Research highlights role of wildlife observations in encouraging wildlife-friendly gardening

This is the 5th in a series of articles by Knight Center students who attended the 2026 annual convention of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

By Iasmim Amiden dos Santos

Research presented at the Society of Environmental Journalists annual conference in Chicago highlighted the role residential yards can play in supporting wildlife and explored what scientists know — and still do not know — about the factors that influence wildlife-friendly gardening.

“The future of biodiversity can start when we just notice a bird in our yard,” Emily Minor, a professor and director of graduate studies in biological sciences at the University of Illinois Chicago (UIC), said at the beginning of her presentation, “The Extinction of Experience.”

Minor presented research conducted with her advisee, Nikolas Ballut, a graduate student in biological sciences, and Andrés M. Urcuqui-Bustamante, an assistant professor in the Department of Urban Planning and Policy at the university.

Their study reviewed existing scientific literature on wildlife gardening, a term used to describe landscaping practices intended to support wildlife in residential spaces. These practices include planting native vegetation, providing food and habitat resources, and managing yards in ways that benefit birds, pollinators and other species.

Residential yards and gardens provide a variety of benefits for people, including access to nature, green infrastructure and improved well-being. At the same time, they can provide important resources for wildlife, particularly in urban areas where natural habitat is limited.

According to their research, previous studies have shown that people manage their yards in different ways to attract or discourage wildlife. Studies have also suggested that seeing wildlife can influence how people think about nature and conservation.

However, according to the researchers, much less is known about how these relationships work together to shape decisions about yard management.

To better understand what researchers already know about the topic, the team reviewed 53 studies from North America, South America, Europe, Oceania, Africa and Asia.

They examined research on wildlife observations, attitudes toward wildlife, social norms related to wildlife gardening and other factors that may influence whether residents adopt wildlife-friendly practices.

The review found that most existing studies focused on attitudes toward wildlife and how those attitudes influence gardening behavior.

Other factors received considerably less attention. In particular, the researchers found that only five studies directly asked residents about wildlife observations or perceived wildlife presence on their properties and connected those observations to attitudes or actual yard management decisions.

That gap stood out because wildlife observations are often assumed to play an important role in encouraging wildlife-friendly behaviors.

Based on their review, the researchers proposed a framework that links wildlife observations, attitudes toward wildlife, social norms, perceived barriers and wildlife gardening practices.

Rather than viewing these factors independently, the framework suggests they may influence one another through a series of feedbacks.

Ballut explained the concept:

“The positive feedback loop between people can be thought of like a bag of salty chips. As you eat the chips, you keep wanting more and more, and even if you want to stop, you still might go for another one. In the context of people, their yards, and wildlife, a person wanting to attract butterflies might plant some flowers, and they feel joy, reward and new confidence when the butterflies actually come to their flowers. In return, they continue to expand their pollinator garden, where more and more butterflies continue to show up.”

The researchers emphasized that the feedback loop remains a hypothesis that requires further investigation.

The findings come as cities around the world continue to expand, placing increasing pressure on urban biodiversity.

Although the review did not directly examine the effects of urban development on species conservation, Ballut said residential landscapes may offer opportunities to support wildlife within developed areas.

He pointed to the Ravenswood Neighbors Association Greening Initiative in Chicago as an example of how communities can encourage wildlife-friendly practices.

“Very cheap, $3 membership gets you access to native plants, seeds, expertise and even labor. They also put on garden walk events to engage their community with their local environment, which can also improve people’s attitudes toward wildlife and native vegetation, and change social norms associated with the practice.”

Such programs can help residents overcome barriers to wildlife gardening while making conservation practices more visible within neighborhoods.

Ballut said privately owned residential land may play an important role as urban areas continue to grow.

“While this literature review did not investigate the effects of different land use and land cover on species conservation, it is true that urban land use is expanding. I believe that privately owned residential land can be used to mitigate the effects of urban land expansion, and increasing residents’ uptake of wildlife gardening is a very attainable solution that does not require changes to local government decision-making,” Ballut said.

For Minor, the broader significance of the research lies in understanding the relationship between people and the environments they manage.

Rather than viewing residential yards solely as private spaces, she encouraged audiences to think about them as places where ecological and social processes interact.

Future research, she said, will help scientists better understand how those interactions shape both human behavior and wildlife outcomes.

“It’s about thinking of yards as ecosystems and people as participants.”