{"paper_id":"374804b7-b037-4d18-be74-8ea89feae4b3","body_text":"Reducing the environmental impact of peat use in gardening: a behavioural science approach | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Reducing the environmental impact of peat use in gardening: a behavioural science approach Zoe Upton, Lucy Porter, Chloe Sutcliffe, Alistair Griffiths, Susan Michie, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Peat extraction for horticulture contributes to carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, yet peat remains widely used in gardening. Transitioning to peat-free gardening requires understanding factors influencing consumers’ behaviours. We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey of 954 UK gardeners, applying the COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour) to identify barriers/enablers to purchasing peat-free compost and peat-free plants. For using peat-free compost, regression analyses identified cost (Physical Opportunity) and off-putting texture/smell of peat-free compost (Automatic Motivation) as barriers, while availability (Physical Opportunity), recommendations from trusted organisations (Social Opportunity) and prioritising 'peat-free' labels (Reflective Motivation) were enablers. Awareness of peat-free plants was low, linked to poor labelling (Physical Opportunity). Enablers included knowing where to purchase (Psychological Capability), availability (Physical Opportunity), and valuing peat-free plants (Reflective Motivation). Qualitative findings highlighted inconsistent peat-free compost quality and adapting care practices. Suggested interventions include clearer labelling, improved quality control and knowledge transfer on peat-free plant care. Biological sciences/Ecology Earth and environmental sciences/Ecology Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental sciences Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences Biological sciences/Plant sciences Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Introduction Peatlands are carbon-rich, biodiverse wetlands that, despite covering only 3% of the Earth's land surface, store at least 550 gigatonnes of carbon – twice as much as all the world’s forests combined [ 1 ]. However, human activities such as drainage for agriculture, forestry and peat extraction disrupt these ecosystems, releasing significant CO₂ while threatening biodiversity [ 2 , 3 ]. Over recent decades, peat has been a key component of horticultural growing media (also known as compost or potting soil) due to its availability, consistency and low cost [ 4 ]. However, its continued use is increasingly incompatible with sustainability goals, including UK net zero [ 5 ] and biodiversity targets [ 6 ], and international climate and biodiversity agreements [ 7 , 8 ]. Several European countries are introducing national policies to restrict horticultural peat use [ 9 ]. While UK governments have made commitments to phase out peat in growing media, legislation remains pending [ 10 – 12 ]. Peat-free alternatives include organic materials like coir, bark, wood fibre and green waste, plus inorganic additives such as perlite and vermiculite to enhance physical properties [ 13 , 14 ]. Transitioning requires behaviour change across stakeholders: manufacturers developing and marketing peat-free products, retailers stocking them, professional growers trialling them, and gardeners adapting their purchasing and gardening practices [ 14 , 15 ]. As primary consumers, gardeners strongly influence market demand for peat-free products, making their purchasing behaviour and constraints a critical area of study [ 14 ]. Growing media supply chain dynamics have been explored in the UK [ 15 ], identifying availability, cost and performance as key barriers to peat-free adoption. Cost barriers reflect complex supply chain dynamics, with higher peat-free prices reflecting input costs plus storage, mixing and quality control expenses [ 14 ], elevated transport costs and competition from other industries (e.g., wood biomass for energy) [ 15 ]. However, research on consumer-level barriers to peat-free adoption remains limited. In Germany, gardeners were generally aware of peat’s environmental impact, but purchasing decisions were primarily utility-driven and price-dominated [ 16 ]. Similarly, attributes like resource origin and ‘peat-free’ labelling mattered to some gardeners, but cost remained the most influential factor [ 17 ]. How consumers navigate supply chain constraints and what factors might enable behaviour change requires deeper investigation. The transition to peat-free gardening depends on human behaviour which is likely influenced by complex interconnected individual, socio-cultural and environmental factors. Employing a theoretical framework that encapsulates these elements allows a structured, evidence-based approach to identifying, designing and evaluating behaviour change interventions [ 18 ]. Engaging directly with gardeners to identify what shapes their behaviour is a necessary first step in developing targeted, context-appropriate strategies [ 19 ]. Doing so in advance of potential legislative bans ensures that support mechanisms are in place to facilitate the transition. Theory-based approaches ensure interventions target underlying mechanisms driving behaviour, rather than relying on assumptions [ 19 ], guiding strategies that are more likely to be effective, replicable and scalable [ 20 ]. One such integrated model of behaviour change is the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour (COM-B) model [ 18 ]. It proposes three conditions for behaviour enactment: Capability (physical and psychological abilities, including knowledge and skills); Opportunity (physical and social attributes of the external environment, including time, resources and social norms); and Motivation (reflective and automatic internal processes, e.g., beliefs about consequences, emotions). COM-B enables researchers and practitioners to consider a breadth of influences on behaviour beyond commonly targeted psychological factors like knowledge, beliefs and attitudes [ 21 , 22 ]. The COM-B model maps onto nine broad intervention types in the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) (Fig. 1 ), a synthesis of 19 behaviour change intervention frameworks [ 18 ] and more granular behaviour change techniques [ 23 , 24 ], enabling systematic identification of intervention strategies. For example, if limited product availability (a ‘Physical Opportunity’ barrier) is identified, the BCW would guide the selection of intervention functions such as 'Environmental Restructuring' to improve access and ‘Regulation’ as a supporting policy category. While widely applied to health contexts, BCW application is expanding within pro-environmental behaviours, including food waste recycling [ 25 ], compostable plastic purchasing [ 26 ] and disposal [ 27 , 28 ], clothing repair [ 29 ], sustainable palm oil purchasing [ 30 ] and front garden planting [ 31 ]. This study aimed to apply these behavioural science frameworks to the issue of peat-free gardening by conducting a theory-based survey with UK gardeners to explore: The current purchasing pattern of peat-free compost and peat-free plants (i.e., plants raised in peat-free growing media) by UK gardeners Barriers and enablers to buying peat-free compost and peat-free plants Interventions proposed by UK gardeners to help them transition to peat-free gardening Results Respondent characteristics A total of 1,057 responses were received, with 954 completing compost sections and 936 completing plant sections and included for analysis. Of these, 40 are missing all demographic data. Descriptive statistics on respondent demographics and gardening characteristics are summarised in Supplementary Table 1. Most respondents were female (78.9%), aged 55+ (75.9%), degree-educated (66%) and self-reported as living comfortably financially (58.5%). Most gardened in private gardens (78.5%) and indoors (95.3%) and had some (32%) or a good (37.5%) level of gardening expertise. Most did not garden professionally (89.4%) and started gardening over 25 years ago (72.3%). Purchasing of peat-free compost and plants Two-thirds (65.7%) reported purchasing only peat-free compost in the previous year (see Supplementary Table 2 for full breakdown). Around half strongly intended to buy peat-free compost (51.3% selecting ‘strongly agree’) (see Supplementary Table 3). Over half (63.9%) often or always purchased compost for its labelled purpose (Fig. 2 ), though reading instructions before buying was less common (24.7% reporting ‘often’ or ‘always’). About one-third (38.8%) often or always adjusted feeding practices, and 48.2% adjusted watering according to the type of compost they use. Most never ask retailers how they had stored their compost (85.4%) or about sell-by dates (87.6%), with 71.3% never checking sell-by dates themselves. For plants, over half (53.7%) reported not knowing whether the plants they bought the previous year were grown peat-free (vs. 2.1% for compost). Only 11.8% reported all plants bought were 100% peat-free (see Supplementary Table 4 for full breakdown). Intentions to buy peat-free plants were substantially lower than for compost (strongly agree: 17.4%) (see Supplementary Table 5). Most (59%) never asked retailers about peat status, with only 7.5% doing so often or always (Fig. 2 ). While 22.6% reported often or always checking labels, 42.1% reported never doing so. Influences on buying peat-free compost The narrative discussion below integrates survey responses on influences on purchasing peat-free compost (Fig. 3 ) with qualitative insights from responses to free-text open questions (Supplementary Table 10). Psychological Capability Almost all (95%) agreed that they understood what ‘peat-free’ compost means, and over 85% reported actively considering peat content. Two-thirds (67.6%) reported knowing where to find information on choosing appropriate peat-free compost for their specific gardening needs. Only half agreed that they knew how to adjust feeding (50.6%) or watering (58%) practices, and just 37.2% agreed that they knew how to store peat-free compost to prevent deterioration. Qualitative responses reflected uncertainty about compost composition and effectiveness, and recognition that using peat-free compost requires adapting gardening practices. Physical Opportunity Peat-free compost was reported available by most (91.2%) and clearly labelled (79.2%), though in-store signage was less common (66.9%). Qualitative responses indicated general availability, but difficulty finding specific high-quality or purpose-specific options. They also highlighted inconsistent product quality across and within brands, including poor texture, contaminants and ingredient variability. Some reported unclear or misleading terms on labelling such as ‘organic’, along with limited guidance on watering and feeding. Views on cost were mixed: 40.6% agreed that peat-free compost was more expensive, while 43.4% were undecided. Qualitative insights echoed cost concerns, with high-quality peat-free compost described as costly, and cheaper options considered less effective, often requiring additives like grit, increasing overall expense and storage needs. Social Opportunity Most respondents (81.2%) agreed that trusted organisations recommend peat-free compost, however, a third (36.3%) disagreed that people they trust had good experiences using it. Qualitative responses explained that formal sources, such as gardening organisations and media outlets, promote peat-free alternatives, while peers and professionals were reported to share mixed or negative experiences, including concerns about poor results and carbon footprint of imported ingredients like coir. Reflective Motivation A majority believed that peat-free compost is more environmentally friendly (86.6%) and aligns with their sustainability values (82.6%). Most (74.7%) agreed that they prioritised ‘peat-free’ labelling when choosing compost. However, over half agreed that they thought peat-free would give them lower quality results. Qualitative responses echoed this: some described a moral commitment to protecting peatlands, but motivation was often challenged by frustration with poorer results. Others questioned sustainability, citing transport emissions, water use and perceived ‘greenwashing’. These doubts may be shaped by mixed messages from peers and professionals, as outlined under Social Opportunity. While some continued buying peat-free despite frustrations, others were willing to buy peat-free only if quality matched peat-based alternatives. A few justified peat use for specific plants or felt home gardeners were unfairly targeted, doubting environmental impact of individual actions. Association of peat-free messaging with political or cultural movements, specifically ‘wokeism’ and ‘leftism’, and perceived external control over purchasing choices, were also mentioned. Automatic Motivation Most felt guilty when buying peat-based compost (70.9%), and good about choosing peat-free (72.7%), though 32.9% found peat-free texture or smell off-putting. Qualitative responses described physical aversion to peat-free compost based on its appearance, texture and smell, with previous negative experiences linked to dislike, frustration and disappointment. Guilt about peat’s environmental impact motivated some to switch despite performance concerns. Influences on buying peat-free plants These findings are based on integrating survey responses on influences on purchasing peat-free plants (Fig. 4 ) with qualitative insights (Supplementary Table 11). Psychological Capability Most (87.5%) agreed they understood what ‘100% peat-free’ means, while only 33.2% agreed that they knew the difference between ‘100% peat-free’ and ‘peat-free grown’ 1 . Around half (53.2%) agreed that they don’t think about whether plants are grown peat-free, contrasting with compost purchasing, where 86.7% actively considered peat content, and qualitative responses supported these findings. Although 93.1% reported knowing the environmental impacts of peat extraction, only 47.3% reported knowing where to buy 100% peat-free plants. Some assumed retailers had already transitioned, and confusion about peat use across different stages of plant production was expressed. Physical Opportunity Only 28.2% agreed that plants labelled as ‘100% peat-free' were readily available in their usual shop, and around half disagreed that they were clearly signposted. Qualitative responses echoed this, with lack of clear, consistent information and confusing terminology reported. Time constraints were also mentioned, with unclear labelling making checking difficult, especially when buying in bulk. Uncertainty about whether peat-free plants cost more was common (70.2% undecided). Qualitative responses revealed that some respondents were influenced by special offers or price reductions on peat-grown plants. Social Opportunity Most (72.9%) agreed that trusted organisations recommended buying peat-free plants, but many were unsure whether people they trusted had good results with peat-free plants (46.4% undecided). Respondents perceived limited information about peat-free plants from trusted gardening sources and retail staff. In contexts such as plant swaps or community sales, discussing peat use was considered potentially inappropriate. Reflective Motivation Most agreed that choosing peat-free plants is important for protecting the environment (81.8%) and aligns with their sustainability values (80.4%). However, 42.6% thought that peat-free plants may not grow as successfully. For some, the quality, health and appearance