Population ageing is a global phenomenon and the policy response is to focus on aged care and congregate living. The majority of older adults live in ordinary neighbourhoods, in ordinary homes. This policy blind spot means that anything to do with ageing is seen as a health or care responsibility and not an urban planning one. We need places and spaces for all ages and that means planning policy has to catch up with demographics.
It’s likely that ageist stereotypes underpins the policy blind spot. The World Health Organization’s Age-Friendly Communities Framework covers all aspects of life. Assumptions based on ageist stereotypes might also be why education is not on the WHO’s list.
Image: Eight Domains of Age-Friendly Cities by WHO.
An article in Rethinking the Future briefly covers the issue of population ageing from a global perspective. High income countries are reaching the peak of their population ageing where up to 30 percent of the population is over 60 years old.
Making cities age-friendly is everybody’s business. It is the business of policy, planning, housing, transport, social services, corporations, small business, etc. The article introduces three guides for age-inclusive cities and public spaces.
The Alternative Age-friendly Handbook for the Socially Engaged Urban Practitioner discusses actions such as mapping, auditing, fixing and collaborating.
Age-Inclusive Public Space is a book that documents interaction with 19 practitioners – architects, geographers, psychologists, and social scientists. Each has a view of designing, using and transforming public space to be more inclusive.
Shaping Ageing Cities focuses on 10 European cities facing ageing populations. This report looks at the built environment, housing, mobility and digital environments.
The article concludes by saying cities will have to adapt to changing needs with inclusivity – age-inclusive design practices. There is a short reference list at the end.
Social media posts rely on hashtags and images so it’s important to present them in a way that everyone can access. Access Central has two useful posts about digital accessibility: one about using CamelCase and the other is image descriptions. Of course, making online social media content accessible makes it easier for everyone to use.
CamelCase hashtags
A hashtag is a way to reach more audiences on social media, and most people use all lower case letters in their identifier. When the hashtag is multiple words strung together, it makes it difficult to read and interpret. For example, #universaldesignaustralia”. If this is written in CamelCase, it becomes #UniversalDesignAustralia”.
CamelCase is named after the way its capital letters protrude like a camel’s humps.
Camel Case helps people with vision impairment and people with dyslexia.
Using Camel Case shows consideration for readers especially people who use screen readers, and people who are neurodiverse. It makes technology more accessible for everyone.
Image descriptions
Images are an important part of social media posts, so it’s important that everyone has the chance to benefit from them. That means, people who are blind or have low vision need a text description of images. This is referred to as alt-text, or alternative text. Screen readers access the alt-text descriptions and read them out to the user.
The description of the image will depend on the purpose and context of where an image appears. For example, a photo on a dating app has a different context and purpose than that same photo on a book cover.
Some social media platforms prompt you to apply a description of your image when you upload it, which is a useful reminder.
Applying alt-text
Using examples, AxessLab has a useful guide on writing meaningful descriptions. The key is to keep it relevant and concise. A sighted person will glance a photo and it is that glance that you should try to convey.
Screenshots of text are also images and therefore all the text should be repeated in the alt text description. Avoid beginning the alt-text with “image of…” or “photo of”. The screen reader will say “image image of…” And remember to put a full stop at the end so the screen reader knows to complete the sentence. It makes for a more pleasant reading experience.
Descriptions of images are also picked up by search engines, so it is worth taking an extra minute to write a description. The AxessLab guide to alt-text is full of good tips.
The ideal pattern and symmetry of the human body underpins Vitruvian ideals for architectural design. Three architects challenge this notion as outdated because it fails to account for human diversity. Their discussion paper takes us from the Vitruvian to the variable body and the role of universal design.
“The architectural module has long been associated with the concept of measurement, where standardisation of the human body is used to define absolute modularity.”
Image is of the classic Vitruvian Man by Italian artist and scientist Leonardo da Vinci.
The Vitruvian concept reduces the human body to standard measurements to create ‘human scale’ for designing space. The variability of the human condition is contrary to this notion.
