The Difference Between Pollinator-Friendly and Wildlife-Friendly in Plants

In a recent e-Gro Alert, Ariana Torres of Purdue University looks at the difference between pollinator-friendly plants and wildlife-friendly plants, what each means to the market, and how growers and retailers (by region) can work together to give consumers what they want.

The Power of a Plant Tag

While “pollinator friendly” and “wildlife friendly” may seem to be saying the same thing, customers disagree. Four national consumer studies of roughly 2,000 U.S. gardeners measured “what consumers will pay for native plants, what they actually want those plants to do, and how the answers shift by region and by customer type.”

In one experiment, consumers simulated a shopping experience of 5-gallon native shrubs, priced at $15, 25, and $35, with each plant tagged as either “pollinator-friendly,” “wildlife-friendly,” or “helps with water management.” The claim of “pollinator-friendly” was a major boon, adding a value of “$5.28 to a fall-color shrub, $6.54 to a fruiting shrub, and $6.22 to a flowering shrub.” Meanwhile, “wildlife-friendly” generated no extra value or interest for any of the plant groups.

Why is “Wildlife-Friendly” a Non-Starter?

In a companion study to the aforementioned experiment, consumers were asked “whether they wanted their landscape to attract or deter 10 specific types of wildlife.”

Consumers wanted to attract:

• Songbirds — 81%
• Butterflies — 78%
• Pollinators (in general) — 68%
• Bees — 57%

Meanwhile, consumers wanted to deter:

• Insects — 53%
• Bats — 63%
• Snakes — 77%

The term “wildlife-friendly” is fairly broad, and therefore forces the consumer to make their own judgment call on what qualifies as “wildlife.” While some may think of positive forms of garden wildlife (i.e., songbirds), others jump to negative associations (i.e., snakes). By contrast, the term “pollinator-friendly” narrows the term to include species that are routinely only regarded as positive.

Additionally, the study showed that consumers with a higher level of native plant knowledge were more likely to want to attract all 10 of the wildlife types, even those typically regarded as negative, such as bats and snakes, highlighting an “enthusiast” archetype of the market, rather than an average customer.

The Differences in Regional Results

Regional results of the studies offered the starkest deviations.

While the “pollinator-friendly” claim generated additional value in the Northeast, Midwest, and South, “ranging from roughly $8 to $10.72 per shrub,” there was “no significant premium” generated in the West. Additionally, the term “wildlife-friendly” generated negative value in the West, with many shoppers requiring significant discounts to accept a “wildlife-friendly” plant over one labeled as “helps with water management.”

For additional information on the consumer studies, including what growers and retailers can learn from the results to better prepare their plants for an evolving market, read the full e-Gro (Electronic Grower Resources Online) alert “Say “Pollinator,” Not “Wildlife”: How One Word on a Plant Tag Changes What Customers Will Pay.” Additional and current e-Gro alert pieces from Volume 15 (2026) can be found online.