Author: Jane Bringolf

Inclusive pedestrian mobility

Do footpaths have an economic value to the public? Are pedestrians all the same? These questions are worth asking policy makers when it comes to inclusive pedestrian mobility. There is a tendency to treat pedestrians as one group with some exceptions such as outside schools and aged care facilities. This is not helped by various definitions of inclusive mobility in the literature.

An area that is accessible to and usable by everyone can be described as an inclusive pedestrian area. Because pedestrian space does not have a strict status or economic value, and is a place that quickly adapts to different purposes, special attention is needed to preserve pedestrian areas.

Pedestrians are walking towards the camera. They are on a wide walkway. Some people are looking at their phones. They are dressed for warm weather. There are buildings on each side of the walkway. Inclusive pedestrian mobility.

Noa Hamacher’s Masters thesis delves into this topic academically and practically. She looks at human-oriented spaces, pedestrian-friendly areas, and a definition of pedestrian inclusion. The case studies take a national and local context in Norway and The Netherlands.

Given the diversity of pedestrians, designs should consider a wide range of user needs. Fair processes and procedures for decision-making is therefore required.

People are in a park area with a water fountain. A man is holding two sticks and creating a giant soap bubble. A place for pedestrians.

Pedestrian areas are sometimes used for community activities, which are a good thing. However, these activities, such as markets and other events, should take care not to create barriers to accessing this space.

In terms of evaluation, the study found no useful evaluation tools for inclusive pedestrian spaces. This allows the more powerful voices to claim priority. Consequently, involving marginalised groups in decision-making processes is required.

The title of the Masters thesis is, Inclusive mobility in pedestrian areas: Defining and evaluating inclusive pedestrian areas in Oslo, Norway, and Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Photos of case study examples are included in the document.

From the abstract

Walking is the most basic form of mobility. It is used as a mode of transportation in every journey, whether it involves a vehicle or not. Therefore, everyone depends on walking to meet their transportation needs. However, policymakers often assume all pedestrians have a productive age and have the same level of capability.

A variety of definitions of inclusive mobility means inclusivity of pedestrian areas cannot be standardized. On one hand, mobility policy should consider the various demands of individuals. On the other, there is a desire for a uniform approach in practice.

Finding a balance between these topics is the main goal of this research. This study sought a deeper understanding of the definition of inclusive pedestrian areas and factors that influence the level of inclusivity.

The questions regarding inclusivity; “of what”, “for whom, “by whom and “how much’’ are studied. Two cases are examined namely Oslo, Norway and Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

The results show that an inclusive pedestrian area is defined as an area accessible to and usable by everyone. Further, it is an area that quickly adapts to different purposes in comparison to space for other travel modes. Therefore, pedestrian space often comes under strain.

Participation varies greatly by type of project and evaluation is poor. A strong national goal and a strategy is needed to raise awareness and provide binding rules and funding.

Pedestrian connectivity to parks

Green open space and parks are considered good for our health. Accessing this space depends on being able to walk there. That means footpaths are a critical element in using this valuable urban space.

A study in Bloemfontein was prompted by reduced usage of urban parks. It was found inadequate footpaths were the barrier to access. Perceptions of footpath safety have a big role to play.

A young woman and man are walking their dog in an urban park.

The title of the article is, Pedestrian connectivity: A focus on residential neighbourhood sidewalks to promote accessibility to public parks.

From the abstract

Public parks play a pivotal role in improving community life in residential neighbourhoods when a walk to a park near home as part of a daily routine. But a decline in the usage of both public parks and footpaths in residential areas of South Africa is an issue.

A crucial element of pedestrian infrastructure that promotes walkability is footpaths. This study analysed the functionality of footpaths in a suburb in Bloemfontein city in South Africa and to propose design guidelines for improvement to promote access to public parks in the suburb.

The study employs the Conjoint analysis technique to identify factors deterring pedestrians from using sidewalks, thus hindering access to public parks. Physical layout, and the perceived and actual safety of pedestrians are the primary factors impacting footpath usage.