of plants took precedence over peat-free status. Others made context-dependent decisions, being more selective for large or planned purchases, or favouring locally grown plants. Some believed buying plants already grown in peat did not actively contribute to peat extraction, making them more willing to purchase them while available. Automatic Motivation Nearly half (46.5%) felt guilty if they bought peat-grown plants, and 60.7% felt good about choosing peat-free plants. Qualitative responses indicated dislike by some of the appearance of the growing medium of peat-free plants. Some expressed frustration about a perceived forced shift towards peat-free practices, limiting their consumer choice. Statistically significant influences on buying peat-free compost People were less likely to report buying peat-free compost if they also indicated that 1) peat-free compost was more expensive than peat-based compost (Physical Opportunity) (β = -0.306, p < .001); 2) they found the texture and/or smell of peat-free compost off-putting (Automatic Motivation) (β = − 0.150, p = .003); and 3) they knew how to adjust watering practices when using peat-free compost (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.231, p = .013) 2 . People were more likely to report buying peat-free compost if they indicated 1) peat-free compost being readily available in their usual shop (Physical Opportunity) (β = 0.241, p = .004), organisations they trust recommending peat-free over peat-based compost (Social Opportunity) (β = 0.134, p = .047) and prioritising 'peat-free' labelling when selecting compost (Reflective Motivation) (β = 0.652, p < .001). The remaining COM-B statements did not reach statistical significance. Correlations between COM-B items and peat-free compost buying are available in Supplementary Table 6. Full regression results are available in Supplementary Table 7. Statistically significant influences on buying peat-free plants People were less likely to report buying peat-free plants if they also indicated that 1) they knew the difference between ‘100% peat-free' and ‘peat-free grown’ (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.1243, p = 0.0323) and 2) they knew the environmental impacts of peat extraction (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.2736, p = 0.0210) 3 . People were more likely to report buying peat-free plants if they indicated 1) not thinking about whether or not a plant has been grown peat-free (β = 0.1746, p = .001) (Psychological Capability); 2) knowing where to buy plants grown 100% peat-free (Psychological Capability) (β = 0.2327, p = 0.0017); 3) plants labelled as 100% peat-free being readily available in their usual shop (Physical Opportunity) (β = 0.3418, p < .001) and 4) it being important to them that plants have not been grown in peat (Reflective Motivation) (β = 0.2376, p = 0.0274). The remaining COM-B statements did not reach statistical significance. Correlations between COM-B items and peat-free plant buying are available in Supplementary Table 8. Full regression results are available in Supplementary Table 9. Proposed interventions The most commonly proposed interventions by participants are described below, with associated BCW intervention functions and policy options in brackets: Improving and standardising the quality and consistency of peat-free compost (Environmental Restructuring; Regulation) (n = 156); Clear and practical information about feeding, watering and plant care when using peat-free compost (Education) (n = 49); Improving availability of high-quality products at retailers (Environmental Restructuring) (n = 60); Clearer labelling of peat-free status on compost bags and plant labels (Environmental Restructuring, Education) (n = 90); Cheaper, competitively priced high-quality peat-free products, or price incentives and subsidies to make peat-free products more accessible (Incentivisation, Environmental Restructuring) (n = 38) A ban, enforced by law, was supported to some extent by the majority of participants (82.4%) (full breakdown in Supplementary Table 12). Most (88.7%) were unaware of the Responsible Sourcing Scheme (RSS) 4 and 97.5% reported that they had never engaged in the RSS (e.g., visiting the RSS website or scanning an RSS QR code on a compost bag). A full list and description of respondents' suggestions for resources or initiatives to help them transition to peat-free gardening are available in Supplementary Table 13. Discussion This study explored behavioural influences on buying peat-free compost and plants using the COM-B model. Two-thirds reported only buying peat-free compost with high future intention, contrasting with peat-free plant buying where over half were unsure about peat status and intention was lower. Key barriers to peat-free compost included cost and dislike of texture/smell. Enablers were perceived availability, recommendations from trusted organisations and prioritising 'peat-free' labels. For plants, key barriers were poor availability and labelling, while enablers included knowing where to purchase, availability and valuing peat-free plants. Qualitative findings highlighted inconsistent peat-free compost quality and adapting plant care. Participants suggested interventions such as standardising product quality; providing practical care guidance; improving retail availability; enhancing labelling clarity; and reducing prices. UK gardeners reported that peat-free compost was available and well-labelled, but this was not the case for plants. This relates to Physical Opportunity within the COM-B model, where external environmental factors create barriers to behaviour change. Regression models showed that perceived availability was positively associated with purchasing peat-free compost and plants, consistent with research showing perceived availability significantly predicts environmentally friendly purchasing [ 30 ], and influences growing media purchasing decisions [ 15 ]. Despite strong environmental motivation, low Physical Opportunity likely contributes to lower intention to buy peat-free plants if they are perceived as hard to find. Most did not check plant labels or ask retailers about peat status, with qualitative responses revealing many had not considered the growing media of plants – highlighting a disconnect between awareness of 'peat-free' and actually considering it when buying plants. Clearer plant labelling represents an obvious intervention target with apparent consumer demand, requiring regulation of labelling standards, and coordinated action from growers and retailers. Regression analysis showed three key barriers to peat-free compost purchasing: perceived higher price, dislike of texture/smell, and, counterintuitively, knowledge about watering adjustments. Cost concerns align with previous research identifying price as dominant in growing media decisions [ 16 , 17 ], and a major peat-free adoption barrier [ 15 ]. Qualitative data reinforced this, describing high-quality peat-free compost as expensive, and cheaper options considered less effective, requiring additives that increase overall cost. Many respondents were undecided about price comparisons, likely due to limited peat-based availability. Disliking the texture and smell was a significant barrier, suggesting interventions should familiarise gardeners with sensory differences, and improve product formulation. This connects to quality concerns – the most frequent intervention suggestion. Peat-free compost, containing multiple organic materials including green waste, is more biologically active than peat-based alternatives. Improper storage may cause odours, structural breakdown and reduced nutrient availability [ 15 ], reinforcing negative quality perceptions. Over half believed that peat-free compost would give lower quality results, echoing previous quality concerns [ 14 ]. Historical legacy of poor-quality peat-free products introduced in the 1990s may contribute to persistent negative perceptions, despite 35 years of product development creating both high-quality options and poorer alternatives [ 32 ]. Quality standardisation appears particularly critical. Currently, 88.7% of respondents were unaware of the Responsible Sourcing Scheme (RSS), representing a missed opportunity for communication on compost quality. Government regulation mandating RSS membership from compost manufacturers could address quality variability while building consumer confidence through transparent standards. Some unexpected regression results warrant careful interpretation. Higher perceived watering knowledge associated with lower peat-free compost purchasing may reflect perceived effort, past disappointments or measurement limitations since this represents perceived rather than actual knowledge of a post-purchase skill. For plants, perceived knowledge of peat-free terminology and environmental impacts was associated with lower peat-free purchasing, possibly reflecting more accurate reporting among informed consumers or limited product availability. Moreover, agreement with 'not thinking about' peat-free status was associated with higher peat-free plant purchasing, which may reflect the same pattern, i.e., informed consumers who pay attention to peat content providing more accurate reports of what is actually available for purchase, rather than overestimating their peat-free purchasing when availability is limited. These findings highlight the limitations of regression analysis alone and the critical importance of triangulating quantitative results with qualitative insights before designing interventions. Overall, findings suggest that domains across Capability, Opportunity and Motivation are relevant for buying and using peat-free compost and plants. As a starting point for intervention development, all nine intervention functions of the Behaviour Change Wheel [ 18 ], including education, training, environmental restructuring and policy changes, should be explored to assess whether they meet criteria for successful interventions, including acceptability, practicability, effectiveness, affordability, minimal negative side-effects, and equity [ 33 ]. As legislative restrictions on peat-based compost sales emerge in the UK and internationally, these findings inform evidence-based support strategies. High support (82.4%) for a peat ban suggests policy acceptance, but implementation success depends on addressing identified barriers. The transition requires coordinated action across the supply chain: manufacturers and growers improving and standardising quality, retailers enhancing availability and information provision, organisations such as the RHS providing practical guidance, regulators implementing labelling standards and quality schemes, and policymakers supporting price interventions. This study builds on previous investigations into barriers and enablers to pro-environmental behaviour [ 26 , 29 , 30 ] and furthers understanding of peat-free adoption barriers [ 14 , 15 ] by applying systematic behavioural analysis with the COM-B model. Rather than assuming knowledge deficits drive behaviour, this approach revealed that Physical Opportunity barriers (availability, labelling, quality, cost) and Automatic Motivation factors (sensory experiences) may significantly influence consumers’ decisions. By investigating Physical and Social Opportunity factors, which reflect behaviours of other actors (retailers, manufacturers), findings inform how the peat-free transition can be enacted systemically rather than focusing solely on individual stakeholders. Sample demographics may not represent all UK gardeners. Over half were retired, potentially having more time and disposable income than working-age gardeners. Additionally, the majority had gardened for over 25 years, suggesting established practices that may affect adaptability to peat-free alternatives. The sample included a high proportion of RHS members, who may hold stronger pro-environmental attitudes. The cross-sectional design limits causal inference, and self-reported behaviour may overestimate peat-free purchasing, lessening validity [ 34 ]. Respondents reported their attributions for their behaviours, i.e. their ideas about causes, which may differ from the actual causes [ 35 ]. Future research should aim for more age-diverse samples and ensure interventions are inclusive across demographics. This study highlights clear targets for evidence-based interventions supporting the peat-free gardening transition. The COM-B analysis revealed that effective interventions must simultaneously address capability building (practical guidance), opportunity restructuring (availability, labelling, quality standards), and motivation maintenance (addressing sensory barriers while reinforcing environmental values). As peatland conservation becomes increasingly urgent for climate stability, understanding and addressing the behavioural aspects of consumer transitions is essential for achieving sustainability goals at scale. The systematic application of behaviour change frameworks offers a replicable approach for examining other pro-environmental transitions in consumer markets. Methods Design A cross-sectional, theory-based, mixed methods online survey was conducted in October 2024. The protocol was approved by University College London Research Ethics Committee (project ID: CEHP/2020/579). Participants, sample size, recruitment The target population was UK gardeners, defined as anyone who buys, owns or takes care of any kind of plant. This exploratory study did not employ pre-defined sample size or demographic criteria but aimed to gather insights from people with varying levels of gardening expertise across the UK. A combination of convenience and purposeful sampling was employed by disseminating a study advert via a) the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) 5 members newsletter and social media; b) email distribution to UK gardening organisations and communities such as the National Allotment Society, Garden Centre Association and Gardeners Club; and c) targeted UK-focused Facebook groups centred on gardening. Participants could enter a prize draw to win one of 10 £25 National Garden Gift Vouchers. Materials The survey focused on two target behaviours: purchasing peat-free compost and purchasing peat-free plants. The survey broadly consisted of five sections: Gardening practices : Type of gardening the respondent engages in (e.g., in a private garden, allotment or indoors); Compost purchasing : Current and intended purchasing and use of bagged compost, including proportion of peat-free versus peat-based bought in the past year and behavioural intentions measured using three statements [ 36 ] ('I intend to choose peat-free', 'I want to choose peat-free', 'I expect I will choose peat-free'). Influences on compost purchasing behaviour were assessed using a 7-point verbal rating scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7) similar to [ 29 ]; Plant purchasing : Current and intended purchasing of plants and influences on behaviour (measured as for section 2 on compost purchasing); Interventions : Respondents’ suggestions for supporting the transition to peat-free gardening and awareness of existing initiatives, including the plan to legislate a ban on the sale of peat-based compost in the UK and the Responsible Sourcing Scheme [ 37 ] 6 ; Demographics : Age, gender, UK region (based categories from [ 38 ]), ethnicity (based on categories from [ 39 ]), personal financial situation (based on categories from [ 40 ]). Questions related to influences on compost and plant purchasing behaviour in sections 2 and 3 were structured around the domains of the COM-B model – Capability (psychological