The architectural ‘module’ is a concept linked to measurement. It is associated with the scale of the human body which defines proportions and how people interact with space.
The authors discuss the creation of a module to account for the variables of the human body – to make variability the foundation of the module. Their paper refers to case studies with photos of where designs exclude people.
The quest for best solutions is apparent in the continuous updating of regulations and tools for accessibility. Integrating disability access standards with universal design is a more inclusive approach to design. The universal design element accounts for human variability in practical, social and ethical ways.
The drawing of the Vitruvian Man above illustrates the idea that the dimensions of the individual limbs of a human follow mathematical laws. Therefore, buildings should also be as well-proportioned and well thought-out as humans themselves. This theory it assumes everyone has the same body size and shape, which of course, is not the case. However, elements of Vitruvian thinking continues to reside in the myth of the average human being.
From the abstract
The architectural ‘module’ is about the measurement and standardisation of the human body. This narrow view of the module’s applicability is problematic, particularly in processes of environmental accessibility and inclusion.
This paper critically explores the limits of the traditional measurement module, rethinking the concept of modularity to account for physical and perceptive diversity. We aim to promote social inclusion and universal design in architectural projects for people.
The paper concludes that the evolution of the concepts of the module and the human being requires a revision of their very meanings, calling for a more inclusive approach to design and planning in our contemporary world.
There is an expectation that everyone will be self-reliant and keep up with the latest technology. But what happens to people who don’t keep up or can’t? Digital technologies have quickly found their way into pubic transport systems. But the digitisation of public transport can lead to unequal access.
We need to broaden the conversation from accessibility to inclusion. It has to go beyond people with mobility and sensory impairment captured by access standards. The digital divide is too complicated to be addressed by a single solution.
According to recent research, there are multiple groups of individuals who are likely to be impacted by the digitisation of public transport. If individuals experience difficulty or can’t get support, they may stop using public transport altogether. But it is these groups that often rely on public transport the most. So, what can be done to mitigate this?
A team of researchers in the Netherland set about finding some answers. Their study found more than one answer was needed, and that they needed to complement each other. They uncovered fourteen measures, categorised into five perspectives. Briefly they are:
Design – strive for universal design
Educational- provide courses
Persuasive – raise awareness
Social – provide non-digital alternatives
Governance – adopt a long term approach
The research paper explains these five perspectives in more detail using the fourteen different measures. Not all measures need to be enacted by all stakeholders in the transport system. Clearly, it depends on what part of the system people are working in. However, universal design is the underpinning perspective.
A focus on an inclusive design from the start showing the added value of digital products and services is needed. In addition, providing courses, specialist products and non-digital alternatives contribute to fostering a more inclusive public transport system. The role of public transport staff ought not to be underestimated by public transport authorities. Workers at the interface between the system and users play a key role in the digital transition.
Last but not least is the governance of digitalisation in the sector to mitigate unequal access. Nevertheless, there is only so much that the transport sector can do. Tackling systemic issues that underlie digital barriers like poverty and low literacy is crucially relevant.
From the abstract
Digitalisation is making its way into public transport (PT) services. Policy approaches to ensure that such services remain inclusive are at best fragmented, at worst non-existent. This study looks existing initiatives and lessons learnt in the transport sector, and takes inspiration from other fields with a more mature understanding of digitalisation.
Twenty-two experts working either in the PT sector or in other sectors such as healthcare and public administration were interviewed. We conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all, but a series of complementary strategies to address digital inequality.
A focus on an inclusive design, specialist products and non-digital alternatives are the basis of a more inclusive PT system in the era of digitisation.
The role of the public transport staff is essential in digital transformations. Acknowledging the issue of unequal access to PT due to digitalisation at a decision-making level is essential.
While the present study was conducted in the Netherlands, the presented measures can be applied in other countries by stakeholders working on inclusive digital transformations in (public) transport services.