For instance, pedestrians frequently opt for roadways over footpaths despite potential risks, mainly due to insufficient pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. The findings suggest that infrastructure upgrades, connected sidewalks and parks, safety measures, inclusive design, community awareness programs, and periodic reviews of pedestrian needs can lead to cities that promote active lifestyles and become more inclusive, sustainable, and conducive to holistic well-being.

Furthermore, this study demonstrates that the Conjoint analysis technique is a powerful tool in urban planning, providing valuable insights into pedestrian preferences and their implications for infrastructure improvement decisions.

Enhancing inclusivity for pathways

This paper is not open access but it takes a universal design approach to pedestrian access for people with disability. The title of the paper is, Enhancing Inclusivity: Designing Disability Friendly Pedestrian Pathways. It might also be available from the authors on ResearchGate.

From the abstract

Pedestrian pathways should be designed to meet the needs of regular pedestrians and accommodate individuals with disabilities. However, a substantial number of pedestrian routes across Indonesia remain inaccessible for people with disability.

This study aimed to evaluate and design disability-friendly pedestrian pathways for optimal accessibility and safety in Indonesia. A pedestrian pathways model was derived using a literature review, observation and simulation and a focus group discussion. The results found none of the pedestrian pathways meet the criteria for individuals with disabilities.

Pedestrians with physical limitations argue that pedestrian pathways cannot provide comfort to support their movement. The evaluation results show that people with disabilities face difficulty accessing pedestrian pathways. This research produces pedestrian pathway designs based on three universal principles. They are: adequate maneuvering space, clear signage and information, and appropriate surface materials. These universal design principles refer to efforts to create accessible, safe, and comfortable environments for everyone, regardless of age and physical ability.

Economic value of wheelchair user homes

The UK organisation for accessible housing, Habinteg, has released new research on the social and economic value of wheelchair users homes. The research was carried out by the London School of Economics. They did a cost-benefit analysis of wheelchair user housing and a qualitative analysis of how their home impacts wheelchair users in everyday life. Together they showed benefits, particularly to government, outweighed the costs.

“… it’s not just the quality
of accommodation and its suitableness for living, but it’s affecting everything else to do with my life.”

“I was living a life that I chose to live, not one that was chosen for me.”

An older man and woman have their head togther and they are smiling happily at the camera. They are on the front cover of the Habinteg report: Living not existing, the economic and social value of wheelchair user homes.

The UK already has a mandated standard of basic access features in new housing called Visitable dwellings. This covers door widths and corridors. However, it fails to guarantee true visitability to everyone and is not adaptable for households over time. There are two other standards which are not mandatory: accessible and adaptable dwellings, and wheelchair user dwellings.

The cost-benefit analysis used three models based on three groups of wheelchair user households.:

  • Households with children who use wheelchairs
  • Working aged, wheelchair user households
  • People in later life who use wheelchairs (aged 65+)

They found that a working age wheelchair user, the benefit was £94,000 over a ten year period. A later years household was £101,000 over a ten year period, and for a child, the benefit was £67,000 over ten years. The financial value was divided between health, local government and the national government.

Benefits of wheelchair housing

The interviews with wheelchair users revealed the personal benefits of improved quality of life. Of being able to work, to come and go independently, and have peace of mind. Being able to work provides additional disposable income and tax revenue for the government. It also means less welfare payments and hours of home care services.

The title of the report is, Living not existing: The economic and social value of wheelchair user homes. The quotes from wheelchair users really tell the story of the difference between existence and living. The analysis shows that when it comes to cost, the real question is, how much and who pays?

Planning, diversity, inequity, justice

These four words, planning, diversity, inequity and justice all belong in the same sentence. Being excluded from places and spaces means walking, public transport, work, education, and seeing friends are out of reach. But good design can fix it.

The way we plan and design for human diversity requires serious rethinking if we genuinely want to address inequity and injustices in our suburbs and cities. 

Image from the inclusive communities workshop.

Lisa Stafford is a planner and researcher and she urges the planning fraternity to be change agents. Her short article in Urbanet neatly spells out the reasons why and what needs to change. Stafford is leading a research project with people aged 9 to 92 years to identify the details of the changes we need.

