Agriculture is often painted as the villain in the story of conservation; it is the largest driver of habitat conversion and accounts for much of the degradation and depletion of natural capital. However, this vital human activity also holds the most promise in achieving a more sustainable future. If properly managed, landscapes made up of both agricultural and other ecosystems can yield a vital and sustainable flow of services, including the production of goods such as food and timber; life-support processes such as providing ample fresh water and climate stability; cultural benefits such as scenic beauty and recreational opportunity; and the preservation of options, such as embodied in biodiversity. Accounting for these ecosystem services reveals the diverse benefits provided by nature and clarifies tradeoffs between alternative development scenarios. For decision makers to evaluate the impacts of land and natural resource use on this diverse suite of benefits, the scientific community needs to deliver knowledge and tools to quantify the values of natural capital in clear, credible, and practical ways. Here we demonstrate a scientifically rigorous approach to incorporate natural capital into major resource policies and decisions, such as spatial planning, payment for watershed and other services, climate adaptation planning, impact assessments for permitting and mitigation, corporate risk management, and habitat restoration. Part of this approach includes tools such as InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Tradeoffs) and RIOS (Resource Investment Optimization System), which can be used to quantify natural capital in biophysical or socio-economic terms, to visualize the benefits delivered today and in the future, to assess the tradeoffs associated with alternative choices, and to integrate conservation and human development aims. We will highlight the use of this approach in the agricultural landscapes of Hawai’i and Water Funds programs in Latin America, and emerging work in agricultural supply chain decisions by Dow and Unilever.