Public opinion on golf courses is divided. Critics point to the land they occupy, the water they consume, and the chemicals they release. Players see recreational space close to nature.

Both readings can be true on the same hectare of grass. The question is which reading is supported by what the course is actually doing — and whether anyone outside the club knows the answer.

Endangered flora observations across Kungsmarken, 1990–2026. Point size scales with the number of organisms; colour follows the IUCN Red List category. The cluster near Green 12 became the anchor for sign placement.

Golf courses are typically seen as antithetical to sustainability due to their land, chemical, and resource usage. The aim of this project is to challenge that perception by emphasizing that golf can be sustainable, using Lunds Akademiska Golfklubb (LAGK) as a case study.

We address the integration of nature preservation and golf course use through the redesign of a hiking path, and through measures to improve the species richness of protected orchids. Through these interventions we aim to strengthen the club's existing sustainability profile and use it to demonstrate to the wider community that golf courses can prioritise environmental responsibility and serve purposes beyond recreation.

For current members, who already take pride in their course, this enhanced sustainability profile is intended to reinforce that pride and position improved environmental conditions as a shared value between the club and its members.

In this project, we have chosen to collaborate with Lunds Akademiska Golfklubb (LAGK). LAGK is located within Kungsmarken Nature Reserve, which is also a Natura 2000 site. The club, therefore, has to follow strict environmental regulations set by the Swedish government and the EU.

As a result, LAGK operates more sustainably than many other clubs across the three challenges named above. First, LAGK leaves large parts of the course non-irrigated: irrigation is limited to the greens, which cover only 1 hectare of the 90-hectare course. All irrigation water comes from lake Glomsjön on site, so LAGK does not compete with the local community for freshwater. Second, LAGK uses no herbicides; pesticides and fertilisers are applied only to the greens.

Third, while the construction of the course likely led to some biodiversity loss, that does not mean the course has reduced biodiversity in Kungsmarken over its lifespan. Ormiston & Cristol (2025) emphasise that the ecological value of golf courses depends on what habitats they replace.

Kungsmarken has a long history of human interference. In the Iron Age it hosted settlement and agriculture. During the Middle Ages, the Bishop of Lund built an estate here — Biskopsborgen Glomstorp. After that period, the area was used for grazing horses, and from 1918 to 1925 Kungsmarken served as a training ground for the Southern Scanian Infantry Regiment, which built a shooting range here. After the regiment's disbandment, voices were raised against various development proposals. According to LAGK's website, the construction of the golf course in 1936 saved Kungsmarken from invasive alternatives, such as the establishment of single-family farms.

Since its establishment, the club has contributed to the preservation of around 400 species in Kungsmarken, including ten orchid species, rare flora such as the narrow-leaved lungwort, and a rich bird life (LAGK, n.d.). Despite this — and the public emphasis on the reserve status — the outreach and communication regarding water management, habitat provision, and low chemical reliance have not yet been fully developed.

We use Hajer's discourse theory, as described in The Politics of Environmental Discourse, as the theoretical basis to argue that communication of sustainable golf course management practices at LAGK can change golfers' expectations for course aesthetics into eco-friendly practices, and serve as an example for other clubs of how golf can be managed more sustainably — pushing eco-friendly management toward becoming the new norm (Hajer, 1997).

Hajer argues that our perception of an environmental problem — in our case the environmental impact of golfing — is not only determined by science, but socially constructed through discourse. He defines discourse as 'a specific ensemble of ideas, concepts, and categorisations that are produced, reproduced, and transformed in a particular set of practices and through which meaning is given to physical and social realities' (Hajer, 1997, p. 44). A discourse is a specific way of talking and thinking about an environmental issue that shapes people's perception of it. There is currently a dominant discourse among many golfers that the quality of play and aesthetics is more important than the environmental consequences of meeting that demand (Fouillouze et al., 2023). Fouillouze et al. argue this discourse is dominant partly due to a lack of understanding of those consequences.

