Homeowner perceptions of watering restriction scenarios in the Minneapolis–St. Paul metropolitan area

Turfgrass-dominated residential yardscapes are an important component of urban ecological landscapes. These spaces provide a multitude of benefits both ecological (e.g., water filtration) and social (e.g., recreation). However, yardscapes can require significant amounts of input such as fertilizers, herbicides, and more critically water. Residential outdoor water use has been extensively studied in water-scarce areas (e.g., southwestern United States) but water supply issues are also beginning to impact previously water-rich regions. One tool a municipality can use to control water usage is residential watering restrictions. Despite past research on the outcomes of such watering restrictions, few studies have tried to understand the perceptions of how homeowners subject to such restrictions feel about them. The current study addresses two critical gaps: first to understand homeowner perceptions of common watering restriction types and their likelihood to water, and second to expand the geographic scope of water use research by targeting a nonwater-scarce area. We conducted an online survey of homeowners in the Twin Cities metropolitan area (TCMA) in Minnesota. Overall, homeowners held moderately favorable views towards three theoretical restriction scenarios and were about equally as likely to water across scenarios compared to no restrictions. Attitudes and perceptions of restrictions saving water drove favorability; conversely, the presence of irrigation systems predicted increased watering likelihood across scenarios. Strategies to reduce water use and achieve conservation goals in nonwater-scarce areas should include assessment of resident perceptions of watering restrictions alongside sustained education campaigns.