University Students’ Lifestyle and Opinions for University-Affiliated Public Housing: Focusing on Auxiliary Welfare Facilities and Residential Services

Abstract

University-affiliated public housing (UAPH) is planned for the purpose of coexistence with the local community as well as housing stability for university students. However, shared spaces such as auxiliary welfare facilities planned to achieve that purpose are not being used by residents because no services or programs are provided. Lifestyle is a useful approach for identifying housing preferences in housing projects for special groups that share similar demographic characteristics. Thus, this study analyzed and clustered the lifestyle of university students, and investigated the differences in preferred auxiliary welfare facilities and residential services by cluster. Data were collected through a self-administered questionnaire survey of 424 university students using an online survey. As a result of the survey, in the factor analysis of university students’ lifestyle types, three categories were identified as individual propensity factors regardless of demographic characteristics except gender. In addition, the characteristics of university students were crucial in examining the preference of auxiliary welfare facilities and residential services of UAPH in terms of community facilities, auxiliary facilities, residential services, and program/operation management. Community facilities showed a high need for academic facilities, a low overall need for residential services, and a high need for program/operational management in terms of cost (housing cost reduction). In this study, there were differences in UAPH opinions according to lifestyle. In particular, many respondents showed a lifestyle that pursued practicality, and accordingly, a preference to utilize practicality, sociality, information, and technology was high. Therefore, for the sustainable operation and management in order to facilitate UAPH construction, the issue of housing cost, including not only rent but also management costs, should be considered most fundamentally, and it is necessary to provide facilities and programs that can provide practical help to the difficulties students face when living alone.