Discourses can change through the development of new storylines and discourse coalitions. Storylines are simplified narratives that combine ideas, values, and political arguments into a commonly shared story. They are essential for creating discourse coalitions: groups of actors attached to the same storyline who unite in pursuit of discursive hegemony (Hajer, 1997). Applying this, repetition of the importance of eco-friendly course management — on signs, websites, scorecards — can gradually reshape expectations and push for more eco-friendly management at LAGK and other clubs as the new norm. This is what Hajer calls discourse structuration: a new way of understanding an issue becomes socially accepted.

For the design of the website elements, we draw on the SciCommercial principles by Finkler & León (2019). This framework extends the six principles of sticky ideas proposed by Heath & Heath (2007) and Shimp & Andrews (2013), known as the SUCCES Framework — Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, Stories — and adds Science as a seventh, producing SUCCESS.

In our project we focused on static images and audio rather than video. This decision was made because another student group worked on a course-history project using video formats. Our collaboration partner preferred a diversity of media on their website. Based on positive empirical findings about images and audio in science communication, we chose this combination, complemented by efficiently used text that creates a narrative.

According to the Dual Coding Theory (Paivio, 1971), multimodal communication is beneficial because cognition operates through two separate but linked systems — verbal/linguistic and visual/non-verbal — and learning is most effective when both are activated simultaneously. Mayer (2009) showed that integrated images and sounds with clear explanations improve comprehension and retention. Sweller (1988) cautions that extra or unclear images can block learning, an effect tied to cognitive load theory: working memory has limited capacity, and overload produces poor understanding and retention.

Jeong & Song (2025) examine the relationship between the eco-friendly management of golf clubs and behavioural intentions of golfers, focusing on the mediating roles of image and perceived quality, and the moderating effect of green marketing. The findings show: (1) green image fully mediates the relationship between eco-friendly management and behavioural intention; (2) perceived quality fully mediates it too; (3) green marketing has a moderating effect. Green image acts as a cognitive filter that lets consumers interpret eco-friendly management as aligned with personal values.

The theory of narrative transportation (Green & Brock, 2000) further highlights that the experience — where attention, emotion, and imagery concentrate on events in a narrative — leads individuals to become immersed, respond emotionally, and form vivid mental images. Unlike traditional persuasion models that require logical evaluation, narrative transportation bypasses analytical defences. Because imagination is occupied, the reader is less likely to counter-argue. This immersive state is effective at shifting beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours.

Table 1 · Adapted by us from Finkler & León (2019, p. 7).

For the sign design, we drew on literature reviews of best-practice scientific visualisation, including infographics and illustrations. According to Perra & Brinkmann (2021), effective visualisations provide clarity for stakeholders and peers, but also act as 'a vessel for story.' In our case the signs depict the topics of the website's stories and link to them directly through QR codes. Fischhoff (2013) argues that collaboration between artists, communication specialists, and scientific experts can accelerate the integration of scientific visualisations and writing — which is why our team brought together natural sciences, science communication, marketing, social sciences, and education.

Design Thinking (DT) is used as the project approach. DT is user-centred and iterative. Projects begin with an exploratory phase aimed at understanding the problem and context, observing users in real situations, and using these insights to define a problem frame. We met with the club manager and the president of LAGK, and visited the course several times to understand how it is managed. Based on these meetings and observations, we developed our problem frame (Buhl et al., 2019).

The second phase is ideation, where we developed a variety of ideas based on the meetings, modelling, and observations. The third phase is experimentation, where the most promising ideas were selected, prototyped, and tested against predefined criteria. We focused on communication of the sustainability of the course, basing our proposed solutions on academic literature and our own calculations. Solutions were continuously discussed with LAGK during regular meetings throughout experimentation and refined according to their input. We measure success of the project by website traffic and through a questionnaire we plan to send to Marcus and Paul at LAGK.

Our project hoped to challenge the perception of golf as inherently careless and environmentally damaging by emphasising sustainability and transparency within golf clubs. We approached this challenge by addressing communication between the golf community and the general public, especially in regard to sustainability.

