By Michael Barnes
Lawns are everywhere in our yards, parks, and sports fields but they’re more than just green spaces. They are part of a complex system that connects people, nature, and technology. Managing them well requires balancing environmental concerns, evolving technology, and social expectations.
In a recent article in the journal Crop Science, my colleagues and I argue for adopting a new perspective to help us move beyond disciplinary boundaries to be able to see lawns as part of dynamic and complex living systems shaped by human behavior, environmental factors, and innovations in technology. The Social-Ecological-Technological Systems (SETS) framework, proposed by McPhearson and colleagues, crafts a triangular approach to understanding ecosystem services broken down into three intersecting domains: ecological-biophysical, social-economic, technological-infrastructural Thinking this way can help us create greener, more efficient, and more sustainable communities.
Why lawns are more than just nature
For years, researchers have studied lawns as coupled human-natural systems, meaning they involve both people and the environment. But this approach leaves out an important factor—technology. With the rise of smart irrigation systems, robotic mowers, and data-driven turf management, technology is now a key player in how lawns are managed.
The SETS framework expands the picture by showing how:
- Social norms and policies influence how we care for lawns (e.g., pressure to keep a "perfect" green lawn).
- Environmental factors like climate change and droughts affect lawn sustainability.
- Technology—from smart irrigation to new grass varieties—can make lawn care more efficient but also requires targeted education and adoption.
By considering all three aspects together, SETS helps us make better decisions about how we manage turfgrass systems for the future.
The evolving role of technology in lawn care
Lawn management is changing fast, and technology plays a crucial role in making lawns more sustainable. For example:
- Smart irrigation systems reduce water waste by adjusting based on weather and soil conditions.
- Robotic mowers cut grass efficiently, reducing emissions from gas-powered lawn equipment and the burden of labor for both homeowners and land managers (Figure 1).
- Complex analyses of large data sets are being used to optimize fertilize use, thereby reducing environmental risks.
However, many homeowners, landscape professionals, and policymakers haven’t fully adopted these technologies yet. Barriers to adoption include real and genuine challenges including cost, lack of awareness, performance and safety concerns. The SETS approach encourages collaboration between scientists, businesses, and communities to bridge these gaps to better understand the challenges and overcome barriers to adoption.
Changing social expectations around lawns
Technology alone won’t fix the way we manage lawns; social attitudes need to evolve, too. Many people still believe a "healthy" lawn should be a perfectly manicured, bright green space. But this expectation often leads to overuse of water, fertilizers, and pesticides.
By using the SETS approach, we can begin to rethink what a “good” lawn looks like—one that is lower maintenance, environmentally friendly, and still functional for rest, relaxation, and recreation. Policies, community initiatives, and education campaigns can help shift these norms and encourage better lawn care practices.
A smarter future for lawns
By applying the SETS framework, we can move beyond traditional ideas of what lawns have to be and how they must be managed and toward integrated solutions that make such spaces healthier for people and the planet. When we recognize lawns as social-ecological-technological systems, we open the door to smarter, more sustainable landscapes that benefit everyone.
References
Barnes, M.R., Friell, J., Runck, B.C., Soldat, D.J., Watkins, E., & Yue. C. (2025). Cultivating connections: Framing turfgrass as a thriving social-ecological-technological system. Crop Science, 65, e21387.
McPhearson, T., Cook, E. M., Berbés-Blázquez, M., Cheng, C., Grimm,N. B., Andersson, E., Barbosa, O., Chandler, D. G., Chang, H.,Chester, M. V., Childers, D. L., Elser, S. R., Frantzeskaki, N.,Grabowski, Z., Groffman, P., Hale, R. L., Iwaniec, D. M., Kabisch,N., Kennedy, C., Markolf, S. A, Troxler, T. G. (2022). A social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services. OneEarth, 5(5), 505–518.