The grass-free lawn: floral performance and management implications

Grass lawns are a ubiquitous feature of urban green-space throughout much of the temperate world. Species poor and intensively managed, lawns are ecologically impoverished, however environmentally aware lawn owners are reluctant to implement alternatives due to aesthetic concerns. Developing an alternative lawn format which is both biodiversity friendly and aesthetically pleasing is an imperative for urban greening. We suggest that such an alternative can be provided by replacing the grass lawn by a forb-based mix. To advance this, we tested the floral performance of three groups of clonal perennial forbs (native, non-native and mixed), each maintained using standard lawn management mowing regimes. Our findings show that both the frequency of mowing and the height at which mowing is applied influence floral performance and lawn aesthetics. Species origin was found to influence floral productivity, floral visibility and floral variety within grass-free lawns, with native species providing the greatest floral performance. The behaviour and management of grass lawns was not found to be a suitable analogue for the management of grass-free lawns and grass-free lawns are sufficiently different from grass lawns to require an entirely original management approach. We suggest that the grass-free lawn can provide an aesthetically and environmentally relevant replacement for the ubiquitous and ecologically-poor grass lawn.

Biodiversity and green open space

Biodiversity has been defined as the totality of genes, species, and ecosystems that inhabit the earth with the field contributing to many aspects of our lives and livelihoods by providing us with food, drink, medicines and shelter, as well as contributing to improving our surrounding environment. Benefits include providing life services through improved horticultural production, improving the business and service of horticulture as well as our environment, as well as improving our health and wellbeing, and our social and cultural relationships. Threats to biodiversity can include fragmentation, degradation and deforestation of habitat, introduction of invasive and exotic species, climate change and extreme weather events, over-exploitation of our natural resources, hybridisation, genetic pollution/erosion and food security issues and human overpopulation. This chapter examines a series of examples that provide the dual aims of biodiversity conservation and horticultural production and service; namely organic horticultural cropping, turf management, and nature-based tourism, and ways of valuing biological biodiversity such as the payment of environmental services and bio-prospecting. Horticulture plays a major role in the preserving of biodiversity.

The evolution of green leases: towards inter-organizational environmental governance

Improving the environmental performance of non-domestic buildings is a complex and ‘wicked’ problem due to conflicting interests and incentives. This is particularly challenging in tenanted spaces, where landlord and tenant interactions are regulated through leases that traditionally ignore environmental considerations. ‘Green leasing’ is conceptualized as a form of ‘middle-out’ inter-organizational environmental governance that operates between organizations, alongside other drivers. This paper investigates how leases are evolving to become ‘greener’ in the UK and Australia, providing evidence from five varied sources on: (1) UK office and retail leases, (2) UK retail sector energy management, (3) a major UK retailer case study; (4) office leasing in Sydney, and (5) expert interviews on Australian retail leases. With some exceptions, the evidence reveals an increasing trend towards green leases in prime offices in both countries, but not in retail or sub-prime offices. Generally introduced by landlords, adopted green leases contain a variety of ambitions and levels of enforcement. As an evolving form of private–private environmental governance, green leases form a valuable framework for further tenant–landlord cooperation within properties and across portfolios. This increased cohesion could create new opportunities for polycentric governance, particularly at the interface of cities and the property industry.