Sustainable LandscapingMarket Transformation Framework

California Urban Water Conservation Council

Sustainable LandscapingMarket Transformation Framework

California Urban Water Conservation Council

February 13, 2015

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................3

PART 1: INTRODUCTION & BARRIERS..........................................................................................................5

Introduction.............................................................................................................................................5

Overcoming Barriers to Sustainable Landscaping: A Market Transformation Approach.........................6

PART 2: ELEMENTS OF THE MARKET TRANSFORMATION APPROACH.........................................................9

ELEMENT 1: Strategy & Collaboration.....................................................................................................9

I. A STRATEGIC PROCESS..................................................................................................................9

A. Four Broad Questions..................................................................................................................9

B. Ten Narrower Questions............................................................................................................10

II. EXPLOITING COLLABORATION...................................................................................................12

A. On-Going Collaborations That Have Embraced the Watershed Approach................................12

B. Collaborations to Develop.........................................................................................................13

ELEMENT 2: Market Interventions.........................................................................................................14

I. Building a Business Case.............................................................................................................14

II. Redefining End User Value Hierarchy & Resultant End User Behaviors.....................................19

III. Devising Effective, Unified, and Collaborative Marketing/Branding/Outreach...........................21

IV. Developing Education, Training, Certifications & Licenses Programs.........................................23

V. Designing Pilot Programs and Performance Criteria...................................................................27

VI. Assisting in Development/Enforcement of Codes, Standards, Statutes and Regulations...........29

ELEMENT 3: Lasting Change...................................................................................................................33

I. Matching Barriers with Intervention Strategies: Introduction....................................................33

II. Matching Barriers with Intervention Strategies: Priorities, Time Frames, Relative Costs............35

PART 3: PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER..........................................................................................................41

Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................41

APPENDIX A: Research – Overcoming the 9th Barrier.................................................................................48

APPENDIX B: Table 7 Addendum – Resources, Roles & Responsibilities...................................................50

APPENDIX C: New Norm Symposia Infographics.......................................................................................51

APPENDIX D: Summary of Presentations to ITP - Meeting #16 November 20, 2014.................................52

1

TablesTable 1: Barriers to sustainable landscaping in California...........................................................................6Table 2: Existing sustainable landscaping educational programs in California..........................................23Table 3: Status of education and licensing requirements by landscaping role in California......................25Table 4: Barriers to sustainable landscaping and potential intervention and removal strategies.............33Table 5: Key to intervention and barrier removal implementation factors...............................................35Table 6: Barrier removal actions/strategies, timing, priorities, and costs.................................................36Table 7: Barrier removal actions/strategies, timing, priorities, costs, and next steps...............................42

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A thirsty California uses over half of its urban water deliveries on landscape irrigation. Water shortages, among other economic and environmental catalysts, are pushing California away from conventional landscapes towards sustainable landscaping1. The California Urban Water Conservation Council (the Council) seeks to accelerate this transition to sustainable landscaping through a collaborative market transformation approach. A market transformation2 can expedite public approval and implementation of a watershed-approach to landscaping in which each landscape is managed as a micro-watershed for resilience and environmental health as well as for water conservation.

Willing to serve as collaborator-in-chief for this market transformation, the Council has identified nine primary barriers to sustainable landscaping in California and has drafted the following document to address each of these nine barriers through a series of market interventions. The strategic interventions are intended to break-down market and behavioral barriers and build an actionable path to sustainable outdoor urban landscapes. Each intervention summarizes the current state of the market and identifies future steps or scenarios that will catalyze a landscaping transformation.

The nine identified barriers are as follows:

1. Lack of ‘Watershed Approach’ Buy-In2. Lack of Unified Leadership, Collaboration and Outreach3. Inadequate Economic Incentives4. Fear of Breaking Social Norms and Culturally Established Aesthetics5. Ineffective, Inconsistent Messaging/Branding/Marketing6. Lack of High Quality, Required Workforce/Public Education and Training7. Lack of Consensus on Quantification and Comparison of Different Approaches8. Insufficient Codes, Standards, Regulations and Enforcement9. Too Many Unknowns

The series of market interventions include:

Adopting a ‘Watershed Approach’ and Exploiting Collaboration Building a Business Case Redefining End User Value Hierarchy and Resultant End User Behaviors Devising Effective, Unified, and Collaborative Marketing/Branding/Outreach Developing Education, Training, Certifications and Licenses Programs Designing Pilot Programs and Performance Criteria Assisting in Development and Enforcement of Codes, Standards and Regulations

1 Sustainable landscaping intends an integrated, holistic, watershed-based approach to landscape design, construction, and maintenance that transcends water-use efficiency to reflect a site’s climate, geography, and soils and to address the related benefits of cost savings, run-off reduction, green waste reduction, pesticide and fertilizer reduction, habitat improvement, and energy/Green House Gas reductions.2 A market transformation intends a strategic process that intervenes in a market to create lasting change in market behavior by removing identified barriers and exploiting collaboration opportunities.

3

Importantly, this market transformation requires comprehensive paradigm shifts across the board. From end user behaviors, to government regulations, to landscape workforce education standards, to industry product promotion, the magnitude of change requisite to this transition demands collaboration from invested partners. Consider the proverbial ‘Silo’ as good as gone. Extensive feedback was collected from sustainable landscape stakeholders from all sectors and integrated into this document, generating early buy-in and capturing an array of interests and perspectives that overlap and allude to prospective cross-sector synergies.

Ultimately, this framework pairs barriers and appropriate intervention strategies and assigns next steps as well as draft priorities, time-frames , and relative cost . The Council plans to vet these priorities and identify available and needed resources as well as responsibilities and roles during a Spring Sustainable Landscaping Stakeholder Workshop. The workshop will bring together sustainable landscaping players from all sectors–water agencies, non-profits, business/industry, and government – to find a collaborative consensus on shared duties.

4

PART 1: INTRODUCTION & BARRIERS

Introduction

The California Urban Water Conservation Council envisions a water-efficient California, characterized by the broad adoption and application of sustainable landscaping practices. California’s landscapes provide essential functions throughout our urban environment. They are where we recreate; capture, clean and recharge groundwater; shade and cool our buildings; enhance property values; provide wildlife habitat; create space to grow food locally; provide a sense of place and much more. The optimal design, installation, and management of these spaces is critical to enhancing California’s quality of life while protecting our limited natural resources.

The Council has developed a new vision for transforming California’s urban landscape. The transition to sustainable landscaping will be a system-wide upgrade to the urban environment. In addition to reducing outdoor irrigation, the transformation promotes multiple environmental benefits for municipalities:

Increased rainwater and graywater capture, storage, and reuse Increased stormwater reduction, capture and infiltration Reduced synthetic pesticide and fertilizer application and runoff Reduced “green waste” production Reduced energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and improved air quality, and Increased food production and habitat for beneficial insects and wildlife, and the restoration of

native biodiversity

The transformation also promotes benefits for individual property owners:

Increased cost savings (lower water bills and upkeep costs) Reduced landscaping maintenance Healthier neighborhoods and communities Increased sense of place and appreciation for local resources Improved stewardship ethics and associated positive feelings towards self and neighborhood,

and Increased shared values between neighbors via increased community participation in a social-

norm-defining transformation.

The Council is committed to spearheading a state-wide transition to sustainable landscaping. As an ongoing collaboration of public agencies, nonprofits, water industry companies and organizations, and green industry professionals, the Council is uniquely suited to serve as a clearinghouse and hub to foster the transition. Acknowledging the numerous and deeply-entrenched barriers that stand in the way of sustainable landscaping progress, the Council is actively building a broad stakeholder collaboration to develop and implement a strategy that will break down these barriers.

5

Overcoming Barriers to Sustainable Landscaping: A Market Transformation Approach

From a number of sources including the 2014 Landscape Symposia Report (Appendix C), insights from the Legislatively-created Independent Technical Panel (ITP) meetings (Appendix D), and end-user landscaping values, the Council has identified nine primary categories of barriers to sustainable landscaping:

Table 1: Barriers to sustainable landscaping in California

Barriers to Sustainable Landscaping

1 Watershed Approach

Lack of ‘Watershed Approach’ Buy-InThere is a general absence of agency/organization understanding of and/or buy-in to the ‘watershed approach’ – a term used synonymously with ‘sustainable landscaping’ in this document. Challenges posed by this barrier, and the collaboration and adaptive management requisite to solving these challenges, are woven into each and every market intervention strategy throughout the document.

2Leadership,

Collaboration& Outreach

Lack of Unified Leadership, Collaboration and OutreachGovernment entities and the private sector do not ubiquitously champion and model sustainable landscapes. Municipalities lack sustainable landscaping priorities and collaboration in planning and development departments. There is a missing collaborative link between public and private stakeholders.

3 Economic Incentives

Inadequate Economic IncentivesThe market is not fully saturated with available, sustainable and affordable landscaping options. Water pricing does not send a sufficiently strong conservation signal to incentivize wide-spread outdoor water-use reductions. Landscape conversions require a significant investment of time and money. Incentives (e.g., rebates, tax credits, etc.) are often insufficient, unproven, unknown, or appear daunting to property owners.

4 Social Norms

Fear of Breaking Social Norms and Culturally Established AestheticsHomeowners are subject to social pressure. Diversifying a landscape to contrast a neighborhood of homogeneous lawns defies our human nature in which we aim to comply with social norms. Lawns are a tried and true component of American homes. Lawns are familiar. Lawn aesthetics are desirable. Lawns can be functional play spaces. Lawns have limited market risk in terms of maintenance service availability and property value. Where lawns are simple to install and maintenance is well-understood, sustainable landscapes are diverse and multi-faceted and involve a maintenance learning curve. Change is stressful.

5 Messaging

Ineffective, Inconsistent Messaging/Branding/MarketingMultiplicity of brands and outreach programs promoting sustainable landscaping throughout state yields disjointed and inconsistent messaging. Existing messaging contains jargon. Behavioral change research shows that information alone is insufficient. Community Based Social Marketing programs, while often effective, however, require labor-intensive neighborhood based actions.

6

Barriers to Sustainable Landscaping

6Education & Workforce

Development

Lack of High Quality, Required Workforce/Public Education and TrainingLike potable water alternatives (e.g., graywater and recycled water), turf alternatives are misunderstood, unfamiliar, or generally unknown. Accessible and reputable education opportunities are undiscovered, lacking, or not required for consumers, landscape professionals, and property managers. Landscape credentialing (licensing and certifications) do not align closely with sustainable landscaping principles for design, installation, and maintenance professionals. Landscaping synergies are absent between landscape design, irrigation, and installation experts. Resources on sustainable landscaping are diffuse, poorly organized, and not always accurate or lay-person friendly. Model landscapes are lacking.

7 Performance Criteria

Lack of Consensus on Quantification and Comparison of Different ApproachesThere is limited consensus on best irrigation systems, requirements, and management regimes for varying landscapes. There are no agreed-upon protocol and performance criteria for comparing landscape project across regions and quantifying associated benefits.

8

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Insufficient Codes, Standards, Regulations & EnforcementLandscape design, installation, and maintenance codes, standards, and regulations are inconsistent. Many state and local landscape codes, standards, and regulations are in need of strengthening, alignment, and revision (e.g., MWELO), yet effective implementation may require market preparedness and time. State regulations have not phased out inefficient irrigation technologies or detrimental/non-native/high water intensity plants. Authority to enforce water ordinances and codes is not always exercised or granted to the parties best equipped to regulate. Expertise and resources to exercise enforcement strategies are limited. Irrigation infractions may not be easily captured by enforcers.

9 Research

Too Many UnknownsData quantifying cost/water savings and positive externalities associated with sustainable landscaping are non-existent, not in agreement, or unclear. Agencies lack data capture capacities. Pilot projects are rarely well-documented or conveniently archived.

