Challenging the Norm of Lawns in Public Urban Green Space: Insights from Expert Designers, Turf Growers and Managers

Abstract

Lawns have evolved from medieval European grasslands into globally accepted urban green surfaces, serving recreational, aesthetic and cultural purposes. Today lawn surfaces are essential components of public urban green space (PUGS), fulfilling ecosystem services such as urban heat mitigation, carbon sequestration and social well-being. However, their ecological and resource-intensive disservices, particularly in dry climates, have prompted growing concerns among environmental scientists, urban planners and landscape designers. In water-scarce regions like Perth, Western Australia, traditional lawns face increasing scrutiny due to their high irrigation demands and limited ecological diversity. This study contributed to the transdisciplinary LAWN as Cultural and Ecological Phenomenon project, focusing on the perspectives of professionals, landscape architects, park managers, turf producers and researchers responsible for the planning, design and management of urban lawn in PUGS. Using qualitative methods (semi-structured in-depth interviews), the research explores expert insights on the values, challenges and future trajectories of lawn use in a warming, drying climate. The interviews included 21 participants. Findings indicate that while professionals acknowledge lawns’ continued relevance for sports and active recreation, water scarcity is a major concern influencing design and species selection. Alternatives such as drought-tolerant plants, hard landscaping and multifunctional green spaces are increasingly considered for non-sporting areas. Despite growing concerns, the ideal lawn is still envisioned as an expansive, green, soft surface, mirroring entrenched public preferences. This study underscores the need to balance environmental sustainability with public preference and cultural expectations of green lawns. Balancing expert insights with public attitudes is vital for developing adaptive, water-conscious landscape design strategies suited to future urban planning and environmental conditions in Mediterranean climates.

1. Introduction

In recent decades, the phenomenon of lawns has caught the attention of many researchers around the globe. Smooth green carpets cover urban parks and private gardens, sport fields, schools and university campuses, cemeteries and streetscapes. The concept of the lawn has its roots in semi-natural European grasslands in medieval times. In the temperate climates of these regions, centuries of mowing regimes and other maintenance practices gradually transformed traditional European pasturelands and semi-natural grasslands into a new ecological entity—the lawn that is cultivated and used entirely for human purposes: recreation, meditation and aesthetic admiration. Lawns are hence defined as a human-originated “plant community consisted of predominantly grass species (cultivars), which are sown by seeds or planted using vegetative parts and could contain spontaneously occurring (unwanted) herbaceous species (“lawn weeds”)” [1]. Ongoing maintenance practices such as mowing, fertilising and applying herbicides are the primary factors shaping the structure and composition of lawns. In dry climates, regular irrigation becomes an equally essential component of lawn maintenance operation, compensating for the lack of natural rainfall and water resources. Supplemental irrigation is highly variable and is usually required for non-native or acclimated lawn grass species. Recently, however, occasional irrigation is required even for lawns in European temperate zone countries due to the increasing number of hot and dry summers.

Small areas of lawn appeared in medieval monasteries and castle gardens as turf benches and “meads” (flower-enriched lawns). The areas of lawns dramatically increased and became an important part of parterres in French-style symmetrical gardens. Finally, lawns and grasslands were the essential elements in English landscape gardens and parks of the 18th century. The introduction of lawns to other continents is related to the establishment of colonial settlements in which lawns functioned as an important tool for creating familiar landscapes in the new lands. The 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century could be seen as the “lawn era” because of the development of public parks and other green-space typologies that need a ground surface capable of withstanding recreational pressure [2].

From the very beginning, the lawn has been a distinctive feature of garden composition—serving as a unifying element that connects parts such as groves, shrubs and flowerbeds. Landscape designers determine the placement of lawns within a garden or park, and then managers are responsible for establishing and maintaining grassy surfaces. Today, urban lawns are an important part of green infrastructure, fulfilling a range of ecosystem services, such as regulating (e.g., urban heat mitigation, water regulation and carbon sequestration), supporting services (creating habitats) and cultural services [1,3]. Cultural ecosystem services of lawns, such as recreation and aesthetic enhancement, are primary roles. However, the urbanisation process, involving clearing of native ecosystems and replacing them with designed nature such as parks and gardens where lawns are prevalent, has resulted in public tolerance of ecosystem disservices of lawns such as overuse of water, the threat of water pollution from the misuse of herbicides and fertilisers, high resource input and ecological and design homogenisation.

The situation is especially acute in arid zones in urban landscapes with dry climates, where disservices of overuse of water for lawns and the threat from invasive lawn grasses are a focus for environmental scientists, stakeholders and professionals responsible for planning, designing and management of lawns. Climate change has resulted in more frequent droughts that influence the condition, functionality and aesthetics of lawns in many cities around the globe. Even in a temperate climate there are increasing numbers of heat waves and summer droughts that result in deterioration and decreasing benefits of lawns.

The lawn became a subject of research in Europe in the 1970s, corresponding with the development of the science of urban ecology, where the lawn was recognised as an important urban biotope type. Several European scholars researched flora, vegetation and pollinators of public as well as private lawns [4,5]. Dramatic changes in land use during urbanisation and loss of biodiversity in the last 20 years resulted in switching attention to more sustainable management and maintenance practices of lawns, particularly creating meadows as an alternative sustainable solution (Figure 1). In Europe, the question of creating biodiverse, safe and resource-keeping waterwise lawns has been one of the leading topics in the last decade [6].

