Land-Use Change and Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs: What Multi-Scale Evidence Can and Cannot Tell Us for Sustainability Governance

Land-use change is a major driver of ecosystem service reconfiguration, yet the character and intensity of resulting trade-offs remain highly variable across studies. This review synthesizes English-language research retrieved primarily from the Web of Science Core Collection and supplemented by Scopus and Google Scholar, with particular attention to the multi-scale characteristics of trade-offs, the analytical consequences of different assessment approaches, and their relevance for sustainability governance. The reviewed literature reveals several recurrent patterns. Intensive land conversion commonly produces short-term gains in provisioning or construction-related benefits while reducing regulating and supporting services. Trade-offs are strongly scale dependent, reflecting differences in ecological processes, land-use decisions, and governance units rather than analytical sensitivity alone. The landscape configuration further shapes ecosystem service interactions in ways that cannot be inferred from land-use area alone. However, evidence on restoration co-benefits, spatial-optimization gains, and governance claims based on scenario results remains context-dependent. These findings should be interpreted as conditional support for comparing land-use options, identifying potential trade-off displacement, and clarifying planning constraints, rather than as proof that restoration or optimization will automatically improve governance outcomes. The current evidence base is geographically uneven and strongly concentrated in Chinese case studies, which enriches planning-oriented research but limits straightforward generalization across institutional and environmental settings. Further progress may depend on stronger cross-scale and dynamic analysis, closer integration of the ecosystem service supply, demand, and flow, and more explicit treatment of uncertainty. More importantly, the value of future research will lie not simply in producing additional maps or indicators, but in establishing a clearer correspondence between the type of evidence generated and the governance decisions it is expected to inform.