To remove these barriers to sustainable landscaping, the Council envisions a strategy based largely on “market transformation” principles. From the Council’s perspective, a Sustainable Landscaping Market Transformation Plan documents:

A strategic process that will intervene in a market to create lasting change in market behavior by removing identified barriers and exploiting collaboration opportunities to accelerate the adoption of sustainable landscaping as a matter of standard practice.3

By Sustainable Landscaping, the Council intends:

An integrated, holistic, watershed-based approach to landscape design, construction, and maintenance that transcends water-use efficiency to reflect a site’s climate, geography, and soils and to address the related benefits of cost savings, run-off reduction, green waste reduction, pesticide and fertilizer reduction, habitat improvement, and energy/Green House Gas reductions.

3 Sentence adapted from Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance’s (NEEA) definition of a Market Transformation Plan.

7

“Watershed-based,” in this context, has two meanings: 1) Macro - a watershed in the conventional sense of a watercourse and the land that it drains; and 2) Micro - each individual’s property as a discrete functioning watershed. Turning property owners into micro-scale watershed stewards fosters the behavioral transformation needed to create macro-scale impact.

Ultimately, the Market Transformation Plan (MTP) seeks to:

Redefine Californians’ relationship with their urban landscapes through market and socio-behavioral transformations and adaptive management regimes that replace the current landscaping norms with a norm based on sustainable landscaping principles, products, and actions.

In the following sections, we consider the key elements of the Sustainable Landscaping Market Transformation definition above. Each section follows a similar approach:

Short introduction; Description of “where we are now;” and an Identification of possible next steps and/or future scenarios.

The conclusion of this document outlines strategic, programmatic, and temporal priorities assigned to each possible next step. A spring 2015 stakeholder meeting will review the priorities, and identify the roles, responsibilities, and resources necessary to accomplish each step.

8

PART 2: ELEMENTS OF THE MARKET TRANSFORMATION APPROACHAs noted above, in this document, a market transformation approach is:

A strategic process that will intervene in a market to create lasting change in market behavior by removing identified barriers and exploiting collaboration opportunities to accelerate the adoption of sustainable landscaping as a matter of standard practice.

In the remainder of this document, we consider the key, underlined segments of that definition as they fit into the following three elements:

Strategy and Collaboration Market Interventions, and Lasting Change

ELEMENT 1: Strategy & Collaboration

I. A STRATEGIC PROCESS

There are tremendous activities already underway across California to help transform the state’s urban landscape. Many of the individual actors are thinking strategically in terms of their own perspectives and interests. However, there is no statewide effort, by a broad group of stakeholders, to think strategically about how best to leverage the individual efforts.

A. Four Broad Questions

The market transformation plan will need to strategically answer four broad sets of questions.

1) Actions: What sequence of actions?

a. E.g., research, investments, programs, projects, messages, social marketing, codes, standards

2) Actors: By which actors?

a. E.g., state, federal, local governments; nonprofits; universities; and private sector individuals and organizations

3) Areas: In which region(s)?

a. Neighborhood/Development

b. City

c. Wholesaler’s Region

d. Importer’s Region

e. Marketing Region

f. Hydrologic Region

g. State

h. West-wide?

i. Nationwide?

j. World-wide?

4) Adopters: What will most efficiently and effectively convince enough early adopters to choose to invest their own time, talent and resources in implementing the multiple-benefit, watershed-based “vision” of a sustainable landscape on their property, so that a critical mass is reached?

9

B. Ten Narrower Questions

In answering the four broad questions set out above, ten additional questions will need to be strategically addressed.

1) Knowledge Base:

a. What do we already know about the:

i. Motivations and values of different groups of landowners?

ii. The obstacles and barriers to their willing transition to sustainable landscaping?

b. What additional information do we need to learn or confirm?

c. How do we integrate adaptive management, understanding that our knowledge will continue to evolve?

2) Other Efforts:

a. What can we learn from earlier efforts to encourage a transition to sustainable landscaping?

b. What can we learn from efforts in other sectors (e.g., energy, water-using appliances) to use market transformation principles?

c. How are we similar to, or different from, those earlier/other efforts?

3) Appropriate Scale:

a. Which actions are best suited for particular actors or in particular geographic areas?

4) Branding and Messaging:

a. How important is it to have a uniform brand/message statewide?

b. What should our messages be per market segment (homeowner, commercial, HOA, industrial)? Why?

c. How can we account for regional differences and market segmentation?

d. How can we address the branding and messaging that has already occurred in certain areas?

5) Community-Based Social Marketing (CBSM):

a. What lessons have we already learned about effective CBSM programs?

b. What gaps do we have in our understanding of how best to harness the principles of community based social marketing? For example, what additional research needs to be conducted to identify target audiences, barriers, benefits, etc.?

6) Role of the Green Industry:

a. How can we best harness the economic interests of:

i. manufacturers, growers, distributors, retailers,

ii. architects/designers,

iii. contractors and maintenance companies, and

iv. builders?

10

7) Segmentation:

a. To what extent should the plan focus on specific segments such as higher volume users? Existing (retrofit) vs. new construction?

8) Codes & Standards:

a. What new standards should be developed to add efficiencies and address laggards?

9) Resources:

a. What resources (time, talent and financial) are currently being dedicated to promoting sustainable landscaping in California?

b. How can these resources be more efficiently and effectively directed?

c. What additional resources are needed?

d. From where will they come?

10) Coordination:

a. Which entities need to be involved in coordinating the planning and implementation efforts?

b. What should their individual roles and responsibilities be?

c. How should coordination efforts be structured and managed?Initial efforts to raise and answer all of these questions are peppered throughout this Framework. For a preliminary list of the prioritized actions that will result from those answers, see Tables 5 & 6.

11

II. EXPLOITING COLLABORATIONThe first two barriers to sustainable landscaping in address two sides of the same fundamental coin: how can the benefits from the watershed approach be appreciated and how can they be implemented? The short answer is, to obtain multiple benefits, multiple players must collaborate. Collaboration lies at the heart of the watershed approach.

Watershed-scale change, at least in the conventional sense of the terms, demands intentional and committed collaboration across sectors. Without it, the multiple benefits offered by the approach will not be realized. Moreover, given the complexity of the challenge, no one entity can create the necessary conditions for change. Only by leveraging powerful partnerships between and among government agencies, non-profit organizations, businesses, and water utilities, is a state-wide, sustainable landscaping transformation achievable.

Collaborations bring together individuals, businesses, organizations and agencies, each of whom can offer different resources and perspectives, play different roles, and undertake different responsibilities. For those who aspire to lead the watershed approach to sustainable landscaping, first and foremost, they must understand and embrace the concept. For public agencies, that will often require them to act in ways that may challenge their institutional histories and cultures.

A. On-Going Collaborations That Have Embraced the Watershed Approach

1. The California Urban Water Conservation Council – The Council’s Landscaping Committee pioneered the watershed approach. Its continuing work and the Council’s 2014 Landscape Symposia represent on-going efforts to spearhead the state-wide transition to sustainable landscaping.

2. Water Service Providers – Many water utilities across the state partner with their customers and educational entities to increase landscaping awareness and incentivize sustainable landscapes. For example Master Gardeners offer sustainable landscaping classes in partnership with Western Municipal Water District [WMWD]. WMWD advertises and hosts the classes, and the Master Gardeners run the classes. Similarly, in the Sacramento region the Regional Water Authority provides financial support and advertises the River-Friendly Landscaping Green Gardener Professional Training Program.

3. Regional – Metropolitan Water District rebate programs such as California Friendly, and Be Water Wise), and Regional Water Authority programs like the Green Gardener effort represent regional efforts to support sustainable landscaping.

4. Other – National, state, academic, and interest group efforts such as the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) (Sustainable SITES), CalRecycle (Sustainable Landscaping), UC Cooperative Extension, and Bay Friendly Landscaping & Gardening Coalition, are also paving the way for the market transformation.

12

B. Collaborations to Develop

1. Industry – Partnerships with manufacturers, growers, and retailers can benefit both the consumer and the industry partner by achieving affordability and availability and by maximizing demand and guaranteeing a market.

2. Government – Inter-governmental partnerships and government agency programming help set a top-down precedent for the direction of landscaping across the board. The U.S. EPA GreenScapes effort promoted sustainable landscaping principles, but appears to no longer exist. State agencies in particular, can be leaders in collaboration by setting the example for sustainable landscapes and raising the bar for the state.

3. Associations – Engaging associations that affect change on the ground level can result in fast-paced change with the right amount of buy-in. Potential groups include the Building Industry Association, local homeowners associations and property management associations.

4. Academia – Further engagement with the University of California Cooperative Extension, and with other schools strong in urban planning/horticulture/landscape architecture such as Cuyamaca College, or with well-established training programs such as Phipps Conservatory in Pennsylvania, will yield a next generation of sustainable landscaping advocates and wealth of cutting edge research.

5. Opinion Leaders – Recruiting famous spokespeople to undertake sustainable landscaping conservation as their pet projects will reach a broad fan-base of social-norm abiding citizens that follow trends and imitate their idols. Getting a high profile celebrity or cultural icon to change his or her water use ways and lead his or her flock of fans to do the same could make a huge impact.

6. Social Justice – Easily lost in a multi-faceted effort to transform a market, building partnerships with community leaders and social justice advocates will help ensure that sustainable landscaping is not just for the affluent.

7. Youth & Community Groups – Partnering with youth organizations, college groups, and service-oriented groups can rally boots-on-the-ground to physically install sustainable landscapes.

13

ELEMENT 2: Market Interventions

The next six barriers4 in are best addressed by a wide range of market interventions. Six primary interventions, each responsive to one or more of the barriers, include:

1. Building a Business Case

2. Redefining End User Value Hierarchy and Resultant End User Behaviors3. Devising Effective, Unified, and Collaborative Marketing/Branding/Outreach

4. Developing Education, Training, Certifications and Licenses Programs 5. Designing Pilot Programs and Performance Criteria

6. Assisting in Development and Enforcement of Codes, Standards and Regulations

The following section outlines each of the six interventions’ current status and possible future steps towards a sustainable landscaping norm. Importantly, the collaborative, watershed approach, carried out through adaptive management regimes, should guide each intervention.

I. Building a Business Case To overcome the third barrier, Economic Incentives, and to motivate broad adoption of sustainable landscaping, a strong economic argument is required. Sustainable landscaping must make financial sense to both consumers (see Redefining End User Value Hierarchy and Resultant End User Behaviors) and businesses alike. By understanding the current state of the market and by building a business case with strong, defensible data and targeted incentives, a market transformation can appeal to for-profit economic interests in both the sale of and the use of sustainable landscaping materials/systems.

A. Current State of the Market and Existing Business Cases5 1. Plant and Landscaping Materials – Where limited availability of climate-appropriate

plant materials used to challenge landowners and property managers, large-scale contracts between well known brands are increasing the presence of water-efficient plant and landscaping materials in the market. For example, Home Depot stocks the California Friendly ™ line of plants in its stores. Generally speaking, at current pricing, conventional plant and landscaping materials have a lower up-front purchase and installation cost than do sustainable materials, and regionally appropriate materials are not always readily available to consumers. Cost comparisons over time that include upkeep and maintenance are rarely available; existing studies tend to focus on water savings and yield variable results. For example, a nine-year case study on water use, waste production, and maintenance time in Santa Monica contrasted a conventional garden (turf yard) with a native garden, and found that the native garden reduced water

4 Conceptually, the ninth barrier, “too many unknowns,” does not lend itself as easily to a market “intervention.” The strategy to overcome that barrier—i.e., ‘research,’ is implicit in all strategic behavior. Advancing knowledge should occur continuously to inform adaptive management regimes; APPENDIX A elaborates.5 This list is not intended to be exclusive or exhaustive. The Council is very much interested in expanding the list—and partnering with—other examples of growers, manufacturers, retailers, landscaping professionals and builders. Send any information to landscape@cuwcc.org .

14

use by 83 percent, green waste by 56 percent, and maintenance time by 68 percent. Even though it initially cost 35 percent more to install than the conventional garden (in part due to cement path removal and rain gutter installation), the native garden paid back dividends in water cost savings and maintenance time. This study was a highly controlled study. Critics suggest that when left to their own devices, property owners do not manage watering as closely or irrigation systems as effectively, yielding water application on native gardens similar to that of traditional lawns. When studies do find water savings, financial incentives may be insufficient. A UC Davis study found lawn conversions to save homeowners, on average, 60 percent of water use, or $46/year. The study calculated average conversion costs to be $3,960, offering a 23-year Return On Investment (ROI) (based on 2012 City of Davis water costs).