US cities became one of the biggest consumers of lawns. According to Weeler et al. [7], “lawns cover more land than any other irrigated crop in the USA”. American scholars are actively researching the social aspects, cultural norms and possibilities of converting water-demanding lawns to alternatives such as xeric lawns in arid zones based on drought-tolerant plant species assemblages or grasslands–prairies. For example, Larson et al. [8] investigated private residential yards (the dominant land use type in American cities) and analysed complex social as well as ecological implications of private yard plant choices for landscape solutions (traditional grass (mesic) yards versus alternative gravel-based (xeric) and mixed yards) in Phoenix, Arizona [8,9].

Projects such as the “Rethinking Lawns Project” running at the Chicago Botanic Garden are some of the latest examples of how ecologists try to establish demonstration sites that could convince urban dwellers to replace conventional lawns with regionally adapted and climate-friendly native grassland versions [10]. American botanical gardens include targeted displays of possible alternatives for more tolerant turf species or pollinator-friendly species such as clover (Trifolium spp.) for private gardens (Figure 2).

American social scientists are especially interested in social perceptions and attachment of Americans to perfect home lawns and the potential for switching public preferences towards more biodiverse urban private lawns [11,12,13,14]. The majority of sociological studies in the USA are based on private garden lawns. Recently, lawns have become a subject for more targeted research on urban public land managers’ perceptions of more suitable lawn species and their willingness to accept more environmentally sustainable maintenance practices for public lands [15]. Barnes et al. [16], for example, investigated homeowner perceptions of possible watering restriction scenarios. American researchers have also studied how visitors of public parks perceived artificial lawns compared with natural lawns [17]. In the last decade, there has been a new tendency to study urban lawns as social–ecological systems that could provide opportunities for accepting lawns as valuable ecological assets and provide nature-based learning for urban citizens [18]. Taking into consideration the amount of space occupied by lawns in all cities, American researchers suggested turf grass ecosystems be considered as “coupled human–natural systems” [18]. Barnes [19] also argues that in modern times, the adoption of new alternative sustainable solutions for lawns requires an understanding of human behaviour and the perception of the public, professionals and practitioners responsible for establishing lawns in cities [19].

The social phenomenon of lawn and attachments to grassy surfaces requires a complex research approach, looking at values not only from a lawn “users’” perspective but also from people who are responsible for planning lawn areas and designing their structure as well as maintaining them. The approaches and visions on what are preferable and acceptable grass surfaces could be different and depend on societal, economic and political peculiarities. However, only a few studies include perceptions of professionals using semi-structured interviews in addition to online surveys. Usually, the sample for such detailed interviews is around 20. For example, in an interdisciplinary project on Swedish lawns, a total of 23 people (politicians, municipality managers, city planners, landscape architects and property managers) were interviewed about policies, lawn maintenance and alternative biodiverse options [20]. A similar complex approach combining questionnaires about public views with interviews of professionals and observation of social activities on lawns was used by Yang et al. [21] in the City of Xi’an (18 stakeholders, semi-structured interviews).

Compared to Europe, the USA and China, there are relatively few studies on the ecological (plant biodiversity and wildlife) and social aspects of lawns in Australia. The majority of the literature is horticulturally centred and focused on how to create urban lawns that would satisfy urban uses all year round, for example, waterwise irrigation, relevant soil preparation, using wetting agents and the influence of fertiliser regime on nitrogen leaching and quality of different-aged turfgrass [22,23]. Lawn in Australia was not considered an urban biotope and part of urban nature but was seen as a component of built infrastructure. There are also very few sociological surveys in Australia that investigate urban lawns as a unique social and ecological entity. One of the few papers includes a study of “lawnscapes” from a socio-historical perspective to understand “the co-evolution of Perth’s people’s extraordinary attachment to year-round green lawns and gardens” and “the water systems needed to maintain them” [24].

The research of social values and preferences of lawns from the perspective of professionals who are responsible for planning, establishing and managing urban lawns in public urban green space contributes to understanding the current vision on value of urban green spaces and developing new sustainable solutions in the time of climate change and growing concern about resource use, public health and biodiversity loss. This study is a part of a pioneering broader, transdisciplinary, industry-supported project in Perth, Western Australia. The LAWN project aims to study the ecological and social phenomenon of urban lawns. The social part of the project aims to explore public and professional perspectives on urban lawns (e.g., social values and preferences regarding traditional lawns as well as new options, considering visual appearance, uses and maintenance). The part of this study on public perspectives is based on online questionnaire surveys in 2022–2023 involving 171 respondents [25].

Perth citizens are prevalent users of lawns, while professionals are responsible for the creation and maintenance of lawns. The expertise of these professionals could be crucial in developing and implementing innovative and sustainable landscape design solutions. Landscape architects design public green spaces and thus decide the location of grassy surfaces; they also specify the choice of turf species. Park managers are responsible for setting lawn maintenance schedules (e.g., mowing frequency, fertiliser application and irrigation settings), monitoring the condition and coordinating actions for replacing damaged lawns. Turf producers respond to the market’s demands and grow turfs in specialised farms.

The main objective of this study is to explore the views and perspectives of key professionals (experts) responsible for lawn planning, design, management and research of urban lawns in public urban green spaces. This contributes to understanding the motifs for current use and to identify the potentials for future urban planning and design of more environmentally friendly green surfaces.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area: Perth, Western Australia

Perth is the capital city of Western Australia (Figure 3a). It was founded by British colonists in 1829 on the land of the Wadjuk Noongar people, who have inhabited the region for at least 40,000 years. The city has several native vegetation remnants within the metropolitan area (banksia woodlands, Eucalyptus woodlands, dune vegetation and wetlands). Perth is located in the Southwest Australian Floristic Region (SWAFR), One of 35 biodiversity hotspots worldwide. The remnant plant communities have exceptional species diversity (about 9000 plant species) and high endemism.

