The Conversation has an interesting article about being lonely in the city. It discusses the notion of “third places” – places that are in the public domain that encourage informal and casual social interaction. The “first place” is home, and the “second place” is where significant time is spent in a formal sense such as the workplace. Community gardens and town squares are an example of a “third” place. This bring into focus the idea of creating spaces with the human scale in mind. Loneliness is a growing concern and spoken of as the “new smoking”. Time for urban designers to ensure social interaction is encouraged for everyone – yes, it’s universal design. The article, Many people feel lonely in the city but perhaps third places can help with that has links to relevant papers.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) embrace the concept of “leave no-one behind”, but we hear little of the SDG in Australia. Perhaps because the focus of the SDG are on developing countries. But some of the aims and ideas could be applied at home as well as elsewhere. A report from the University of Birmingham in the UK reviews ways in which “different groups of people might be unintentionally excluded .. in infrastructure projects.” While the SDG are broad ranging to cover many aspects of exclusion, this report has a focus on people with disability, people of all ages and women. Large scale infrastructure projects can have negative effects for people who are largely invisible to investors, designers, and deliverers of such projects. The report covers transport, water and electricity, discusses tools and approaches, participatory planning processes, social equity audits and universal design. Case studies are provided throughout. Again, although this report is written with developing countries in mind, there are still learnings to be had for developed countries. The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has a booklet promoting universal design in aid projects funded by the government.
Until recently it was thought that a diagnosis of dementia meant staying home and being cared for. Those who work in the area of dementia are doing their best to change this view in the general population. But is the design community prepared to embrace people living with dementia? In Breaking Well-Formed Opinions and Mindsets by Designing with People Living with Dementia, researchers report on a range of disruptive design interventions to break the cycle of well-formed opinions and mindsets. Co-designed interventions have resulted in providing ways for people with dementia to continue contributing to society and have fulfilling lives. The abstract explains more.
Abstract: This paper presents ongoing research that highlights how design thinking and acting can contribute significantly to breaking down preconceived ideas about what people living with dementia are capable of doing. The research, undertaken in collaboration with Alzheimer Scotland and other dementia organisations across the UK, has adopted a range of disruptive design interventions to break the cycle of well-formed opinions, strategies, mindsets and ways-of-doing that tend to remain unchallenged in the health and social care of people living with dementia. The research has resulted in a number of co-designed interventions that help change the perception of dementia by showing that people living with dementia can offer much to UK society after diagnosis. Moreover, it is envisaged that the co-designed activities and interventions presented here will help reconnect people recently diagnosed with dementia to help build their self-esteem, identity and dignity and help keep the person with dementia connected to their community, thus delaying the need for formal support and avoid the need for crisis responses. The paper reports on three design interventions where the authors have worked collaboratively with nearly 200 people diagnosed with dementia across the UK in co-design and development activities. The paper concludes with a number of innovative recommendations for researchers when co-designing with people living with dementia.
Cambridge Workshop on Universal Access and Assistive Technology
CWUAAT 2018: Breaking Down Barriers pp 251-262
Nabil Eid writes a thoughtful piece on how inclusion in urban environments is an investment that benefits everyone. And not just built infrastructure – it includes services and experiences. This means a collaboration across disciplines that go beyond the traditional links. The more active we are, the healthier we will stay. He says, “Such concepts apply across the entirety of built environment, including not only buildings, transport infrastructure, public space and parks, but also to key products, services and facilities that help improve the experience of movement and connectivity. [It] will involve a wide array of different types of designers, each of whom will benefit from collaborating across disciplines and working with experts in a range of technologies or on designs that extend beyond their traditional spheres of interest.”
See his comprehensive article on the need for inclusion, Smart city means building an inclusive society for all.