abilities), Opportunity (physical and social attributes of the external environment), and Motivation (reflective and automatic internal processes) – with at least one question per domain (reported in Figs. 3 and 4 ), and also informed by prior research and surveys by the RHS (RHS Growing Medium Usage Surveys, 2013, 2021; RHS Sustainability Survey, 2021; RHS Annual Membership Survey, 2024 7 ; RHS Industry Peat-Free Survey 2023 Report [ 41 ]. Survey response formats were mixed, including multiple choice, verbal rating scales and free text responses. A pilot study was conducted of the online format to ensure accessibility and usability, including aspects such as language and survey length. The final survey took approximately 15–20 minutes to complete. Procedure Participants gave their informed consent for inclusion before participating in the study. The first screen of the survey was an information sheet followed by a consent page. The survey was hosted online via Qualtrics and was accessible by personal computers or mobile devices. The survey was made available from 3 October 2024 to 1 November 2024. Responses were automatically recorded by Qualtrics. Analysis Data were downloaded from Qualtrics and imported in Excel (Version 2507) and R (Version 4.4.1) for analysis. Participants who did not complete all sections up until ‘intention to buy peat-free compost’ at the end of section 2, which was considered a key variable, were excluded from the analysis. Participants with missing demographic information were retained in the dataset, as these variables were not essential for addressing the primary research questions. Retaining these cases maximised the available data for analysis of key outcome and predictor variables (i.e., influences on behaviour). To address the first research question, frequencies of current behaviour and intention were examined. To address the second research question, descriptive statistics of agreement ratings in relation to COM-B statements were examined. Correlations between COM-B statements and peat-free compost were conducted. Ordinal logistic regressions were conducted to identify which COM-B statements were significantly associated with purchasing of peat-free compost and plants. For compost, the dependent variable (DV) was current purchasing behaviour grouped into: (1) ‘Approximately half or more bags contained peat’, (2) ‘Mostly peat-free, a small number contained peat’, and (3) ‘All peat-free’. ‘Not sure/don’t know’ responses were excluded. The independent variables (IVs) were agreement ratings to 19 COM-B statements. For plants, the DV was similarly grouped: (1) ‘Approximately half or more plants were grown in peat’, (2) ‘Mostly grown peat-free with some having peat’, and (3) ‘Grown 100% peat-free’. The independent variables (IVs) were agreement ratings to 17 COM-B statements. In both models, significant negative coefficients were interpreted as barriers (higher agreement associated with lower peat-free purchasing likelihood), while significant positive coefficients were interpreted as enablers (higher agreement associated with higher peat-free purchasing likelihood). Full descriptions of the models, along with justification for exclusion of certain COM-B statements is provided in Supplementary Materials 1 and 2. Free text responses (e.g., to the question ‘Is there anything else that personally encourages or discourages you to choose peat-free compost?’) were analysed qualitatively, using a combined inductive thematic analysis and deductive framework analysis approach [ 42 , 43 ], with the following steps: Familiarisation with the data : Free-text responses were read and re-read; ideas and patterns were noted down; Coding : Codes were inductively generated and assigned to responses; Coding development : Creation of detailed code descriptions; Framework mapping : Codes were deductively mapped to COM-B domains; Summarisation : Tabulation of codes, descriptions, frequencies and sample quotes; To address the third research question, the free-text data were analysed qualitatively following a combined inductive thematic and deductive framework analysis approach described above, mapping inductively generated intervention themes to intervention types and policy options from the BCW. Respondents’ awareness of existing initiatives (e.g., the Responsible Sourcing Scheme) was summarised with descriptive statistics. Declarations Data Availability: The datasets presented in this study will be made available in an online repository. Funding Declaration: This research is funded by the Royal Horticultural Society. Author Contributions: Z.U.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Data Collection, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. L.P.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. C.S.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. A.G.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. S.M.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. M.J.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. F.L.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. Competing Interests: There are no competing interests to declare. References IUCN. Peatlands and climate change. 2021 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: https://iucn.org/resources/issues-brief/peatlands-and-climate-change . Rhymes, J.M., et al., Assessing the effectiveness, practicality and cost effectiveness of mitigation measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from intensively cultivated peatlands . Land Use Policy, 2023. 134. Lindsay, R., et al., Peatlands: the challenge of mapping the world’s invisible stores of carbon and water . Unasylva, 2019. 251: p. 46–57. Alexander, P.D. and R.H. Williams, Growing Market Share – Barriers to Uptake of Peat-Free Growing Media by UK Amateur Gardeners . Acta Horticulturae, 2013(982): p. 83–91. Climate Change Act 2008 . Environment Act 2021. Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/30/contents . UNFCCC. Paris Agreement . 2018; Available from: https://unfccc.int/documents/184656 . UNEP. Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework . 2022; Available from: https://www.unep.org/resources/kunming-montreal-global-biodiversity-framework . Gruda, N., O. Hirschler, and J. Stuart. Peat reduction in horticulture an overview of Europe . in IX South-Eastern Europe Symposium on Vegetables and Potatoes 1391 . 2023. Defra Press Office. Media reporting on peat-ban for the professional Horticulture sector . 2023 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: https://deframedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/03/24/media-reporting-on-peat-ban-for-the-professional-horticulture-sector/ . Welsh Government. Retail sale of peat in horticulture in Wales to end . 2022 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: https://www.gov.wales/retail-sale-peat-horticulture-wales-end . Scottish Government. Ending the sale of peat in Scotland . 2023 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: https://www.gov.scot/news/ending-the-sale-of-peat-in-scotland/ . Atzori, G., et al., The Role of Peat-Free Organic Substrates in the Sustainable Management of Soilless Cultivations . Agronomy, 2021. 11(6). Hirschler, O. and B. Osterburg, Achieving peat-free hobby gardening for climate mitigation in Germany: Insights into prices of growing media constituents, potting soils and policy options . Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2025. 220: p. 108330. Koseoglu, M.N. and M. Roberts, Supply Chain Dynamics of Moving from Peat-Based to Peat-Free Horticulture . Sustainability, 2025. 17(13): p. 6159. Braun, H., et al., On the irrelevance of (peat-free) substrates-Qualitative insights into the social practices of hobby gardeners in Germany . Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 2024: p. 100201. Dahlin, J., et al., Sustainable compost and potting soil marketing: Private gardener preferences . Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019. 208: p. 1603–1612. Michie, S., M.M. Van Stralen, and R. West, The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions . Implementation science, 2011. 6: p. 1–12. Skivington, K., et al., A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance . bmj, 2021. 374. Davidoff, F., et al., Demystifying theory and its use in improvement . BMJ quality & safety, 2015. 24(3): p. 228–238. Marselle, M.R. and S.E. Golding, Applying the Behaviour Change Wheel to mitigate the biodiversity crisis , in Handbook on Pro-Environmental Behaviour Change . 2023, Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 353–371. Albarracín, D., B. Fayaz-Farkhad, and J.A. Granados Samayoa, Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions . Nature Reviews Psychology, 2024: p. 1–16. Marques, M.M., et al., The behaviour change technique ontology: transforming the behaviour change technique taxonomy v1 . Wellcome open research, 2024. 8: p. 308. Michie, S., et al., The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions . Annals of behavioral medicine, 2013. 46(1): p. 81–95. Allison, A.L., et al., Barriers and enablers to food waste recycling: a mixed methods study amongst UK citizens . International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 19(5): p. 2729. Allison, A.L., et al., Barriers and enablers to buying biodegradable and compostable plastic packaging . Sustainability, 2021. 13(3): p. 1463. Allison, A.L., et al., Improving compostable plastic disposal: An application of the Behaviour Change Wheel intervention development method . Frontiers in Sustainability, 2022. 3: p. 92. Buckland, N.J., et al., Developing and evaluating an intervention to improve the disposal of compostable packaging at UK workplaces . Waste Management & Research, 2025: p. 0734242X251322145. Zhang, L. and J. Hale, Extending the lifetime of clothing through repair and repurpose: An investigation of barriers and enablers in UK citizens . Sustainability, 2022. 14(17): p. 10821. Sundaraja, C.S., D.W. Hine, and A.D. Lykins, Palm oil: Understanding barriers to sustainable consumption . PloS one, 2021. 16(8): p. e0254897. Allison, A.L., R. Frost, and N. Murtagh, Promoting planting in front gardens: a systematic approach to intervention development . UCL Open Environment, 2024. Bek, D., et al., Transitioning towards peatfree horticulture in the UK: an assessment of policy, progress, opportunities, and barriers . Coventry University publication, 2020. Michie, S., L. Atkins, and R. West, The behaviour change wheel. A guide to designing interventions, 2014. 1: p. 1003–1010. Kormos, C. and R. Gifford, The validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: A meta-analytic review . Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2014. 40: p. 359–371. Doughty, H. and L. Thomas-Walters, Measuring pro-environmental behavioural determinants using closed-answer surveys. Oryx, 2025: p. 1–11. Francis, J., et al., Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health services researchers. 2004. Responsible Sourcing Scheme . [cited 2025; Available from: https://www.responsiblesourcing.org.uk/ . Natural England and Defra. The people and nature surveys for England . 2020; Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/people-and-nature-survey-for-england . ONS. Ethnic group, England and Wales: Census 2021 . 2022; Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census 2021. Williams, V.F., et al., Validity of a subjective financial situation measure to assess socioeconomic status in US young adults . Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 2017. 23(5): p. 487–495. Royal Horticultural Society, RHS Industry Peat-Free Survey 2023 Report . 2023. Braun, V. and V. Clarke, Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qualitative research in psychology, 2006. 3(2): p. 77–101. Porter, L., et al., Role-model, reoffer, reward: A thematic analysis and TDF mapping of influences on families’ use of evidence-based vegetable feeding practices . Appetite, 2023. 189: p. 106764. Footnotes A ‘100% peat-free’ plant means that no peat was used at any point of growth of the plant. A ‘peat-free grown’ plant, however, might be sold in a peat-free growing medium, but that doesn’t guarantee it was originally grown without peat earlier in the supply chain. This result is unexpected and explored in the discussion. These results are explored in the discussion. The Responsible Sourcing Scheme is an initiative led by UK horticultural industry stakeholders to encourage informed decisions about the environmental impact of growing media products. It uses a colour-coded traffic light system to allow consumers to compare products based on their environmental credentials. The Royal Horticultural Society is the UK's leading gardening charity. The Responsible Sourcing Scheme is an industry-led scheme encouraging consumers to make informed decisions based on the environmental impact of growing media. By scanning a QR code on the packaging, consumers are provided with an easy-to-understand traffic light system which rates the products on seven environmental criteria, allowing them to compare the environmental impact of each product. Content and data from previous RHS surveys were obtained via personal communication with researchers at the RHS and are not publicly available. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryUptonnpjClim.Action2025.