Subshrubs as ground cover: when they work better than a lawn

Subshrubs work better than a lawn when the surface does not need to be walked on and the aim is to create a mass of planting, protect the soil or stabilise a bank. The gain does not come from planting a few specimens far apart, but from choosing adapted species, setting a spacing that allows the cover to close and accepting an establishment phase with watering, weeding and replacements.

An effective cover combines relatively low height, branching close to the ground, the ability to occupy the space and compatibility between plants. It may be evergreen, semi-evergreen or seasonal. The choice changes with sun, shade, wind, soil type and the visual effect intended. Instead of looking for a universal species, it makes more sense to work with small groups suited to each microclimate.

Creeping or compact species can reduce bare soil, but they do not create a walkable surface like a lawn. Nor do they close at the moment of planting, except when a high density is used. The interval until closure is precisely the phase when most weeds appear and the need for monitoring is greatest.

The spacing should be set by the real width of the plant and by its growth rate, not just by the initial budget. Planting too far apart reduces the immediate cost, but prolongs weeding and leaves the soil open to erosion and heating. Planting too close increases competition and may call for early thinning. For each species, the team should record expected width, time to closure and response to pruning.

A composition can use a dominant species to form the matrix and other plants in drifts or seasonal repetitions. This organisation gives visual continuity without depending on a monoculture. It also makes it possible to replace a species here and there if the site turns out to have more shade, moisture or wind than expected.

In full sun and well-drained soil, the selection can favour Mediterranean or xerophytic species, provided they receive establishment watering. In dry shade, the challenge is root competition and the lower availability of light. On banks, besides the adaptation of the plants, it matters to control surface erosion, run-off and access for maintenance.

In the first two to three years, management should include adjusted watering, selective weeding, replacement of gaps and correction of the soil cover. After closure, the work tends to change in frequency: fewer regular cuts, but containment pruning, tidying and monitoring of dominant species.

The most common mistakes are confusing low height with resistance to trampling; using the same spacing for species of different widths; doing without establishment watering; and not providing access for maintenance on a bank.

At Diaplant, spacings are set by mature size, by speed of closure and by the conditions of the site. Wherever possible, we monitor how the cover develops so as to correct gaps before they become structural.

A well-designed subshrub cover is a planting, not a finish. Its performance depends as much on composition and spacing as on monitoring during closure.

• Smith, L. S.; Fellowes, M. D. E. The grass-free lawn: Management and species choice for optimum ground cover and plant diversity. (2014).
• Ecological restoration and biodiversity-friendly management of urban grasslands – A global review on the current state of knowledge. (2024).
• Uppala, E.; Deak Sjöman, J.; Emilsson, T.; Hedblom, M. Reviewing designed plant communities’ potential for optimizing the performance of urban nature-based solutions. (2025).