11,376 rated or chosen profiles from 474 respondents, in up to 6 tasks of 4 profiles varying on 5 attributes.

About this table

Description	Choice experiment on how grassy areas in urban parks could be managed as wildflower meadows: 474 park visitors in Leeds, Bristol and Edinburgh chose among options A, B, C and the current situation D in six tasks, described by plant species, native share, pollinator quality, flower appearance and a yearly council tax increase.
Reference	King, P., Pett, T. J., Goddard, M. A., Lundhede, T. H., Austen, G. E., Davies, Z. G., & Dallimer, M. (2026). Understanding public preferences for urban wildflower meadows: data and replication code [Data set]. Zenodo.
DOI	10.1016/j.jenvman.2026.131156
Licence	MIT License
Source data	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23374961

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint_2). Choice among options A, B, C and the current situation D in six tasks (fixed two-block design of 12 cards), described by added plant species, native share, pollinator quality, flower appearance and an annual council tax increase in GBP; D is displayed with its own levels (no change, GBP 0), so it is a profile and there is no opt-out. Level text follows the choice cards; appearance is shown as photographs only, so its text is a paraphrase. Weighted analytic sample (474 of 563 recruited); cov_survey_weight is the authors' entropy-balancing weight.

These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.

Size and shape

Respondents	474
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	11,376
Tasks per respondent (most)	6
Profiles per task	4
Attributes	5
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	climate energy environment
A profile represents	policy
Country	GB
Language shown	en
Language of stored levels	en
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	Please consider each table as a separate set of choices. Which ONE of the following options would you choose? (A / B / C / D) [choice, forced]

Columns

attr_appearanceattr_costattr_nativeattr_plantsattr_pollinatorschoicecov_age_groupcov_citycov_education_codecov_employment_codecov_gendercov_income_midpointcov_meadow_typecov_parkcov_survey_weightidprofiletasktrial_card

The layout (one row per respondent, task and profile; choice/rating outcomes; attr_ columns holding each attribute level as displayed) is defined in the IRW conjoint standard. What the outcomes asked is under Design above.

Get the data

Download CSVno account needed Browse on Redivisexplore and query Croissant metadataHugging Face, Kaggle, OpenML

Or load it directly in R or Python (both need a free Redivis account; the first call opens a browser to sign in):

# R
install.packages("remotes")
remotes::install_github("itemresponsewarehouse/Rpkg")
library(irw)
df <- irw_fetch("king_2026_urban_meadows", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("king_2026_urban_meadows", source="conj")

How to cite

@dataset{King2026,
  author = {King, P. and Pett, T. J. and Goddard, M. A. and Lundhede, T. H. and Austen, G. E. and Davies, Z. G. and Dallimer, M.},
  title = {Understanding public preferences for urban wildflower meadows: data and replication code},
  year = {2026},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23374961},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23374961}
}

Version and provenance

IRW version	v584
Redivis dataset	irw_conjoint_2 v1.4
Redivis dataset DOI	10.57761/hk97-wv30
Manifest pin for this IRW version	v1.4
Metadata source	irw_meta v44.0