Barriers and opportunities for further enhancing urban garden biodiversity: Insights from a behaviour change model for the United Kingdom

Abstract Urbanisation poses a major threat to biodiversity, yet residential gardens offer opportunities to provide key habitats for urban wildlife. Understanding both the perceived feasibility of implementing further improvements to gardens for biodiversity and the barriers that constrain engagement is essential for designing effective conservation interventions. This study uses a questionnaire survey of 231 householders in Great Britain to assess the likelihood of adding 10 wildlife‐friendly garden features and to identify perceived barriers using a behaviour change framework which considers capability (C), opportunity (O) and motivation (M) as determinants of behaviour (B) (COM‐B model) Within a sample of gardens, in which most already contained at least one wildlife‐friendly feature, the overall odds of respondents implementing further improvements were low, indicating a 37.5% probability of engagement. Wildflower patches were the only feature rated as more likely than unlikely to be implemented, while compost heaps and ponds were the least likely. All COM‐B barrier subgroups significantly reduced the likelihood of engagement, with physical opportunity constraints (67.9%), particularly a lack of space, and psychological capability (20.5%) being the most prevalent, followed by social opportunity (6.2%) and physical capability (5.4%). Younger respondents and those from more socio‐economically deprived areas reported more barriers. Given that many surveyed gardens already contained wildlife‐enhancing elements, limited space, the level of effort required, associated costs and existing knowledge were key obstacles to further improving gardens for biodiversity, even among a potentially conservation‐aware group. Our findings indicate that the presence of existing conservation efforts does not necessarily predict householders' engagement with additional biodiversity interventions. Individuals report substantial barriers to engagement; therefore, we recommend that conservation non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) coordinate efforts that target higher‐level stakeholders, enabling resources to be reallocated towards addressing barriers through top‐down policy change. Policy‐led interventions have the potential to overcome barriers to individual householder engagement, thereby improving biodiversity outcomes at a broader spatial scale. Applying these insights in policy and practice could enhance urban gardens as key contributors to biodiversity conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
People and Nature
Published
2026-08-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.70412
Primary Topic
Urban Green Space and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Barriers and opportunities for further enhancing urban garden biodiversity: Insights from a behaviour change model for the United Kingdom

Andrew Moss, Richard W. Yarnell, G. Counsell, Kat Hamill et al.
People and Nature
Urban Green Space and Health
article

Barriers and opportunities for further enhancing urban garden biodiversity: Insights from a behaviour change model for the United Kingdom

Andrew Moss, Richard W. Yarnell, G. Counsell, Kat Hamill, Leah J. Williams, Simon Tollington, Kelly Hitchcock
article en

Abstract

Abstract Urbanisation poses a major threat to biodiversity, yet residential gardens offer opportunities to provide key habitats for urban wildlife. Understanding both the perceived feasibility of implementing further improvements to gardens for biodiversity and the barriers that constrain engagement is essential for designing effective conservation interventions. This study uses a questionnaire survey of 231 householders in Great Britain to assess the likelihood of adding 10 wildlife‐friendly garden features and to identify perceived barriers using a behaviour change framework which considers capability (C), opportunity (O) and motivation (M) as determinants of behaviour (B) (COM‐B model) Within a sample of gardens, in which most already contained at least one wildlife‐friendly feature, the overall odds of respondents implementing further improvements were low, indicating a 37.5% probability of engagement. Wildflower patches were the only feature rated as more likely than unlikely to be implemented, while compost heaps and ponds were the least likely. All COM‐B barrier subgroups significantly reduced the likelihood of engagement, with physical opportunity constraints (67.9%), particularly a lack of space, and psychological capability (20.5%) being the most prevalent, followed by social opportunity (6.2%) and physical capability (5.4%). Younger respondents and those from more socio‐economically deprived areas reported more barriers. Given that many surveyed gardens already contained wildlife‐enhancing elements, limited space, the level of effort required, associated costs and existing knowledge were key obstacles to further improving gardens for biodiversity, even among a potentially conservation‐aware group. Our findings indicate that the presence of existing conservation efforts does not necessarily predict householders' engagement with additional biodiversity interventions. Individuals report substantial barriers to engagement; therefore, we recommend that conservation non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) coordinate efforts that target higher‐level stakeholders, enabling resources to be reallocated towards addressing barriers through top‐down policy change. Policy‐led interventions have the potential to overcome barriers to individual householder engagement, thereby improving biodiversity outcomes at a broader spatial scale. Applying these insights in policy and practice could enhance urban gardens as key contributors to biodiversity conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

People and Nature
Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust (JE), Chester Zoo (GB), Forest Research (GB), Nottingham Trent University (GB)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Urban Green Space and Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.