The urban–rural fringe is a dynamic environment where urban expansion limits the provision of landscape services. Economic valuation of these services is proposed to quantify the impact of urbanisation and inform planners of the potential losses that attribute to these land-use changes. However, most evaluation methods remain controversial regarding shortcomings in providing reliable results. This study applies market price, contingent valuation and value transfer methods and compares their performance in assessing the economic impact of land-use changes on the urban–rural fringe of the Amstelland (the Netherlands). Results with these applied methods differ greatly due to their respective advantages in revealing use values or non-use values of landscape services and dependence on land-use change. Thus, results are sensitive to value types, the scarcity of landscape services, scale of the study area, and involved stakeholders. This paper reflects on the strengths and weaknesses of these methods in different planning contexts.