Monetary valuation of urban green space using stated‐preference approaches has gained prominence among pragmatic urban researchers, but the resultant reduced potential for value pluralism has gone unnoticed. There is confusion on value concepts. Public‐social values have been treated as private‐economic ones. The potential for reflecting the multiple values and social roles of urban nature is thus reduced. Being method‐driven, the practice fails to relate to the claimed objective of comprehensively portraying it. There is inadequate understanding of the philosophy and psychology of the values associated with urban green space, despite its multi‐faceted role being widely recognized. This results in an unreflective acceptance of economic techniques. More work is needed to clarify issues concerning the manifestation and theoretical foundation of value pluralism. Deliberative approaches may be a potential complementary or alternative valuation method.