Urbanization-induced changes in the urban-rural landscape led to spatially unequal distributions of ecosystem services, significantly undermining regional socio-ecological sustainability. However, it remained unclear whether the patterns of urban-rural ecosystem services were related to ecological risks, and how to implement ecological zonal protection and hierarchical management based on their relationships. Therefore, it is urgent to understand the spatial heterogeneity and correlation mechanisms of ecosystem services and ecological risks in urban and rural areas under the influence of human-environment interactions, and to propose targeted and refined ecological security zoning and management recommendations. Taking the Yangtze River Economic Belt-which spans multiple regions-as a case study, typical urbanization indicators were selected for clustering to identify the urban, suburban, rural and natural regions. A biophysical model was employed to quantitatively assess key ecosystem services and ecological risks, while their correlations along the urban-rural gradient were measured to establish ecological security zones. The results showed that: (1) From 2010 to 2022, the area of urban-rural transitional region-referred to as the suburban region-increased most significantly, by approximately 77%, while rural areas experienced the greatest reduction, with a decrease of about 8%. (2) Compared to rural and natural areas, urban and urban-rural fringe areas generally exhibited lower values of regulating and supporting services, but higher risks of heatwaves and flooding. Over the past twelve years, recreational services and heat island mitigation in urban and urban-rural fringe areas declined significantly. In contrast, rural and natural areas experienced a marked decrease in soil retention services, along with a significant increase in geological disaster and flood risks. (3) In urban and urban-rural fringe areas, climate regulation, air purification, heat island mitigation, and habitat quality were more strongly correlated with ecological risks, whereas in rural areas, food production and water purification were more closely associated with ecological risks. (4) For ecological security zoning, urban regions were predominantly classified as ecological restoration zones, accounting for 71% of the total area. The urban-rural transitional regions were mainly designated as ecologically sensitive conservation zones and ecological improvement and restoration zones, representing 52% and 30%, respectively. Rural regions were predominantly classified as ecologically sensitive conservation zones, accounting for over 62% of the total area. Natural lands were primarily identified as ecological function conservation zones and ecologically sensitive conservation zones, accounting for 44% and 10% respectively. These findings provided a scientific basis for ecosystem service zonal governance and precise ecological risk management in similar large-scale, highly heterogeneous urbanized regions, such as the Yangtze River Economic Belt.