2. Water Smart Plant Retailers – Large and small plant retailers are offering a wider and more consistent selection of drought-tolerant, non-invasive, climate appropriate, native, and or California-Friendly™ plants in response to increased customer demand during the drought. For example, Altman Plants, a major nursery in California and an early adopter of sustainable landscaping in the industry, has a Smart Planet Plants line and has started plans to propagate more native and climate-appropriate plants in anticipation of and in support of a market shift and increase in water smart plant demand. This is an example of a big nursery considering a big shift. Many smaller native plant suppliers already thrive on selling climate appropriate plants to local markets.

3. Irrigation and Capture Technology, Systems Designers, and Retailers : Irrigation technologies continue to evolve in sophistication and user-accessibility. Many irrigation system manufacturers, are producing smart and weather-based irrigation controllers in addition to other water-saving products, while phasing out less efficient models. While water-efficient and smart-controller technologies are available to home-owners, for many lower-income residents, they may be cost prohibitive. Irrigation experts have not reached consensus concerning the most efficient brands, technologies, and application management systems as they relate to specific regions and specific end users. Furthermore, research indicates that water loss attributable to user error is greater than water-conserved attributable to irrigation technology.

4. Home Depot – Home Depots in Southern California have partnered with plant growers and water agencies to host water saving events. These outdoor events are festive and lively, attracting customers off the street and through broad store and water utility advertising. The events offer sales on, Water Saving Garden-Friendly™, and climate appropriate plants. Landscaping and water conservationist experts are present to educate consumers on their water use. The events support wise landscaping while generating revenue for a for-profit entity. This is just one example involving a well-known business; other business cases exist in different sizes and scopes.

5. Green Gardens Group (G3) – A network of landscaping professionals, G3 is committed to supporting its clients with a holistic approach to sustainable landscaping, balancing soil, carbon, and water interests. G3 is also hosting Soil Carbon Water Summit in 2015,

15

bringing together stakeholders from all sectors to increase the recognition of the universal value of a watershed-approach to landscaping.

6. Large Landscape Installations – Many turf removal rebate programs are doling out significant rebate checks to large landscapes that can achieve similarly large water savings by replacing their turf with sustainable alternatives. For example, the MillerCoors brewery removed over 2 acres of turf grass on their grounds in Irwindale, CA and saved over half the cost of a conversion, receiving the $2 per square foot rebate and replacing the terrain with $3-$4 per square foot landscaping. The $187,000 MillerCoors received from MWD pushed the company to convert more grass than it otherwise would have, because the cost-benefit ratio made sense to the business. In another example, the Harbor Bay Business Park Association in Pleasanton, CA replaced 2.5 miles of median turf using Bay-Friendly landscaping techniques such as sheet mulching, and the group now saves $15,000 on water costs alone each year. There is often a disconnect; however, between those paying the bills and those making the landscape decisions which limits the buy-in for large landscape conversions.

7. Water Purveyor Pricing – For many water districts of California, water cost is a weak motivator for conservation. Utilities are working hard to adapt their pricing structures in the face of complicated regulation and the absence of political will. There are examples of pricing structures such as Eastern Municipal Water District’s allocation based rates that charge more for outdoor water consumption than indoor water consumption, sending a stronger outdoor water conservation signal.

B. Future State of the Market and Business Cases to Develop6

1. Homeowners – Eliciting sustainable landscaping buy-in from homeowners will be that much easier with a sound business case and persuasive economics. A credible and clear financial justification for the transition must be developed to appeal to the money-minded homeowner.

2. Plant Materials and Nurseries/Growers – Nurseries across the state will play an important role in ensuring that plant supply can meet plant demand generated by the market transformation; proving a growing demand will incentivize nurseries to move in the sustainable landscaping direction. Their ability to affordably and sustainably propagate non-invasive, climate-appropriate plants will impact the financial feasibility of sustainable landscaping for customers. As much as possible, growers should aim to make region-appropriate plants readily available and affordable and phase out high water use, invasive and otherwise unsustainable plants.

3. Irrigation Equipment Manufacturers/Suppliers – Irrigation equipment manufacturers across the state will play an important role in ensuring that irrigation systems supply can meet demand generated by the market transformation; proving a growing demand will incentivize manufacturers to move in the sustainable landscaping direction. Their ability to affordably design, produce, and market water-smart irrigation (low maintenance, long-lasting, regionally-calibrated, and efficient) while phasing out older, less efficient

6 This list identifies changes that will need to happen. A market transformation plan will strategically sequence these and the other interventions laid out below.

16

models systems will impact the financial feasibility of sustainable landscaping for property owners. Future irrigation equipment manufacturers and suppliers should make efficient and regionally-appropriate technology readily available and affordable, and phase out the production of older wasteful technologies.

4. Retailers/Wholesalers – As the direct link to consumers, retailers and wholesalers have immense power when it comes to product placement and purchasing incentives. Retail industry support for sustainable landscaping is critical to ease the cost of the transition for customers and to popularize the right products. Once again, creating and proving a demand for sustainable landscaping products will encourage retailer buy-in through bottom-line incentive. Future retailers/wholesalers should make region-appropriate plants, efficient irrigation and capture technology, and healthy landscaping materials readily available and affordable and phase out high water use, invasive and otherwise unsustainable plants, inefficient irrigation technologies, and harmful landscaping materials.

5. Owners of Large Landscapes – The relative impact of a single large-landscape compared to a small private residence is measured in orders of magnitude. Approaching large landscape owners with business propositions that clearly demonstrate how sustainable landscaping can improve their bottom line may incite impressive landscaping overhauls that catalyze smaller scale neighbors to replicate the efforts. Landscape caretakers or third party individuals can bring forward these propositions to engage the bill-payers who are often removed from the landscaping decisions, in landscaping matters.

6. Landscaping Professionals – Professionals in the field make the concrete decisions and perform the actual maintenance that directly impacts water use and management. To encourage landscape contractors, architects, builders, maintenance workers, and businesses to obtain training and implement their sustainable landscaping knowledge and practices, there must be a value-add to their services. Increased consumer awareness of and interest in sustainable landscapes should motivate professionals to increase and legitimize their sustainability practices in order to attract more customers and potentially charge a service premium. All landscaping professional roles should be acknowledged and responsibilities clarified and adjusted to encourage a team approach to sustainable landscaping and an escape from well-established silos. Sustainable practices can then be communicated from the initial design through the life cycle of the project, adding market efficiencies and producing happy clientele.

7. Water Pricing – To signal the importance of outdoor water conservation, or water conservation in general, water pricing structures and regulations require restructuring to allow for stronger price signals (e.g., water-budget rates, tiered rates, volumetric rates, etc.) that catalyze behavioral change in customers and that provide for the stability and longevity of water distribution operations.

8. Incentives – Wherever the market has not yet made sustainable landscaping materials, technologies, and services cost-competitive, financial incentives can attract otherwise reticent adopters of the watershed approach. Rebate or coupon programs, tax breaks, subsidies, sponsorships, etc., can be employed to catalyze both consumer behavioral

17

change and market composition change, making sustainable products and services normal, accessible, and competitively priced.

18

II. Redefining End User Value Hierarchy & Resultant End User BehaviorsCritical to the adoption of sustainable landscaping are end user values, captured in the fourth barrier ‘Social Norms.’ These values drive consumer behavior. For example, the value of ‘fitting in’—complying with a ‘social norm’—drives end users to maintain a lush, vibrant green lawn in order to keep up with their neighbors’ thriving lawns. The desire to save money and the assumption that turf grass is cheaper than native gardens push consumers to install inexpensive sod rather than a healthy variety of non-invasive, native or climate appropriate plants.

A market transformation can employ two tactics to achieve desired consumer behaviors: 1) appeal to existing end user values such as promoting the affordability and convenience of sustainable landscaping; and 2) re-define or create new end user values such as promoting a new aesthetic as more desirable and ‘en vogue’ than turf grass.

A. Appeal to Existing End User Values1. Money – Consumers protect their pocket book first and seek cost effective landscaping

options that do not undermine their property value . 2. Time – End users place a high value on time. Simple, familiar, or homogenous landscapes

appear to be low-maintenance and therefore a low time-investment.3. Convenience/Simplicity – Consumers take the easiest path and typically avoid change. Well-

understood traditional lawns have been around so long that the industry has made their installation, growth, and maintenance commonplace, convenient, and simple. Consumers value this convenience.

4. Functionality – In part, end users value turf for its functional and durable play space for children, pets, lawn games, etc., as well as for its cooling effects.

5. Personal Aesthetic Preferences – Consumers value landscapes that they find visually appealing; healthy, vibrant lawns are appreciated by many consumers for their aesthetics.

6. Public Appearance/ Social Reputation – Beyond appeasing personal aesthetic preferences, consumers wish to maintain a positive public image. They value how their landscape appears to the passerby and to their neighbors.

7. Physical Health – Consumers, particularly parents, are concerned with the negative health impacts associated with exposure to pesticides and fertilizers relied upon in conventional landscaping practices. Additionally, homeowners value turf grass as a protective fire break.

8. Environmental motivations – Some end users attribute value to water, energy, and waste conservation beyond the monthly bill. Conserving resources and creating environmental benefit such as habitat is important to some consumers.

B. Promote New End User Values1. Environmental Stewardship – Beyond basic conservation ethics, the sustainable landscaping

market transformation seeks to instill a watershed ethic in all end users, meaning they value and manage their own property as a micro-watershed. This includes the intentional creation of native habitat that will form an urban mosaic, increasingly conducive to supporting native animals as lawn conversions multiply and appear like squares on a chess board across cities and towns.

19

2. New Aesthetic – The market transformation plans to establish sustainable landscapes as the new desirable yard aesthetic, embracing native landscapes that offer us a sense of place unique to our state’s diverse climate and biodiversity. (For an example of market-created preferences, investigate the black pearl market intervention; the sustainable landscaping transition may not use the same tactic, but this article shows that artfully presented market interventions can redefine end user values.)

3. Shared Investment in Community – To fulfill the consumer’s need to fit in while supporting a shared environmental ethic, the market transformation must foster community solidarity and social equity. Once a handful of houses convert to a native garden in the same neighborhood, the rest are more likely to follow in suit.

4. Patience – While individual property owners can transform their landscapes in a matter of weeks (or many months for slower DIY-ers), early adopters may feel discouraged by the enormity of the scale of transformation needed in their communities and across the state. The transformation, a long process that may not yield instant gratification, must cultivate patience in these early adopters. A characteristic not fully embodied in most consumers, a sense of patience in concert with community momentum can yield complete transformation.7

C.

7 The Council will look to past examples of long-term campaigns and efforts that changed consumer behavior, such as the measures that effectively changed the U.S. from a smoking country to a non-smoking country.

20

III. Devising Effective, Unified, and Collaborative Marketing/Branding/OutreachInformation alone does not change behavior. Innovative and unified communication of sustainable landscaping information and brands; however, can help redefine social norms and convey benefits of sustainable landscaping to consumers, businesses, and organizations, indirectly changing behavior and overcoming the fifth barrier, inconsistent messaging. Knowing which customer segments are pivotal to a market transformation and learning how to effectively communicate with, and market to, these segments can expedite what would be a longer transition to sustainable landscaping. Working outside of silos (e.g., government, academia, non-profit, for-profit, and industry) to align messaging and maintain consistent expectations will also accelerate the transition to sustainable landscaping.

A. Existing Marketing/Branding/Outreach Examples: 1. Friendly Brands – A series of “Friendly” themed brands promote similar sustainable water

use and landscaping values: Bay-, California-, Creek-, Fish-, Garden-, Ocean-, River-, Russian River-, River (Sacramento)- Friendly.

2. Turf Rebate Programs – Financial incentive programs across the state use varying titles in outreach materials such as ‘Cash for Grass,’ ‘Lawn be Gone,’ and ‘Lawn to Garden’ to promote turf grass replacement.

3. Save Our Water (SOW) – SOW generates outreach materials with graphics and slogans such as ‘Brown is the new Green’ and ‘Bucket Brigade’ for use by anyone.