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {\"props\":{\"pageProps\":{\"initialData\":{\"identity\":\"rs-8263138\",\"acceptedTermsAndConditions\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"archivedVersions\":[],\"articleType\":\"Article\",\"associatedPublications\":[],\"authors\":[{\"id\":561105703,\"identity\":\"9637f370-9dd9-4e89-adb3-a58686916fcb\",\"order_by\":0,\"name\":\"Zoe Upton\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"University College London\",\"correspondingAuthor\":true,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Zoe\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Upton\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105705,\"identity\":\"87159ac4-b485-4fa0-9762-0be417892fff\",\"order_by\":1,\"name\":\"Lucy Porter\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"University College London\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Lucy\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Porter\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105706,\"identity\":\"0df0b4e3-1404-4163-bbbe-ae5d4461b306\",\"order_by\":2,\"name\":\"Chloe Sutcliffe\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"Royal Horticultural Society\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Chloe\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Sutcliffe\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105707,\"identity\":\"10b0599f-4de9-45cd-b855-31393f4d4bea\",\"order_by\":3,\"name\":\"Alistair Griffiths\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"Royal Horticultural Society\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Alistair\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Griffiths\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105709,\"identity\":\"0b50e100-4e65-487a-aff9-a8b922daf4e3\",\"order_by\":4,\"name\":\"Susan Michie\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"University College London\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Susan\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Michie\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105710,\"identity\":\"8898333f-028b-4a1b-9fb3-713e464c085a\",\"order_by\":5,\"name\":\"Marie Johnston\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"University of Aberdeen\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Marie\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Johnston\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":561105711,\"identity\":\"dd5670fb-c134-41ae-89f4-cf2ae3f01dae\",\"order_by\":6,\"name\":\"Fabiana Lorencatto\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"University College London\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Fabiana\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Lorencatto\",\"suffix\":\"\"}],\"badges\":[],\"createdAt\":\"2025-12-02 17:38:09\",\"currentVersionCode\":1,\"declarations\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1\",\"doiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1\",\"draftVersion\":[],\"editorialEvents\":[],\"editorialNote\":\"\",\"failedWorkflow\":false,\"files\":[{\"id\":98538189,\"identity\":\"8aedac85-0bd9-4d73-b4ad-236ef9e127f9\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"docx\",\"order_by\":0,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":1111044,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"UptonnpjClim.Action2025.docx\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/2fd60239b4433e480768fd8f.docx\"},{\"id\":98538188,\"identity\":\"5e323e34-0ffd-468a-85d1-fbd2c06721eb\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"json\",\"order_by\":1,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":8560,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"1e5ffeb8b41d4e5195115cc6734c3905.json\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/d4189c3d7187633d25ab3971.json\"},{\"id\":98625809,\"identity\":\"ba3a7400-f78d-44e3-9ef9-20bb726595bb\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:09:22\",\"extension\":\"docx\",\"order_by\":2,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":78754,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"SupplementaryUptonnpjClim.Action2025.docx\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/84650597f2942968454c5736.docx\"},{\"id\":98538202,\"identity\":\"2b69d58b-0cb2-4df0-8fad-32c2cfdbb33c\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"xml\",\"order_by\":3,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":98562,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"1e5ffeb8b41d4e5195115cc6734c39051enriched.xml\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/d60070a54bf9550a0498fe83.xml\"},{\"id\":98538195,\"identity\":\"5eb1ecf5-1c71-4987-b3f2-66accc850851\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":8,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":77393,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"Onlinefloatimage1.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/42085931de405ef75650ea22.png\"},{\"id\":98538191,\"identity\":\"26c0fb8a-e7f9-4212-a95c-6252085771e2\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":9,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":34683,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"Onlinefloatimage2.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/ddd458b76c270a28fc0d1450.png\"},{\"id\":98538198,\"identity\":\"5645de0b-0f3d-494a-9ff5-cc077fa2be94\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":10,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":242578,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"Onlinefloatimage3.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/e343629c3e1af8f1f99f267c.png\"},{\"id\":98626990,\"identity\":\"042cba39-7b0b-4c3b-97e5-fd34010d2c7d\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:10:05\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":11,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":133924,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"Onlinefloatimage4.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/7eb59c43cf3fa66186ace0c8.png\"},{\"id\":98538199,\"identity\":\"7b32fdb0-349c-4cc0-b86e-842612cf80f0\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"xml\",\"order_by\":12,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":96657,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"1e5ffeb8b41d4e5195115cc6734c39051structuring.xml\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/f67d7f380ee95d1b8d0bcdaa.xml\"},{\"id\":98538201,\"identity\":\"b8515358-1893-4782-8fbc-fd21635ee781\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:39\",\"extension\":\"html\",\"order_by\":13,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"acdc-reference\",\"size\":110019,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"earlyproof.html\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/901d2dbcd3bbd4eeeaf7cf2c.html\"},{\"id\":98625033,\"identity\":\"78540748-9455-4c5f-9afd-dbd9c3845fe8\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:08:54\",\"extension\":\"jpeg\",\"order_by\":1,\"title\":\"Figure 1\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":187540,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eThe Behaviour Change Wheel.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage1.jpeg\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/743d7f765fc2014a11f5a789.jpeg\"},{\"id\":98626462,\"identity\":\"4c651373-0f37-439a-a813-72a4884ac15c\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:09:46\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":2,\"title\":\"Figure 2\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":128177,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eSelf-reported frequency of behaviours relating to buying and using bagged compost and plants.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage2.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/f5664f6b177e5342a4736556.png\"},{\"id\":98625216,\"identity\":\"5ca393e5-3095-4b63-a7c5-1f66a96eb304\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:08:59\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":3,\"title\":\"Figure 3\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":484830,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eAgreement ratings for 22 COM-B statements relating to buying peat-free compost across all respondents.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage3.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/d190aec856b4d50b84c9d025.png\"},{\"id\":98624962,\"identity\":\"1dba2a52-ada4-4c42-b8df-aac85fb49ece\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:08:51\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":4,\"title\":\"Figure 4\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":347285,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eAgreement ratings for 19 COM-B statements relating to buying peat-free plants across all respondents.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage4.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/283767d45452ab58f85d4c55.png\"},{\"id\":103922993,\"identity\":\"68077c9b-f13a-40a9-b363-6ace45193f10\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2026-03-04 14:42:28\",\"extension\":\"pdf\",\"order_by\":0,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"manuscript-pdf\",\"size\":1838722,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"manuscript.pdf\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/6f52037f-6f37-4856-a0ae-6ab8e86a0676.pdf\"},{\"id\":98625960,\"identity\":\"9f5950f1-0bf4-4f60-b647-bc6ae94c4bd2\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-12-19 17:09:27\",\"extension\":\"docx\",\"order_by\":0,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"supplement\",\"size\":78754,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"SupplementaryUptonnpjClim.Action2025.docx\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8263138/v1/90e6961ea70e8c1bf6700dc0.docx\"}],\"financialInterests\":\"No competing interests reported.\",\"formattedTitle\":\"Reducing the environmental impact of peat use in gardening: a behavioural science approach\",\"fulltext\":[{\"header\":\"Introduction\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003ePeatlands are carbon-rich, biodiverse wetlands that, despite covering only 3% of the Earth's land surface, store at least 550 gigatonnes of carbon \\u0026ndash; twice as much as all the world\\u0026rsquo;s forests combined [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR1\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e]. However, human activities such as drainage for agriculture, forestry and peat extraction disrupt these ecosystems, releasing significant CO₂ while threatening biodiversity [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR2\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR3\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eOver recent decades, peat has been a key component of horticultural growing media (also known as compost or potting soil) due to its availability, consistency and low cost [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR4\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e4\\u003c/span\\u003e]. However, its continued use is increasingly incompatible with sustainability goals, including UK net zero [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR5\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e5\\u003c/span\\u003e] and biodiversity targets [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR6\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e6\\u003c/span\\u003e], and international climate and biodiversity agreements [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR7\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e7\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR8\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e8\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Several European countries are introducing national policies to restrict horticultural peat use [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR9\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e9\\u003c/span\\u003e]. While UK governments have made commitments to phase out peat in growing media, legislation remains pending [\\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\\\"CR11\\\" citationid=\\\"CR10\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e10\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u0026ndash;\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR12\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e12\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003ePeat-free alternatives include organic materials like coir, bark, wood fibre and green waste, plus inorganic additives such as perlite and vermiculite to enhance physical properties [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR13\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e13\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Transitioning requires behaviour change across stakeholders: manufacturers developing and marketing peat-free products, retailers stocking them, professional growers trialling them, and gardeners adapting their purchasing and gardening practices [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eAs primary consumers, gardeners strongly influence market demand for peat-free products, making their purchasing behaviour and constraints a critical area of study [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Growing media supply chain dynamics have been explored in the UK [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e], identifying availability, cost and performance as key barriers to peat-free adoption. Cost barriers reflect complex supply chain dynamics, with higher peat-free prices reflecting input costs plus storage, mixing and quality control expenses [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e], elevated transport costs and competition from other industries (e.g., wood biomass for energy) [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e]. However, research on consumer-level barriers to peat-free adoption remains limited. In Germany, gardeners were generally aware of peat\\u0026rsquo;s environmental impact, but purchasing decisions were primarily utility-driven and price-dominated [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR16\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e16\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Similarly, attributes like resource origin and \\u0026lsquo;peat-free\\u0026rsquo; labelling mattered to some gardeners, but cost remained the most influential factor [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR17\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e17\\u003c/span\\u003e]. How consumers navigate supply chain constraints and what factors might enable behaviour change requires deeper investigation.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe transition to peat-free gardening depends on human behaviour which is likely influenced by complex interconnected individual, socio-cultural and environmental factors. Employing a theoretical framework that encapsulates these elements allows a structured, evidence-based approach to identifying, designing and evaluating behaviour change interventions [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR18\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e18\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Engaging directly with gardeners to identify what shapes their behaviour is a necessary first step in developing targeted, context-appropriate strategies [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR19\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e19\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Doing so in advance of potential legislative bans ensures that support mechanisms are in place to facilitate the transition.