Many studies use research methods that are not designed to enable everyone to participate. This means only some people get heard and for others, researchers aren’t hearing them. Whether it’s academic research or a workplace survey researchers could be missing out on valuable information. Cathy Basterfield makes this point in her short article on who gets heard in research methods .
Co-design processes are another form of research – action research. But will that process include people with intellectual, physical and sensory conditions? If there is a reading component, will everyone be able to read and interpret written information?
Basterfield lists some common problems with surveys: use of difficult vocabulary, imprecise response options, and ableist language or concepts.
People who need Easy English find it confusing to be asked to read a statement and rate their agreement on a scale. They prefer to be asked a direct question.
Expecting every person to have the ability to access websites is another barrier. 25% of Australian adults are digitally excluded according to Basterfield. Some only have a phone and completing surveys requiring text is difficult at the best of times. Basterfield’s tips to help make sure everyone can understand your information:
add prefaces to increase precision or explain context
Policy makers have been talking about population ageing, ageing-in-place and age-friendly communities for several years. But has there been any progress? The focus is still on residential care homes and this is the policy blind spot. Most older Australians are living in their own homes. So how do policies support them? And what about renters?
Three housing researchers analysed 85 policy documents against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines on age-friendly cities. They found these policies reflected outdated views of older age. That’s because the policy focus in on care and support services. This means less attention to housing, transport, walkability and cultural diversity.
Most older Australians aren’t in aged care – they are living in the community.
Policy blind spots mean they live in communities that aren’t age-friendly.
Being age-friendly for older people means age-friendly for all ages.
The research also reveals a failure to recognise the diversity and impact of the ageing process. In particular, is the lack of recognition of diverse cultural needs.
“There is almost a complete blindness to their impacts on ageing and other social determinants of health.” Regardless most older Australians want to live where they are.
In another study, researchers asked what motivates older homeowners and renters to age where they are or to relocate. It seems older renters are not given a fair choice. For homeowners, family ties matter.
Owners with children living nearby were more likely to want to stay. They might then have a reason to call on their housing wealth and become the “bank of mum and dad”. Renters, however, want the same choice but face the most disruption. Many had to move out of their neighbourhood to find a place to rent.
This is another area where policy change is needed and for many, social housing is the answer. However, social housing is in short supply.
There’s a glimmer of hope on the horizon with the new Livable Housing Design Standard. This mandated Standard in the National Construction Code provides for accessible features such as a level entry into the home. It will support many more people to age in place and reduce the need for costly home modifications.
While it will take many years for new accessible homes to make an impact, it does mean that rental housing will be included in mainstream housing stock. However, states and territories are showing reluctance to adopt this essential Standard in the face of industry lobbying. But none of us is getting any younger.
See CUDA’s short online course which provides all the technical detail for implementing the Livable Housing Design Standard.
Applying universal design principles to playgrounds means that more people will use them. That’s what a study of three playgrounds in the United States found. Two were standard playgrounds meeting ADA standards, and one was universally designed. Result? Not only did the universally designed playground receive higher use, there was also more physical activity overall.
There are many types of disability which means definitions of universal design are open‐ended. Consequently the outcomes are difficult to measure quantitatively, but not impossible. At least the move to make playgrounds more accessible has shifted assumptions that universal design is limiting.
100% of the elevated play components that are typically part of a modular play structure must be on the accessible route. But ADA standards require only 50%.
The three playgrounds in the study were of a similar character. Each had equipment of the same type and manufacturer, and the surfacing was the same including the colour.
What they found
The findings support the hypothesis that applying universal design principles can result in higher rates of playground use than those only meeting ADA standards. This counters the notion that such playgrounds are only for those living with a disability. The universally designed playground in this case study was found to be attractive to all users, It offered the same level of fun and challenge for children. The additional playground activity lead to increased physical activity in other areas of the park.
Another finding was that adults used the playground zones more than the researchers expected. Making them more comfortable for accompanying adults was the key. This last point is something that the Australian Everyone Can Play Guideline factored in from the beginning. Playspaces are for everyone regardless of age.
