The Universalising Design website has an interesting article, Negotiating Place: The Challenge of Inclusive Design. The article highlights the concept of place as being unequal – many places are designed in ways that keep certain people out. It begins with a quote from an access consultant, “In my more miserable moments I think we’ll never get it right, and people just ignore it, and building control officers don’t implement it, and we still see buildings where somebody says it’s accessible, and it’s not accessible at all. We’re still designing public spaces with cobbles, brand new public spaces with cobbles and seats that have got no arms or backrests, and they don’t understand that an older person can’t get up off a concrete stone bench. Why do they keep designing stuff like that?”
The author, Charlotte Bates, makes good points, including the one that many of us know: even when you design something to be inclusive, it is overridden by contractors who focus on time and money. So there is no guarantee the end result will be accessible. Very readable article.
If we apply the underpinning principles of universal design to all aspects of our daily lives and embrace the concept of inclusion, where do very low paid workers fit into the scheme of things? Willow Aliento discusses in Fifth Estate the “key worker” issue using a barista as an example of how low paid workers can’t even consider a home and family. So how does that fit with notions of equity? And for older workers who might have their own home, maintaining an existence becomes a daily challenge. She argues that property development policies need to factor stable employment into the mix along with being age and ability inclusive. A good article well written.
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?
Cities are expanding across the globe and dictating how we live our lives. So the way they are designed is becoming increasingly important. Cities take up about 2% of the land mass but make up 70% of the economy, 60% of the global energy consumption, 70% of greenhouse gas emissions and 70% of global waste. The development of the UN New Urban Agenda has taken many years and there is a raft of documentation. The 5 page New Urban Agenda Explainer gives a more digestible overview. While the document does not mention universal design specifically, inclusion of all people to access the benefits of cities is a key theme. It also recommends a bottom up approach so that marginalised groups can participate in designing and developing urban areas.
The New Urban Agenda was adopted by the United Nations at the end of 2016, and, “… represents a shared vision for a better and more sustainable future – one in which all people have equal rights and access to the benefits and opportunities that cities can offer, and in which the international community reconsiders the urban systems and physical form of our urban spaces to achieve this.”
Abstract: Autonomous driving is a topic of extensive research; however user views on this new technology are largely unexplored, especially for an inclusive population. This paper presents a survey and two focus groups, investigating driving habits and attitudes towards autonomous cars of an inclusive group of UK drivers. A subset of survey participants were invited to attend one of two focus groups, to discuss handovers of control between car and driver. Maintaining safety, trust and control were themes commonly identified in both focus groups, while unique views and concerns, relating to different characteristics of the group were expressed. These results can inform an inclusive, user-centred design of autonomous vehicle interfaces, especially for the safety-critical use case of driver handovers of control.”
You will need institutional access for a free read, otherwise the chapter can be purchased.
Connected and automated vehicles are being trialled across the world, but will their use and facility be universally designed? The arrival of the driverless car could be life-changing for people who have been unable to own and/or drive a car. In their article, Towards Life-Long Mobility: Accessible Transportation with Automation, the authors explore some of the challenges and opportunities for automated vehicles for people usually excluded from driving. They conclude that the future of automated vehicles for currently excluded people seems to be promising.
Despite the prevalent discussions on automated vehicles, little research has been conducted with a focus on inclusiveness of traditionally excluded populations from driving. Even though we may envision a future where everyone can drive with perfect automation, the problem will not be that simple. As with any other problem domains, we need to scrutinize all the design considerations – not only each population’s characteristics (capabilities and limitations), but also the entire system, technological limitations, and task environments. To this end, the present paper explores challenges and opportunities of automated vehicles for multiple populations, including people with various difficulties/disabilities, older adults, and children. This paper brings up some controversial points and is expected to promote lively discussions at the conference.