From Trapped to Resilient Mountains: Diversified Coupling Pathways Linking Land Use Transition and Rural Revitalization for Mountain Sustainable Development

Abstract

The synergistic interplay among land use transition, rural revitalization, and sustainable development is critical for harmonizing human‐land‐economic systems. Understanding their diverse coupling pathways is key to resolving human‐land conflicts and advancing sustainable rural development in mountainous regions. However, existing research has not systematically elucidated their dynamic mechanisms or delineated context‐adaptive implementation pathways. This study establishes a theoretical framework of the “Land Use Transition‐Rural Revitalization‐Sustainability” (TRS) system. It also proposes a three‐stage evolutionary model, termed “Trapped‐Activating‐Resilient Mountains” (TAR), to understand it. This model characterizes a sequential developmental trajectory of mountain villages: starting from low‐level systemic lock‐in, transitioning via factor mobilization, and culminating in resilient human‐land symbiosis. This paper systematically unpacks the synergistic mechanisms and evolutionary pathways across the T, R, and S dimensions. It then verifies the theoretical framework via comparative case analysis. The core findings are as follows: (1) Land use transition acts as the spatial foundation and primary driver of the coupled TRS system. Rural revitalization serves as an intermediate carrier through diversified implementation pathways. Sustainable development sets the ultimate developmental goal and generates reverse feedback effects. Institutional innovation enables the coordinated co‐evolution of the three subsystems. (2) The three‐stage TAR evolution represents an upgrading process of the TRS system from “inefficient coupling” to “preliminary activation” and finally to “efficient synergy,” each exhibiting distinct characteristics. In the trapped mountain stage, inefficient coupling leads to low‐level development dilemmas. During the “activating mountain” stage, factor linkage and activation drive breakthroughs in pathways. In the resilient mountain stage, efficient TRS synergy forms a sustainable paradigm. (3) Based on the aforementioned theoretical discussions, comparative case evidence further verifies that disparities in regional resource endowments produce differentiated rural revitalization pathways under distinct driving modes, while all pathways follow the unified internal operating mechanisms of the TRS system. In conclusion, sustainable mountain development relies on localized adaptive governance, full exploitation of multifunctional land use transition potentials, and targeted adoption of context‐specific coupling pathways. This study provides a conceptual framework and an actionable roadmap, offering a resilient theoretical foundation for context‐specific implementations.