Australia was one of the first countries to contribute to the WHO’s age-friendly cities project, but how much has been implemented? Hal Kendig explains the situation in a book chapter, Implementing age-friendly cities in Australia, which can be found in Age Friendly Cities and Communities: A Global Perspective. Kendig and co-authors conclude, “Notwithstanding the potential value for the broader community interests, there has been little achievement demonstrating the benefits of taking age and the life span into account in mainstream policy areas such as transport, housing and land-use planning.” They add that perhaps as the baby boomer numbers increase, the value might be better understood as this is a group with higher expectations of self determination in later life. The book is important reading for policy makers at all levels of government, particularly local government where the real lives of people are more keenly felt. Some parts of the chapter are available for a free read. You might also be interested in the WHO’s New Urban Agenda and the Place Design Group‘s ideas on implementation.
Editor’s note: I compiled the five most important aspects of neighbourhood design in a workshop handout: Footpaths, Seating, Lighting, Wayfinding, and Toilets.
Service design is yet to get on board with universal design according to a Norwegian Masters thesis study by Oda Lintho Bue. Norway leads the way with its overarching policy and commitment in their policy document, Norway Universally Designed by 2025. So it is no surprise to see this study undertaken here. Universal design is not a profession in its own right, but many projects need a UD champion on the team. Committing resources on universal design early in the project will most likely ensure that there will be no need for resources used on redesign later. This point is well made in the thesis. Given that Norway has such a strong stance on UD, it is interesting to note that even Norway is struggling with getting implementation across the board.
High values are placed on statistics and economics. So when it comes to the topic of people with disability questions are asked such as, “So how many people are there with disability anyway?” and “Should we bother about a few people when there are so many other things to think about?” What more could statistics add (or detract) from the inclusion agenda? What kind of statistics might matter most? Who is the subject of such data and how is it collected? Who is best placed to collect such data? And who decides on the questions to be asked?
Deborah Rhodes addresses some of these issues in a thoughtful discussion paper “Monitoring and Evaluation in Disability-Inclusive Development: Ensuring data ABOUT disability-inclusive development contributes TO inclusion”. Elements of this discussion paper provide food for thought for both development projects and policy development here at home in Australia. There are some key questions at the end of the paper that should be asked as there are many unspoken assumptions that all data are good data:
- What is the most important purpose for collecting data?
- Who is determining the reason for the data collection?
- What are other purposes for collecting data (that may or may not need to be prioritised)?
- How can we ensure that the data we collect is relevant to the policy, programming and attitudinal changes that people in the specific context seek to achieve?
- What information will tell us about the specific changes involved?
- Who will actually benefit from the information generated?
- What is the opportunity cost associated with data collection, i.e. would funds needed for the survey be better spent on raising awareness or responding to local priorities for inclusion?
- Will the data help to raise awareness of the costs of exclusion?
The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) oversees the funding of Australian Aid projects and has has produced guidelines on universal design for all Australian aid projects.
The Fifth Estate has published a very interesting article titled, Why people hate on diversity and inclusion (and how to get them not to). It’s by the CEO of Diversity Council Australia, Lisa Annese. She argues that when diversity and inclusion fall on certain ears it raises hackles as being a problem. She quotes David Gaider, “Privilege is when you think something is not a problem because it’s not a problem to you personally.” Annese discusses the research that shows the more diverse a company’s workforce, the more satisfied the whole workplace is, and that leads to improved productivity. It should also lead to better service for their customers. They are a diverse lot too!
The Missed Business booklet originally devised by the Australian Human Rights Commission and Marrickville Council has been updated by the NSW Business Chamber. On the positive, it gives key messages in simple sentences and information is presented on three pages with lots of graphics. The layout is designed for two page spread so font is small for online reading. Nevertheless it is good to see this publication appear again. It is aimed at small businesses. There are links to additional documents. You can access the guide online or by downloading the PDF document directly. Lane Cove Council, and Macarthur, have developed their own similar guides with a little more information. Check you local council too. For more on customer service and digital access, see the Human Rights Commission’s additional booklet, Access for all: Improving accessibility for consumers with disability (2016).