Geoff Barker’s presentation highlights the importance of community engagement and involvement. Using a case study of a project in the Northern Territory with the local Aboriginal people he shows how careful planning, and involvement in all stages from initial concept to implementation, is important for the success of a project. Inclusion is a necessity and not an option.
Geoff Barker Presentation Transcript PDF
Geoff Barker Presentation Transcript Word
Geoff Barker slideshow PDF 4MB
Transcript from the live captioning of Guy Luscombe’s presentation, Beyond Universal Design: What else can designers do?
Guy outlines his research in Europe which included engagement with older residents in care settings and found some unexpected results. He was looking for innovative buildings for housing and care for older people. Large windows was an unexpected finding and he goes on to discuss why this might be one of the most desirable features, among others, for older people.
Guy Luscombe Presentation Transcript PDF
Guy Luscombe Presentation Transcript Word
Abstract:
The principles of universal design, as they are realised in buildings and products, focus on physical and physiological needs such as accessibility and of ease of use.
However, despite being hinted at by principles of equitability and simplicity, the more emotional and psychological barriers, such as stigmatisation and social exclusion, are not usually actively addressed in building design.
True universal design would surely address this and try to design for the whole person. But is it possible and if so, how can the more emotional and psychological needs be addressed in design?
This presentation will draw upon an exploration of innovative buildings for older people completed as part of a Byera Hadley Travelling Scholarship study tour recently completed to suggest that there are ways to design for the whole person and provide a more thorough, richer and ultimately more inclusive universality.
DrGer Craddock’s first keynote presentation, Universal Design as a Public Good, was captioned and transcribed. It was his presentation at the 2014 Australian Universal Design Conference that got CUDA off to a start. The transcript includes questions from the audience
UD as a public good Transcript PDF
UD as a public good Transcript Word
Slideshow presentation PDF 4MB
Synopsis: Dr Craddock’s presentation covers the importance of using consistent terminology when discussing and researching aspects of universal design and supports the use of the term “universal design” as defined in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Also essential to the ongoing success of universal design is finding champions within government and industry. Continue Reading Universal Design as a Public Good: can it deliver?
This is an edited transcript of the final panel session at the Australian Universal Design Conference 2014.
Dr Ger Craddock, The Hon Susan Ryan AO, Ms Joe Manton, and Mr Richard Hawkins discuss the need for a centre for universal design in Australia. It includes audience questions.
Final Panel Session Where to from Here? Transcript PDF
Final Panel Session Where to from Here? Transcript Word
Embracing the whole mosaic that forms society, Ireland’s story
You can read the edited transcript from the live captioning of Dr Ger Craddock‘s keynote presentation at the Australian Universal Design Conference 2104. He explains how the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design was set up in 2007 and the progress made to date. He showcases how a dedicated centre can promote the principles, provide information and educational guidance, develop appropriate standards and be a driving force for inclusion. His presentation was the catalyst for starting CUDA.
Ger Craddock’s transcript PDF Ger Craddock’s transcript Word
Ger Craddock’s slideshow PDF 4MB
Synopsis: Dr Craddock outlines some of the challenges and successes of the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design in Ireland. He explains the establishment of the Centre and its position within the government framework. He highlights the work they have carried out since its inception seven years ago and some of the key documents that have helped inform their work. Much of the Centre’s work has been engaging with stakeholders to develop many standards and guidelines, promotional material, educational packages, and award programs.
The Centre covers the three key areas of design: the built environment, product development, and information and communication technology. Universal design in education is also closely linked. Their website contains many useful publications, guidelines and standards. Dr Craddock’s presentation was followed by a panel session and a call for a similar centre to be set up in Australia. The presentation begins with a video of students undertaking a design challenge.
In 1998 a group of passionate people came together with the aim of creating a centre for accessible design. They consulted widely and held two symposia, one in Sydney and one in Melbourne. The findings from these symposia are documented in Accessible Design in Australia.
For various reasons, the project ended at this point and no further action was taken. However, soon afterwards a small group, led by Dr Max Murray, started the Association of Consultants in Access Australia, (ACAA). This has become the professional body for access consultants in Australia.
Centre for Universal Design Australia has picked up the threads of the original idea to follow through on the aim of having a central point or body for creating an inclusive Australia.
The Norwegian Government has taken the principles of universal design and applied them across all policies to create maximum inclusion. This makes everyone responsible for inclusion at every level – in the built environment, outdoor areas, transport, and ICT. Here is an update to “Norway Universally Designed by 2025”.
In 2008, the Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion, launched its first Action Plan 2009-2013 with the goal of a universally designed Norway by 2025.
The focus on was on people with disability, accessible built environments and minimising discrimination. The plan covered the actions of the public service and all ministries. “The Government’s work is based on universal design. Universal design is an expression of a value put on equality by society.”
In 2010, Norway amended its Planning and Building Act, among others, to include universal design. The plan is to take a staged approach to upgrading public buildings and spaces.