The Everyone Can Play guide was instrumental in initiating inclusive playgrounds in New South Wales. Taking a universal design approach underpinned this award-winning guide. However, the work of universal design is never done because there are always improvements to be found. Everyone Can Play guide is no exception.
Two researchers used the Everyone Can Play Evaluation Checklist as an assessment tool on playgrounds in Victoria and New South Wales. Destination playgrounds scored higher than neighbourhood playgrounds. Image from Everyone Can Play
Researchers found that the Checklist was not capturing the specific needs of different disabilities as the focus was on mobility. The areas in need of most improvement were wayfinding, layout, signage and sensory and cognitive play opportunities. The researchers note that families and children with disability were not included in the study.
As with all universal design guides, they are not prescriptive. Rather they invite designers to consider the diversity of the population. When it comes to specific disabilities, specific solutions, rather than generic solutions will be required.
Interviews with caregivers revealed that they thought inclusive playgrounds promote physical and social accessibility for children with disability. They encourage social interaction and friendships among children with and without disability.
This research explored the caregivers’ perceptions of children’s social and physical accessibility in inclusive playgrounds. We conducted 11 in-depth interviews with caregivers regarding their perceptions of the accessibility and use of an inclusive playground by children with disabilities and how they perceive interactions between children with and without disabilities while using the playground.
From the interviews, two major themes emerged. The first was physical accessibility, with three minor themes emerging: a) safety and physical accessibility; b) sensory and cognitive safety; and c) variety and options. The second major category was social accessibility, with two minor themes: a) social interactions; and b) building friendships and practicing social skills.
Overall, the participants described the inclusive playgrounds as safe places that include varied play equipment. It encouraged children with and without disabilities to play together, interact verbally, and build immediate friendships.
The findings highlight the importance of inclusive playgrounds as a starting place for enhanced community relationships. We suggest conducting further research that focuses on children’s perceptions including a broader range of children with varying disabilities.
Playgrounds: universal design not enough
Universally designed playspaces bring play into the lives of families with disabilities. They also provide opportunities to champion disability advocacy, and support disabled children in developing critical social skills. However, additional work and resources are needed to achieve full social inclusivity.
Image: Livvi’s Place Carousel
Findings from a Canadian study can help guide designs of future playgrounds and other community spaces to improve inclusivity for everyone.
This paper begins with the playground experience and universal design and then applies this to other public spaces.
Disabled children and their families are often excluded from community play opportunities, including playgrounds. One potential solution is, of course, to design inclusive playgrounds.
This study explores the experiences of parents of disabled and non-disabled children at playgrounds inspired by Principles of Universal Design. Participants were 29 parents (16 with disabled children). They were located across four Canadian cities with newly built inclusively designed playgrounds.
Three themes were identified which provide deeper understandings of ableism in community playspaces and the impact on children and their families. 1. Inclusive playgrounds also act as a platform for disability advocacy. 2. They provide opportunities for social and emotional development. 3. Inclusive play may influence family dynamics.
Findings highlight the value of universal design, but indicate that physical environments alone do not ensure social inclusion, as social barriers can continue to exist even in spaces purposefully designed for disability inclusion.
Whether it’s digital technology, the built environment, or a tourist destination, checklists don’t make an inclusive culture. When it comes to digital accessibility checklists Sheri Byrne-Haber says, “Just say no”. That’s because general accessibility checklists do more harm than good in establishing a good accessibility program. It doesn’t lead to an inclusive culture.
“… requiring accessibility or guilting or punishing people for failing to provide accessibility is at the bottom half of the accessibility motivation hierarchy.”
According to the Hierarchy, Guilt is about not caring enough. The threat of Punishment is based on, “Do this or you will get sued”. Require focuses on technical requirements – the minimum required by law. Rewards, such as certification statements, awards, and badges can bring about change. However, they are often for the benefit of the maker or designer rather than the user.
