Urea fertiliser use is inefficient and typically results in excessive nitrogen (N) loss into the atmosphere as either nitrous oxide (N2O) or ammonia (NH3) or loss to surface and ground water as nitrate (NO3-). Environmental losses of N are of major concern as excess N is altering ecosystem functioning whilst also posing a threat to human health. One solution to reducing fertiliser N losses to the wider environment is by increasing the efficiency by which plants can take up fertiliser N. Regulations concerning the use of N fertilisers and agricultural practices are changing to ensure N losses are minimised and human and environmental health is improved. This is also the case for amenity grass (e.g. sports turf, golf courses) which is the focus of this thesis. Typically, amenity grass prioritises vibrant green aesthetics, thick crop density but minimal crop yield to reduce maintenance costs. This main focus of this study is evaluating the potential benefits of polymer-coated urea fertiliser for improving N use efficiency. It will also test the efficacy of a new biodegradable polymer coated fertiliser (BDCU). It also reviews the consequences of excess N in the environment and the fate and impacts of plastic on soil health and food consumption as a result of the use of plastic-coated fertilisers. All the fertilisers were urea-based with differing coating formulations, and products of ICL Group Ltd. A series of small-scale pot experiments, and controlled laboratory and glasshouse trials were conducted to compare the current and new polymer coated urea fertiliser products on gaseous emissions (N2O and NH3), grass health (colour analysis and biomass yield), NO3- and NH4+ leaching and fertiliser solubility rates. Non-coated urea was included as a reference treatment in all experiments. The study found that both the original (PSCU) and new (BDSCU) polymer coated urea emit significantly less NH3 than the uncoated urea (UU) (p < 0.05). The PSCU and BDSCU formulations reduced NH3 emission rates by 75% and 58%, respectively, compared to UU. Both coated fertilisers also dissolved slower in water resulting in a slower N release rate. However, there was no significant difference between the coated and uncoated urea on cumulative biomass (grass) yield. The N2O emission rates were also higher for the coated fertiliser compared to the uncoated urea with PSCU and BDSCU emitting 0.12 and 0.15 g m-2 respectively and UU emitting 0.055 g m-2. The chlorophyll content of the grass was greater for the coated fertilisers over a longer period of time, but not significantly differently to the uncoated urea, which is an important factor of amenity grass. In conclusion, the new biodegradable polymer coating performed more efficiently than un-coated urea fertiliser, but did not perform as efficiently as the original polymer coating. This could be because the BDSCU coating seemed to be more fragile than the traditional coatings. Further long-term field-scale studies are needed to fully assess the potential benefits of the new coated products.