The Delta Centre was given responsibility to coordinate the actions in Norway’s 2015-2019 plan in 2016. This plan is more comprehensive and covers ICT and communications to a more detailed level. This is in recognition of how we are becoming more reliant on digital applications.
Olav Rand Bringa provided extra insights at the 2018 UDHEIT conference in Dublin. The title of the paper is, From Visions to Practical Policy: The
Universal Design Journey in Norway. What Did We Learn? What Did We Gain? And What Now?
Bringa outlines the remaining barriers to implementation along with the successes.
A group of architects, product designers and engineers devised the 7 Principles of Universal Design in the mid nineties. The late Ron Mace led this team and is often referred to as the “father of universal design”. The principles were devised at a time when the focus was on the built environment and designers were responsible for getting it right.
However, some people find the 7 principles a good starting point for thinking about design from an inclusive perspective. With thought they can apply to any building, open space, service, product, phone app, website or document. Briefly they are:
Universal design in the built environment was a relatively new idea in the 1990s. It was soon realised that access for wheelchair users was good for everyone. It’s a universal good. Hence the the term “universal design”. Universal design has evolved and recognised as an inclusive design thinking process. Consequently it applies to all things designed including processes and policies.
Many still believe universal design is only about the built environment. Others believe universal design is a one-size-fits-all approach which means designers cannot be creative. Indeed, it requires a good deal of thought and creativity.
There is one other important misconception and that is, universal design is about access standards. This is where the term “universal access” belongs – it is not the same as universal design. Building, product and web standards are about compliance. Universal design is about creative designs that include compliance to relative standards.
The video below covers people at home, in public transport, in the street, at an airport, at a computer, at the entrance door and in the parking space. “Universal Design is the design of anything (city, service, thing) to make the experience of using it comfortable for anyone”.
A great little video for anyone new to universal design, or for others wanting to share their understanding. It’s 2 minutes long and great for education purposes.
Steinfeld and Maisel devised an update to the 7 principles of universal design in 2012. The 8 Goals of Universal Design are more action based than the principles, and include cultural inclusion.
In 2006 Steinfeld and Danford also ‘cross-walked’ the principles to the ICF. This is a handy reference for academics utilising the ICF for activities and participation. You can download a copy of their slideshow.
To help policy makers, CUDA has devised a model Universal Design Position Statement.
Universal design has gone through many iterations. It is no longer just about access to buildings, but access to anything and everything for everyone.
The latest thinking and practice is co-designing with users – a really iterative design process that shares the design power between users and designers.
The Danish Design Ladder takes universal design thinking yet another step forward. It shows how to apply universal design thinking to organisations and business strategies.
The 7 Principles of Universal Design emerged from the built environment, but things have moved on since the 1990s. The 8 Goals of Universal Design were devised to be more practical. They emerged out of work carried out to link the concepts with the World Health Organisation’s, International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
For anyone interested in ICF related research, Universal Design Guidance and the ICF demonstrates how universal design can be applied to develop design guidance standards. It uses a set of linking rules together with related classifications to represent the interaction of human functions, activities, and environmental factors.
See also a slideshare of Steinfeld and Danford’s crosswalk of UD principles with the ICF. It shows the process they went through to translate the 7 Principles of Universal Design to the 8 Goals of Universal Design, as well as relating them to universal design and the ICF. All other references have been removed except a review of the ICF conference which includes Steinfeld and Danford’s paper at itm 7.
This opinion piece, Universal Design: Is it Accessible? critiques the 7 Principles of Universal Design. Several aspects of universal design are questioned including the terminology and inherent difficulties in understanding the concepts. Jane Bringolf argues that the 7 Principles of Universal Design are not themselves universally designed.
The article was published by Multi:The RIT Journal of Plurality and Diversity in Design. It is also available on ResearchGate.
The article was written in 2008 before the 8 Goals of Universal Design were devised by Steinfeld and Maisel in 2012. These goals have a more practical focus. More recently, the concept of universal design has evolved to embrace diversity and inclusion in their broadest sense.
The beginnings of the universal design movement are attributed to Ron Mace, a polio survivor who went on to be an architect.
Designing products and environments to be usable by the majority of people is the underpinning concept of universal design. In some aspects, however, universal design fails to meet some of its own principles. This has resulted in a lack of understanding of the concept, which in turn, has allowed the terms “accessibility” and “disability” to inhabit the language of universal design. Consequently, universal design is bounded by concepts of accessibility, regulations and disability rights, rather than the intellectual challenges inherent in designing for the whole of the population bell curve.
The universal design movement recognizes that making headway is proving difficult and is seeking ways to improve its position. Market research, however, indicates universal design is branded as a disability product and this has implications for consumers, practitioners, and for the universal design movement in general. Discussed are the influence of terminology on the direction and perceptions of universal design, and the dilemmas of applying a regulatory framework as an implementation strategy.