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eTheory-based approaches ensure interventions target underlying mechanisms driving behaviour, rather than relying on assumptions [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR19\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e19\\u003c/span\\u003e], guiding strategies that are more likely to be effective, replicable and scalable [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR20\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e20\\u003c/span\\u003e]. One such integrated model of behaviour change is the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation \\u0026ndash; Behaviour (COM-B) model [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR18\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e18\\u003c/span\\u003e]. It proposes three conditions for behaviour enactment: Capability (physical and psychological abilities, including knowledge and skills); Opportunity (physical and social attributes of the external environment, including time, resources and social norms); and Motivation (reflective and automatic internal processes, e.g., beliefs about consequences, emotions). COM-B enables researchers and practitioners to consider a breadth of influences on behaviour beyond commonly targeted psychological factors like knowledge, beliefs and attitudes [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR21\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e21\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR22\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e22\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe COM-B model maps onto nine broad intervention types in the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e), a synthesis of 19 behaviour change intervention frameworks [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR18\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e18\\u003c/span\\u003e] and more granular behaviour change techniques [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR23\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e23\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR24\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e24\\u003c/span\\u003e], enabling systematic identification of intervention strategies. For example, if limited product availability (a \\u0026lsquo;Physical Opportunity\\u0026rsquo; barrier) is identified, the BCW would guide the selection of intervention functions such as 'Environmental Restructuring' to improve access and \\u0026lsquo;Regulation\\u0026rsquo; as a supporting policy category. While widely applied to health contexts, BCW application is expanding within pro-environmental behaviours, including food waste recycling [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR25\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e25\\u003c/span\\u003e], compostable plastic purchasing [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR26\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e26\\u003c/span\\u003e] and disposal [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR27\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e27\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR28\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e28\\u003c/span\\u003e], clothing repair [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR29\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e29\\u003c/span\\u003e], sustainable palm oil purchasing [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR30\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e30\\u003c/span\\u003e] and front garden planting [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR31\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e31\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThis study aimed to apply these behavioural science frameworks to the issue of peat-free gardening by conducting a theory-based survey with UK gardeners to explore:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe current purchasing pattern of peat-free compost and peat-free plants (i.e., plants raised in peat-free growing media) by UK gardeners\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eBarriers and enablers to buying peat-free compost and peat-free plants\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eInterventions proposed by UK gardeners to help them transition to peat-free gardening\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Results\",\"content\":\"\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec3\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eRespondent characteristics\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eA total of 1,057 responses were received, with 954 completing compost sections and 936 completing plant sections and included for analysis. Of these, 40 are missing all demographic data. Descriptive statistics on respondent demographics and gardening characteristics are summarised in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;1. Most respondents were female (78.9%), aged 55+ (75.9%), degree-educated (66%) and self-reported as living comfortably financially (58.5%). Most gardened in private gardens (78.5%) and indoors (95.3%) and had some (32%) or a good (37.5%) level of gardening expertise. Most did not garden professionally (89.4%) and started gardening over 25 years ago (72.3%).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003ePurchasing of peat-free compost and plants\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eTwo-thirds (65.7%) reported purchasing only peat-free compost in the previous year (see Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;2 for full breakdown). Around half strongly intended to buy peat-free compost (51.3% selecting \\u0026lsquo;strongly agree\\u0026rsquo;) (see Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;3). Over half (63.9%) often or always purchased compost for its labelled purpose (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig2\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e), though reading instructions before buying was less common (24.7% reporting \\u0026lsquo;often\\u0026rsquo; or \\u0026lsquo;always\\u0026rsquo;). About one-third (38.8%) often or always adjusted feeding practices, and 48.2% adjusted watering according to the type of compost they use. Most never ask retailers how they had stored their compost (85.4%) or about sell-by dates (87.6%), with 71.3% never checking sell-by dates themselves.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor plants, over half (53.7%) reported not knowing whether the plants they bought the previous year were grown peat-free (vs. 2.1% for compost). Only 11.8% reported all plants bought were 100% peat-free (see Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;4 for full breakdown). Intentions to buy peat-free plants were substantially lower than for compost (strongly agree: 17.4%) (see Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;5). Most (59%) never asked retailers about peat status, with only 7.5% doing so often or always (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig2\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e). While 22.6% reported often or always checking labels, 42.1% reported never doing so.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003eInfluences on buying peat-free compost\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe narrative discussion below integrates survey responses on influences on purchasing peat-free compost (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig3\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e) with qualitative insights from responses to free-text open questions (Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;10).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003ePsychological Capability\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eAlmost all (95%) agreed that they understood what \\u0026lsquo;peat-free\\u0026rsquo; compost means, and over 85% reported actively considering peat content. Two-thirds (67.6%) reported knowing where to find information on choosing appropriate peat-free compost for their specific gardening needs. Only half agreed that they knew how to adjust feeding (50.6%) or watering (58%) practices, and just 37.2% agreed that they knew how to store peat-free compost to prevent deterioration. Qualitative responses reflected uncertainty about compost composition and effectiveness, and recognition that using peat-free compost requires adapting gardening practices.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003ePhysical Opportunity\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003ePeat-free compost was reported available by most (91.2%) and clearly labelled (79.2%), though in-store signage was less common (66.9%). Qualitative responses indicated general availability, but difficulty finding specific high-quality or purpose-specific options. They also highlighted inconsistent product quality across and within brands, including poor texture, contaminants and ingredient variability. Some reported unclear or misleading terms on labelling such as \\u0026lsquo;organic\\u0026rsquo;, along with limited guidance on watering and feeding. Views on cost were mixed: 40.6% agreed that peat-free compost was more expensive, while 43.4% were undecided. Qualitative insights echoed cost concerns, with high-quality peat-free compost described as costly, and cheaper options considered less effective, often requiring additives like grit, increasing overall expense and storage needs.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec8\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eSocial Opportunity\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMost respondents (81.2%) agreed that trusted organisations recommend peat-free compost, however, a third (36.3%) disagreed that people they trust had good experiences using it. Qualitative responses explained that formal sources, such as gardening organisations and media outlets, promote peat-free alternatives, while peers and professionals were reported to share mixed or negative experiences, including concerns about poor results and carbon footprint of imported ingredients like coir.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003eReflective Motivation\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eA majority believed that peat-free compost is more environmentally friendly (86.6%) and aligns with their sustainability values (82.6%). Most (74.7%) agreed that they prioritised \\u0026lsquo;peat-free\\u0026rsquo; labelling when choosing compost. However, over half agreed that they thought peat-free would give them lower quality results. Qualitative responses echoed this: some described a moral commitment to protecting peatlands, but motivation was often challenged by frustration with poorer results. Others questioned sustainability, citing transport emissions, water use and perceived \\u0026lsquo;greenwashing\\u0026rsquo;. These doubts may be shaped by mixed messages from peers and professionals, as outlined under Social Opportunity. While some continued buying peat-free despite frustrations, others were willing to buy peat-free only if quality matched peat-based alternatives. A few justified peat use for specific plants or felt home gardeners were unfairly targeted, doubting environmental impact of individual actions. Association of peat-free messaging with political or cultural movements, specifically \\u0026lsquo;wokeism\\u0026rsquo; and \\u0026lsquo;leftism\\u0026rsquo;, and perceived external control over purchasing choices, were also mentioned.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003eAutomatic Motivation\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eMost felt guilty when buying peat-based compost (70.9%), and good about choosing peat-free (72.7%), though 32.9% found peat-free texture or smell off-putting. Qualitative responses described physical aversion to peat-free compost based on its appearance, texture and smell, with previous negative experiences linked to dislike, frustration and disappointment. Guilt about peat\\u0026rsquo;s environmental impact motivated some to switch despite performance concerns.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec11\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eInfluences on buying peat-free plants\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThese findings are based on integrating survey responses on influences on purchasing peat-free plants (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig4\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e4\\u003c/span\\u003e) with qualitative insights (Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;11).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec12\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003ePsychological Capability\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMost (87.5%) agreed they understood what \\u0026lsquo;100% peat-free\\u0026rsquo; means, while only 33.2% agreed that they knew the difference between \\u0026lsquo;100% peat-free\\u0026rsquo; and \\u0026lsquo;peat-free grown\\u0026rsquo;\\u003csup\\u003e1\\u003c/sup\\u003e. Around half (53.2%) agreed that they don\\u0026rsquo;t think about whether plants are grown peat-free, contrasting with compost purchasing, where 86.7% actively considered peat content, and qualitative responses supported these findings. Although 93.1% reported knowing the environmental impacts of peat extraction, only 47.3% reported knowing where to buy 100% peat-free plants. Some assumed retailers had already transitioned, and confusion about peat use across different stages of plant production was expressed.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec13\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003ePhysical Opportunity\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eOnly 28.2% agreed that plants labelled as \\u0026lsquo;100% peat-free' were readily available in their usual shop, and around half disagreed that they were clearly signposted. Qualitative responses echoed this, with lack of clear, consistent information and confusing terminology reported. Time constraints were also mentioned, with unclear labelling making checking difficult, especially when buying in bulk. Uncertainty about whether peat-free plants cost more was common (70.2% undecided). Qualitative responses revealed that some respondents were influenced by special offers or price reductions on peat-grown plants.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec14\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eSocial Opportunity\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMost (72.9%) agreed that trusted organisations recommended buying peat-free plants, but many were unsure whether people they trusted had good results with peat-free plants (46.4% undecided). Respondents perceived limited information about peat-free plants from trusted gardening sources and retail staff. In contexts such as plant swaps or community sales, discussing peat use was considered potentially inappropriate.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec15\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eReflective Motivation\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMost agreed that choosing peat-free plants is important for protecting the environment (81.8%) and aligns with their sustainability values (80.4%). However, 42.6% thought that peat-free plants may not grow as successfully. For some, the quality, health and appearance of plants took precedence over peat-free status. Others made context-dependent decisions, being more selective for large or planned purchases, or favouring locally grown plants. Some believed buying plants already grown in peat did not actively contribute to peat extraction, making them more willing to purchase them while available.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec16\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eAutomatic Motivation\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eNearly half (46.5%) felt guilty if they bought peat-grown plants, and 60.7% felt good about choosing peat-free plants. Qualitative responses indicated dislike by some of the appearance of the growing medium of peat-free plants. Some expressed frustration about a perceived forced shift towards peat-free practices, limiting their consumer choice.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec17\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eStatistically significant influences on buying peat-free compost\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003ePeople were less likely to report buying peat-free compost if they also indicated that 1) peat-free compost was more expensive than peat-based compost (Physical Opportunity) (β = -0.306, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;\\u0026lt;\\u0026thinsp;.001); 2) they found the texture and/or smell of peat-free compost off-putting (Automatic Motivation) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;\\u0026minus;\\u0026thinsp;0.150, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;.003); and 3) they knew how to adjust watering practices when using peat-free compost (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.231, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;.013)\\u003csup\\u003e2\\u003c/sup\\u003e. People were more likely to report buying peat-free compost if they indicated 1) peat-free compost being readily available in their usual shop (Physical Opportunity) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.241, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;.004), organisations they trust recommending peat-free over peat-based compost (Social Opportunity) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.134, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;.047) and prioritising 'peat-free' labelling when selecting compost (Reflective Motivation) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.652, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;\\u0026lt;\\u0026thinsp;.001). The remaining COM-B statements did not reach statistical significance. Correlations between COM-B items and peat-free compost buying are available in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;6. Full regression results are available in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;7.