Through continuous discussion with LAGK we identified several connected opportunities to broaden and improve public discourse around golf and biodiversity:

• Building a more inclusive community within golf clubs
• Expanding visitors beyond the golfing community
• Emphasising sustainability and ecological goals as part of LAGK's identity
• Increased transparency regarding environmental management
• Supporting nature exploration and conservation

The map in Fig. 1 shows verified observations of rare flora between 1990 and 2026 using data from Artportalen, Sweden's national species observation platform. For our analysis we used only verified observations. Observations were categorised by colour according to IUCN Red List categories and by point size in relation to the number of organisms observed.

Fig. 1 suggests two major outposts of endangered plant observations within Kungsmarken: one located near Green 12 on the western side of the reserve and the other further east. However, density analysis (Fig. 2) shows that these two areas have very different observation densities, with the higher proportion located near Green 12. This indicates that the area surrounding Green 12 should be a priority area for future conservation and management efforts.

A methodological caveat: a portion of the dataset comes from public observation, so there is perception bias — people are more likely to record species in accessible and commonly visited locations (Beck et al., 2014). Future in-field biodiversity assessments should validate these spatial patterns.

In discussions with LAGK, club representatives expressed interest in identifying locations where interventions could most effectively increase biodiversity and improve the public visibility of rare plants. To address this, an optimised geospatial outlier analysis was conducted (Fig. 3).

The pale red hexagons represent areas which are statistically expected to have many rare plant observations and indeed do. Pale blue represents the same for low counts. The important outliers for further decision-making are the intense blue hexagons (low-high outliers): areas where we could statistically expect many observed rare plants, but don't see them in reality. These are the leverage points to expand plant biodiversity in Kungsmarken, and they are targets for our further communication with LAGK.

Statistical analysis reveals deviations from expected plant distribution but cannot show causation. Further investigation focused on environmental patterns that may influence biodiversity, with one notable pattern emerging from surface runoff dynamics.

Areas of higher density of rare plants coincide with zones characterised by smaller, more parallel surface water flows instead of concentrated runoff channels (Figs. 4–7). This relationship is most clearly seen in Fig. 5, in which the highest density of rare plants corresponds to diffuse and parallel water flow patterns. Figs. 6 and 7 show concentrated runoff channels associated with low numbers of rare plant observations. Statistically, endangered flora is also more likely to be observed away from concentrated surface streams (Fig. 8). This is one likely factor among several.

In terms of identifying biodiversity hotspots, our field observation results and the Artportalen dataset align closely. However, these findings differ from the habitat assessment conducted by Länsstyrelsen at the time of the reserve's establishment (Fig. 9). This discrepancy highlights the need for continuous updating of ecological assessments through current observations and research. Reliance on historical classification alone risks losing contextual accuracy and supporting strategic mistakes.

The original habitat assessment by Länsstyrelsen prioritised habitats 6230 (species-rich Nardus grasslands on siliceous substrates) and 6270 (species-rich dry-to-mesic lowland grasslands of Fennoscandian type). In observed reality, those are not the biodiversity hotspots. This underlines one crucial role of research in the decision process: decisions need to be grounded in current data and observations.

Selecting a 'positive case' — a club already managing more sustainably than the industry norm — meant the project's interest in reshaping golf's public discourse and LAGK's interest in their own public image converged by default. In Hajer's terms, this is a productive discourse coalition: a coalition of actors who do not share goals but share a useful narrative, holding together long enough to push storylines (Hajer, 1997).

The trap is this: when a science-communication project and a client's PR interest converge without friction, the design has to actively manufacture the friction, or the science-communication function collapses into the marketing function. Jeong & Song's (2025) empirical work on the moderating effect of 'green marketing' is the precise gravitational field this project was working in. The rest of this Discussion examines where the project's choices generated that friction, and where they didn't.