Enlightenment comes when people see that accessibility is not just the smart thing to do, or the right thing. When people are motivated for good, that’s enlightenment. This is when they can see the powerful benefits end users gain. A better product emerges and business improves so not being accessible doesn’t make sense.
“Inspiration occurs when you see and experience the distinct impact the accessibility (or lack thereof) of your product can have on the lives of an individual with disabilities.”
Byrne-Haber discusses the issues of checklists from the perspective of digital technology, but her arguments apply across the built environment as well. Indeed, you could also add businesses that are claiming Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) credentials. WebAIM’s effectiveness pyramid, Hierarchy for Motivating Accessibility Change, puts it into perspective.
When are checklists OK?
Once an inclusive culture is established, targeted checklists are appropriate for guiding new people to make sure they don’t “break the system”. In the website world, Byrne-Haber says that people adding material to a website need some do’s and don’ts. But this could also apply in other areas too. Maintaining the inclusive design intent of a building requires all stakeholders to keep to the theme. So, for example, a checklist for interior designers might be appropriate in these circumstances.
How do you measure diversity and inclusion in the workplace if people don’t identify as being in a defined or separate category? And why should they? Diverse from what or whom? What is the baseline measure and who is doing the measuring? And is disability or ageing considered part of the diverse workforce population? A research team in Italy had a look at workplace diversity, design and strategy to assess the state of play.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted how much the physical environment can affect people’s well-being, mental health, social relationships, customs and habits.”
In their paper, the researchers discuss examples of workplaces that claim to promote a culture of diversity and reduced discrimination. Many have created positions for “Diversity and Inclusion Managers” to asses the mismatch between company and employee perceptions of inclusion. Details of the research methodology include diversity types, design features, workplace policies and strategies.
Disability, race, gender
Company reports embrace and list diversity features. The most cited diversity feature is disability, followed by ethnicity/race, gender, sexual orientation and age. However, ignoring this listing and focusing on inclusion and accessibility provides other measures of success.
Inclusion is when “an employee feels a sense of community and belonging in a work system, being accepted by others for their unique characteristics and treated as an insider.”
Companies focus on HR policies for inclusion but don’t address aspects such as workspace design. This separation neglects the role of architectural and interior design. However, there is research on the physical elements of workplace design. Floor plans, acoustic comfort, choice of materials and green building certifications all have a role to play.
Diversity and inclusion is more than a policy or strategy. Organisations need to join the dots between employment practices and the design of the workplace. For people with disability in particular both are essential. An inclusive corporate culture together with an appropriately designed physical environment is what’s required. That’s universal design in action.
While organisations of all types claim to be implementing diversity strategies in the workplace, it isn’t easy to measure their validity. The video from the UK is a parody on employers who say their organisations are diverse.
From the abstract
This paper explores how scientific literature and company reports address inclusive workplace design and strategies. It asks the following question: To what extent is inclusion present in workplace design and related strategies?
We analysed 27 scientific papers and 25 corporate social responsibility reports of the highest-ranked companies in the Great Place to Work global ranking. We disentangled the main aspects related to workplace design and strategies for promoting inclusion.
This paper reports on four macro-categories of diversity that support the development of inclusive workplace design. These are psychophysical; cultural; socio-economic conditions; and ability, experience and strengths.
Although diversity, equity and inclusion (DE&I) is key in many organizations, it remains unclear how DE&I principles are applied in workspace design and strategies. This scoping review integrates scientific knowledge and practice-based approaches which address this matter independently.
School to work transition
The transitioning from school to work report indicates that outcomes can be improved for young people with disability. But only when mechanisms are in place to enhance what is usually available within schools, post school education and in the disability employment ecosystem.
Despite a policy context in Australia that professes to policy goals of increased employment for people with disability and successful school to work transition, people with disability remain less likely to complete year 12, attend university, or gain work experience and employment than their peers.
In 2012, Ticket to Work commenced as an initiative to change these outcomes and bring evidence-based transition practice to Australia. It’s an innovative approach aimed at improving transition to work from school for young people with disability.