4. Local Brands – Individual water utilities, local governments, watershed coordinators, watershed councils, and resource conservation districts also deploy sustainable landscape campaigns using their own distinct brands and graphics. For example, RightScape is an Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) outreach program that uses concise slogans and cartoon characters to market sustainable landscaping to the public. This individualized branding leads to many, confusing names, logos, and graphics spread throughout California that intend similar messages.

5. Outreach Programs – Beyond slogans and graphics, organizations and municipalities are hosting landscape seminar series, educational events, and certifying programs to promote sustainable landscaping by word of mouth and repeated messaging and customer-contact opportunities. These varied programs sometimes compete with each other or duplicate work efforts.

B. Marketing/Branding to develop1. Develop Unified Branding – To create well-recognized and social-norm-building brands,

unify current branding efforts across the state.8 This effort includes increasing communication and collaboration across government, academia, non-profit, for-profit, and industry sectors.

2. Use Community Based Social Marketing i. Study past successful CBSM campaigns to learn from their strategies:

8 “Unification” should allow a consumer or landscape professional to instantly recognize non-invasive, micro-climate-appropriate plant and other landscaping materials. In addition, with the appropriate degree of training, it can form the basis for landscaping professionals to distinguish themselves in the market.

21

1. Social norms to reduce energy consumption

2. Personal communication and watering restrictions to maximize water efficiency 3. Commitment and incentives to increase public transit

4. Prompts to increase recycled content purchases ii. Implement targeted new CBSM campaigns combining complementary strategies to

achieve community-level progress towards sustainable landscaping.

22

IV. Developing Education, Training, Certifications & Licenses Programs

Those most intimately involved with the landscaping industry stand to affect the most direct behavioral change when it comes to sustainable landscaping. Without the appropriate education, training, and in-the-field experience, knowledge and understanding, it is unfair to expect landscaping professionals to effectively engrain and implement sustainable landscaping principles in their every day work. Thoughtful, vocation-appropriate, and requisite sustainable landscaping training and certification programs can catalyze major movement towards ubiquitous sustainable landscaping practices and overcome the sixth barrier, the need for Education and Workforce Development.

A. Existing Sustainable Landscaping Programming and Education Requirements: 1. Sustainable Landscaping Educational Programs

Table 2: Existing sustainable landscaping educational programs in California.

Program/Organization Name

Program Genre Target Audience Notes

Academia (e.g., UC Davis, Cal Poly Pomona, San Luis Obispo, Long Beach City College, Pierce College, etc.)

Educational/Training

Students,General Public

Hands on urban horticulture classes,Master Gardener courses through the UC extension, landscape architecture courses, irrigation engineering courses, etc.

American Rainwater Catchment Systems Association (ARCSA)

Professional Training & Accreditation

Variable, Landscape Professionals, Regulators, Decision Makers, Business and Home Owners

Tiered-level programs teaching rainwater system design, construction, and use

Bay-Friendly Qualified Professional (BFQP) and Rater Training s

Professional Training & Certification

Landscape Designers,Landscape Architects,Landscape Contractors, Maintenance Professionals, Public Sector Professionals, BFL Raters (prerequisite: BFQP training)

Resulting Qualification: Raters document and submit 3rd-party rating of BFL landscapes; BFQPs design, install and/or maintain landscapes that conserve water, reduce waste, build healthy soils, protect water/air quality, protect and provide wildlife habitat

California-Friendly™ Landscaping Classes

Educational Open to All,Garden HobbyistsLandscape Professionals

Promote more attractive, water-efficient yards; Curricula used throughout the state in local classes (e.g. San Diego); offered for free

California Landscape Contractors Association (CLCA) Water Managers

Professional Training & Certification

Landscape Contractors, Irrigation Professionals

Certification for water managers with irrigation audit and site management experience, and a proven track record of saving water

23

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Native Landscape Professionals

Professional Training & Certification

Landscape ContractorsLandscape Company OwnersLandscape ProfessionalsMaintenance WorkersDecision MakersIrrigation ProfessionalsHome Owners, etc.

Actual certification is in-the-works; Pre-Certification Class includes: Basic Native Plant Ecology, Site Assessment and Preparation, Installation, Watering Principles, Early Establishment, Maintenance, and Troubleshooting

California Stormwater Quality Association (CSQA) Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) & Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD)

Professional Training & Qualification

Engineers,Surveyors,Geologists,Stormwater Professionals (e.g., site managers, superintendents, or inspectors)

Construction General Permit training for the development and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Preventions Plans (SWPPP) that comply with state-mandated BMPs and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements

EcoLandscape California River-Friendly Landscaping ‘Green Gardener Professional’ Training

Professional Training

Landscape Architects, Landscape Designers, Landscape Contractors, Irrigation Professionals, Landscape/Property Mangers, Maintenance Workers

Trains professionals to design, install, and manage landscapes holistically, conserving water minimizing waste and pollution outputs, and integrating soil, plant, pest, and irrigation management

EcoLandscape California River-Friendly ‘Green Gardener at Home’ Training

Training General PublicGarden Hobbyists

General training to teach whole-systems approach to sustainable landscaping, from designing to growing to maintaining healthy landscapes

EcoLandscaper TM Professional Training & Qualification

River-Friendly Landscaping Green Gardener Professionals

Advanced training building on the principles introduced in the River-Friendly Green Gardener Professional Training

EPA Water Sense Irrigation Partners; Irrigation Association

Professional Training & Certification

Landscape Contractors, Irrigation Professionals, Landscape/Property Managers

Separate certifications in irrigation system design, installation and maintenance, and audits that take into account surrounding landscape and local climate

G^3 Green Garden Group Professional Training & Certification

Variable,Landscape Educators

Technical training to evaluate landscapes and make water efficient, carbon sequestering, and storm water reducing landscaping decisions

Green Roofs for Healthy Cities (GRHC)

Professional Training and Accreditation

Landscape Architects, Landscape Designers, Landscape Contractors

Green roof/wall/integrated agriculture and building water management design, installation, and maintenance training

QWEL Professional Training & Certification

Landscape Professionals Professional training on principals of proper plant selection for the local climate, irrigation system design and maintenance, and irrigation system programming and operation.

24

Sustainable Sites Initiative™ Landscape for Life: Train the Trainer Program

Professional Training & Qualification

Garden/Horticulture Educators,Master Gardeners/Naturalists, Landscape Architects, Landscape Designers

Teaching tips, tools, and curricula disseminated via webinar to train future teachers on holistic, sustainable gardening

2. Current Landscaping Education and Licensing Requirements 9

Table 3: Status of education and licensing requirements by landscaping role in California.

Target AudienceStatus of

Education/TrainingStatus of Certification/ Licensing Status of Continuing

Education Requirements & Opportunities

Certified Arborist 3 years of experience and a license exam

Annual license renewal through the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)

30 CEU’s every 2 years

Landscape Architect

6 years of experience (4-year degree plus two years experience) to qualify for License

Biennial state license renewal 3. None required, some offered (see

above)Landscape Designer

No educational requirements

No formal certifications; membership in Association of Professional Landscape Design (APLD) California Chapter and APLD Certification lends credibility

4. None required, some offered (see

above)Landscape Contractor

4 years experience in the field and a license state exam (pre-test license classes available)

C-27 state license required for any landscaping work over $500 other than maintenance; membership in California Landscape Contractors Association (supportive of the New Norm) lends credibility; Landscape Industry Certified Technician and Water Manager Certification available but not required

None required; Landscape Industry Certified Technician must complete 24 CEU’s every 2 years

Irrigation Professionals

4 years experience in the field and a license state exam (pre-test license classes available)

C-27 state license required for any landscaping irrigation work over $500 other than maintenance; membership in the Irrigation Association (supportive of the sustainable landscaping initiative) lends credibility; Certified Irrigation Expert certifications available in a number of fields but not required

None required; Certified Irrigation Experts require ~20 CEU’s every 2 years depending on the certification type

9 Initially this table was intended to cover required sustainable landscaping educational programs; in the absence of required sustainable landscaping programming (outside of school-specific curricula), the table covers other educational requirements.

25

Maintenance Workers (a.k.a., mow, blow, and go)

None Required None Required 5. None Required, some available (see

above)Landscape/Property Managers

None Required None Required 6. None Required, some available (see

above)Garden Hobbyists/ All Public

None Required None Required 7. None Required, some available (see

above)

B. Sustainable Landscaping Educational Programming Development: 1. Encourage the development and requirement of specific units of sustainable landscaping

training for landscape architects, designers, and contractors.2. Encourage the inclusion of sustainable landscaping topics in licensing examinations for

landscape architects and contractors.3. Develop and require continuing education units in sustainable landscaping for landscape -

architects, -designers, and –contractors.4. Determine best strategies to reach and educate the unlicensed ‘mow-blow-and-go’ sector;

offer and widely-publicize multi-lingual sustainable landscaping courses with worthwhile participation rewards, such as grants and scholarships, to incentivize maintenance sector attendance. Make a business case for offering different skills and services, and targeting new markets.

5. Work with school districts on outdoor classroom and living schoolyard projects that demonstrate water efficiency and stormwater infiltration best practices. Identify and improve age-appropriate education and sustainable landscape curricula in K-12 Schools with hands-on assignments or field components.

6. Update sustainable landscaping curricula in higher education degree paths and increase the opportunity for field experience.

7. Facilitate cross-sector communication throughout all education programming to emphasize the importance of idea-conveyance from design, to installation, to irrigation, to maintenance.

8. Compose and or compile easily digestible landscaping educational materials to be used across sectors in a centralized location (e.g., plant maintenance information by region to supplement Water Use Classification of Landscape Species [WUCOLS], plant selection methodology for healthy hydrozones, etc.)

26

V. Designing Pilot Programs and Performance CriteriaWithout the wide-spread successful development and implementation of pilot projects and the means with which to compare project outcomes, it is challenging to recommend with certainty region-specific sustainable landscaping programs and interventions. To overcome the absence of coordination in landscape and irrigation evaluation, collected under the seventh barrier’s title ‘Performance Criteria10,’ it is critical to identify existing project and program success stories, understand their approaches and determine their quantifiable costs and benefits. A concerted effort to understand and catalogue existing approaches to sustainable landscaping can establish a foundation for a consensus-based evaluation protocol that both sets watershed approach expectations and serves as a basis for comparing landscaping programs, technologies, and management regimes.

A. Identified Successful Pilot Projects:1. Garden - Garden lawn conversion comparison in Santa Monica 2. Cash for Grass programs throughout California

3. Elmer Ave neighborhood retrofit in Sun Valley, Los Angeles4. Sustainable SITES pilot s in Santa Barbara and Los Angeles

5. RWA Blue Thumb Neighbors in Sacramento6. Bay-Friendly Landscaping Rated Commercial, Civic and Multi-Family projects in Alameda

County 7. Additional pilot projects state-wide that embody sustainable landscaping principles and

vary in scope and subject are available for reference and replication (e.g., demonstration gardens, rebate programs, pilot partnerships, etc.); these projects are not yet centrally catalogued. The Council Landscape Committee’s ‘New Normal Toolbox,’ designed to share sustainable landscaping resources on pilot projects, outreach programs, technical tools, etc.; currently in second phase of development .

B. Identified Existing Performance Criteria: 1. Site-Assessment Organizations – Existing performance criteria are variable in content

and stringency, and diffuse in application (e.g., Bay Friendly Rated Landscapes, and American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) Sustainable SITES).

2. Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881 - MWELO) – The state-produced MWELO is to be adopted by local municipalities, or municipalities are to develop their own ordinances that are as effective as MWELO; these standards are poorly implemented and not fully consistent with the watershed approach.

C. Future Pilot Projects and Performance Criteria1. Complete the Council Landscape Committee Toolbox Clearinghouse and gather a

continually growing, up-to-date, and centralized collection of landscaping project/program examples and resources.

10 Performance Criteria, in another sense of the phrase, can suggest technological specifications (e.g., sprinkler head distribution specifications); this version of performance criteria is discussed more in the following section, ‘VI. Assisting in Development/Enforcement of Codes, Standards, Statutes and Regulations.’

