Barriers to Native Plantings in Private Residential Yards

Amélie Davis () and Jessica Stoyko
Additional contact information
Amélie Davis: Department of Economics and Geosciences, United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, CO 80921, USA
Jessica Stoyko: Department of Geography, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056, USA

Land, 2022, vol. 12, issue 1, 1-21

Abstract: In urban areas, private yards can make up large portions of the available “green space” which can be used to provide resources for many species, including birds, and pollinators. If residents are persuaded or willing to plant certain native plants, the aggregate effect of these plantings could be hugely beneficial for key pollinator species. The objectives of this study are to uncover impediments to adding different types of pollinator-beneficial plants to private yards, as well as ascertain which incentives to plant these native plants might be most persuasive, and finally determine if there are procedural knowledge gaps in how to plant, care for, or where to purchase three pollinator-beneficial plants. In this study, we randomly selected properties in two counties in southwestern Ohio along two gradients: parcel size and parcel valuation (as a proxy for income). Two hundred surveys were distributed and 113 were returned (57% response rate). We find that, in aggregate, respondents do not have a strong intent to plant these native plants, especially Asclepias syriaca (a milkweed that serves as host plant to the iconic monarch butterfly; Danaus plexippus ) and, surprisingly, the intent to plant these does not differ statistically even when help with costs, labor, or the provision of online resources are offered. We also find that the reported knowledge of where to purchase wildflowers is significantly higher than how to care for them and how to plant them. Lastly, respondents are much more confident in how to take care of trees compared to the three pollinator-beneficial plants shown in the survey. We discuss the implications of these findings for outreach and extension purposes.

Keywords: human-environment interactions; ecosystem services; education; habitat; bees; urban; peri-urban; garden; intent; pro-environmental behavior (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/1/114/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/1/114/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:114-:d:1020003

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().