The Ecosystem Services (ES) concept highlights the varied contributions the environment provides to humans and there are a wide range of methods/tools available to assess ES. However, in real-world decision contexts a single tool is rarely sufficient and methods must be combined to meet practitioner needs. Here, results from the OpenNESS project are presented to illustrate the methods selected to meet the needs of 24 real-world case studies and better understand why and how methods are combined to meet practical needs. Results showed that within the cases methods were combined to: i) address a range of ES; ii) assess both supply and demand of ES; iii) assess a range of value types; iv) reach different stakeholder groups v) cover weaknesses in other methods used and vi) to meet specific decision context needs. Methods were linked in a variety of ways: i) as input–output chains of methods; ii) through learning; iii) through method development and iv) through comparison/triangulation of results. The paper synthesises these case study-based experiences to provide insight to others working in practical contexts as to where, and in what contexts, different methods can be combined and how this can add value to case study analyses.

生态系统服务（ES）的概念突出了环境为人类提供的各种贡献，并且有各种各样的方法/工具可用于评估ES。但是，在现实世界的决策环境中，单个工具几乎是不够的，必须结合各种方法来满足从业人员的需求。在此，将介绍OpenNESS项目的结果，以说明为满足24个实际案例研究的需要而选择的方法，并更好地理解为什么以及如何结合使用这些方法来满足实际需求。结果表明，在这些案例中，方法结合在一起：i）解决了一系列ES问题；ii）评估ES的供求；iii）评估一系列价值类型；iv）覆盖不同的利益相关者群体v）掩盖其他使用的方法的弱点，vi）满足特定决策环境的需求。方法以多种方式链接在一起：i）作为方法的输入-输出链；ii）通过学习；iii）通过方法开发和iv）通过比较/三角化结果。本文综合了这些基于案例研究的经验，以向在实际环境中工作的其他人提供洞察力，以了解在何处以及在何种环境中可以组合使用不同的方法，以及如何为案例研究分析增加价值。