27

2. Determine gaps (geographic, seasonal, scale/scope) in current array of state-wide pilot projects; design and implement projects to fill in the gaps.

3. Recruit publically visible and influential partners to implement new, visually-appealing pilot projects and publicize widely.

4. Develop holistic programmatic performance criteria and evaluation protocol to standardize evaluation of sustainable landscaping programs across the state, to quantify associated benefits, and to allow for consistent landscape benchmarks and indicators that follow the watershed approach; borrow from existing rating systems where relevant.

5. Make sure that highly-visible pilot projects receive proper maintenance.

28

VI. Assisting in Development/Enforcement of Codes, Standards, Statutes and RegulationsOvercoming the eighth barrier, insufficient codes, standards, regulations and enforcement, requires a substantial commitment and effort from industry, consumer and government partners.

Industry codes and standards set a baseline for future progress. By legally raising the sustainability bar for landscaping (for example, requiring climate-appropriate plant materials and weather-based irrigation systems), the market is forced to phase out old landscaping paradigms in favor of environmentally healthier alternatives. In turn, the public is forced to make better landscaping decisions. This ‘command and control’ intervention is difficult to employ without the buy-in of major private industry players as well as affected consumers.

Historically one of the last pieces to develop in a given market transformation, legislative and regulatory changes tend to follow a shift in the private industry codes, standards, and practices described in the immediately preceding paragraph. To help guide California’s water future, the California Legislature directed the Department of Water Resources to create the Independent Technical Panel (ITP), a rotating group of subject-matter experts who provide information and recommendations to legislators, and others, on topical demand management measures. This year, the ITP has been, and will be, meeting to discuss sustainable landscaping. This ITP is a group of seven water efficiency, landscaping and conservation experts from retail water suppliers, environmental organizations, the business community, wholesale water suppliers, and academia. This cycle’s timely topic, sustainable landscaping, offers this market transition the unique opportunity to defy conventional trends and witness the birth of new sustainable landscaping regulation, in the form of statutes, ordinances, or regulations, closer to the front end of a market transformation.

A. Existing Codes11

1. CalGreen 2013 Codes – New buildings, residential and non-residential, must have weather/soil-moisture-based irrigation controllers (Chapters 4.3 and 5.3); new non-residential buildings must develop a water budget, submeter outdoor potable water use on certain plot sizes, and meet specified irrigation design criteria such as weather/soil-moisture-based irrigation controllers

2. California Department of Public Health – Recycled Water Use codesi. (Chapter 3, Articles 1-4) – requires the use of labels to identify recycled water

irrigation that may be in contact with the public.3. California Plumbing Code – includes graywater regulation

B. Existing Standards

11 The line between standards and codes can be ambiguous. Take for example Building Codes: these are statewide standards promulgated by a statewide commission, yet they are ultimately referred to as codes.

29

1. Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance 12 (AB 1881 - MWELO) – sets standards for commercial and residential irrigation efficiency and best management practices and establishes new development requirements

2. Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) /Low Impact Development Ordinances – vary across the state (examples include the County of Los Angeles Low Impact Development Standards, and the San Diego County SUSMP)

3. US EPA – establishes Water Sense standards for irrigation controllers

4. Irrigation Association – provides vetted irrigation industry technologies (SWAT)5. Municipal Standards – vary across the state; created at the discretion of cities to make

consistent public standards such as landscape design standards C. Existing Guidelines (summarized from MaP’s ”A Comparison of Green’’)

1. Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design, LEED V4 – landscape irrigation requires a 30 percent to 50 percent reduction from baseline calculated via WaterSense water budget tool; 80 percent of irrigated landscape must be metered excluding Xeriscaped, water efficient, and native vegetation landscape areas

2. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, ASHRAE SS189.1 – landscape irrigation must be ET-based using smart controllers and is subject to restrictions on turf; landscape irrigation must be submetered when the total irrigated area is greater than 25,000 square feet

3. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, ASHRAE S191P – outdoor irrigation must be submetered when the total irrigated area is greater than 5,000 square feet

4. International Code Council, ICC 700-2008 (with National Association of Home Builders [NAHB]) – no mandatory provisions for landscape irrigation; some turf restrictions

5. International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), Green Plumbing & Mechanical Code Supplement – 75 percent of irrigation needs must be satisfied with water from alternate sources; smart controllers are required when a controller is needed; outdoor irrigation must be submetered when the total irrigated area is greater than 2,500 square feet

6. International Green Construction Code (lgCC), ICC Green Code – smart controllers are required when a controller is needed; alternate non-potable sources encouraged; outdoor irrigation must be submetered when automatic

D. Existing Constitutional Provisions and State Statutes1. Reasonable and Beneficial Use Doctrine (Article X Section 2 of CA Constitution) 2. Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB 1881; Article 10.8, 4.5)

3. Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SBX7-7)4. Home Owners Association Legislation affecting water use (AB 2104; SB 992)

E. Existing State Regulations

12 Though labeled an ordinance, MWELO acts more like a standard, as it sets a floor below which local ordinances may not go.

30

1. SWRCB Emergency Conservation Regulations (under authority of Water Code § 1058.5)

2. Stormwater Permitting and Regulations (e.g., stormwater resource planning, stormwater disposal, Stormwater Enforcement Act of 1998

3. CalRecycle compost and green waste statues and regulations4. Pesticide Application Regulations

F. Existing Local/Municipal Codes and Ordinances1. Municipal Water Waste Ordinances (e.g., City of San Juan Capistrano)

2. Local/Municipal Codes – variable across the state and can include, watering schedules, water-use limitations, and synthetic turf codes

G. Existing Enforcement & Implementation Efforts1. State Law – enables local public agencies/water utilities to enforce conservation codes

(Water Code § 375); time and money resources, and political will are often lacking, limiting enforcement

2. Public Entity Enforcement – local public agency or water utility enforcement strategies range from administrative warnings, to monetary penalties, to infractions, to misdemeanors; the extent to which these strategies are used is unclear without further study, but generally any sort of enforcement is reserved for blatant water abusers

H. Future Development1. Codes

i. Require irrigation retrofit on property re-sales ii. Update MWELO; make enforceable as an outdoor irrigation code for all landscapes

(including residential properties) that engrains water efficiency ethics into all landscape management actions; require compliance for any project being installed, regardless of whether it was approved prior to January 1, 2010 (when MWELO went into effect)

2. Standards i. Develop third-party-vetted, enforceable market standards for irrigation technology

efficiency3. Guidelines

i. Increase public awareness and recognition of building/landscape certifications that have high water conservation and BMP standards, thus incentivizing certifying bodies (e.g., SITES and LEED) to raise the bar for water conservation

4. State Statutes and Regulations

i. Increase landscaping rights of homeowners in Home Owners Associations (HOAs)ii. Raise legal water efficiency standards for government and large commercial

properties (e.g., require dedicated landscape meters)iii. Have MWELO applied to all buildings approved by the State Architect

iv. Increase power of local water agencies to design and enforce water conservation policy regardless of drought status

31

v. Establish efficiency baselines for market irrigation equipment

vi. Require additional sustainable landscaping CEU’s for state-licensed landscaping professions

vii. Revive irrigation standards work directives laid out in AB 1881viii. Capitalize on regulatory synergies between water conservation and stormwater

measures5. Enforcement and Implementation

i. Provide creative enforcement tools such as water-infraction education classes ii. Ensure sufficient resources and incentives are available for implementation of old

and new codes and standardsiii. Create and distribute enforcement tools in place of prescribing enforcement

measures

32

ELEMENT 3: Lasting Change

I. Matching Barriers with Intervention Strategies: IntroductionTo establish sustainable landscaping as the standard practice among property owners, market and behavioral barriers must be removed through a prioritized series of collaborative interventions and research. Below, specific barriers are strategically paired with removal strategies and actions. Implementation factors such as intervention timing, intervention priority, and human and monetary resources are identified and attributed to each strategy. Implementation factors are assigned based on best guesses and anticipated market transformation trends. For example, we assume for the sake of the strategic process and based on existing market transformation curves that after early adoption, the big jump to majority adoption will happen on an exponential growth curve. The assumption will impact how timing and priority implementation factors are attributed to each intervention strategy.

Table 4 pairs intervention categories and strategies with each of the nine major barrier categories.

Table 4: Barriers to sustainable landscaping and potential intervention and removal strategies.

BARRIERS & REMOVAL STRATEGIESBarrier Category Primary Intervention Categories Example Barrier Removal Strategy

Watershed Approach AllIdentify champions to communicate the value of

sustainable, alternative options to turfLeadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Devising Effective, Unified, and Targeted Marketing / Branding /

Outreach

Unite state and local sustainable landscaping stakeholders to coordinate standards and expectations

for the landscaping industry

Economic Incentives Building a Business CaseImplement or increase financial incentives for

consumers and businesses; Prove a market demand

Social NormsRedefining End User Value

Hierarchy & Resultant End User Behaviors

Redefine social norms; Employ social diffusion via Community Based Social Marketing

MessagingDevising Effective, Unified, and

Targeted Marketing / Branding / Outreach

Initiate a state-wide sustainable landscape messaging campaign; Devise creative, effective messaging, with

person-to-person delivery options, prompts, and commitment solicitations

Education & Workforce

Development

Developing Education, Training, Certifications & Licenses

Programs

Establish and mandate state-wide sustainable landscaping certifications for landscape professionals

Performance CriteriaResearching Data Gaps, Pilot

Programs & Designing Performance Criteria

Design and implement a standardized landscape evaluation protocol

Codes, Standards, Regulations & Enforcement

Assisting in Development and Enforcement of Codes &

Standards; Catalyzing Regulatory Action

Redesign old codes, standards, and regulations and develop new ones to catalyze sustainable landscaping; Design enforcement tools and generate enforcement

resources

ResearchResearching Data Gaps, Pilot

Programs & Designing Performance Criteria

Prioritize research needs and delegate targeted research tasks

33

Despite an understanding of general barriers to sustainable landscaping, there are no specific and thorough data on how end user values and associated barriers vary across space and time. To accurately target sustainable landscaping programs and efforts, it is critical to match appropriate barrier removal strategies with the most prevalent and entrenched barriers in a specific region, town or neighborhood. Finer data resolution is needed to effectively implement intervention strategies. Specifically, the following questions must be answered:

How do end user values and associated barriers to sustainable landscaping vary:

- over space?

- over time? and

- across demographics?

Space – Regional variability in water availability, water sources, water cost, pricing structures, water needs, population, and population density may correlate with variability in barriers to sustainable landscaping. For example, a small rural population relying on well water and experiencing dire water shortage may not concern itself with landscape upkeep. Residents may not consider landscaping transformation as their limited water resources will be saved for more basic needs such as bathing and drinking.. A small rural community with an abundant supply of water and no imminent water threats; however, may not consider investing in a transformation that is, in the minds of its residents ‘not needed. Identifying, without speculation, what barriers apply to which geographic regions will guide market transformation implementation.

Time – Seasonal, generational, cultural, and technological change over time can build up and break down barriers to sustainable landscaping. To know these changes over time is to inform tactical market intervention. Take, for example, the current California drought. End users have been primed, and are more aware than any time in recent memory of water challenges in California. The market should be ripe to tackle barriers weakened by the drought. Social norms may have morphed during this drought, and perhaps it’s now more acceptable to consider dramatically overhauling a landscape, where it may not have been a few short years ago, before the drought started. This temporal difference in barrier priority can open or close windows to ripe market intervention.

Demographics – Variability in socio-economic class, education level, and cultural heritage may parallel variability in barriers to sustainable landscaping. An impoverished urban area with high water costs may be less concerned with social norms and more concerned with cost savings. A wealthy suburban neighborhood may be more concerned with social norms and functional space than with water cost savings. These hypothetical differences in end user demographics can inform barrier removal strategies. Water utility staff members, landscaping professionals, and retailers are most likely to know their communities best. Their knowledge is critical to informing local strategies.

Implementing intervention strategies at strategic moments in space and time for the appropriate demographic will cause barriers to fall more readily and cost-effectively than a haphazard, shotgun approach, where a mix of strategies are applied without deference to spatial and temporal data.

