provide both provisioning services, such as food and materials, and cultural services, including recreation, traditional ecological knowledge and heritage, but their study remains geographically uneven and methodologically incomplete.

The researchers searched Web of Science and Scopus on 18 December 2022 without restricting the publication period. They formulated their questions using the population-exposure-outcome framework and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol. The searches returned 307 records. After removal of 101 duplicates, two articles published in languages other than English and seven ineligible document types, title-and-abstract screening excluded 140 of the remaining 197 records. Full-text assessment excluded another 15, leaving 42 publications for in-depth analysis.

Eligible publications were original works focused on the ecosystem services associated with edible plants or fungi. General ecosystem services assessments that merely listed wild food alongside wild animals were excluded, as were studies addressing species that were not edible. The review covered multiple continents, spatial scales and foraging habitats. Europe contributed the most publications, followed by Asia, with smaller numbers in North America, Africa, Latin America and Australia. European studies were primarily regional or local, but the review did not establish that this scale pattern applied worldwide.

Almost all included studies, 93%, mentioned at least one foraging habitat. Forests appeared in 52%, agroecosystems in 29% and urban habitats in 19%. Wild edible plants were the principal subject in 86% of the articles, compared with 29% for wild mushrooms, while 14% examined both groups. The earliest selected publications appeared in 2014, followed by two or three papers annually in the early years and an increase to nine or ten per year after 2020. The review documented this pattern but did not establish its cause.

A keyword analysis identified two central clusters. One included “ecosystem services,” “non-timber forest products,” “wild edible plants” and “wild food,” while the other included “provisioning ES,” “urban foraging” and “biocultural diversity.” Studies applied the ecosystem services framework inconsistently: 31% mentioned provisioning services, 7% focused on cultural services and 29% addressed both, while 33% acknowledged wild foods as ecosystem services without identifying a section. Only 7% explicitly mentioned an ecosystem services classification system.

Methodological approaches also varied. Approximately 36% of the studies combined biophysical and sociocultural methods, 36% relied only on sociocultural methods and 26% used only biophysical methods. Fourteen percent mapped wild edible resources or harvesting sites. Using version 5.1 of the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services, the reviewers assigned 16 service classes to the literature: five provisioning and 11 cultural. Every included study described wild plants or mushrooms as food. Other provisioning uses included plant or fungal materials, cultivation, energy sources and genetic material.

The cultural classes included traditional ecological knowledge, culture and heritage, recreation, education, scientific investigation, spiritual or symbolic meaning, entertainment, existence value and future-use value. Traditional ecological knowledge appeared in 55% of papers, culture and heritage in 52% and recreational activities in 43%. The reviewers noted that medicinal uses did not fit neatly into the classification and placed them under the class for fibres and other materials for direct use or processing. In 76% of publications, the researchers could identify the motivations for foraging. Personal consumption was prominent in Asia and Latin America, while leisure was especially important in Europe. Income through local or informal markets appeared across Europe, Asia and Latin America, and tradition was especially common in Latin American studies.

Potential harms were reported in about 29% of the articles. The most frequently mentioned concern was overexploitation, followed by faulty harvesting methods, harvesting endangered species and, in one Romanian study, illegal harvesting. Sustainable practices were mentioned in 52% of studies, including planting or seeding species, forest management, harvesting only common species and using sustainable harvesting methods. Twelve percent of studies reported benefits for particular species, including increased productivity in the reviewed examples of wild bamboo and wild asparagus. Separately, 14% reported other advantages such as environmental awareness and contributions to urban resilience and sustainability; these percentages describe the reviewed literature and do not establish a general effect across foraging systems.

The review has bounded coverage because it relied on two citation databases, which may have omitted books, book chapters, regional studies and conference papers, and because its search terms did not include the Nature Contribution to People framework. Many included studies also had small samples or restricted geographic scopes, limiting generalizability. The authors concluded that wild edible plants and mushrooms remain under-researched within ecosystem services research. They recommended more consistent classification, spatial mapping and monitoring, combined ecological and sociocultural methods, and collaboration among researchers, foragers, managers and policymakers to support sustainable management and land-use decisions.

Subject of Research: Systematic review of the provisioning and cultural ecosystem services associated with wild edible plants and mushrooms

Article Title: How wild edible plants and mushrooms have been approached within the ecosystem services framework: a systematic review

Article References: Paula, A., Pulido, F., Figueiredo, A., & Castro, P. (2025). How wild edible plants and mushrooms have been approached within the ecosystem services framework: a systematic review. One Ecosystem, 10, Article e145448. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.10.e145448

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3897/oneeco.10.e145448

Keywords: systematic review, wild edible plants, wild mushrooms, ecosystem services, provisioning services, cultural services, foraging, sustainable harvesting, CICES, ethnobiology, wild, edible