The use of various modeling approaches is critical in the assessment of ecosystem services. Although numerous assessments have been conducted as scholarly studies to quantify, map, and value ecosystem services, a wellstructured platform is necessary to ensure consistency of the assessment approaches with regard to theories and practices. To identify gaps between practical ecosystem services assessments and scholarly studies in the Asian region, we reviewed assessment cases in the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) catalogue and peer-reviewed literature using Web platforms. We identified 31 assessment cases and 290 such peer-reviewed studies conducted throughout Asia. Our review of recent peerreviewed studies revealed a bias in the geographic distribution, with numerous Chinese studies and few studies in West Asia. Our comparison of the approaches applied in the assessment cases with those in the peer-reviewed studies revealed that little information on the models was reported in the assessment cases, whereas the approaches used in the peer-reviewed studies were mostly modeling and biophysical indicators. Although the modeling and scenario approaches used in the actual assessments require further clarification in the IPBES catalogue, many scientific modeling studies have been conducted throughout Asia. These scientific data, however, are not easily accessible to those outside of academic communities. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop a new catalogue to guide all the stakeholders involved in ecosystem services assessment at multiple scales.