34

II. Matching Barriers with Intervention Strategies: Priorities, Time Frames, Relative Costs

This section, and the following section, supplement and expand Table 4 with three new tables.

Table 6 and Table 7 both pair more specific intervention with more specific barriers to sustainable landscaping in California. For each intervention strategy, they both also add implementation factors such as action priority, time frame and relative cost. They differ primarily in their organization. Table 6 organizes its strategies by primary barrier category. Table 7 organizes its strategies by proposed priority, timing and relative cost. To allow easier comparison between the two different displays, each Table 6 strategy has the same number as its Table 7 counterpart. Finally, Table 5 provides a simple key for reading Tables 6 and 7.

Table 5: Key to intervention and barrier removal implementation factors.

KeyIntervention & Barrier Removal Implementation Factors

Priority (TP) Top Priority (MP) Mid Priority (LP) Low PriorityTiming (ST) Short Term 1-2 years (MT) Medium Term 3-5 years (LT) Long Term 5+ yearsCost ($) Low Cost ($$) Medium Cost ($$$) High Cost

35

Table 6: Barrier removal actions/strategies, timing, priorities, and costs; the row ‘#’ references the numerical order of actions found in Table 7

Primary Barrier

Category# Specific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost

Watershed Approach13 1

Absence of agency/organization understanding of and/or buy-in to the watershed approach impedes the exponential adoption of sustainable landscaping principles and implementation

Engage, inform, and incentivize key sustainable landscaping stakeholder buy-in from the get-go of the market intervention

TP ST $

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

15

Lack of integration of landscaping priorities and collaboration in local and state government agencies (planning, inspecting, regulating, enforcing, etc.)

Mandate a formal degree of landscaping integration and coordination across local and state government sectors; start an information campaign to educate local governments on the benefits of sustainable landscaping and provide utilities with effective tools; establish a permanent technical advisory committee between stakeholders (e.g., DWR, DPR, CalRecycle, etc.) to facilitate coordination

TP LT $$$

21 No Central HOA association exists to govern HOA sustainability standards

Facilitate the birth of regional HOA associations, created on the platform of sustainability; incite competition between HOAs to maximize sustainability and motivate with advertising benefits

MP MT $$

Economic Incentives

5

Consumers assume sustainable landscapes are more costly to purchase and install than traditional counterparts; ROI for some sustainable landscape conversions can exceed 20 years; water efficient irrigation and plant materials are often more expensive than their traditional counterparts

Catalyze landscape conversions with financial incentives (e.g., rebates, tax credits, etc.); grow demand for sustainable landscape materials to increase affordability due to market-based economies of scale

TP ST $$$

7

Native plants and climate-appropriate plants are often more difficult and more costly to propagate; nursery production and retail presence of water-efficient and sustainable plants is limited

Prove a consumer demand and/or guarantee a buyer for climate-appropriate and native through partnership creation and growth; demonstrate to nurseries and plant retailers the long-term incentives from a for-profit perspective such as getting ahead of the market trajectory

TP S-MT $$

13 The ‘Watershed Approach’ barrier category applies to each and every intervention strategy/action in both Tables 6 & 7.

36

Primary Barrier

Category# Specific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost

Economic Incentives

Cont.

11

Competitive maintenance contracts do not allow the time/money to include healthy landscaping practices and Landscaping and irrigation industry professionals and maintenance workers are unfamiliar with effective sustainable landscaping practices (e.g., watering to a budget instead of a Maximum Allowable Water Allowance [MAWA])

Build a business case to help property managers understand landscaping stress and the benefits of a water budget; pilot a landscape designer/contractor joint challenge program to design and install landscapes based on a designated evapotranspiration level (0.00-0.80 by intervals of 0.10); capture visual results and post installation consumption records in a photo gallery and data file

TP MT $$

16

Water pricing does not send a strong conservation signal to outdoor water end users; water agencies often have their hands tied by political will and existing regulation, restricting them from affecting constructive water-pricing change

Re-evaluate water pricing regulation and creation on a state-level; determine the economic and conservation implications for restructured water pricing; encourage agency adoption of water rates that incentivize outdoor water use conservation

TP LT $$$

26Property owners are concerned with the impact of sustainable landscapes on property value

Capture property value trends over time as they vary with household ‘curb-appeal’ and increased utility efficiencies attributable to landscaping; engage and educate the real-estate sector to help market sustainable landscapes positively to clients

LP LT $

Social Norms

8

Turf lawns are the preferred yard aesthetic for old and new properties; native and climate-appropriate plants, shrubs, and landscapes can be perceived as ugly; some existing examples of ‘sustainable’ conversions are aesthetically unappealing

Counter negative sustainable landscaping perceptions with well-designed, distributed, prevalent, and aesthetically-pleasing demonstration gardens that include related statistics comparing traditional landscaping to sustainable landscaping in terms of water, resources, labor, green waste, emissions, etc.

TP S-MT $$

13Neighborhood demographics, HOA standards, and other norm-setting communities encourage turf-based uniformity

Employ CBSM at the neighborhood and HOA scale to establish a new landscaping social norm using incentives, messaging, commitment bias, and person-to-person communication; leverage early adopters/ environmental stewards to spread the word via inventive messaging

TP M-LT $$$

17

Turf lawns are preferred for their functionality; the public does not universally perceive climate appropriate alternatives as sufficiently 'functional'

Gather and disseminate imagery of functional sustainable landscapes (e.g., urban farms, permeable pavers, etc.) ; draft and disseminate template landscape design plans that emphasize functional space; grow, pilot, and market climate-appropriate, durable, and attractive lawn alternatives

MP ST $$

37

Primary Barrier

Category# Specific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost

Social Norms Cont. 18

CII, HOA, celebrity, corporate, and government landscapes that are highly visible to the public do not consistently lead by example

Recruit extremely public and well-known people, government agencies, landscapes, associations, etc. to serve as sustainable landscaping ambassadors and to host pilot projects on their properties; require government buildings to transition immediately

MP ST $$

Messaging 6 Lack of state-wide integrated messaging and branding

Construct a comprehensive state-wide advertising campaign with unified TV, radio, billboard, internet, and print marketing and graphics; include a parallel plant and product labeling project

TP ST $$$

Education & Workforce

Development

12

No CEUs are required for professionals in the landscape and irrigation industry; communication within landscape and irrigation professionals is disjointed

Require CEUs and a degree of collaboration for all professional sectors of the landscape industry TP M-LT $$

14

Turf installation and maintenance is well-understood (by both consumers and landscape professionals), quick, and simple with high market familiarity and availability; native gardens are multi-faceted and fewer educated market services are available to successfully design, install, and support their maintenance

Design and distribute/implement educational, sustainable landscaping materials/projects/trainings to increase public familiarity and comfort with the 'watershed approach'; bring industry leaders and professionals up-to-date on sustainable landscaping and able to provide necessary services

TP LT $$$

19Watershed approach-based informational materials and pilot project records are limited and/or diffuse

Compose and/or compile easily digestible landscaping materials and pilot project records in a centralized location MP MT $

22 Sustainable Landscaping educating entities are limited in number, resources, and visibility

Fund educating entities and facilitate collaboration and cross-referencing within programs to ensure accurate material, state-wide consistency, and wide-spread distribution of education opportunities ranging from school children to professionals

MP MT $$

Performance Criteria 4

The irrigation industry lacks consensus on best irrigation technologies, designs, and water budgets for specific landscapes

Plan an irrigation technology summit to share irrigation and design details and to arrive at consensus of best irrigation systems/management regimes for specific landscapes/regions

TP ST $$

38

Primary Barrier

Category# Specific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost

Performance Criteria Cont. 10

Performance criteria and evaluation protocol for sustainable landscaping projects are non existent or inconsistent across the state

Develop programmatic performance criteria and evaluation protocol to standardize evaluation of sustainable landscaping programs and initiatives, to quantify associated benefits, and to allow for consistent landscape benchmarks and indicators

TP MT $$

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

2

The MWELO is unenforceable and insufficient as an outdoor irrigation code for residential homes and it does not apply to re-sale properties

Resolve the MWELO enforcement challenges faced by water utilities and municipalities and apply standards to re-sale properties; update to include regular revision, lower ET rates, stricter water budget components, etc.

TP ST $

20Water utilities and municipalities lack the resources to effectively enforce conservation mandates

Identify and distribute potential funding sources and points of contact; encourage Proposition 1 agents to designate funding for conservation and landscaping enforcement measures

MP MT $

23The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (among other state regulations and standards) is outdated and insufficient

Re-work the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act and other outdated regulations and standards to include holistic, sustainable landscaping principles and to capitalize on synergies between water conservation and stormwater management

MP MT $$$

24Market standards such as irrigation technology efficiency standards and regional plant restrictions are lacking

Develop and implement third-party-vetted, enforceable market standards for irrigation technology efficiency and plant permissibility

MP M-LT $$

25

Existing water conservation enforcement measures are prescriptive and without policy space; water utilities are reticent to use punitive enforcement measures

Require specific water conservation outcomes and suggest a variety of enforcement strategies, but ultimately leave enforcement open to the agents of enforcement; design creative alternatives to fines and water service interruptions

LP ST $

Research

9Data-based, life-time cost-benefit analyses for landscape conversions are not fully available or substantiated

Calculate clear, real-world, climate-specific, numbers (e.g., Life Cycle Assessments) with appropriate caveats for current potential water/cost savings, and other benefits attributable to sustainable landscaping practices

TP ST $$

3 Regional variability in sustainable landscaping barriers is unstudied/unclear

Perform necessary research to increase data resolution/understanding of sustainable landscaping barriers

TP S-MT $$$

39

40

PART 3: PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

C onclusion

Table 7 below summarizes the next steps for the array of barrier removal strategies/action items presented in Table 6. Actions are organized by highest priority level to lowest priority level, and subsequently by shortest term to longest term. To move forward with the actions presented below and the market transformation plan as a whole, the following steps are critical:

Host a stakeholder meeting to solicit further feedback and generate early buy-in, and engage with all sectors identified in the above framework;

Create a steering committee to drive the planning and implementation processes; Identify additional barrier removal strategies and refine next steps; and Determine for all strategies identified the following:

o responsible parties and roles,o available resources, ando needed resources.

A patient commitment to collaboration will transform the landscaping market and yield long-term payoffs for water conservation and environmental benefit.

41

Table 7: Barrier removal actions/strategies, timing, priorities, costs, and next steps; actions are ordered by priority and subsequently by timing; shading indicates ‘Top Priority,’ ‘Mid Priority,’ and ‘Low Priority’ groupings

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

1 Watershed Approach14

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

Absence of agency/organization understanding of and/or buy-in to the watershed approach impedes

the exponential adoption of sustainable landscaping principles

and implementation

Engage, inform, and incentivize key sustainable landscaping stakeholder buy-in from the get-go of the market

intervention

TP ST $

Identify all potential stakeholders; host an inclusive

stakeholder workshop to generate early buy-in and to

determine roles and responsibilities

2

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

The MWELO is unenforceable and insufficient as an outdoor irrigation code for residential homes and it

does not apply to re-sale properties

Resolved the MWELO enforcement challenges faced by water utilities and municipalities and apply standards to re-sale properties; update to include

regular revision, lower ET rates, stricter water budget components, etc.