The project pivoted from a multi-pronged technical scope (SWAT modelling, pathway design, biodiversity, and communication) to a communication-led one with biodiversity analysis as supporting evidence. This pivot is what activates the discourse-coalition reading. The pivot was a diagnosis of where the binding constraint at LAGK actually lay: management practice is already substantially better than the industry norm, so additional technical intervention would have marginal sustainability impact, while the gap between practice and public/golfer understanding is wide.

This is what problem-driven, solution-oriented sustainability science is supposed to do (Clark, 2007; Kates, 2012) — but it commits the project to operating in the discursive arena, which is exactly where the trap sits. The GIS biodiversity analysis is the empirical work that survived the pivot and now does double duty: informing sign placement and grounding the content of the communication outputs.

Three specific choices in the design resist the collapse into green marketing. First, the decision to communicate the broader sustainability problems of golf — water demand, chemical use, biodiversity loss — and not only LAGK's successes. This is content LAGK's marketing function would not produce on its own. The Pesticide & Fertiliser sign explicitly names what golf courses do in general, before naming what this course does differently.

Second, grounding sign content in the empirical biodiversity analysis — the Artportalen data and the surface-runoff correlation — rather than in generic stewardship language. The cluster near Green 12 is presented as a measurement, not as a claim. Rodríguez Díaz, Bekken, and Metcalfe et al. are cited by name on the website, not as background but as the people whose work the visitor can go look up.

Third, the operationalisation of the SUCCESS framework's 'Science' and 'Credible' principles as constraints on what could be claimed, not just as heuristics for how to claim it. Narrative transportation (Green & Brock, 2000) is a deliberately used but double-edged tool — we used it to make verifiable content more sticky, not to bypass verifiability. The Photo Story chapters carry the emotional load; the Report carries the load that has to be checkable.

Naming these is not self-flagellation but the discipline the through-line of this project demands: a project that critiques alignment-by-default has to be willing to identify where it was complicit in it.

LAGK's gatekeeping of the communication channel — the agreement that LAGK would be the presenter of the information, with no external website — effectively means the project's outputs are mediated by the actor whose image the project also shapes. Then: the absence of direct golfer interviews or surveys before sign design, which meant the audience-facing decisions were informed-based rather than evidence-based, and structurally tilted toward what LAGK believed about its members. The 'ambassador' framing itself has a promotional grammar even when its content is empirically disciplined. And the clubhouse photo exhibition is the project deliverable that sits most clearly inside promotional territory regardless of intent.

In Chambers et al.'s terms, claiming transdisciplinarity at LAGK's design discretion is a partial co-productive agility, not the full version. We did not have an independent audience-side check on the communication design before deployment.

The biodiversity analysis contradicts Länsstyrelsen's original habitat assessment (6230 / 6270 prioritisation). The authoritative state framing has ossified around the assumptions of the reserve's establishment and no longer matches current biodiversity distribution. This is structurally the same move the project is trying to make at the discourse level: refuse to take an authoritative framing — whether from a state actor or from the dominant public narrative about golf — as ground truth, and treat it instead as data subject to revision.

The methodological discipline we applied to Länsstyrelsen's framing is the same discipline we have to apply to our own project's framings, including the 'LAGK-as-ambassador' framing from 13.4. That is what makes the Länsstyrelsen result more than an interesting empirical curiosity — it is the methodological reflection of the project's through-line. (A note on data: Artportalen carries citizen-science perception bias, and Beck et al. (2014) is the relevant caution; the result is robust because field observation aligns with the Artportalen pattern.)

The LAGK questionnaire and website analytics are not yet available. Under the course's process-first grading philosophy, the proper object of evaluation is the design logic itself — but this is not an escape clause. It raises the burden on the design logic, which is what 13.1–13.5 attempted to meet.

Closing the loop would require: a golfer survey after sign installation; comparison of website analytics pre- and post-launch; structured interviews with LAGK after a season of operation; and — the hardest one — some way of testing whether the communication shifted perception among the non-golfer public the project also addressed. The project was transdisciplinary in execution (multiple actor levels, ongoing scope adjustment with LAGK) but the evaluation, in the absence of audience data, is necessarily intra-disciplinary at this stage (Bergmann et al.).