Perth has a population of approximately 2,1 million [26] (ABS, 2021) and is situated in a Mediterranean climate zone, characterised by hot and dry summers (24.6 °C is the mean maximum temperature) and warm, wet winters (12.7 °C is the mean minimum). Perth is one of the sunniest cities in the world. The annual rainfall is 850 mm (about 90% occurs between April and October). Perth has a unique hydrological system (three layers of aquifers) that supports its rivers, wetlands and minor waterways.

The city is dominated by private gardens, with embedded designed public parks based on a mixture of native and exotic trees and shrubs. Colonists brought the fashion of the Victorian Gardenesque garden style, which was characterised by eclecticism and the use of many exotic species as well as the design of extended lawn surfaces (Figure 3b,c).

Lawns are the most visible feature of Perth’s urban landscape. In Perth’s “Urban Zone”, 7% is covered by lawns, 12% is covered by tree canopies and the remaining 81% is built areas. Lawns in private gardens and verges (areas in the public road reserve between the carriageway and the boundary of private property) are the largest lawn category (53%), followed by lawns in smaller local parks (37%). Lawns are also the main ground-cover type under the tree canopy in public parks [27]. The most common turf grass species used for lawns are non-native grasses such as Cenchrus clandestinus, Cynodon dactylon and Stenotaphrum secundatum.

Expert Survey

This study employed a qualitative research approach to explore expert perceptions of urban lawn, focusing on its use and management in public green spaces [28]. Data was gathered through semi-structured interviews. The semi-structured interview format allows for in-depth conversations that explore the subject from diverse perspectives [29]. Interview participants were selected using a combination of purposive and snowball sampling focused on information-rich representatives with a range of experience relating to lawn in public urban green space. Snowball sampling is a method primarily used in qualitative research that relies on networking and referral to access populations that are otherwise hard to reach. The researchers started with a small number of initial participants (“seeds”) who met the study criteria. The initial participants were identified using the researcher’s professional networks associated with landscape designers, the turf industry and local government. These initial participants were identified based on their professional experience and association with turf lawn and public open space design or management. The initial participants were then asked to recommend other potential interviewees from their professional networks who had experience with public open-space lawn design or management until a target sample was achieved [30,31].

The interview participant sample represented the key aspects associated with lawn in public open green spaces, including public green space design, lawn supply and installation and urban green space management. Consequently, the interviews included 21 participants, including landscape architects, urban green space managers, turf industry representatives and researchers specialising in studying urban green spaces (including lawns) and their use as well as potential for finding sustainable pathways for urban lawns in urban planning and design. Two of the turf industry respondents were also involved in lawn research (studying new turf species, improving growing mixtures, etc.) (

Table 1. Interview respondent type and years of experience associated with lawn in public urban green space.

Respondent Type	n	Years of Experience		Respondent Code
		Median	Range
Landscape architect	7	5	2 to 25 years	A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7
UGS manager	6	11	2 to 17 years	M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M6
Turf industry	6	19.5	12 to 49 years	T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6
Researcher	2	5	5 years	R1, R2

). Two respondents were also researchers with urban environmental expertise (including green infrastructure and green spaces).

2.2. Interview Design and Implementation

The interview included a series of open-ended questions drawing on past research on urban green space and lawn [20,21]. The interview included two sets of paired questions about the advantages and disadvantages of having lawn in public urban green spaces, and the barriers and the enablers associated with lawn management in public urban green spaces. The remaining questions explored the participants’ opinion on key characteristics of the perfect lawn in public urban green space and viable alternatives to using lawn in public urban green spaces (Table S1). A question was also included regarding the perceived changes in public urban green space use during and after COVID-19 restrictions. This question aimed to identify the influence of the pandemic and post-pandemic period that was characterised by a significant increase in public green space usage, which could help to understand the motifs of use and values of lawns.

Interviews were conducted face to face between February 2023 and January 2024 by researchers trained in the interview technique. Interview duration varied between 30 and 40 min. The interviews were audio-recorded, with the consent of interview participants, and transcribed for analysis.

2.3. Analysis

Content analysis of the interview transcripts was conducted manually using NVivo [32], a qualitative data analysis software package. Coding of the interview transcriptions was conducted by three experienced researchers involved in the project. Initially, two of the researchers independently coded the interview responses. Coding of responses to each of the questions focused on key terms that were used to identify common topics across interviews. Inter-coder reliability (ICR) was ensured through the involvement of a third senior researcher, experienced in qualitative research, who cross-checked the coding results. Discrepancies were discussed among all three researchers until consensus was reached [33,34,35]. The topics were aggregated into key themes following Braun and Clarke [36] and Bazeley and Jackson [37]. Themes were collated into frequency response tables based on the number of respondents with comments associated with respective themes for each question. Response themes were cross-tabulated with respondent profession type to provide insights into the pattern of responses associated with respondent type.

