IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i4p878-d1636090.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Green Campus Environments in Chinese Universities from Subjective Perceptions: A Textual Semantic and Importance–Performance Analysis Through a Satisfaction Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Lutong Sun

    (School of Architecture and Design, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Rubin Lian

    (Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA)

  • Wei Gao

    (School of Architecture and Design, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Mei Zhao

    (School of Design and Art, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Hui Wang

    (School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

Abstract

University campuses play a crucial role in sustainable development; however, the current green campus evaluation systems tend to focus primarily on the physical environment and building technology, often overlooking user perception and the impact of these factors on the execution of green campus strategies. Starting with an examination of the connotation and evolution of green campuses, we derived relevant indicators of campus subjective perceptions from both domestic and international green campus evaluation systems. We collected user feedback through satisfaction questionnaires and text data on the green campuses of nine representative Chinese universities. Factor analysis was used to establish the correlations between campus planning and subjective perceptions across six key areas. This research applied importance–performance analysis (IPA) to assess the prioritization of each green campus indicator, integrating it with textual semantic analysis to better understand the perceptions and attitudes of campus users toward green campus development. The findings suggest that the objectives of a green campus cannot be fully achieved using only technical or physical evaluation criteria. Instead, combining subjective feedback with quantitative indicators forms the foundation for effective strategy development. This study also found that users were more concerned about the design of details related to learning, living, entertainment, and recreation than the broader green campus planning decisions made by planners and decision-makers. Focusing on user perception and balancing scientific planning with public participation can help achieve the ultimate goal of green campus planning and design, adhering to a human-centered approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutong Sun & Rubin Lian & Wei Gao & Mei Zhao & Hui Wang, 2025. "Evaluating Green Campus Environments in Chinese Universities from Subjective Perceptions: A Textual Semantic and Importance–Performance Analysis Through a Satisfaction Survey," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-30, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:4:p:878-:d:1636090
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/4/878/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/4/878/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Endre Tvinnereim & Kjersti Fløttum, 2015. "Explaining topic prevalence in answers to open-ended survey questions about climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 744-747, August.
    2. Bakioglu, Gozde, 2024. "Selection of sustainable transportation strategies for campuses using hybrid decision-making approach under picture fuzzy sets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    3. Yu-Ling Peng & Yuan Li & Wei-Ying Cheng & Ke Wang, 2024. "Evaluation and Optimization of Sense of Security during the Day and Night in Campus Public Spaces Based on Physical Environment and Psychological Perception," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Ivanov, Stanislav & Soliman, Mohammad & Tuomi, Aarni & Alkathiri, Nasser Alhamar & Al-Alawi, Alamir N., 2024. "Drivers of generative AI adoption in higher education through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behaviour," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Lauri Lidstone & Tarah Wright & Kate Sherren, 2015. "Canadian STARS-Rated Campus Sustainability Plans: Priorities, Plan Creation and Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, January.
    6. Sever, Ivan, 2015. "Importance-performance analysis: A valid management tool?," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 43-53.
    7. Ying Cao & Lianghao Huang, 2023. "Research on the Healing Effect Evaluation of Campus’ Small-Scale Courtyard Based on the Method of Semantic Differential and the Perceived Restorative Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lin, Zhibin & Vlachos, Ilias, 2018. "An advanced analytical framework for improving customer satisfaction: A case of air passengers," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 185-195.
    2. Andrew Bieler & Randolph Haluza-Delay & Ann Dale & Marcia Mckenzie, 2017. "A National Overview of Climate Change Education Policy: Policy Coherence between Subnational Climate and Education Policies in Canada (K-12)," Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, , vol. 11(2), pages 63-85, September.
    3. Kong, Minjin & Lee, Minhyun & Kang, Hyuna & Hong, Taehoon, 2021. "Development of a framework for evaluating the contents and usability of the building life cycle assessment tool," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Wang, Shaofeng & Zhang, Hao, 2024. "Green entrepreneurship success in the age of generative artificial intelligence: The interplay of technology adoption, knowledge management, and government support," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Camilla Salvatore & Silvia Biffignandi & Annamaria Bianchi, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Through Twitter: From Topic Model Analysis to Indexes Measuring Communication Characteristics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1217-1248, December.
    6. repec:ehu:cuader:33234 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Yu-Hung Chien & Fang-Yu Chang, 2023. "An importance-performance analysis of teachers’ perception of STEM engineering design education," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Esmailpour, Javad & Aghabayk, Kayvan & Abrari Vajari, Mohammad & De Gruyter, Chris, 2020. "Importance – Performance Analysis (IPA) of bus service attributes: A case study in a developing country," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 129-150.
    9. Jeong-Sil Choi & Se-Young Ju, 2022. "A Study of Food Safety Knowledge for Sustainable Foodservice Management of Childcare Centers in South Korea Using Importance–Performance Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-14, August.
    10. Chi-Cheng Chen & Jia Wei Chook & Linh Bao Nguyen & Chun-Hung Lee, 2024. "Integrating Locals’ Importance–Performance Perception of Community Resilience into Sustainable Indigenous Tourism Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Eugenie Dugoua & Marion Dumas & Joëlle Noailly, 2022. "Text as Data in Environmental Economics and Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(2), pages 346-356.
    12. Gianluca Goffi & Magdalena Cladera & Linda Osti, 2020. "Sun, Sand, and… Sustainability in Developing Countries from a Tourists’ Perspective. The Case of Punta Cana," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Babalola, Taiwo Oladapo, 2023. "Adopting Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) model to assess land governance in the peri-urban areas of Ibadan, Nigeria," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    14. Abel, Dennis & Lieth, Jonas & Jünger, Stefan, 2024. "Mapping the spatial turn in social science energy research. A computational literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    15. Zhou, Tao & Zhang, Chunlei, 2024. "Examining generative AI user addiction from a C-A-C perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    16. Agung Budi Santoso & Setia Sari Girsang & Budi Raharjo & Arlyna Budi Pustika & Yanter Hutapea & Mahargono Kobarsih & Agus Suprihatin & Erpina Delina Manurung & Deddy Romulo Siagian & Sidiq Hanapi & To, 2023. "Assessing the Challenges and Opportunities of Agricultural Information Systems to Enhance Farmers’ Capacity and Target Rice Production in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, January.
    17. K. D. V. Prasad & Tanmoy De, 2024. "Generative AI as a catalyst for HRM practices: mediating effects of trust," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    18. Hanchen Jiang & Maoshan Qiang & Dongcheng Zhang & Qi Wen & Bingqing Xia & Nan An, 2018. "Climate Change Communication in an Online Q&A Community: A Case Study of Quora," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    19. Lianjie Duan, 2022. "Estimation of export cutoff productivity of Chinese industrial enterprises," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-16, November.
    20. Gangwei Cai & Yan Hong & Lei Xu & Weijun Gao & Ka Wang & Xiaoting Chi, 2020. "An Evaluation of Green Ryokans through a Tourism Accommodation Survey and Customer-Satisfaction-Related CASBEE–IPA after COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    21. So Sun Kim & Young Sook Roh, 2016. "Status of cardiopulmonary resuscitation curricula for nursing students: A questionnaire study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 496-502, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:4:p:878-:d:1636090. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.