The concept of “irreversibility” and its counterpart “reversibility” have become prominent in environmental and ecological research on human-induced changes, thresholds, climate tipping points, ecosystem degradation, and losses in the cryosphere and biosphere. Through a systematic literature review, we show that in these research fields, these notions are not only descriptive terms, but can have different semantic functions and normative aspects. The results suggest that, in the context of environmental and ecological research the concepts of irreversibility and reversibility have taken on additional usages in comparison to their contexts in theoretical thermodynamics and mechanics. Irreversible as a classification of anthropogenic environmental change can be used categorically, in the sense of a finite end, or relatively, i.e. on time or spatial scales of interest. Surprisingly, most of the analyzed scientific articles that use the terminology of (ir)reversibility substantively do not provide an explicit conceptualization or definition (74.7%). The research on potential (ir)reversibility of environmental change may affect the social and political willingness to bear the costs of interventions to mitigate or prevent undesirable environmental change. In particular, classifying a change as reversible or irreversible and determining the timescale(s) and spatial scale(s) involved has implications for policy and ecosystem management decisions, as suggested by its use in several high-level scientific and policy reports on ecosystem and climate change. Therefore, it is important to explicitly present a clear definition of irreversibility or reversibility for the readers from other fields, even if it could be the case that within a specific community an implicit definition was considered to be sufficient. We propose further recommendations for inter- and transdisciplinary reflection and conceptual use in the context of environmental, ecological, and sustainability research.