3. Results

The results present the emergent themes derived from coding the 21 expert interview transcripts across the four respondent profession types. Some themes were shared across the different respondent types, such as concerns about water use, while other themes were dominated by a particular respondent type, for example, managers focusing on lawns for urban cooling. While different profession types tended to focus on particular issues, there was common ground in relation to shared views on lawn in public urban green space (PUGS). The results are grouped by the key survey questions, advantages and disadvantages of PUGS lawns, factors that make managing PUGS lawn easy and difficult, what makes the perfect lawn and potential PUGS lawn alternatives.

3.1. Advantages of Lawns in Public Urban Green Space

Several advantages associated with lawn in PUGS were apparent in the interview responses (Figure 4). The primary advantage mentioned by 16 of the 21 respondents was the promotion of physical activity, including sport and physically active recreation. The promotion of physical activity was mentioned by all four respondent types. The following are examples:

“… lots of advantages. for recreation, in particular, active recreation, I think, very essential within urban areas for active recreation. Numerous sports rely on lawn areas.”

(A2)

“… promote active play because it’s an open surface that you kick a ball around.”

(M1)

“I think that the lawns are particularly important for physical activities and in particular for sports and Australia. So, there are certain types of sports that require grass cover.”

(R2)

“… the biggest advantage from my perspective is for recreational opportunities in public open spaces, so that’s active recreation being sporting facilities …”

(T3)

The urban cooling effect of PUGS lawn was mentioned by 11 respondents, with almost half being PUGS managers working for local government (M2, M3, M4, M5, M6), while three were landscape architects (A2, A4, A5). The remaining three consisted of two turf industry representatives and a researcher (T2, T3, R2). The cooling effect was associated with PUGS lawn in two contexts: first, as a ground cover that is cooler than the built surroundings, making it a pleasant surface for sitting or recreation, and second, in terms of the role of PUGS lawn in countering the urban heat island effect to benefit urban residents living in the proximity of PUGS lawn.

The utility of lawn as a means for enabling multipurpose PUGS was mentioned by seven respondents, mainly landscape architects (A1, A4, A5, A6). Turf industry representatives and a PUGS manager also mentioned this utility (T5, T6, M4). The multipurpose functionality related to the wide range of activities PUGS lawn can host. For example, a landscape architect explained the following:

“I try to have a lawn as much as possible for public use. So, if you have a public space that does require some areas to be open and dynamic, … you want them to have different functionalities. … you want an area for people like a social hub, or you want something else in the future, or something that is open for different functions in the future, for that use of the space. I am OK with having lawns in those areas.”

(A6)

Another landscape architect was of the following view:

“They get their green grass in the park. … One of the things that is actually space that isn’t full of other stuff, so it’s vacant. And that’s one thing that is becoming more and more important is that whilst we build everything else up, we do at least have a space that is able to be used for multiple things.”

(A4)

A cross tabulation of the emergent themes on the advantages of PUGS lawn and respondent type reveals similarities and differences in emphasis. A greater proportion of PUGS managers mentioned lawn promoting physical activity as well as countering the urban heat island effect. The other respondent types tended to focus mainly on the notion of lawn promoting or enabling physical activity. Landscape architects’ answers also reflect the interdisciplinary nature of the landscape design profession. Lawns in Perth are created as a multipurpose open space (designed space) which is accepted by the public as the most suitable ground cover (grass) for different physical activity.

3.2. Disadvantages of Lawn in PUGS

Responses to the question on disadvantages of lawn in PUGS were associated with relatively fewer emergent themes compared to the perceived advantages (Figure 5). The dominant theme was significant water use, mentioned by 18 of the 21 respondents. Water use was the dominant theme for all respondent profession types. In particular, several respondents addressed the need to use large volumes of water to maintain the PUGS lawn to a standard acceptable to the public. Some examples follow:

“… turf needs more water than other plantings, especially. I think more than trees and shrubs because trees and shrubs can get the water by themselves … that’s a problem.”

(A1)

“… the city has always generally kept a fairly high standard within maintenance and that takes a lot of energy, I suppose as well to maintain that Lawn, a lot of water.”

(M2)

“Well, it can be high water use. I guess from our perspective that’s what we look at mostly, is compared to native gardens for instance, they [lawns] have high water use …”

(M3)

“Enormous water usage.”

(T4)

Negative environmental impacts included references to impacts from use of herbicides and fertilisers polluting water sources (such as groundwater) as well as affecting soil health (A2, A3, A5, M1, M2, M3, R2, T4). Some respondents also pointed to global environmental impacts in terms of the contributions to greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuelled machinery used to maintain lawn in PUGS (A2, A5). Negative environmental impacts also included impacts on human health (T5). Maintenance of lawns was considered a disadvantage in terms of the need to ensure PUGS lawns are of a high-quality standard in the eyes of the public, requiring frequent mowing, weed control and other maintenance activities. This was seen to require significant costs in terms of money and time (A1, A3, A4, A6, A7, M4, M6, R1).

Of interest was the fact that few respondents put “low biodiversity” in the category of major negative factors of urban lawns. Establishment and maintenance cost was noticed first of all by landscape architects who are responsible for green space design and creating a two-year maintenance plan.

3.3. Factors That Make Managing Lawns in PUGS Difficult

The primary theme in response to the question of factors making lawn management in PUGS difficult was limited water supply, with 11 respondents mentioning this factor (Figure 6). The limited water supply relates to the dry climate of the study area (Perth, Western Australia) and the reduction in groundwater levels over recent decades. The limited water supply complements the commonly mentioned need for significant volumes of water use as a disadvantage of lawns. The limited water factor was mainly a concern of landscape architect respondents, while some PUGS managers also mentioned limited water. The responses of landscape architects, in particular, were dominated by the limited water theme, as shown by the examples below:

“… water availability can be a very key factor.”

