We recognize that the results presented by the EcoValue project are a first order approximation of the economic value of ecosystem services provided by nature and should therefore be treated as baseline estimates that will improve as our collective ability to estimate economic values of ecosystem goods and services likewise improves.

Following conventional value transfer methods, we have turned to published, peer-reviewed data to extrapolate meaningful economic value estimates for our study sites. We consistently are updating and reviewing the available literature using our explicit search criteria and application of conventional economic valuation methods. We are therefore confident that the valuation estimates presented here are both meaningful and reliable as first order estimates.

Apart from the known challenges associated with value transfer methods (see Desvouges, Johnson and Banzhaf 1998), we acknowledge that there are a number of remaining questions in the field of ecosystem service valuation which we hope will be stimulated by the EcoValue Project and explored in future research, including:

• What is the minimum required scale for a given ecosystem service to function properly?
• What is the impact of historical or ongoing land use degradation on the provision of ecosystem value?
• What is the impact of land cover fragmentation on ecosystem service provision?
• Is there a threshold of scarcity that affects the marginal ecosystem service value of any given acre of land cover?

As ecosystem service value data quality and volume improves, we anticipate that these questions will be addressed and answered and that the quality of our valuation estimate will likewise improve. We therefore hope that this ongoing research effort encourages others to support the pursuit of more ecosystem service valuation research.