What Motivates People to Change Their Irrigation Behaviors to Reduce Water Waste?

Editorial Director: Steve Whitesell
Author: Kevin Rowe

Americans are rethinking their yards. Faced with droughts, high water bills, and shifting social norms, many are trading turf for climate-smart landscapes that use less water and maintenance. But the study found that behavioral motivations — not financial ones — drive lasting change.

Key Takeaways

Homeowners are most motivated by:

Saving water and doing their part during drought.
Reducing maintenance and simplifying upkeep.
Keeping curb appeal while conserving resources.
Following neighbors’ example — peer comparisons and community norms matter more than cash rebates.

According to the Study, people change their landscapes and irrigation practices for a combination of practical, environmental, and social reasons—often influenced by drought conditions, local incentives, and perceptions of aesthetics and maintenance.

The National Landscape Transformation Study by the Alliance for Water Efficiency reveals why homeowners actually remove lawns and change irrigation habits — and it’s not just about rebates.

Why it Matters

Understanding these motivations helps cities design smarter conservation programs. Instead of relying solely on rebates, utilities can focus on education, social proof, and design support — saving water for the long term, not just during crises.

What are the Primary Motivations?

Homeowners don’t just replace lawns for the money. The study found that most landscape transformations stem from deeper motivations — conserving water, cutting maintenance, and adapting to drought. Aesthetics still matter, but the biggest drivers are practicality and purpose: saving water, saving time, and doing the right thing for the environment and community

Top motivations identified in participant surveys (Figure 6.3, p. 85):

To save water — The leading motivator across nearly all participating utilities.
To reduce maintenance — Many homeowners viewed transformation as a way to simplify yard care.
Drought awareness — Drought messaging and visible scarcity triggered action among early adopters.
To save money — Especially where utilities offered cash-for-grass or turf replacement rebates.
Aesthetic preference — A smaller but notable share they “like the look” of the new landscape.
Community or peer influence — Seeing neighbors participate or receiving social encouragement also played a role.

When asked for the single most important reason (Figure 6.4, p. 86), saving water and reducing maintenance dominated, with financial incentives ranking much lower as a primary driver.

Underlying Behavioral and Psychological Factors

Changing landscapes isn’t just a physical act — it’s a behavioral shift. The study shows that emotions, identity, and social influence play powerful roles in motivating water-saving choices.

Homeowners act when conservation feels personal — when it aligns with their values, their sense of control, and what their neighbors are doing. In short, water efficiency spreads through people, not policies.

The report highlights that landscape transformation is both a behavioral and market process:

Environmental identity and “doing the right thing.” Early adopters often acted out of environmental concern or civic responsibility rather than direct economic gain (p. 80).
Social norms and peer effects. Many customers reported awareness of neighbors’ participation—showing “spillover” and “neighborhood effects” where behavior diffuses through communities (p. 27–28).
Perceived control and confidence. The likelihood of participation increased when residents felt capable of designing or managing the change themselves, or could access technical help (Appendix C, p. 140–141).
Aesthetic assurance. People needed reassurance that water-wise landscapes could still be beautiful and functional (Appendix A, p. 110).

The Role of Incentives and Utility Programs

Financial incentives may spark interest, but they rarely sustain change on their own. The study found that rebates work best when paired with education, design support, and visible success stories.

When utilities combine funding with guidance and recognition, conservation feels rewarding — not like a chore. The result: smarter programs that inspire commitment, not just compliance.

While incentives encouraged participation, the report emphasizes that rebates alone did not drive transformation:

Customers motivated only by rebates often reverted to old practices or failed to complete projects (p. 13, 22).
The most effective programs combined education, design support, and recognition with financial incentives.
Programs that connected conservation to property value, aesthetics, and long-term savings saw higher satisfaction and sustained behavior change (p. 103–104).

Key Insights from Market Segmentation (pp. 93–101)

Not all homeowners think — or act — the same. The study’s market segmentation revealed distinct mindsets driving landscape decisions, from DIY environmentalists to aesthetics-driven homeowners to cost-conscious savers.

Tailoring outreach to each group’s motivations makes conservation more effective. One-size-fits-all messaging misses the mark; personalized engagement makes it stick.

Different customer “types” emerged across utilities:

DIY environmental stewards: Motivated by saving water, self-design, and long-term residence.
Aesthetic investors: Used designers and contractors, cared more about beauty than rebates.
Practical savers: Focused on reducing water bills and maintenance effort.
Unaware or skeptical groups: Needed targeted outreach correcting misperceptions about water use.