There have been several pleas for more inclusive ecosystem services assessments in recent years. This is partially due to a growing consensus about the importance of incorporating value pluralism into ecosystem services assessments. While there is increasingly attention for such value pluralism in academia and at the IPBES science policy interface, this concern barely reached many conservation practitioners, as indicated in studies reviewing decision support tools for ecosystem services. We examined six review studies of such tools and this revealed there is indeed little attention for value pluralism and only a part of the tools provides the conceptual space to incorporate value pluralism. The growing scientific and science-policy consensus that recognizing value pluralism is key for inclusive assessments can only be translated in actions if there is a connection to the field. Users of ecosystem services assessment tools should have the opportunity to select value-inclusive tools, as this can lead to a stronger support base for conservation actions, prevent conflict, and lead to more comprehensive ecosystem services assessments. This does not imply that all tools need to focus on values; the actual goal of a specific ecosystem services assessment tool is context-specific. If scientists want the plural valuation debate to have an impact on conservation practices, three conditions need to be fulfilled: (i) developing value-inclusive decision-support tools; (ii) clarifying when to use value inclusive tools; and (iii) learning from and sharing of value-inclusive tools.

近年来，有几项呼吁要求进行更具包容性的生态系统服务评估。部分原因是由于越来越多的共识，即将价值多元化纳入生态系统服务评估的重要性。尽管在学术界和IPBES科学政策界面上越来越关注这种价值多元化，但正如审查生态系统服务决策支持工具的研究所指出的那样，许多保护从业人员几乎没有关注到这种价值多元化。我们检查了六种有关此类工具的综述研究，结果表明，对于价值多元性的关注并不多，只有一部分工具提供了整合价值多元性的概念空间。越来越多的科学和科学政策共识认为，认识到价值多元化是包容性评估的关键，只有在与该领域有联系的情况下，才能转化为行动。生态系统服务评估工具的用户应有机会选择具有价值的工具，因为这可以为保护行动提供更强大的支持基础，防止冲突，并导致更全面的生态系统服务评估。这并不意味着所有工具都需要关注价值。具体的生态系统服务评估工具的实际目标是针对特定环境的。如果科学家希望对复数估值的辩论对保护实践产生影响，则需要满足三个条件：（i）开发包括价值的决策支持工具；（ii）明确何时使用价值包容性工具；