(A2)

“… lack of water, or no water available, really in Perth. We are constrained with the licenses and we’re constantly not really giving a chance to replenish water…”

(A3)

“Perth is dry, it’s dry weather. Having lawn everywhere is not a good idea.”

(A6)

“It’s from a water perspective. There are a lot of urban developments occurring in areas where groundwater is quite limited.”

(M3)

“…maintaining a healthy turf surface while not exceeding our water allocations can be challenging in some circumstances.”

(M5)

The public attitudes to the management response theme included the public expectation for perfect lawns (green, lush, weed-free) and the contrasting public concerns related to the use of pesticides and herbicides on lawns. The public attitudes to the management theme were mentioned solely by PUGS managers and some turf industry representatives. PUGS managers and turf industry representatives considered these two types of public attitude to be inconsistent, noting that meeting the public’s desire for “perfect lawns” requires the use of chemicals, as shown by the following examples:

“They [the public] don’t like it when the lawn is not beautiful and green.”

(M2)

“…then we’ve got the public perception of pesticides and the use of pesticides in turf, while we try to reduce our footprint of pesticides, we still need to use pesticides to manage the turf and weeds and pests so that poses a challenge as well.”

(M5)

“…sometimes there can be issues with members of the public and for me, it usually boils down to education the way or how the public understand things like chemicals. … Because a lot of people are very afraid of some chemicals.”

(T1)

3.4. Factors That Make Managing Lawns in PUGS Easy

The majority of respondents (12 respondents) considered that the amenable environment made it easy to manage PUGS lawns. The amenable environment was in terms of the study area geography being a flat coastal plain, with well-drained sandy soil, combined with the low-density urban sprawl affording large areas for PUGS and lawn (Figure 7). The availability of large, flat areas for lawn was seen as making it easy to maintain using machinery (such as large mowers) by the landscape architects, PUGS managers and turf industry. Examples follow:

“… lots of areas are pretty much flat then it’s much easier to maintain. I have seen many places in the world where the geography doesn’t allow for that, things are a lot more up and down, a lot more smaller areas of grass.”

(A6)

“Because it’s a homogenous turf, it’s a one species that you can just drive over and cut to the same level while with the shrubs, each shrub has a varied maintenance regime which doesn’t just allow this kind of mechanical maintenance when lawn, as a monoculture, can be mechanically maintained quite easily.”

(A7)

“Most of our areas are quite flat. … our green spaces are generally big areas, big open areas and so it is easy for our mowers.”

(M2)

“…large public open spaces makes it a lot easier to manage.”

(M5)

Well-equipped local LGAs refers to local government municipalities having experienced staff and modern equipment to maintain lawns (A2, A5, M6, T4). This included staff with good technical knowledge and equipment for monitoring irrigation performance and soil moisture.

3.5. The Perfect Lawn

The main response themes to the question of what comprises the perfect PUGS lawn included an area of lawn that was both aesthetically pleasing (11 respondents) and low-maintenance (9 respondents) (Figure 8). Three respondents were of the view that there was no universal perfect lawn (A4, A6, M3), while two respondents commented that having no lawn was the ideal (A5, R1). The aesthetically pleasing themed responses included most of the PUGS managers and landscape architects. This response theme mainly included references to large, lush, green and homogenous areas of grass, such as the following examples:

“… a huge area. … it looks big and like traditional English gardens. Huge, huge turf lawn areas.”

(A1)

“… it would look lush and green.”

(A2)

“It would be flat, it would be green. Consistent, even, homogenous.”

(A7)

“… soft underfoot … a leaf thickness that is comfortable to walk [on], sit [on], run hands down or whatever. “

(M1)

“So as long as it looks soft and green and inviting … I’m happy with that.”

(M2)

In contrast to the idea of homogenous, large, flat green lawn areas being aesthetically pleasing, two respondents (R1, A3) considered aesthetically pleasing lawn to include variety, such as different grass lengths and lawn interspersed with shrubs and trees.

The low maintenance theme mainly included responses from PUGS managers and turf industry representatives. This theme primarily included references to low water use while still maintaining lawn health and green colour, as well as some comments on slow-growing lawn. The comments on resilient lawns related to the traits of the grass species used in PUGS lawn and were comments that were also mainly associated with PUGS managers and turf industry representatives, such as the following examples:

“… deep rooted, so it can obviously withstand drought periods.”

(M1)

“Newly introduced species used for turf are more resilient, waterwise. This way they make better lawns.”

(M6)

“… turfgrass that can withstand sting nematode … and at least grow in sting nematode infested soil that would be a big advantage in our situation.”

(T3)

Aesthetically appealing green lawn was the leading theme associated with responses by landscape architects and park managers in their vision of perfect Perth lawn.

3.6. Alternatives to Traditional PUGS Lawns

Most responses to the question of PUGS lawn alternatives (13 respondents) were of the view that there should be a more selective use of lawn in PUGS (Figure 9). The responses in this theme were mainly by landscape architects and PUGS managers. Selective use of lawn was based on the idea that lawn should not be used as a “default” surface covering in public spaces. Rather, more thought and planning were seen to be needed based on the characteristics and usability of an area and the appropriateness of lawn or lawn alternatives, as follows:

“… the question is how much space we need as lawn and how much doesn’t need to be a lawn, we can replace it with other things. … when it’s not an area that should be used for a traditional lawn, we use groundcovers and this area becomes more pleasant than just a lawn. Groundcovers and climbers/creepers.”

