Is the garden green? The paradox of consumer motivations for gardening and substrate preferences

Peatlands are crucial natural carbon sinks and reducing the peat usage in gardening substrates is vital for their preservation. As attitudes and values are important in gardeners' decision-making, we analyze the discourse around environmental and climate impacts of hobby gardening using the Q-methodology. We uniquely compare the results of two Q-sorts related to motivations and actions. Based on our participants' motivations for gardening, we identify three perspectives: (i) egoistic food-producers; (ii) altruistic-conservationists, and (ii) relaxed-horticulturists. Based on actions, i.e. substrate use, we identify four perspectives: (i) competent climate-gardeners; (ii) climate-gardeners with limited substrate awareness; (iii) consumption-relativists and (iv) overwhelmed consumers. We find a weak relationship between sustainability motivations for gardening and actions, revealing a paradox: gardeners may harm the environment through substrate use despite intending to garden sustainably. Gardeners particularly often relativize their personal impact because of their minimal substrate need. Regarding the elimination of peat, our research demonstrates the importance of bridging the disconnect between consumer motivations and actions, for example, through various marketing tools. Policy-makers should consider mandatory and progressively increasing minimum levels of peat alternatives in substrates. This would gradually introduce and accustom consumers to peat alternatives, making it easier to adapt their purchase and application behavior.