Effects of Mixed-Use Green Roof on Student Community & Subjective Well-Being : A Case Study of the University of British Columbia’s Exchange Residence Green Roof
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing body of research indicates that university green spaces positively impact the subjective well-being of university students by providing benefits to physical and mental health and good social relations. The green roof of the University of British Columbia’s Exchange Residence building shares many features of conventional green spaces, but its location over an active bus exchange and integration into a high-density residence building may impact its well-being potential. This small-scale, exploratory study investigates how the green roof’s unconventional design elements affect users’ perception of the space and its effect on their subjective well-being. Using qualitative methods, a total of eight participants (including student residents of the building, non-resident students, and Building Operations staff) were interviewed. The results show that some green roof users perceive the space as providing restorative and social benefits including emotional relief from stress and improved social cohesion. Although these users perceive the space as being less natural and restorative than other campus green spaces, its convenient location is a significant factor in participants’ preference for visiting the green roof over more natural spaces. The study results also suggest a social-restorative benefit trade-off between green spaces that are perceived as highly natural and green spaces that have greater visibility. The paper concludes with recommendations for improving the green roof’s well-being benefits and suggestions for future research. 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".