(A6)

“… grass will still persist to some degree. So other alternatives, the native landscape certainly is an alternative that just needs to, I suppose … needs to be sort of become a bit more publicly acceptable.”

(M1)

“… large mulched areas, there might be understory planting in them or just a high tree canopy with mulch underneath. But also having areas of lawn.”

(M5)

The dry/non-irrigated landscapes theme was mainly based on comments by landscape architects (four respondents) and one PUGS manager. Comments included the use of gravel, crushed limestone, large boulders and logs or mulch instead of lawn. Some comments included the idea of not irrigating areas of lawn such that it dies during the hot, dry summer months of the study area. Five respondents commented that there were no practical alternatives to PUGS lawn. This theme included comments by landscape architects, one PUGS manager and turf industry representatives. The primary justification of this idea was that sport and active recreation requires large areas of flat lawn that cannot be replaced by other types of ground cover because other types of ground cover are not durable to foot traffic or are not appropriate due to their physical characteristics (e.g., not flat or soft).

3.7. Changes in Usage Rates of Public Green Spaces Since the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Public use of PUGS is central to the design, supply and management of PUGS lawn [25]. The COVID-19 pandemic, and its associated restrictions on public movement and access to public spaces in the study area (between 2020 and 2021) and the eventual cessation of restrictions, was a significant event impacting PUGS lawn public use and management. In this context, most respondents across all the respondent types believed changes in use of PUGS had occurred during and after the COVID-19 restrictions in Perth (Figure 10). However, two respondents thought that no changes in use had occurred during and after this event (T3, A7). A “don’t know” response was based on a stated lack of monitoring of PUGS use; hence, the respondents indicated they were unable to answer the question in the absence of data.

Most respondents focused on changes in the use of PUGS lawn during COVID-19 restrictions rather than after restrictions had ceased, mainly regarding people accessing PUGS to escape the confinement of their homes (participants A3, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, R2, T4) (Figure 11). The following are examples:

“… a greater appreciation of the outdoors and that sort of thing. Since they were just being locked indoors.”

(M1)

“… they just needed to get out of the house before going a bit crazy. So, I did notice that you would see a lot more families out in the reserves in the parks and things like that.”

(M2)

“During the pandemic, we definitely saw a far greater usage of our public open spaces, especially during the lockdowns when people were only allowed an hour or so a day, to go outside, public space was utilized significantly more …”

(M5)

Socialising and exercise were also mentioned as being more prevalent in PUGS during COVID-19 restrictions, although this may be associated with escaping the confinement of lockdowns.

Changes in use of PUGS after the COVID-19 restrictions were less likely to be mentioned by respondents. One respondent (M5) suggested that the increase in PUGS use during COVID-19 restrictions was followed by a decline after COVID-19 restrictions. Those who were of the view that changes in use of PUGS persisted after COVID-19 restrictions mentioned a continued increased prevalence of people exercising and dog walking. Interestingly, none of the respondents who were of this belief were PUGS managers. Rather, they were turf industry and landscape architecture representatives. This suggests that their opinion is based more on personal experience than professional experience.

4. Discussion

This study presents expert views on lawn management and use in PUGS in the context of a low-density, sprawling city that experiences a Mediterranean-type climate. This study provides some alternative insights into PUGS lawns compared to the majority of studies that were conducted in Northern Hemisphere countries with more temperate climates. The results highlight the various perceived benefits, values and challenges of designing, installing and managing lawn in a city with a hot, dry climate and large areas of PUGS. The expert participant perspectives correspond with findings of a previous survey of the general public in relation to urban lawns, whereby lawns were a publicly valued component of urban areas [25].

The interviewed experts held the common view that the main advantage of PUGS lawn was that it enables organised sport and physically active recreation in urbanised areas. The researchers, landscape architects, turf industry professionals and PUGS managers all considered that members of the public benefit from access to lawns for playing sport and other recreational activities (e.g., walking dogs). A point of difference in perceived advantages was related to lawns contributing to urban cooling. While most of the PUGS managers (local municipality employees) identified urban cooling as an advantage of lawn, a lesser proportion of the other expert groups identified urban cooling as an advantage. The focus of the PUGS managers on the urban cooling effect of lawn is likely a result of the urban heat island effect being a dominant policy focus for local municipalities in Perth [38]. Past research found that the public also values the cooling effect of lawns; however, recreation and the aesthetic appeal of lawns took precedence over cooling effects. For the experts, the “aesthetic appeal” of lawn was placed after cooling, sporting and active recreation opportunities.

The dominant design typology of Perth’s public open spaces, such as urban public parks, where lawn covers significant areas (more than half of the overall area [27] has historical roots in the urban planning approach for Perth. The first urban planning scheme developed for Perth in 1955 included a requirement for 10% of urban areas to be set aside as public open space for sporting activities [39], in other words, large, flat, lawned areas that catered to cricket, football and other forms of sport requiring large, flat areas of lawn. This planning approach reflected a general global trend in the increasing presence of PUGS lawns for recreational and sporting use from the 20th century onwards [2,3].

