Background Project was initiated by HOA residents concern with water - - PDF document

4/18/2012 1

Uncovering Barriers to Changing Homeowner Landscaping Practices

Glenn D. Israel, Jessica L. Gouldthorpe, Sally A. Scalera, & Paul F. Monaghan University of Florida

An earlier version was presented at the International Symposium on Society and Resource Management in Madison, WI, June, 2011. Please do not cite or circulate without the authors permission at the research is ongoing.

Background

• Project was initiated by HOA resident’s concern

with water quality

• Aligned with state and national concerns over

surface and groundwater quality (e.g., IRL)

• Collaboration to assess educational needs &
• pportunities for CBSM
• Project environment contains considerable

controversy

• Role of fertilizer county & municipal regulations
• EPA rules
• “Green” industry lobby
• UF actions & responses

4/18/2012 2

Example HOAs Methods

• Convenience sample

focused on HOAs

• Unimode‐designed Web &

Paper surveys

• Items focus on fertilization,

irrigation, attitudes & preferences, and demographics

• Analytic sample is 489

4/18/2012 3

Decision Maker for Maintaining the Lawn and Landscape

HOA & Service Lawn Service HOA only Respondent & Service Resp., HOA & Service Respondent & HOA Respondent/Spouse 1.2% 1.2% 4.3% 3.9% 4.7% 5.7% 78.9% n = 489

Respondent Profile

Attribute Mean

• Std. Dev.

Min Max N Age 56.7 12.4 21 89 449 Years in home 11.9 10.3 50 484 Years in Florida 27.7 17.4 74 483 Education (% with a 4‐year degree) 62.5% 473 Income (% with $75,000 or more) 53.7% 415 Home market value $169,829 $76,511 $34,410 $857,400 367 Environmental Attitude Index 4.32 .77 1.00 5.00 473 Use lawn service (%) 45.6% 489 Have irrigation system (%) 79.1% 484 Property abuts water (%) 26.1% 486

4/18/2012 4

Environmental Attitude Index for 5 HOAs

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 WDF (n=29) IND (n=21) GEO (n=10) CAT (n=47) CHE (n=18)

Factors in Fertilizer Purchase Decision

*Amount of slow release N *Amount of Phosphorus (P) Another person's recommendation *Amount of N in formulation Price Coverage area per bag Store location Brand name Priority of BMP factors (*s) 25.3% 26.5% 30.1% 30.1% 33.7% 43.4% 49.7% 59.6% 46.9% 22.9% 21.8% 8.4% n = 166

4/18/2012 5

Information Read on the Fertilizer Bag

Avoiding injury to plants/lawn Month/Season to use Which grasses/plants suited best How often to use When to water Rate to apply Count of topics read 64.6% 68.5% 74.7% 75.8% 86.5% 87.6% 5% 5% 6.1% 8.4% 10.1% 20.7% All 6 ‐ 44.7% n = 178

Fertilization Best Management Practices

Knew square footage of lawn Avoided winter fertilization Use 30% slow release N Nitrogen Application 49.2% 55.8% 46.6% 15.1% 5.7% 16.3% 47.7% 12.8% 55.8%

Matched setting to bag Used turf area on bag Over fertilized Not enough information Not enough information Yes No

To be updated

4/18/2012 6

Respondents’ Knowledge of Lawn Service Company’s Fertilizer Practices

1 2 3 4 5 31.0% 15.2% 29.0% 14.3% 10.5% I know nothing about what they do I know exactly what they do n = 210

Irrigation Frequency by Season and Adjustment Status

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Summer Winter Summer Winter Nearly every day 3‐4/Week Twice/week Once/week Less than 1X Adjusted Schedule No Adjusted Schedule

4/18/2012 7

Fertilizer‐relevant Landscape Design For Homeowners with a Water Body

Landscape Attributes 54.8% 15.9% 29.4% Lawn to shore, no buffer Lawn to shore, with buffer Lawn not to the shore n = 126

Discussion

• Respondents were relatively well‐educated and

affluent with pro‐environmental attitudes

• Behaviors less consistent with attitude index
• Considerable effort needed to move HOA

residents from conventional norms driving fertilization and irrigation practices

• Opinions about landscapes suggest need to

emphasize environmental health theme in ways that don’t impact value and attractiveness