The Ecosystem Service concept is a widely used framework to examine the links between the functioning of ecosystems and human well-being. There is a broad range of ecosystem services, which are often classified hierarchically as provisioning, regulating and cultural services. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), an approach for analyzing complex problems that involve trade-offs between multiple objectives, has increasingly been applied in the ecosystem service context. In MCDA, a problem is typically represented hierarchically as a value tree, which resembles the hierarchical structure of the ecosystem service classifications. However, in practice, there are several potential pitfalls that could distort the analysis, if some commonly used ecosystems service classification was directly used as the basis of an MCDA value tree. In this paper, we discuss these potential pitfalls and how to avoid them. Our discussion is illustrated with experience from a case study focusing on the ecosystem services provided by the peatlands in Finland.

生态系统服务概念是一个广泛使用的框架，用于检查生态系统功能与人类福祉之间的联系。生态系统服务种类繁多，通常将其划分为供应，调节和文化服务。多标准决策分析（MCDA）是一种用于分析涉及多个目标之间折衷的复杂问题的方法，现已越来越多地应用于生态系统服务环境中。在MCDA中，问题通常被层次化表示为价值树，类似于生态系统服务分类的层次结构。但是，实际上，如果将某些常用的生态系统服务分类直接用作MCDA价值树的基础，则可能存在一些可能导致分析失真的潜在陷阱。在本文中，我们讨论了这些潜在的陷阱以及如何避免它们。案例研究重点说明了芬兰泥炭地提供的生态系统服务，我们的讨论得到了说明。