There are differences in valuing and using lawns that are driven by cultural, social and historical factors. For example, in Sweden, the range of activities and the specifics of lawns are clearly connected to the land use (urban planning structure), with domination of publicly acceptable lawns in residential areas and public parks, with a limited number of private lawns. These lawns are derived from semi-natural ecosystems dominated by native species and have been used for centuries in gardens and other public spaces. The number of lawns in Swedish cities was double in the post-World War II period [40]. The majority of lawned areas are publicly accessible and intensively used during the summer period. There is more diversity in the lawn’s typology and division of lawns, including intensively maintained decorative lawns, utility (common) lawns and meadow-like lawns (cut only once or twice a season). Cut biodiverse meadows have also been used in Sweden for centuries as a green roof for protecting roof material. Sports lawns are a separate category here and cover small areas compared to other categories. There are some similarities in the use of Swedish lawns and Perth lawns, for example, for walking with dogs, playing, exercising and picnicking. However, Perth lawns in public parks are more often used for active sports. Another similarity is the preferences by people to have well-maintained lawns in public spaces.

In contrast, lawns in Chinese cities are a very recent phenomenon, a consequence of globalisation. Most public lawns in China have restricted public access to minimise overuse and preserve cultural requirements (to be a super “clean and green” lawn). The dominance of the green colour and neatness aesthetic is also stressed by USA studies of lawns [2]. The Perth experts also consider aesthetics as one value of PUGS lawn; however, the aesthetic value of lawns in Chinese open spaces (neatness and green colour) is by far the leading priority for both park users and managers [21]. Consequently, passive recreation (watching lawns and enjoying the appearance of green space covered by grass) is one of the leading uses of lawns in China.

The significance of PUGS and the advantages of large expanses of lawn was exemplified by the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated restrictions on public movement. This research was conducted soon after COVID-19 restrictions were lifted. Lawns, as the largest component of UGS in Perth, were considered by experts, and the public, as particularly important places for exercising, socialising and dog walking in an open space that also allowed for social distancing. PUGS lawn was seen as a means for escaping the confinement of home lockdowns and contributing to personal and community well-being [41] Thus, the pandemic reinforced the positive perception and appreciation of large areas of PUGS lawns by urban dwellers.

The most common disadvantage of PUGS lawns, identified by all expert groups, was the need for significant volumes of water to establish and maintain PUGS lawn. Lawn in Perth is a colonial phenomenon, an introduced landscape design feature originally intended as a civilising influence on what was seen as a hostile landscape [24,25]. Perth’s hot, dry climate and limited water supply, with increasing water use restrictions, means that the ability to maintain PUGS lawn in a state suitable for sport and recreation is difficult. In addition to large quantities of water, the dry, sandy, nutrient-poor soils of Perth mean establishment and maintenance of lawn requires significant effort and resources, such as adding a layer of fertile soil, using wetting agents to facilitate water retention in soil and using fertilisers and herbicides. These requirements were associated with negative environmental impacts of lawn in Perth PUGS by about half of each expert group. High costs of establishing and maintaining lawns was a main concern in Chinese cities, where lawns are also an introduced phenomenon [21]. In Swedish cities, where lawns are not new, the major maintenance operation is mowing, and major concerns focused on the gas emissions from petrol-driven mowing machines [1]. While concern about emissions from lawn maintenance machinery was mentioned by some Perth experts, it was not a commonly held view. In contrast, recent research in Los Angeles (California) highlighted greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) as a major disadvantage associated with maintenance of lawns (mowing, irrigation and fertilisation). The authors calculated the total annual GHG emissions emitted from maintenance of turf surfaces in all types of lawn’s land-use typologies (private residential, public parks and gardens, golf courses, university campuses and cemeteries). The amount of greenhouse gas per year’s emission was tremendous and equivalent to a year’s emission from 119,280 passenger vehicles. In dry and hot summers, as in Los Angeles, these high emissions are also connected to intensive watering (e.g., transporting water to the urban zones) [42].

While disadvantages of lawn were apparent both in the literature and in the expert interviews, it is evident that these are effectively countered by the utility of lawn as a public good. In all countries it is seen as a “given” and one of the most familiar elements of outdoor urban space. There is one common expectation of lawns in Perth, Sweden and China. It is a well-maintained lawn surface which is appreciated and demanded by citizens in public spaces.

4.1. Attitudes Towards Sustainable/Alternative Practices and Solutions

When asked about lawn alternatives, the common view was the necessity for rethinking the existing urban planning practice and restricting use of conventional irrigated lawns. Restricting installation of lawns was in the context of considering the purpose and function of public spaces and areas within PUGS and whether lawn is necessary. Restricting installation of lawns to areas where it is a necessity, (e.g., for sport and active recreation) was associated with the idea of installing dry/non-irrigated areas (brown landscapes) or low-maintenance native vegetation in suitable areas of PUGS. Such an approach requires, or perhaps facilitates, a change in public perceptions of PUGS as consisting mainly of expansive lawned areas. Using native plants corresponds with a trend towards using water-efficient, heat-tolerant lawn alternatives in cities with hot and dry climates, which generally has public support in Perth [43,44]. Along these lines, Doll et al. (2023) [45] argued that Perth residents could accept some non-irrigated alternatives and designers could incorporate at least 40% of native vegetation ground cover, while irrigated lawns in PUGS should still have an important role. This strategy of using drought-tolerant alternatives to classic (mesic) irrigated lawns corresponds to findings from Los Angeles, which shares climatic characteristics with Perth. American researchers also suggested reducing areas of highly maintained lawns (especially non-functional zones) and decreasing the intensity of management (including mowing and irrigation) to help “significant reduction of emissions and support water conservation efforts” [42]. Use of drought-tolerant native plants (including grass species) also fulfills another important target—increasing biodiversity values of lawns. However, for Perth and Los Angeles, the task of finding appropriate native grasses or ground-cover species capable of creating a durable sod-like entity is more complicated due to the specifics of natural biomes.

