Methodology
2.1. Selection of nationally important ecosystem services Our categorization of ecosystem services (Fig. 1) began by identifying the most important ecosystem services in Finland. By the help of the CICES classification (V.4.3) we formulated approximately ten classes for each of the three ecosystem services sections;provisioning, regulating and maintenance, and cultural services(Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010a). We omitted some CICES classes that we deemed marginal for Finland such as animal based mechanical energy. All classes were given an accessible and nation-ally relevant title (e.g. CICES class level title ‘Wild plants, algae and their outputs’ was formulated as ‘Berries and mushrooms’). We focused on ESs that are currently relevant in Finland while being aware that new ESs may emerge in the future.We consulted multidisciplinary national biodiversity indicator expert groups of main ecosystem types: forests, mires, the Baltic Sea, inland waters and farmlands. These groups, each containing approximately ten members from a wide spectrum of research institutes, universities, administration, NGOs and other organizations (www.biodiversity.fi/en/about/expert-groups), have been operational since 2010. Having provided the preliminary CICES class list as an introduction into the subject we asked each expert group, which ESs are most relevant from their point of view. Once the general framework was constructed, relevant indicators chosen and a preliminary review of data availability conducted, we organized a second meeting, where all the expert groups joined.After the expert consultations we organized a one-day stake-holder workshop for a wide national audience, including ministries,