Dr David Bonnett writes in an opinion piece for the Design Council, that health professionals need to step up to show the benefits (cost savings) of designing inclusively. He argues that inclusive design contributes to our health and wellbeing, but these benefits don’t get measured. In the UK new buildings, both public infrastructure and private homes, must incorporate basic access features. But older buildings are not under the same regulation. There are costs for refurbishing older buildings, but by now we should be calculating that cost more effectively. Bonnett says, “The considerable cost of improving these will be borne by local authorities who will in turn need to justify the benefits of their proposals to Government and other funding agencies.” He adds, “Design professionals, highways engineers included, are open to influence, and access consultants and others can tell them what to do. But first, health professional must assist in devising a method for demonstrating the benefits of inclusive design in order to make the case. Concerns for health succeeded in a ban on smoking in public building almost overnight. Inclusive design – already fifty years in the making – has got some catching up to do.”
We sometimes hear mention of the cost of bed days for falls, for example, and other conditions that are brought about by poorly designed environments, but as Bonnett says, it is time for the health profession to get on board.
A new report by Per Capita about employment and older people advises that stereotyping, even if positive, is still stereotyping and not helpful for employers. Indeed, the report reminds us that ageism can be applied to any age group, but more recently it has been captured in policy agendas as a term belonging older people. The research for the report, “What’s Age Got to Do With It?“, was carried out by Philip Taylor* and Warwick Smith. The report challenges some of the notions in the Willing to Work report by the Human Rights Commission. It also suggests that ageing advocates might like to rethink some of their messages.
“Age-based stereotypes (such as loyal, reliable, wise) are often used by older people’s advocates but recent research has shown that these stereotypes may be reinforcing already existing negative views of older workers among employers because these are not the traits they are primarily looking for in employees. This has potentially important implications for efforts to overcome age discrimination by employers. Not only are older workers being promoted in terms of qualities that employers are already more likely to ascribe to them, such qualities are given a lower weighting in terms of employment decisions that take account of productivity.”
The New Daily and Crikey posted articles based on the report. The full report can be downloaded from the Per Capita website.
*Professor Philip Taylor is a Director of CUDA
Australian Building Codes Board, which produces the National Construction Code (NCC) has released its 2017-2018 Business Plan. Within the work program list is Accessible Housing. The task is to produce a “Research report on the provision of minimum requirements for accessible housing in the NCC”. However, in a letter to Australian Network for Universal Housing Design (ANUHD), the Executive Officer of the ABCB, Mr Neil Savery, indicates that any change, should that be decided, would not happen until the 2022 edition of the NCC. Nevertheless, Mr Savery encourages ANUHD and others to gather evidence in support of a change, particularly in relation to economic arguments. ANUHD will campaign for the process to be expedited.
ANUHD submitted a proposal for change to the NCC last year but to no avail. It is a detailed document addressing all the criteria for the change to be considered. You can find out more about ANUHD’s actions by going to their website. Anyone is welcome to join ANUHD, join the monthly teleconferences, and keep up to date with progress. ANUHD Convenor, Margaret Ward, recently attended a hearing of the inquiry into outcomes of the National Disability Strategy and spoke about the issues in Australian housing and why regulation is needed.
Also included in the business plan is, Access for Adults with Profound Disability – Sanitary Facilities. The task is to produce a “Research report and regulation impact analysis for the provision of accessible change facilities for adults with profound disability.” This relates to a previous post, Changing Places or Lift and Change?
Sabrina Fonseca has written a very interesting article, Designing forms for gender diversity and inclusion. The focus is on designing surveys and marketing materials and whether the collection of gender information is really necessary, and if it is, how can you be inclusive? Sabina did some of her own research within trans and gender non-conforming (GNC) communities to come up with some good recommendations and practical examples. Giving people a really good reason for asking their gender is one example:
“Are you monitoring diversity? Creating policies that will benefit them and other trans and GNC folks? Figuring out if they are eligible for benefits? Or is it for marketing and communication purposes? Is it for their doctor, or for their health insurance? Be transparent, explain what exactly you are asking about, and how it will benefit them. Reassure that your organization strives to be inclusive of everyone so they can feel welcome and protected while disclosing their information. As with any form field, if there isn’t a clear benefit to the user, you probably shouldn’t ask about it.”
A great comprehensive look at some of the issues trans and gender non-conforming people face when filling out forms and identity documents. This article was posted on the uxdesign.cc website.