This report:
Brings together the international research evidence about elements that result in successful transition from school to work for young people with disability
Provides an analysis of the ecosystem in which young people with disability experience transition from school in Australia, and
Gives a description of the Australian transition initiative, Ticket to Work and its impact on transition for this group
Digital technology is here to stay but not everyone has the talent for it. Gregg Vanderheiden says there is a difference between digital skill and digital talent. Skill is something you can learn, but talent, like a sporting or musical talent is inherent. So this might explain why some people find websites, smartphones and computers difficult to master.
Vanderheiden explains that low digital affinity is not the same as intelligence. Some very bright people have trouble using digital interfaces. This is like being tone deaf and being unable to sing in tune. Or unable to be athletic because of poor coordination.
Image: Professor Gregg Vanderheiden
Consequently, as the digital world expands into all sections of life, some people will face limitations to their independence in everyday activities. People who rely on digital assistive technologies such as screen readers, and read and write programs are likely to be further challenged by technology.
Making it easier to use computers
Computers and technology have transformed the lives of many people with disability. This is largely due to additional technologies loaded onto their computers and smartphones. However, unlike others, unless they take their computer everywhere with them, they cannot access computers in libraries and at school. That is, unless they have a computer dedicated to them which probably means others can’t use it. Vanderheiden has a solution.
Morphic is an extension to Windows and Mac operating systems to make it easier to use a computer. Morphic is open source software with a great add-on. What if the settings for your home computer were able to follow you around in the Cloud? And what if it gave you confidence you wouldn’t “break” the computer?
“Assistive Technology on Demand” or AToD, is a companion service to Morphic. It allows users to have the assistive technologies they need on any computer at any place, any time. When you log out of the computer, your settings disappear and the computer goes back to the original settings.
New employees can set up on their first day at work
If computer fails or is lost, a new one can be set up in no time
IT departments can save time – all computers can have AT when needed without needing to install anything
With one click Morphic retrieves your assistive settings and when you leave the computer your settings completely disappear. That leaves the computer free for others to use in the library, university, or school. It is also good for people who struggle with technology because their device can be set up specifically for their requirements. This could be something as simple as creating one click to join the family Zoom meeting.
A one page review of Vanderheiden’s keynote from 2020 explains in more detail how it works. At the AAATE 2023 conference, Vanderheiden describes the roll-out to 7000 computers in major universities. AT users now have the ability to access computers in the same way as their peers. This gives them a new level of digital equity so they can better compete and succeed in all aspects of life, work and education.
Tech and older adults
The stereotype of grandchildren helping grandparents with their phone or remote controller is often perpetuated by older people themselves. Skill in using phones and websites depends on the motivations for using them. Younger people can have different interests from older adults meaning they use different apps and software. This doesn’t mean tech and older adults don’t belong together.
“Grandma cannot use her phone because it was not designed for her. Ubiquitous mass-market tools should not present obvious and avoidable hurdles to everyday users.” Robert Schumacher.
The stereotype is not based inevidence, and it might not be the tech that’s the barrier – poor vision or hand dexterity can also cause problems with using phones and computers.
It’s about mental models
According to Schumacher, the main difference between younger and older generations is when their mental models of how things work was formed. He explains how these mental models can widen any gap in understanding in how things work. Every generation has its own mental models of the world.
Schumacher’s article discusses more on this topic and how to remedy the situation. More testing with older adults is essential. Their mental models aren’t the same as the developer’s – what’s intuitive for a seasoned tech user is not intuitive for everyone. However, it doesn’t mean older people are averse to using technology or too “stuck in their ways” to learn.
The concept of designing tech from the perspective of mental models is a factor in a research project for autonomous vehicles. As concepts evolve, eventually the need to design in-vehicle interfaces will be minimal with presets for each rider. In the meantime, touchscreens and audio controls will still be needed. These need to be co-designed with users to develop prototypes.