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec18\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eStatistically significant influences on buying peat-free plants\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003ePeople were less likely to report buying peat-free plants if they also indicated that 1) they knew the difference between \\u0026lsquo;100% peat-free' and \\u0026lsquo;peat-free grown\\u0026rsquo; (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.1243, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.0323) and 2) they knew the environmental impacts of peat extraction (Psychological Capability) (β = -0.2736, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.0210)\\u003csup\\u003e3\\u003c/sup\\u003e. People were more likely to report buying peat-free plants if they indicated 1) not thinking about whether or not a plant has been grown peat-free (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.1746, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;.001) (Psychological Capability); 2) knowing where to buy plants grown 100% peat-free (Psychological Capability) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.2327, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.0017); 3) plants labelled as 100% peat-free being readily available in their usual shop (Physical Opportunity) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.3418, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;\\u0026lt;\\u0026thinsp;.001) and 4) it being important to them that plants have not been grown in peat (Reflective Motivation) (β\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.2376, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;0.0274). The remaining COM-B statements did not reach statistical significance. Correlations between COM-B items and peat-free plant buying are available in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;8. Full regression results are available in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;9.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec19\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eProposed interventions\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe most commonly proposed interventions by participants are described below, with associated BCW intervention functions and policy options in brackets:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eImproving and standardising the quality and consistency of peat-free compost (Environmental Restructuring; Regulation) (n\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;156);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eClear and practical information about feeding, watering and plant care when using peat-free compost (Education) (n\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;49);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eImproving availability of high-quality products at retailers (Environmental Restructuring) (n\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;60);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eClearer labelling of peat-free status on compost bags and plant labels (Environmental Restructuring, Education) (n\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;90);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eCheaper, competitively priced high-quality peat-free products, or price incentives and subsidies to make peat-free products more accessible (Incentivisation, Environmental Restructuring) (n\\u0026thinsp;=\\u0026thinsp;38)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eA ban, enforced by law, was supported to some extent by the majority of participants (82.4%) (full breakdown in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;12). Most (88.7%) were unaware of the Responsible Sourcing Scheme (RSS)\\u003csup\\u003e4\\u003c/sup\\u003e and 97.5% reported that they had never engaged in the RSS (e.g., visiting the RSS website or scanning an RSS QR code on a compost bag). A full list and description of respondents' suggestions for resources or initiatives to help them transition to peat-free gardening are available in Supplementary Table\\u0026nbsp;13.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Discussion\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eThis study explored behavioural influences on buying peat-free compost and plants using the COM-B model. Two-thirds reported only buying peat-free compost with high future intention, contrasting with peat-free plant buying where over half were unsure about peat status and intention was lower. Key barriers to peat-free compost included cost and dislike of texture/smell. Enablers were perceived availability, recommendations from trusted organisations and prioritising 'peat-free' labels. For plants, key barriers were poor availability and labelling, while enablers included knowing where to purchase, availability and valuing peat-free plants. Qualitative findings highlighted inconsistent peat-free compost quality and adapting plant care. Participants suggested interventions such as standardising product quality; providing practical care guidance; improving retail availability; enhancing labelling clarity; and reducing prices.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eUK gardeners reported that peat-free compost was available and well-labelled, but this was not the case for plants. This relates to Physical Opportunity within the COM-B model, where external environmental factors create barriers to behaviour change. Regression models showed that perceived availability was positively associated with purchasing peat-free compost and plants, consistent with research showing perceived availability significantly predicts environmentally friendly purchasing [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR30\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e30\\u003c/span\\u003e], and influences growing media purchasing decisions [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Despite strong environmental motivation, low Physical Opportunity likely contributes to lower intention to buy peat-free plants if they are perceived as hard to find. Most did not check plant labels or ask retailers about peat status, with qualitative responses revealing many had not considered the growing media of plants – highlighting a disconnect between awareness of 'peat-free' and actually considering it when buying plants. Clearer plant labelling represents an obvious intervention target with apparent consumer demand, requiring regulation of labelling standards, and coordinated action from growers and retailers.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eRegression analysis showed three key barriers to peat-free compost purchasing: perceived higher price, dislike of texture/smell, and, counterintuitively, knowledge about watering adjustments. Cost concerns align with previous research identifying price as dominant in growing media decisions [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR16\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e16\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR17\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e17\\u003c/span\\u003e], and a major peat-free adoption barrier [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Qualitative data reinforced this, describing high-quality peat-free compost as expensive, and cheaper options considered less effective, requiring additives that increase overall cost. Many respondents were undecided about price comparisons, likely due to limited peat-based availability.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eDisliking the texture and smell was a significant barrier, suggesting interventions should familiarise gardeners with sensory differences, and improve product formulation. This connects to quality concerns – the most frequent intervention suggestion. Peat-free compost, containing multiple organic materials including green waste, is more biologically active than peat-based alternatives. Improper storage may cause odours, structural breakdown and reduced nutrient availability [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e], reinforcing negative quality perceptions. Over half believed that peat-free compost would give lower quality results, echoing previous quality concerns [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Historical legacy of poor-quality peat-free products introduced in the 1990s may contribute to persistent negative perceptions, despite 35 years of product development creating both high-quality options and poorer alternatives [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR32\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e32\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Quality standardisation appears particularly critical. Currently, 88.7% of respondents were unaware of the Responsible Sourcing Scheme (RSS), representing a missed opportunity for communication on compost quality. Government regulation mandating RSS membership from compost manufacturers could address quality variability while building consumer confidence through transparent standards.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eSome unexpected regression results warrant careful interpretation. Higher perceived watering knowledge associated with lower peat-free compost purchasing may reflect perceived effort, past disappointments or measurement limitations since this represents \\u003cem\\u003eperceived\\u003c/em\\u003e rather than \\u003cem\\u003eactual\\u003c/em\\u003e knowledge of a post-purchase skill. For plants, perceived knowledge of peat-free terminology and environmental impacts was associated with lower peat-free purchasing, possibly reflecting more accurate reporting among informed consumers or limited product availability. Moreover, agreement with 'not thinking about' peat-free status was associated with higher peat-free plant purchasing, which may reflect the same pattern, i.e., informed consumers who pay attention to peat content providing more accurate reports of what is actually available for purchase, rather than overestimating their peat-free purchasing when availability is limited. These findings highlight the limitations of regression analysis alone and the critical importance of triangulating quantitative results with qualitative insights before designing interventions.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eOverall, findings suggest that domains across Capability, Opportunity and Motivation are relevant for buying and using peat-free compost and plants. As a starting point for intervention development, all nine intervention functions of the Behaviour Change Wheel [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR18\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e18\\u003c/span\\u003e], including education, training, environmental restructuring and policy changes, should be explored to assess whether they meet criteria for successful interventions, including acceptability, practicability, effectiveness, affordability, minimal negative side-effects, and equity [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR33\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e33\\u003c/span\\u003e].\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eAs legislative restrictions on peat-based compost sales emerge in the UK and internationally, these findings inform evidence-based support strategies. High support (82.4%) for a peat ban suggests policy acceptance, but implementation success depends on addressing identified barriers. The transition requires coordinated action across the supply chain: manufacturers and growers improving and standardising quality, retailers enhancing availability and information provision, organisations such as the RHS providing practical guidance, regulators implementing labelling standards and quality schemes, and policymakers supporting price interventions.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThis study builds on previous investigations into barriers and enablers to pro-environmental behaviour [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR26\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e26\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR29\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e29\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR30\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e30\\u003c/span\\u003e] and furthers understanding of peat-free adoption barriers [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR14\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e14\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e15\\u003c/span\\u003e] by applying systematic behavioural analysis with the COM-B model. Rather than assuming knowledge deficits drive behaviour, this approach revealed that Physical Opportunity barriers (availability, labelling, quality, cost) and Automatic Motivation factors (sensory experiences) may significantly influence consumers’ decisions. By investigating Physical and Social Opportunity factors, which reflect behaviours of other actors (retailers, manufacturers), findings inform how the peat-free transition can be enacted systemically rather than focusing solely on individual stakeholders.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eSample demographics may not represent all UK gardeners. Over half were retired, potentially having more time and disposable income than working-age gardeners. Additionally, the majority had gardened for over 25 years, suggesting established practices that may affect adaptability to peat-free alternatives. The sample included a high proportion of RHS members, who may hold stronger pro-environmental attitudes. The cross-sectional design limits causal inference, and self-reported behaviour may overestimate peat-free purchasing, lessening validity [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR34\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e34\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Respondents reported their attributions for their behaviours, i.e. their ideas about causes, which may differ from the actual causes [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR35\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e35\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Future research should aim for more age-diverse samples and ensure interventions are inclusive across demographics.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThis study highlights clear targets for evidence-based interventions supporting the peat-free gardening transition. The COM-B analysis revealed that effective interventions must simultaneously address capability building (practical guidance), opportunity restructuring (availability, labelling, quality standards), and motivation maintenance (addressing sensory barriers while reinforcing environmental values). As peatland conservation becomes increasingly urgent for climate stability, understanding and addressing the behavioural aspects of consumer transitions is essential for achieving sustainability goals at scale. The systematic application of behaviour change frameworks offers a replicable approach for examining other pro-environmental transitions in consumer markets.