A succession of conceptual value frameworks from natural capital to Ecosystem Services (ES) and Nature’s Contributions to People (NCP) have effectively made the case for nature to no longer be ignored in economic decision making. However, while recent development has seen ES and NCP become more inclusive of the plurality of values that reflect complex human-nature relations, they have yet to provide a way of framing plural worldviews and are often criticised for being inherently anthropocentric. While the Life Framework of Values (or Life Frames) has been advocated as a tool to address these concerns, in this paper we further explore its’ potential through examining ontological and axiological plurality.

We draw upon a community-based participation approach, pooling our findings from four independent UK coastal community case studies. While the Life Frames acknowledge the tensions in the debates between instrumental, relational and intrinsic values, here through examining the co-emergence of the Life Frames and ES, we explore the impacts of these tensions through real-world application. Our findings are cross-referenced with self-reported pro-environmental behaviour or respondents’ reasons for engaging in sustainability to relate the Life Frames to its’ potential use in future policymaking. Our approach reveals surprising themes within participants’ preferences for a sustainable future, underlining the need for intrinsic values to have a seat at the table of sustainable development. The Life Frames illuminate the ‘forgotten side’ of NCP, unpacking a more inclusive approach to conservation. Further, they provide a space for sustainability to be achieved through myriad approaches and value perspectives, which does not preclude traditional definitions of values within ES. Our results add further credence to the claim that the Life Frames provide the opportunity to operationalise articulated intrinsic values in a way that lets them see ‘eye-to-eye’ with the values of ES and NCP.