Services of General Interest (SGI) are basic services that society and economy vitally need to function and develop. Securing access to these services is a key concern in many European spatial planning systems. In remote regions across Europe, SGI provision is facing challenges due to demographic and economic transformation processes. Opposing political proposals on how to address these challenges are often rooted in opposing ethical convictions. This article sheds light on the perspectives that different ethical concepts offer on SGI provision and explores the practical repercussions they entail. It is shown that proponents of libertarianism will advocate for allowing people to move to or stay in remote regions without adequate access to SGI as long as this is their voluntary and conscious decision, whereas proponents of egalitarianism will consider it a matter of justice to ensure universal access to SGI in remote regions even if this presupposes major societal efforts. Proponents of utilitarianism, it is shown, will consider it reasonable to expand SGI in densely populated regions, where provision is cost-effective and many people benefit from it, and to reduce it in remote regions, where costs of provision are high and users are few. These positions are illustrated using the examples of school education and local public transport. The article puts forward the view that while a reflection of the different ethical positions cannot resolve the challenges that SGI provision in remote regions is facing, it is often possible to find solutions for SGI provision that reconcile the seemingly contradictory demands resulting from the different positions. The reflection of the different positions thus contributes to reasoned, informed decision-making on SGI provision in spatial planning and beyond.