TP ST $

Convene stakeholders to achieve MWELO revision consensus;

propose revisions to state legislative bodies

3 Research Economic Incentives

Data-based, life-time cost-benefit analyses for landscape conversions

are not fully available or substantiated

Calculate clear, real-world, climate-specific, numbers (e.g., Life Cycle

Assessments) with appropriate caveats for current potential water/cost

savings, and other benefits attributable to sustainable landscaping practices

TP ST $$

Gather existing data; achieve region-specific consensus

/conclusion from existing data; plan additional studies where

data is weak

4 Performance Criteria Research

The irrigation industry lacks consensus on best irrigation

technologies, designs, and water budgets for specific landscapes

Plan an irrigation technology summit to share irrigation and design details

and to arrive at consensus of best irrigation systems/management

regimes for specific landscapes/regions

TP ST $$Identify stakeholders; identify

planning agent; identify desired outcome

5 Economic Incentives

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

Consumers assume sustainable landscapes are more costly to

purchase and install than traditional counterparts; R.O.I. for some

sustainable landscape conversions can exceed 20 years; water efficient

irrigation and plant materials are often more expensive than their

traditional counterparts

Catalyze landscape conversions with financial incentives (e.g., rebates, tax

credits, etc.); grow demand for sustainable landscape materials to

increase affordability due to market-based economies of scale

TP ST $$$

Identify consumer-perceived financial barriers and actual

market cost barriers; implement pilot financial incentive programs

based on findings; analyze results; scale up effective

incentive programs

14 The ‘Watershed Approach’ barrier category applies to each and every intervention strategy/action in Tables 6 & 7.

42

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

6 MessagingLeadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Lack of state-wide integrated messaging and branding

Construct a comprehensive state-wide advertising campaign with unified TV,

radio, billboard, internet, and print marketing and graphics; include a parallel plant and product labeling

project

TP ST $$$

Meet with water utilities and landscaping organizations to

generate buy-in; coordinate with organization capable of handling

state-wide initiatives; hire advertising firm to plan campaign

7 Economic Incentives Messaging

Native plants and climate-appropriate plants are often more

difficult and more costly to propagate; nursery production and retail presence of water-efficient and sustainable plants is limited

Prove a consumer demand and/or guarantee a buyer for climate-appropriate and native through

partnership creation and growth; demonstrate to nurseries and plant

retailers the long-term incentives from a for-profit perspective such as getting

ahead of the market trajectory

TP S-MT $$

Gather existing data on landscape conversions and ripple effects on market economics (e.g. evidence

of growing demand via lawn rebate programs); create a simple, clean, distributable

business case document targeting nurseries and retailers

8 Social NormsLeadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Turf lawns are the preferred yard aesthetic for old and new

properties; native and climate-appropriate plants, shrubs, and landscapes can be perceived as

'ugly'; some existing examples of ‘sustainable’ conversions are

aesthetically unappealing

Counter negative sustainable landscaping perceptions with well-

designed, distributed, prevalent, and aesthetically-pleasing demonstration gardens that include related statistics comparing traditional landscaping to sustainable landscaping in terms of

water, resources, labor, green waste, emissions, etc.

TP S-MT $$

Identify and map existing, beautiful and sustainable

landscapes; capture imagery and design concepts of these spaces; identify partner sites and funding to generate landscaping bids for

new or renovated public landscapes built on sustainable

principles; advertise landscaping RFPs, requiring contractors to be

trained in sustainable landscaping practices

9 Research Social NormsRegional variability in sustainable

landscaping barriers is unstudied/unclear

Perform necessary research to increase data resolution/understanding of sustainable landscaping barriers

TP S-MT $$$

Determine where data-based understanding of barriers is

sparse; plan surveys and focus groups in conjunction with water

utilities to better understand barriers

10 Performance Criteria

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

Performance criteria and evaluation protocol for sustainable

landscaping projects are non existent or inconsistent across the

state

Develop programmatic performance criteria and evaluation protocol to

standardize evaluation of sustainable landscaping programs and initiatives,

to quantify associated benefits, and to allow for consistent landscape

benchmarks and indicators

TP MT $$

Identify existing performance criteria and evaluation models;

convene stakeholders to synthesize best hybrid of existing

evaluation models

43

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

11 Economic Incentives

Education & Workforce

Development

Competitive maintenance contracts do not allow the time/money to

include healthy landscaping practices and Landscaping and

irrigation industry professionals and maintenance workers are unfamiliar with effective

sustainable landscaping practices (e.g., watering to a budget instead

of the MAWA)

Build a business case to help property managers understand landscaping stress and the benefits of a water

budget; pilot a landscape designer/contractor joint challenge

program to design and install landscapes based on a designated

evapotranspiration levels (0.00-0.80 by intervals of 0.10); capture visual results

and post installation consumption records in a photo gallery and data file

TP MT $$

Gather existing information on sustainable landscape

conversions and relevant incentives from a landscape

architect, designer, contractor, and laborer point of view; create

a simple, clean, distributable business case document

targeting competitive landscape contractors and their clients

12Education & Workforce

Development

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

No CEUs are required for professionals in the landscape and irrigation industry; communication

within landscape and irrigation professionals is disjointed

Require CEUs and a degree of collaboration for all professional sectors of the landscape industry

TP M-LT $$

Meet with educators, industry leaders, and certifying bodies to

determine the process and obstacles to CEU requirement; identify important landscape

synergies and propose mandated communication between

landscape/irrigation designers and landscape/irrigation

installers

13 Social NormsLeadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Neighborhood demographics, HOA standards, and other norm-setting communities encourage turf-based

uniformity

Employ CBSM at the neighborhood and HOA scale to establish a new landscaping social norm using

incentives, messaging, commitment bias, and person-to-person

communication; leverage early adopters/ environmental stewards to

spread the word via inventive messaging

TP M-LT $$$

Design CBSM pilot projects and identify water agency,

community, and/or HOA partners to implement the projects

14Education & Workforce

DevelopmentMessaging

Turf installation and maintenance is well-understood (by both consumers and landscape

professionals), quick, and simple with high market familiarity and availability; native gardens are

multi-faceted and fewer educated market services are available to successfully design, install, and

support their maintenance

Design and distribute/implement educational, sustainable landscaping

materials/projects/trainings to increase public familiarity and comfort with the 'watershed approach'; bring industry leaders and professionals up-to-date on sustainable landscaping and

able to provide necessary services

TP LT $$$

Identify education partners; communicate simple, and

attractive sustainable landscape concepts to homeowners and

property managers that they can relay to contractors; propose

more stringent sustainable landscaping CEUs to certifying

bodies

44

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

15Leadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Codes, Standards, Regulations

& Enforcement

Lack of integration of landscaping priorities and collaboration in local

and state government agencies (planning, inspecting, regulating,

enforcing, etc.)

Mandate a formal degree of landscaping integration and

coordination across local and state government sectors; start an

information campaign to educate local governments on the benefits of

sustainable landscaping and provide utilities with effective tools; establish a

permanent technical advisory committee between stakeholders (e.g.,

DWR, DPR, CalRecycle, etc.) to facilitate coordination

TP LT $$$

Identify potential partnerships; host a stakeholder meeting to gauge individual organizational

interests in cross-sector collaboration and/or

participation in a technical advisory committee; propose

legislative amendments to require state-level coordination

that streamlines landscaping processes

16 Economic Incentives

Codes, Standards, Regulations

& Enforcement

Water pricing does not send a strong conservation signal to

outdoor water end users; water agencies often have their hands tied by political will and existing regulation, restricting them from

affecting constructive water-pricing change

Re-evaluate water pricing regulation and creation on a state-level; determine the economic and conservation implications for

restructured water pricing; encourage agency adoption of water rates that

incentivize outdoor water use conservation (e.g., water budget rates)

TP LT $$$

Identify creative water pricing structures and regulatory

limitations; compose recommendations for water

pricing regulation change evaluate regional applicability;

compile and disseminate current conservation-incentivizing water

pricing tactics

17 Social Norms Messaging

Turf lawns are preferred for their functionality; the public does not

universally perceive climate appropriate alternatives as

sufficiently 'functional'

Gather and disseminate imagery of functional sustainable landscapes (e.g., urban farms, permeable pavers, etc.) ;

draft and disseminate template landscape design plans that emphasize

functional space; grow, pilot, and market climate-appropriate, durable,

and attractive lawn alternatives

MP ST $$

Identify functional and sustainable existing landscapes; identify nursery partners who specialize in turf alternatives; validate products; advertise

products

18 Social Norms

Codes, Standards, Regulations

& Enforcement

CII, HOA, celebrity, and government landscapes that are highly visible to the public do not consistently lead

by example

Recruit extremely public and well-known people, government agencies, landscapes, associations, etc. to serve

as sustainable landscaping ambassadors and to host pilot projects

on their properties; require government buildings to transition

immediately

MP ST $$

Recruit partners for pilot landscapes; devise and propose

government landscaping standards to legislative bodies

19Education & Workforce

Development

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

Watershed approach-based informational materials and pilot project records are limited and/or

Compose and/or compile easily digestible landscaping materials and pilot project records in a centralized

MP MT $Identify useful, existing sustainable landscaping

materials; archive in the Council's

45

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

diffuse location

Landscape Committee Toolbox; identify material gaps; delegate

material and pilot project creation

20

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Economic Incentives

Water utilities and municipalities lack the resources to effectively enforce conservation mandates

Identify and distribute potential funding sources and points of contact;

encourage Proposition 1 agents to designate funding for conservation and

landscaping enforcement measures

MP MT $

Identify and compile funding opportunities; define agency

needs for a Proposition 1 agent audience

21Leadership,

Collaboration & Outreach

Education & Workforce

Development

No Central HOA association exists to govern HOA sustainability

standards

Facilitate the birth of regional HOA associations, created on the platform of sustainability; incite competition

between HOAs to maximize sustainability and motivate with

advertising benefits

MP MT $$

Use a well-established regional entity to reach out to HOAs and

hold a pilot meeting for a regional HOA council

22Education & Workforce

Development

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

Sustainable Landscaping educating entities are limited in number,

resources, and visibility

Fund educating entities and facilitate collaboration and cross-referencing within programs to ensure accurate

material, state-wide consistency, and wide-spread distribution of education

opportunities ranging from school children to professionals

MP MT $$

Identify available funding resources for sustainable

landscaping education entities and apply for grants; gather

educators in one room to discuss collaboration and to leverage

growth opportunities

23

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Leadership, Collaboration & Outreach

The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (among

other state regulations and standards) is outdated and

insufficient

Re-work the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act and other outdated regulations and standards to include

holistic sustainable landscaping principles and to capitalize on

synergies between water conservation and stormwater management

MP MT $$$

Identify out-of-date/insufficient landscaping regulations and standards; propose detailed

recommendations to the ITP; ensure proposals are brought to

legislative bodies

24

Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Performance Criteria

Market standards such as irrigation technology efficiency standards and

regional plant restrictions are lacking

Develop and implement third-party-vetted, enforceable market standards for irrigation technology efficiency and

plant permissibility

MP M-LT $$

Engage in conversation with market entities to determine the

steps necessary for market standard revision;

25 Codes, Standards,

Regulations & Enforcement

Education & Workforce

DevelopmentExisting water conservation enforcement measures are

prescriptive and without policy space; water utilities are reticent to use punitive enforcement measures

Require specific water conservation outcomes and suggest a variety of

enforcement strategies, but ultimately leave enforcement open to the agents

of enforcement; design creative alternatives to fines and water service

interruptions

LP ST $

Propose revised conservation enforcement measures to

legislators; brainstorm prescriptive and fine

enforcement alternatives; pilot 'water school' as an alternative to

fines; gather feedback from

46

#Primary Barrier

Category

Secondary Barrier

CategorySpecific Barrier Addressed Intervention Strategy/Action Priority Timing Cost Next Steps

existing 'alternative' enforcement measures

26 Economic Incentives Research

Property owners are concerned with the impact of sustainable landscapes on property value

Capture property value trends over time as they vary with household curb-appeal and increased utility efficiencies

attributable to landscaping; engage and educate the real-estate sector to help market sustainable landscapes

positively to clients

LP LT $

Gather real estate data and anecdotal information; find

compelling case studies that are in favor of sustainable

landscaping; identify real estate partners

47

APPENDIX A: Research – Overcoming the 9th Barrier

Conceptually, the ninth barrier—lack of sufficient knowledge—does not lend itself to a market intervention. Rather, developing an adequate knowledge base is often a pre-requisite to successful interventions. Similarly, improving a knowledge base is necessary to adaptive management. Within the sustainable landscaping community, there is an underlying hesitation to push forward on all sustainable landscaping fronts without ascertaining further evidence of water savings and environmental health benefits attributable to specific landscaping actions such as irrigation system selection, plant selection, landscape design choices, etc. Though this document is peppered with research results and pilot projects that have yielded promising and repeatable results, there is still a need for a continued expansion of collective sustainable landscaping knowledge, defensible by robust research and testing methodologies. The following outline parallels the format of all other market interventions, detailing the current state of research and then suggesting future research steps.