In contrast, Europe has natural and semi-natural meadows and thus inspiration and plant material availability for PUGS [4]. European lawns are dominated by native species and can be turned into biodiverse and more resource-efficient models by searching for appropriate maintenance regimes. For example, in Sweden, where water supply and climate are more amenable, alternatives to lawn are rooted in the biodiverse meadow that is cut only once or twice during the vegetative seasons. Urban uses in Sweden were particularly positive in relation to the alternative option of “cues to care” [46], where meadow-like parts were bordered by conventional, frequently cut lawn strips.

In China, the alternative biodiverse meadow idea has not yet received general support. Ground covers with flowers (Oxalis) are used for the substitution of grass areas, especially in shady park spaces. In China, the search for durable alternative grass or ground species that can withstand heavy human traffic is not so acute compared to Perth, where lawn spaces are used mostly for sport and active recreation. It is evident that lawn alternatives appear to be influenced not only by climatic conditions but also by cultural history and how PUGS is used, understood and appreciated. For example, users of PUGS in China enjoy the smooth, green beauty of lawns from pathways in a way similar to how they use classical Chinese gardens with rocks, winding pathways, trees and ground covers. In the Chinese context, lawns represent nature available in a crowded, dense city, which can provide a sense of pleasure and freedom, while Perth PUGS areas are primarily considered places to be used for sport and recreation. These contrasting uses of an introduced landscaping design phenomenon arguably influence perceptions of viable/desirable alternatives to lawn in PUGS. In Perth, one of the new directions could be the research of native grasses or other plants which are capable of creating an equivalent of Northern Hemisphere durable sod (turf). In the near future, lawns most likely will rely on more drought-tolerant non-native grass species and their cultivars and new sustainable technology of smart water use.

4.2. The Vision of Perfect Lawns

For the landscape architects and PUGS managers surveyed, the perfect lawn should first be aesthetically appealing, while members of the turf industry were less focused on this aspect, with a tendency toward favouring low-maintenance lawn. Similarly, Swedish and Chinese research also identified the perfect law as “smooth grass surface looking perfectly green and good”. This is despite the different social and historical contexts and contrasting environmental conditions for use. However, in all countries, two groups were revealed that could be called “lawn enthusiasts” and “nature enthusiasts” who want to encourage the implementation of flower-rich meadows or native drought-tolerant ground covers and reduced areas of lawns. Some of the interviewed experts believed that the public expects conventional, flat, green, aesthetically pleasing and well-maintained lawns in PUGS. They argued that they are the public “servants” and the expectations from the lawn’s users should be always prioritised. This potentially influences perceptions of the perfect PUGS lawn and the potential for lawn alternatives. However, evidence suggests that the public is open to alternative solutions to lawn in PUGS [25,43,44,45,47]. The published research suggests that alternatives to lawn may be publicly acceptable in certain areas of PUGS as long as access to large areas of lawn are also provided.

Based on the findings of this study, the range of experts tend to be of the view that lawns will continue to be a dominant feature of PUGS because of their well-recognised value for sport and recreation (promoting physical and mental health) and their urban cooling effect. This is despite momentum promoting establishment of lawn alternatives in PUGS [43]. The warming and drying climate in regions where water is becoming a scarce resource means that there may be pressure to shift toward low-maintenance and water-sensitive PUGS. This may include non-lawn alternatives as well as re-planning and re-design of PUGS. However, it seems that lawns will remain a dominant feature, though managed using water-wise technology and drought-tolerant lawn varieties.

5. Limitations and Future Directions

This research highlighted the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in researching public open spaces such as lawns from social perspectives. The main limitation was the small amount of research on social aspects of public lawns that limited the extent of comparable material. For Perth, with its significant number of private lawns, research on priorities, norms and possible alternatives regarding private green space is also required.

The future research direction could prioritise a search for the phenomenon of “perfect” lawns for different countries which can address current challenges of climate (drying), socio-economic situation (limitation of maintenance budget) and cultural challenges (changing of using public open spaces, physical exercises and public attitude).

6. Conclusions

Lawn was considered by most experts as a vital component of PUGS, enabling sport and active recreation for urban dwellers. In the context of a city in a Mediterranean-type climate that is warming and drying, the main disadvantage was seen as the need for large volumes of water for lawn irrigation combined with a limited and a declining water supply. Managing PUGS lawn with a diminishing water supply was reflected in the suggested lawn alternatives focusing on using landscaping materials other than plants or using water-efficient plants in areas that cater to uses other than sport and active recreation. The need to reduce water use contrasted with the view of the perfect lawn that was generally considered by most of the experts to be an expansive, flat area of soft, green grass.

The general agreement among the experts indicates that lawn will remain a dominant feature of PUGS despite the increasing water scarcity in regions such as Perth. This means there is importance in adaptive design and management approaches that address the challenge of establishing and maintaining a lawn to a standard that enables safe sporting and recreational use. It also suggests that despite public support for lawn alternatives in certain contexts, the public still expects high-quality, well-maintained lawns in PUGS. The public expectation for expansive lawns in PUGS may require further research to ascertain the willingness to accept certain characteristics and combinations of lawn and lawn alternatives in PUGS. A threshold for the proportion and types of PUGS lawn and lawn alternatives in the context of regional variation may help inform the effective management of PUGS.