Understanding the Landscape of Student Food Insecurity at the UBC Vancouver Campus and Identifying Opportunities to Meet Student Needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The University of British Columbia is located in Vancouver, Canada--a city that is regarded as one of the top 5 most liveable cities in the world (Carey, 2023). However, the city's world-renowned educational institution, The University of British Columbia (UBC) is plagued by a food-insecurity crisis, with its students struggling to meet their food needs at a rate more than twice the National average. The issue of Food Insecurity is not just a UBC specific problem, but a National one, as many other leading Canadian institutions of higher education have reported the same degree of food insecurity; some as high as 46%. Over the last several years, UBC has increasingly placed more resources towards addressing the chronic issue of food insecurity, and this work is the latest in a long line of efforts to solve the student food insecurity crisis on the university’s campus. This Community Based Action Research (CBAR) was conducted alongside the UBC Food Hub, Alma Mater Society (AMS) Food Bank, and UBC’s SEEDS Sustainability Research Program in an effort to better understand the food landscape at UBC. Following a mixed-methods approach, we engaged multiple Stakeholders within UBC’s Food System through eight interviews with four different Food Security Resources (FSRs) and 299 surveys to assess students' food security status, engagement, and awareness of various FSRs at UBC’s Point Grey Campus. Following the Canadian Household Food Security Module for assessing food insecurity we discovered an alarmingly high rate of food insecurity among 229 student survey responses (76.9%), 64% of which were determined to be moderately food insecure. What made this finding so alarming was the randomness of our sampling as we had professors send out mass email blasts, approached random people at the bus stop, and passed out dozens of surveys at the Storm the Wall event. Another significant discovery in our research was that students were largely finding out about resources from their friends, even UBC Financial Aid was primarily discovered by students from conversations with other students, as opposed to UBC communication channels. UBC’s most targeted communication channel for connecting students with Food Security Resources, a digital resource known as the UBC Food Hub was among the least cited resources for discovering Food Security Resources at the campus. The lack of awareness to resources is problematic as our research has found that many severely food insecure students (both domestic and international) are going through their degree without the support of any financial aid / using institutional resources such as the AMS Food Bank / Food Hub Market (UBC’s Most Affordable Grocery Store). In our Interviews, our primary finding was that the student leaders of FSRs have a genuine desire to do more than what they are currently doing to support their fellow students. They want a ‘seat at the table’ where valuable discussions around student food security status are taking place. In particular, they long to increase the amount of support their initiatives are offering, and to see UBC become a food secure campus. This research project has reported the highest rate of food insecurity ever at UBC’s Campus, discovered that institutional communication channels are not reaching students, and found that many students are going through their degree hungry and lacking considerable support to alleviate their burden. Thankfully, grassroots initiatives are making a difference to the students using them, and are ready and willing to be a part of more substantial change. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".