Consumer Preferences for Low-input Turfgrasses: A Conjoint Analysis

Abstract

<jats:p>Traditional turfgrasses found in residential lawns provide a functional and aesthetically pleasing landscape if provided adequate resource inputs, yet, as available natural resources become more limited and public concerns grow stronger about the ecological effects of urban turfgrass management, it becomes increasingly important to pursue alternative landscape options. There are non-traditional turfgrasses that require fewer resource inputs that could be made available to homeowners. The objective of this study was to estimate consumer preferences and the relative importance of aesthetic and maintenance attributes of turfgrasses as well as identify potential market segments of the residential turfgrass market. Conjoint analysis was conducted on survey responses of 116 Minnesota homeowners. The results indicated that maintenance attributes of turfgrasses, specifically irrigation requirement, significantly affected consumer purchasing behavior. The analysis also identified four potential market segments, the Price Conscious segment, the Shade Adaptation segment, the Mowing Conscious segment, and the Water Conscious segment.</jats:p>

Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences for Turfgrass Attributes in the United States and Canada

“…Water usage, followed by fertilizer requirement, was also one of the most influential attributes for consumers. The high WTP premiums for a lower irrigation requirement were consistent with the findings from Yue et al () and Hugie et al (), indicating a growing demand for turfgrass species that can tolerate lower levels of water inputs.…”

“…Although the demographic factors were different between U.S. and Canadian participants, similar consumer segments were identified based on participants’ heterogeneity in their preferences for turfgrass attributes: Balanced Consumers , Low‐input Conscious Consumers , and Appearance Conscious Consumers . Unlike the distinct “Water Conscious” and “Mowing Conscious” segments identified by Hugie et al (), the Low‐input Conscious Consumers are concerned with all of the low‐input attributes as well as the ability to withstand foot traffic. We found the percentages of the Appearance Conscious Consumers were similar for the United States and Canada, while the share for Low‐input Conscious Consumers was lower and the share for Balanced Consumers was higher in the United States compared to Canada.…”

“…It is likely that most consumers are more aware of the number of times that they fertilize compared to the total quantity of fertilize they apply to their lawns. The reports of Meyer et al () and Hugie et al () indicated that up to 50% of consumers think fertilizer is not good for human health and environment. This may be one reason why consumers prefer turfgrasses requiring less fertilizer.…”

“…There are increasing concerns among researchers and consumers about the potential for negative impacts of improperly applied pesticides and fertilizer on water quality and human health (Robbins and Birkenholtz ; Robbins and Sharp ; Meyer et al ). In addition, water use is one of the biggest concerns for lawn maintenance among homeowners (Hugie et al ; Yue et al ; Ghimire et al ). Previous studies point out that lawn irrigation accounts for up to 67% of residential water consumption in hot climate areas such as Phoenix, Tempe, and Scottsdale (Mayer et al ), and water accessibility impacts landscape design and choice of plant type (Spinti et al ; Larsen and Harlan ; Yabiku et al ).…”

“…Using discrete choice and best‐worst methods, Ghimire et al () reached the same conclusion, finding that the top‐ranked desirable lawn attributes for consumers in the southern United States were drought tolerance and low maintenance. In addition, Hugie et al () segmented Minnesota consumers into four potential groups, each of which was primarily influenced by a specific turfgrass attribute: price, adaption to shade, mowing requirement, or water use.…”