The Rise of Wellbeing-First Campus Design by James Wright, Head of SCF (South East and London)
With one in four young people experiencing mental health challenges in the UK according to a recent NHS report, universities are under pressure to rethink physical spaces as part of the solution.
As competition for student enrolment intensifies in an era of funding pressures and evolving student preferences, wellbeing-focused estates are becoming a key differentiator.
This comes as research shows that spaces which promote mindfulness, optimism and vitality improve cognitive performance and emotional health.
At the same time, wellbeing design often overlaps with sustainability. For example, natural ventilation, green spaces, and energy efficient systems reduce carbon footprints while promoting health. This supports public sector objectives for net zero and social value.
With the Procurement Act also now in full force, “Most Advantageous Tender” (MAT) has replaced “Most economically Advantageous Tender” (MEAT), procurement decisions are no longer driven by cost, but broader value, including wellbeing outcomes. For estate projects, this allows universities and public bodies to embed wellbeing criteria such as mental health friendly design, accessibility, social value and community engagement into tender evaluations.
Critical for making this work is adopting a two-stage procurement approach whereby early contractor involvement means practical solutions for wellbeing can be tested and refined before finalising plans, ensuring these features are feasible and cost-effective.
But beyond taking a two-stage approach, what should university estate teams consider?
Designing for collaboration
Loneliness is a huge issue facing younger generations, with research by the Mental Health Foundationfinding that 40% of respondents aged 16-24 report feeling lonely often or very often. This means it’s vital that university estates are designed to create opportunities for social and academic collaboration.
For example, the Clive Booth Student Village at Oxford Brookes University includes communal kitchens, lounges and study areas within clusters of flats. These spaces encourage collaboration and interaction among students, reducing isolation and creating opportunities for social and academic collaboration.
Creating spaces that respond to student needs requires a collaboration between contractor and university from the outset, as this ensures the design and construction of spaces are truly informed by the lived experiences and preferences of the students themselves.
Mark Tugwell, Head of Capital Projects, at Oxford Brookes University, said:
“Early involvement with contractor Morgan Sindall was crucial in shaping a student village that truly supports wellbeing. By having conversations early on, this meant the right expertise was brought into the planning process from the outset. We were able to design inclusive communal spaces that foster connection, encourage meaningful relationships, and build strong support networks, essentials for both student wellbeing and academic success.”
A rising demand for inclusivity
A growing proportion of students identify as having disabilities or neurodiverse needs with disabled students making up 20% of the population, over double compared with 2010.
However, many students have reported a lack of inclusion at university, with Disabled Students UK finding that 37% of people with disabilities have stated they do not feel welcomed by university staff. There are many ways universities must address this including through improving culture and training. Improving physical accessibility is also a vital place to start. For example, Clive Booth Student Village includes dedicated accessible bedrooms across its twelve new buildings, designed to meet mobility and sensory requirements. It also has lifts that can be used in a fire evacuation, meeting both accessibility and safety requirements.
Instead of taking a single-stage procurement approach, which often leads to cost-cutting that undermines design intent, two stage procurement mitigates this by enabling open book cost planning and risk identification early, so that budgets reflect the true cost of inclusive and wellbeing design. This also then makes it easier to ring-fence funds for ongoing support, such as specialist staff training or assistive technology.
Mark continued:
“As part of the design for Clive Booth, we have implemented a bridge in at the top of our steep site, so a person with mobility issues can come in across this bridge into an upper floor of the building, then go down in the lift and come out the bottom.
“This is something that needs joining up right from the start, and we ensured we included disability planning advisors within the early-stage meetings to ensure this was considered.”
Future-proofing estates
Students increasingly expect universities to take sustainability into consideration, with a survey by SOS-UKfinding 80% of students want their institutions to be doing more.
Therefore, developing sustainable buildings not only future proofs estates in terms of resilience to a changing climate, but also in terms of competitiveness and responding to future demand.
Begin the process by undertaking a cost-benefit analysis that balances both wellbeing and sustainability considerations from the outset. It is essential to determine whether a retrofit or a new build will enhance the health, comfort, and inclusion of its users, as well as being financially and practically viable.
Simultaneously, it is vital to account for the full life cycle of the building, including whole life carbon, ensuring that the environmental footprint of any construction work is justified by long-term benefits to both people and planet. By bringing together all stakeholders early in the process, clear wellbeing and sustainability targets can be established, and plans developed to embed the most effective technologies and inclusive design features.
This collaborative approach ensures that choices, such as natural ventilation, biophilic design elements, and flexible communal spaces not only reduce operational carbon but also support the physical and mental wellbeing of building users. By intertwining wellbeing and sustainability priorities, universities can create spaces that are both future-proof and genuinely supportive of all students and staff.
Looking ahead to 2026, universities are facing a challenging paradox: rising expectations from students alongside tightening finances and decarbonisation deadlines. But the solution isn’t just design innovation, it’s procurement strategy. By prioritising not only collaborative risk management, early engagement, and transparent cost planning, university estates can champion student wellbeing whilst meeting the challenge of the moment.