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec21\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Methods\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch2\\u003eDesign\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eA cross-sectional, theory-based, mixed methods online survey was conducted in October 2024. The protocol was approved by University College London Research Ethics Committee (project ID: CEHP/2020/579).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eParticipants, sample size, recruitment\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe target population was UK gardeners, defined as anyone who buys, owns or takes care of any kind of plant. This exploratory study did not employ pre-defined sample size or demographic criteria but aimed to gather insights from people with varying levels of gardening expertise across the UK.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eA combination of convenience and purposeful sampling was employed by disseminating a study advert via a) the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS)\\u003csup\\u003e5\\u003c/sup\\u003e members newsletter and social media; b) email distribution to UK gardening organisations and communities such as the National Allotment Society, Garden Centre Association and Gardeners Club; and c) targeted UK-focused Facebook groups centred on gardening. Participants could enter a prize draw to win one of 10 £25 National Garden Gift Vouchers.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eMaterials\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe survey focused on two target behaviours: purchasing peat-free compost and purchasing peat-free plants. The survey broadly consisted of five sections:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eGardening practices\\u003c/b\\u003e: Type of gardening the respondent engages in (e.g., in a private garden, allotment or indoors);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eCompost purchasing\\u003c/b\\u003e: Current and intended purchasing and use of bagged compost, including proportion of peat-free versus peat-based bought in the past year and behavioural intentions measured using three statements [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR36\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e36\\u003c/span\\u003e] ('I intend to choose peat-free', 'I want to choose peat-free', 'I expect I will choose peat-free'). Influences on compost purchasing behaviour were assessed using a 7-point verbal rating scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7) similar to [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR29\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e29\\u003c/span\\u003e];\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003ePlant purchasing\\u003c/b\\u003e: Current and intended purchasing of plants and influences on behaviour (measured as for section 2 on compost purchasing);\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eInterventions\\u003c/b\\u003e: Respondents’ suggestions for supporting the transition to peat-free gardening and awareness of existing initiatives, including the plan to legislate a ban on the sale of peat-based compost in the UK and the Responsible Sourcing Scheme [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR37\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e37\\u003c/span\\u003e]\\u003csup\\u003e6\\u003c/sup\\u003e;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eDemographics\\u003c/b\\u003e: Age, gender, UK region (based categories from [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR38\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e38\\u003c/span\\u003e]), ethnicity (based on categories from [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR39\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e39\\u003c/span\\u003e]), personal financial situation (based on categories from [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR40\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e40\\u003c/span\\u003e]).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eQuestions related to influences on compost and plant purchasing behaviour in sections 2 and 3 were structured around the domains of the COM-B model – Capability (psychological abilities), Opportunity (physical and social attributes of the external environment), and Motivation (reflective and automatic internal processes) – with at least one question per domain (reported in Figs.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig3\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e and \\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig4\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e4\\u003c/span\\u003e), and also informed by prior research and surveys by the RHS (RHS Growing Medium Usage Surveys, 2013, 2021; RHS Sustainability Survey, 2021; RHS Annual Membership Survey, 2024\\u003csup\\u003e7\\u003c/sup\\u003e; RHS Industry Peat-Free Survey 2023 Report [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR41\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e41\\u003c/span\\u003e]. Survey response formats were mixed, including multiple choice, verbal rating scales and free text responses. A pilot study was conducted of the online format to ensure accessibility and usability, including aspects such as language and survey length. The final survey took approximately 15–20 minutes to complete.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eProcedure\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eParticipants gave their informed consent for inclusion before participating in the study. The first screen of the survey was an information sheet followed by a consent page. The survey was hosted online via Qualtrics and was accessible by personal computers or mobile devices. The survey was made available from 3 October 2024 to 1 November 2024. Responses were automatically recorded by Qualtrics.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eAnalysis\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eData were downloaded from Qualtrics and imported in Excel (Version 2507) and R (Version 4.4.1) for analysis. Participants who did not complete all sections up until ‘intention to buy peat-free compost’ at the end of section 2, which was considered a key variable, were excluded from the analysis. Participants with missing demographic information were retained in the dataset, as these variables were not essential for addressing the primary research questions. Retaining these cases maximised the available data for analysis of key outcome and predictor variables (i.e., influences on behaviour).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eTo address the first research question, frequencies of current behaviour and intention were examined. To address the second research question, descriptive statistics of agreement ratings in relation to COM-B statements were examined. Correlations between COM-B statements and peat-free compost were conducted. Ordinal logistic regressions were conducted to identify which COM-B statements were significantly associated with purchasing of peat-free compost and plants.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor compost, the dependent variable (DV) was current purchasing behaviour grouped into: (1) ‘Approximately half or more bags contained peat’, (2) ‘Mostly peat-free, a small number contained peat’, and (3) ‘All peat-free’. ‘Not sure/don’t know’ responses were excluded. The independent variables (IVs) were agreement ratings to 19 COM-B statements.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor plants, the DV was similarly grouped: (1) ‘Approximately half or more plants were grown in peat’, (2) ‘Mostly grown peat-free with some having peat’, and (3) ‘Grown 100% peat-free’. The independent variables (IVs) were agreement ratings to 17 COM-B statements.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eIn both models, significant negative coefficients were interpreted as barriers (higher agreement associated with lower peat-free purchasing likelihood), while significant positive coefficients were interpreted as enablers (higher agreement associated with higher peat-free purchasing likelihood). Full descriptions of the models, along with justification for exclusion of certain COM-B statements is provided in Supplementary Materials 1 and 2.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFree text responses (e.g., to the question ‘Is there anything else that personally encourages or discourages you to choose peat-free compost?’) were analysed qualitatively, using a combined inductive thematic analysis and deductive framework analysis approach [\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR42\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e42\\u003c/span\\u003e, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR43\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e43\\u003c/span\\u003e], with the following steps:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eFamiliarisation with the data\\u003c/b\\u003e: Free-text responses were read and re-read; ideas and patterns were noted down;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eCoding\\u003c/b\\u003e: Codes were inductively generated and assigned to responses;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eCoding development\\u003c/b\\u003e: Creation of detailed code descriptions;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eFramework mapping\\u003c/b\\u003e: Codes were deductively mapped to COM-B domains;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eSummarisation\\u003c/b\\u003e: Tabulation of codes, descriptions, frequencies and sample quotes;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eTo address the third research question, the free-text data were analysed qualitatively following a combined inductive thematic and deductive framework analysis approach described above, mapping inductively generated intervention themes to intervention types and policy options from the BCW. Respondents’ awareness of existing initiatives (e.g., the Responsible Sourcing Scheme) was summarised with descriptive statistics.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Declarations\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch3\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eData Availability:\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe datasets presented in this study will be made available in an online repository.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eFunding Declaration:\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis research is funded by the Royal Horticultural Society.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eAuthor Contributions:\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eZ.U.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Data Collection, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eL.P.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eC.S.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eA.G.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eS.M.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eM.J.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eF.L.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – review \\u0026amp; editing.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eCompeting Interests:\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThere are no competing interests to declare.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"References\",\"content\":\"\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eIUCN. \\u003cem\\u003ePeatlands and climate change.\\u003c/em\\u003e 2021 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://iucn.org/resources/issues-brief/peatlands-and-climate-change\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://iucn.org/resources/issues-brief/peatlands-and-climate-change\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eRhymes, J.M., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eAssessing the effectiveness, practicality and cost effectiveness of mitigation measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from intensively cultivated peatlands\\u003c/em\\u003e. Land Use Policy, 2023. 134.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eLindsay, R., et al., \\u003cem\\u003ePeatlands: the challenge of mapping the world\\u0026rsquo;s invisible stores of carbon and water\\u003c/em\\u003e. Unasylva, 2019. 251: p. 46\\u0026ndash;57.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAlexander, P.D. and R.H. Williams, \\u003cem\\u003eGrowing Market Share \\u0026ndash; Barriers to Uptake of Peat-Free Growing Media by UK Amateur Gardeners\\u003c/em\\u003e. Acta Horticulturae, 2013(982): p. 83\\u0026ndash;91.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eClimate Change Act 2008\\u003c/em\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eEnvironment Act 2021. Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/30/contents\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/30/contents\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eUNFCCC. \\u003cem\\u003eParis Agreement\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2018; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://unfccc.int/documents/184656\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://unfccc.int/documents/184656\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eUNEP. \\u003cem\\u003eKunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2022; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.unep.org/resources/kunming-montreal-global-biodiversity-framework\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.unep.org/resources/kunming-montreal-global-biodiversity-framework\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eGruda, N., O. Hirschler, and J. Stuart. \\u003cem\\u003ePeat reduction in horticulture an overview of Europe\\u003c/em\\u003e. in \\u003cem\\u003eIX South-Eastern Europe Symposium on Vegetables and Potatoes 1391\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2023.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eDefra Press Office. \\u003cem\\u003eMedia reporting on peat-ban for the professional Horticulture sector\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2023 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://deframedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/03/24/media-reporting-on-peat-ban-for-the-professional-horticulture-sector/\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://deframedia.blog.gov.uk/2023/03/24/media-reporting-on-peat-ban-for-the-professional-horticulture-sector/\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eWelsh Government. \\u003cem\\u003eRetail sale of peat in horticulture in Wales to end\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2022 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.gov.wales/retail-sale-peat-horticulture-wales-end\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.gov.wales/retail-sale-peat-horticulture-wales-end\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eScottish Government. \\u003cem\\u003eEnding the sale of peat in Scotland\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2023 [cited 2025 30 June]; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.gov.scot/news/ending-the-sale-of-peat-in-scotland/\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.gov.scot/news/ending-the-sale-of-peat-in-scotland/\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAtzori, G., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eThe Role of Peat-Free Organic Substrates in the Sustainable Management of Soilless Cultivations\\u003c/em\\u003e. Agronomy, 2021. 