A. Existing Research:a. Existing outdoor water savings research has been compiled by the Alliance for Water Efficiency’s Outdoor Water Savings

Initiative in a newly released report that identifies research gaps.b. Existing sustainable landscaping research (e.g., composting, native plants, alternative water supply, etc.) is available from diffuse

resources.B. Future Research Projects:

a. Identify significant gaps in sustainable landscaping subject coverage, reference the following AWE Outdoor Water Savings Research Initiative ’s list of greatest need research areas:

Impact of native, water-wise, and xeric landscapes vs. turf on water use and cost. Impact of water rates, rate structures, and billing information on demand. Impact of various drought restrictions on demand. The best/only research on this topic is now 10 years old. Water requirements and drought tolerance of landscape turfs and plants under different climate and drought conditions.

Water requirement should be based on acceptable appearance rather than maximum growth. Impact of landscape contractor training, education, and certification. The human element of landscape water management – how people manage and interact with the entire irrigation system

and the installed landscape. Impact of improving system efficiency through audits, tune ups, sprinkler-head retrofits, and other measures. Reasons and rationale for customer landscape choices. Cost-effectiveness and cost savings of various outdoor water saving programs. Impact of regional variability (climate, soils, demographics, etc.) on outdoor water demand and savings, with a standard

measure for comparison across regions. Standard methods for monitoring and verifying water savings. Long-term reliability and projected lifetime of outdoor water savings.

48

b. Develop a prioritized list of needed research and pilot projects and identify funding and partners to undertake the research and project tasks. Research and evaluate past and future water conservation landscaping technologies and management regimes, such as water budgets, to achieve consensus on best landscape management practices and technologies as they relate to specific regions and end users.

49

APPENDIX B: Table 7 Addendum – Resources, Roles & ResponsibilitiesComing soon…a Table 7 addendum, formatted in Excel, that will determine each of the following for all barrier removal strategies/action items as identified at the Council’s April 15, 2015 Sustainable Landscaping Stakeholder Meeting:

a. Next step roles and responsible partiesb. Available resourcesc. Needed resources

50

APPENDIX C: New Norm Symposia Infographics

51

APPENDIX D: Summary of Presentations to ITP - Meeting #16 November 20, 2014

OrganizationCurrent and Anticipated

Challenges/Barriers Summary Recommendations Summary

Conceptual Representation in Document (High,

Medium, Low)

American Society of Irrigation

Consultants

Consistency in ordinances Cost of additional paperwork in design process Public shift to accept appearance of lower water use plant

palettes Proper design and maintenance of drip irrigation Education on use of weather based controls Cost of weather based controls Proper use of harvested water – grey or rainwater

Smart timers negate need for cycle based restrictions Eliminate 24 inch offset requirement Eliminate use of drip and/or turf in spaces 8 feet or

smaller Promote use of high efficiency spray devices as alternate

technology in turf Provide direction in the ordinance to focus more on the

goal and less with the objective. Increased number of CIMIS (non-ideal) locations Homeowner efficiency Nuisance water harvesting, treatment, supplement

Medium

American Society of Landscape Architects

Client preferences and lack of 100% consensus on achieving goals

Inconsistencies among municipalities regarding water conservation design regulations, tracking (metering), and enforcement

No link to the water budget based calculations required under the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Lack of scientific data regarding plant water use requirements

Inconsistent maintenance and care of installed landscapes Acres of existing outdated landscapes and the long Return

on Investment to retrofit Lack of coordination between local Regional Water

Quality Control Boards water quality and hydro-modification goals, and stormwater capture for irrigation

Socioeconomic impacts of water costs Existing wasteful landscapes and the cost of retrofitting Aligning Regional Water Quality Control Boards with

stormwater capture and re-use Issues regarding private reclamation plants Climate change and severity of droughts impacting the

value of landscape, groundwater reserves, and the

Discourage Synthetic Turf and gravel/heat-island aesthetics

Value regionally appropriate landscapes Initiate a budget based billing for landscape meters

throughout the state that uses the metrics under the state Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance

Develop standards and incentives for private reclamation plants; streamline approval processes

Align Regional Water Quality Control Boards with stormwater capture and re-use

High

52

economy including agriculture

Association of

Professional Landscape Designers

The whole-systems approach may be at cross-purposes with a” water conservation at all cost” message

Water conservation is often framed as a short-term issue; Irrigation is emphasized, not always soil, rain water

harvesting, plant selection, and the use of mulch and compost

CEUs are lacking Resistance by experienced design professionals to learn

and practice the “New Normal” of landscape design General industry lack of understanding about new science

in the plant-soil-water relationship Baseline standards for sustainable landscapes using the

watershed approach have not been implemented throughout CA; MWELO has not gone far enough

Several regional groups implementing MWELO actively have excluded Landscape Designers from the certifying process

Revise Landscape Architecture Practice Act does not allow California consumers to contract Landscape Designers

Enforcement and one-on-one coaching with water conservation objectives is insufficient

Turf removals should be rebated Incentives should motivate returning organic material to

soils; 3” compost and organic mulch should be encouraged

Incentives and education should be developed for reduction of irrigated areas so long as a multi-benefit retrofit has been installed

Artificial turf should be excluded from rebates A program should be funded that supports municipalities

in the removal of turf in all parkways and medians Citizen scientists help enforce fines for dry weather run

off on private and public properties More aggressive and transparent public outreach and

education programs that encourage a watershed approach should be funded

Create state-wide standards that are more aggressive in landscape water budgeting and grading for rainwater capture than MWELO

Medium

Bay-Friendly Coalition

Prioritization and focus –not everyone needs to do it all Avoid duplication of efforts - collaborations/partnerships Develop/share metrics - help “sell” to the public Shifting public acceptance - Education and demonstration

Adopt a holistic approach – it’s all related; multi-objective, multi-benefit

Link water conservation and water quality; air quality and GHG; public health – expands fundability

Education/training of public/private professionals in design, installation and maintenance

Address design, installation and maintenance Rethink WELO – lower threshold? Emphasize soil health from a soil food web perspective;

support sheet mulching Establish IPM as required approach to maintenance

(chemicals only as last resort and appropriately utilized) Recommend at least 50% native plants to rebuild

healthy/beneficial insect populations Funding – for training, public outreach, demonstration

projects, etc.

High

City of Santa Monica

Landscaping and irrigation is not considered as vital to health and safety compared to indoor plumbing

Plan checkers and inspectors lack of knowledge and experience with sustainable landscaping

Consider requiring education and continuing education for licensure – architects and contractors (every kind)

Consider working with manufacturers to educate professionals and property owners about their best water

High

53

Many hours spent reviewing and correcting plan sets because the plans submitted do not meet the basic code requirements

Lack of Education and Experience: design, install, maintain (across all players in industry)

Regulation and Enforcement Coordination lacking: permits, plan check, inspections

Bad products on market: sprinklers, high water use plants Lacking knowledgeable staff Lack of leadership and cooperation amongst landscapers

to inform, educate, and assist professional landscapers regarding sustainable landscaping best management practices and complying with state and local laws

saving products Consider requiring landscape/irrigation permits, plan

check, and inspections Consider banning water wasting products such as

sprinklers and high water use plants (why are we doing turf removal if we allow it to be installed somewhere else)

Consider promoting the New Normal state-wide

California Landscape

Contractors Association

(See recommendations to infer barriers.)

Water meters everywhere ASAP Dedicated landscape-only meters for large landscapes of

all kinds Rate structures that encourage efficient use Rebate programs New developments plumbed for reclaimed water Enforce Model Ordinance Communication with CLCA Follow directive of SWRCB and target runoff Don’t neglect existing landscapes. That’s where most of

the water is to be saved Measure water use, including landscape water use Price water to reflect its true cost Encourage and perhaps require certification of water

managers who service large landscapes. Look to CLCA to support any measure that targets waste

or otherwise saves water without doing harm to urban landscapes or unnecessarily restricting owners

Medium

Coachella Valley Water

District

Educating all staff and staffing Low water rates Entitlement mentality by an affluent population Lack of knowledge about water conservation Organizing and implementing plans Low water rates viewed as a conservation impediment

Effective Landscape Ordinance requiring: Drip irrigation on shrubs, Lower ET adjustment factor, Turf setbacks

Budget tiered rates that incorporate: Landscaped area, Weather, Irrigation efficiency

Turf Conversion featuring: Flexibility, 80% water reduction with desert-friendly designs, Changing thought processes

Medium

UC Davis Cooperative

Extension

Number of UC CE staff is shrinking although demand for expertise continues to rise in environmental horticulture,landscape and turf, nursery and floriculture, & irrigation technology

Educating the public adequately to generate impact is difficult with variable levels of understanding/motivation

Consistent enforcement of water conservation mandates Promote obtaining water conservation expertise (e.g.,

certification programs) Provide more outreach and education Customize information and messaging by group

(Professional landscape managers- public agency and

High

54

Master Gardeners struggle to teach clients about landscape management and irrigation controllers

Precise landscape/irrigation management is complex and end users are diverse in their understanding and motivations

commercial; Growers; Retail nursery staff and garden enthusiasts; General public)

Surfrider

Limited Capacity – volunteer and $ limitations Silos & lack of collaboration Lack of understanding about watershed approach Turf rebates not promoting watershed approach Lack of skilled workforce Consumers under-valuing role of landscape & pros Cheap “solutions” - artificial turf, no-cost retrofits Lack of innovation – need for Civilian Conservation Corps Piece-meal solutions – one-offs Opposition from traditional landscape industry

Watershed Approach – adopt & promote Integrated governance – engage fellow agencies Education – draw from MWD’s Cal Friendly class Training – invest in hands-on workforce development Data from each retrofit – common metrics, make

accessible

High

Tree People

Working with Latino and other communities – cultural differences, pre-conceptions

Offering all information and website in Spanish Not enough staff to be in every neighborhood Low availability of native plants People buy what they know, and that’s typically non-

native species Working with the residents on Elmer Ave to care for their

own landscapes Permit process for irricades Permit process for using recycled water Permits VERY expensive for curb cuts, & replacing turf in

parkways with native plants other than what’s on the city’s list of only “walkable” groundcover

Funding Association of drought-tolerant with desertification People not looking at sites holistically

Design tall tree planting to achieve at least 25% canopy coverage of the site

Stormwater shall be directed to trees and landscapes with curb cuts, swales and berms.

Adequate soil volume specified for tree planting. Turf in public green spaces for recreation should be

maintained with recycled water or massive water catchment systems

Healthy soils that absorb water are critical to an urban environment; include humus in soil, 3-4 inches mulch, permeable pavers, ANSI tree/shrub management/pruning

no concrete/metal grates/rocks in tree-wells Do not allow IPC-listed plants to be sold

Medium

Turfgrass Water

Conservation Alliance

Manpower – TWCA is still fairly young and relatively small Consistency - Maintaining a consistent message to our

members and municipalities over time Market challenges in supplying water conserving live

goods Outdated beliefs about turfgrasses Cultural Practices Market challenges in supplying water conserving

livegoods Under-informed decision making processes

State of California join the TWCA Implement TWCA qualification standards for all

turfgrasses in the state Recognize TWCA qualified varieties as water saving

varieties eligible for lawn replacement rebates Require TWCA qualification for all turfgrasses installed in the managed landscape

Low

Western Municipal

Educating staff that interacts with customers Sufficient time and labor to support programs

Support for allocation-based water rates Consistent state-wide messaging

High

55

Water District

Funding to support staff and programs Customer Education- increasing customer knowledge Empowerment, changing of water ethic Loss of knowledgeable staff and institutional knowledge Time Setting efficiencies based on water use sector Setting clear and reasonable long-term targets Educating regulators and legislators Enforcement by jurisdictional agencies (e.g., landscape

ordinances)

In a drought or not; fresh and positive messaging Make SaveOurH2O.org a truly state-wide website Change the water use ethic Support development of meaningful product standards

(WBICs, soil sensors, other smart technology) Funding of water use efficiency research projects (Tech

grants, challenge grants)

56