11(6).\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eHirschler, O. and B. Osterburg, \\u003cem\\u003eAchieving peat-free hobby gardening for climate mitigation in Germany: Insights into prices of growing media constituents, potting soils and policy options\\u003c/em\\u003e. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2025. 220: p. 108330.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eKoseoglu, M.N. and M. Roberts, \\u003cem\\u003eSupply Chain Dynamics of Moving from Peat-Based to Peat-Free Horticulture\\u003c/em\\u003e. Sustainability, 2025. 17(13): p. 6159.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eBraun, H., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eOn the irrelevance of (peat-free) substrates-Qualitative insights into the social practices of hobby gardeners in Germany\\u003c/em\\u003e. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 2024: p. 100201.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eDahlin, J., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eSustainable compost and potting soil marketing: Private gardener preferences\\u003c/em\\u003e. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019. 208: p. 1603\\u0026ndash;1612.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eMichie, S., M.M. Van Stralen, and R. West, \\u003cem\\u003eThe behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions\\u003c/em\\u003e. Implementation science, 2011. 6: p. 1\\u0026ndash;12.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eSkivington, K., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eA new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance\\u003c/em\\u003e. bmj, 2021. 374.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eDavidoff, F., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eDemystifying theory and its use in improvement\\u003c/em\\u003e. BMJ quality \\u0026amp; safety, 2015. 24(3): p. 228\\u0026ndash;238.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eMarselle, M.R. and S.E. Golding, \\u003cem\\u003eApplying the Behaviour Change Wheel to mitigate the biodiversity crisis\\u003c/em\\u003e, in \\u003cem\\u003eHandbook on Pro-Environmental Behaviour Change\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2023, Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 353\\u0026ndash;371.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAlbarrac\\u0026iacute;n, D., B. Fayaz-Farkhad, and J.A. Granados Samayoa, \\u003cem\\u003eDeterminants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions\\u003c/em\\u003e. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2024: p. 1\\u0026ndash;16.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eMarques, M.M., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eThe behaviour change technique ontology: transforming the behaviour change technique taxonomy v1\\u003c/em\\u003e. Wellcome open research, 2024. 8: p. 308.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eMichie, S., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eThe behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions\\u003c/em\\u003e. Annals of behavioral medicine, 2013. 46(1): p. 81\\u0026ndash;95.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAllison, A.L., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eBarriers and enablers to food waste recycling: a mixed methods study amongst UK citizens\\u003c/em\\u003e. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 19(5): p. 2729.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAllison, A.L., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eBarriers and enablers to buying biodegradable and compostable plastic packaging\\u003c/em\\u003e. Sustainability, 2021. 13(3): p. 1463.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAllison, A.L., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eImproving compostable plastic disposal: An application of the Behaviour Change Wheel intervention development method\\u003c/em\\u003e. Frontiers in Sustainability, 2022. 3: p. 92.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eBuckland, N.J., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eDeveloping and evaluating an intervention to improve the disposal of compostable packaging at UK workplaces\\u003c/em\\u003e. Waste Management \\u0026amp; Research, 2025: p. 0734242X251322145.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eZhang, L. and J. Hale, \\u003cem\\u003eExtending the lifetime of clothing through repair and repurpose: An investigation of barriers and enablers in UK citizens\\u003c/em\\u003e. Sustainability, 2022. 14(17): p. 10821.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eSundaraja, C.S., D.W. Hine, and A.D. Lykins, \\u003cem\\u003ePalm oil: Understanding barriers to sustainable consumption\\u003c/em\\u003e. PloS one, 2021. 16(8): p. e0254897.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eAllison, A.L., R. Frost, and N. Murtagh, \\u003cem\\u003ePromoting planting in front gardens: a systematic approach to intervention development\\u003c/em\\u003e. UCL Open Environment, 2024.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eBek, D., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eTransitioning towards peatfree horticulture in the UK: an assessment of policy, progress, opportunities, and barriers\\u003c/em\\u003e. Coventry University publication, 2020.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eMichie, S., L. Atkins, and R. West, \\u003cem\\u003eThe behaviour change wheel.\\u003c/em\\u003e A guide to designing interventions, 2014. 1: p. 1003\\u0026ndash;1010.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eKormos, C. and R. Gifford, \\u003cem\\u003eThe validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: A meta-analytic review\\u003c/em\\u003e. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2014. 40: p. 359\\u0026ndash;371.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eDoughty, H. and L. Thomas-Walters, \\u003cem\\u003eMeasuring pro-environmental behavioural determinants using closed-answer surveys.\\u003c/em\\u003e Oryx, 2025: p. 1\\u0026ndash;11.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eFrancis, J., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eConstructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health services researchers.\\u003c/em\\u003e 2004.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eResponsible Sourcing Scheme\\u003c/em\\u003e. [cited 2025; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.responsiblesourcing.org.uk/\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.responsiblesourcing.org.uk/\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eNatural England and Defra. \\u003cem\\u003eThe people and nature surveys for England\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2020; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.gov.uk/government/collections/people-and-nature-survey-for-england\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/people-and-nature-survey-for-england\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eONS. \\u003cem\\u003eEthnic group, England and Wales: Census 2021\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2022; Available from: \\u003cspan class=\\\"ExternalRef\\\"\\u003e\\u003cspan class=\\\"RefSource\\\"\\u003ehttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003cspan address=\\\"https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census\\\" targettype=\\\"URL\\\" class=\\\"RefTarget\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/span\\u003e2021.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eWilliams, V.F., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eValidity of a subjective financial situation measure to assess socioeconomic status in US young adults\\u003c/em\\u003e. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 2017. 23(5): p. 487\\u0026ndash;495.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eRoyal Horticultural Society, \\u003cem\\u003eRHS Industry Peat-Free Survey 2023 Report\\u003c/em\\u003e. 2023.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003eBraun, V. and V. Clarke, \\u003cem\\u003eUsing thematic analysis in psychology\\u003c/em\\u003e. Qualitative research in psychology, 2006. 3(2): p. 77\\u0026ndash;101.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003ePorter, L., et al., \\u003cem\\u003eRole-model, reoffer, reward: A thematic analysis and TDF mapping of influences on families\\u0026rsquo; use of evidence-based vegetable feeding practices\\u003c/em\\u003e. Appetite, 2023. 189: p. 106764.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Footnotes\",\"content\":\"\\u003col\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e A \\u0026lsquo;100% peat-free\\u0026rsquo; plant means that no peat was used at any point of growth of the plant. A \\u0026lsquo;peat-free grown\\u0026rsquo; plant, however, might be sold in a peat-free growing medium, but that doesn\\u0026rsquo;t guarantee it was originally grown without peat earlier in the supply chain.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e This result is unexpected and explored in the discussion.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e These results are explored in the discussion.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e The Responsible Sourcing Scheme is an initiative led by UK horticultural industry stakeholders to encourage informed decisions about the environmental impact of growing media products. It uses a colour-coded traffic light system to allow consumers to compare products based on their environmental credentials.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e The Royal Horticultural Society is the UK's leading gardening charity.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e The Responsible Sourcing Scheme is an industry-led scheme encouraging consumers to make informed decisions based on the environmental impact of growing media. By scanning a QR code on the packaging, consumers are provided with an easy-to-understand traffic light system which rates the products on seven environmental criteria, allowing them to compare the environmental impact of each product.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003cli\\u003e\\u003cspan\\u003e Content and data from previous RHS surveys were obtained via personal communication with researchers at the RHS and are not publicly available.\\u003c/span\\u003e\\u003c/li\\u003e\\u003c/ol\\u003e\"}],\"fulltextSource\":\"\",\"fullText\":\"\",\"funders\":[],\"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow\":false,\"hasManuscriptDocX\":true,\"hasOptedInToPreprint\":true,\"hasPassedJournalQc\":\"\",\"hasAnyPriority\":false,\"hideJournal\":true,\"highlight\":\"\",\"institution\":\"\",\"isAcceptedByJournal\":false,\"isAuthorSuppliedPdf\":false,\"isDeskRejected\":\"\",\"isHiddenFromSearch\":false,\"isInQc\":false,\"isInWorkflow\":false,\"isPdf\":false,\"isPdfUpToDate\":true,\"isWithdrawnOrRetracted\":false,\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"researchsquare\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"externalIdentity\":\"\",\"sideBox\":\"\",\"snPcode\":\"\",\"submissionUrl\":\"/submission\",\"title\":\"Research Square\",\"twitterHandle\":\"researchsquare\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":false,\"editorialSystem\":\"\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"\",\"inReviewEnabled\":false,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":true},\"keywords\":\"\",\"lastPublishedDoi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1\",\"lastPublishedDoiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1\",\"license\":{\"name\":\"CC BY 4.0\",\"url\":\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/\"},\"manuscriptAbstract\":\"\\u003cp\\u003ePeat extraction for horticulture contributes to carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, yet peat remains widely used in gardening. Transitioning to peat-free gardening requires understanding factors influencing consumers\\u0026rsquo; behaviours. We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey of 954 UK gardeners, applying the COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation \\u0026ndash; Behaviour) to identify barriers/enablers to purchasing peat-free compost and peat-free plants. For using peat-free compost, regression analyses identified cost (Physical Opportunity) and off-putting texture/smell of peat-free compost (Automatic Motivation) as barriers, while availability (Physical Opportunity), recommendations from trusted organisations (Social Opportunity) and prioritising 'peat-free' labels (Reflective Motivation) were enablers. Awareness of peat-free plants was low, linked to poor labelling (Physical Opportunity). Enablers included knowing where to purchase (Psychological Capability), availability (Physical Opportunity), and valuing peat-free plants (Reflective Motivation). Qualitative findings highlighted inconsistent peat-free compost quality and adapting care practices. Suggested interventions include clearer labelling, improved quality control and knowledge transfer on peat-free plant care.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"manuscriptTitle\":\"Reducing the environmental impact of peat use in gardening: a behavioural science approach\",\"msid\":\"\",\"msnumber\":\"\",\"nonDraftVersions\":[{\"code\":1,\"date\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:34\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8263138/v1\",\"editorialEvents\":[{\"type\":\"communityComments\",\"content\":0}],\"status\":\"published\",\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"researchsquare\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"externalIdentity\":\"\",\"sideBox\":\"\",\"snPcode\":\"\",\"submissionUrl\":\"/submission\",\"title\":\"Research Square\",\"twitterHandle\":\"researchsquare\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":false,\"editorialSystem\":\"\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"\",\"inReviewEnabled\":false,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":true}}],\"origin\":\"\",\"ownerIdentity\":\"a7782b4c-d267-4136-9cc6-6ce517371ea9\",\"owner\":[],\"postedDate\":\"December 18th, 2025\",\"published\":true,\"recentEditorialEvents\":[],\"rejectedJournal\":[],\"revision\":\"\",\"amendment\":\"\",\"status\":\"posted\",\"subjectAreas\":[{\"id\":59738717,\"name\":\"Biological sciences/Ecology\"},{\"id\":59738718,\"name\":\"Earth and environmental sciences/Ecology\"},{\"id\":59738719,\"name\":\"Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental sciences\"},{\"id\":59738720,\"name\":\"Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences\"},{\"id\":59738721,\"name\":\"Biological sciences/Plant sciences\"}],\"tags\":[],\"updatedAt\":\"2026-03-04T14:42:05+00:00\",\"versionOfRecord\":[],\"versionCreatedAt\":\"2025-12-18 17:04:34\",\"video\":\"\",\"vorDoi\":\"\",\"vorDoiUrl\":\"\",\"workflowStages\":[]},\"version\":\"v1\",\"identity\":\"rs-8263138\",\"journalConfig\":\"researchsquare\"},\"__N_SSP\":true},\"page\":\"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]\",\"query\":{\"redirect\":\"/article/rs-8263138\",\"identity\":\"rs-8263138\",\"version\":[\"v1\"]},\"buildId\":\"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7\",\"isFallback\":false,\"isExperimentalCompile\":false,\"dynamicIds\":[84888],\"gssp\":true,\"scriptLoader\":[]}","source_license":"CC-BY-4.0","license_restricted":false}