Changes needed in planning for diversity and equity

To address the injustices we must adapt and retrofit our suburbs and cities for sustainable inclusive futures. People with disability have a right to access everyday spaces, housing, transport and social infrastructure.

Stafford’s article discusses changing the narrative and confronting ableism and adopting inclusive urban governance. Treating people with disability as equals in planning processes requires a universal design approach. Stafford points out that the New Urban Agenda and SDG 11 are about disability justice. Adopting inclusive urban governance, planning, and leadership are a good start.

Stafford concludes the article with a call to action:

“Planning for equity and inclusion is an essential approach. We simply will not have sustainable suburbs and cities if they are not inclusive and just. The message for our profession is simple – we must do better. Be a change agent by considering your ways of working and what it means to plan better for equity and inclusion.”

The title of the article is, Celebrating Human Diversity – Urban Planning for Disability Equity and Inclusion.

Diversity is more than disability and urban planners also have to consider many other groups including gender, ages, and cultural background. This is the era of intersectionality – we can be more than one identity.

Evolving perspectives on disability

A literature review of the evolving perspectives on disability focuses on the interaction of the built environment and people with disability. It concludes with some recommendations which are not new to followers of universal design. However, it adds to the growing literature on the topic. Briefly, the recommendations are:

1. Create accessible environments by removing physical barriers to spaces, places and transport.
2. Adequate amendments and enforcement of existing accessibility legislation. Currently, the laws are poorly executed in plans and practice.
3. Adequate funding, investment in specific programs and services for people with disability.
4. Increase public awareness about disability rights and building human resource capacity training of staff and professionals.
5. Involvement of people with disability in policy and design.
6. Strengthen and support research on disability.

The title of the paper is, “An analysis of national ideological constructs in evolving perspective on disability in built environment design: A comprehensive review of the social and medical models in contemporary literature”.

A woman in a powered wheelchair and a man in a mobility scooter enjoy the pathway.

This paper discusses social and medical models of disability. The end result is a focus on accessibility rather than inclusive design and universal design. 21st century universal design thinking and practice has moved past describing the models of disability. However, this paper provides historical context for newcomers to universal design and accessibility.

Legislation promotes inclusive design and accessibility in every sphere of life, but doesn’t enforce it. Anti-discrimination legislation also demands equity and inclusion, but people continue to face barriers and stigmatising stereotyping.

Prevailing narratives inform design

Narratives, or the way we talk about about everyday things, are expressed in many forms whether intended or not. Policies, plans and designs are all affected by prevailing societal narratives. But we can turn that around and challenge those narratives with our designs . This is essential if we are to make our world more inclusive and equitable for our diverse population.

A paper from the UK discusses this issue and offers a matrix of concepts for designers to consider when designing. This is not to provide a solution but to stimulate critical reflection on the role of narratives in design.

The title of the paper is, Design as an agent of narrative: A matrix and framework for incorporating narrative into deign processes.

Schandorffs Square: Parking lot to park

A distant view of the place and gate showing the winding path, steps and sitting areas in Schandorff Square.
Re-modelled Schandorffs Square in Oslo

Remodelling a sloping urban open space with a heritage building is no easy task. Taking a universal design approach is one way to solve the issues. The re-design of Schandorffs Square shows how to turn a parking lot into a park using a universal design framework.

The problem was making a city space, with a heritage wall and gate, on a sloping site into a pleasant place to walk, and to have informal get-togethers.

The height difference of seven metres was the main challenge. But with some universal design thinking to drive the design they came up with a successful inclusive and accessible design. Lots of seating areas and visual contrast increase the accessibility of the site. In addition, designers also found the right mix of plants to suit people with allergies. 

See more detail on the story about this universally designed open space and the difficulties they overcame. Several photos illustrate the final design, and the designer explains their universal design approach in a Vimeo video. 

Editor’s Note: Norway has almost no flat land and is at the forefront of rolling out universal design everywhere. So the myth that you can’t do UD on sloping sites is put to bed.

Re-modelling a city park

A landscape study brings together aspects of universal design and accessibility with wellbeing. Using an existing park in a Polish city as a case study, researchers had to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of eliminating some features in favour of others.

A view of the park showing many people using the park on a sunny day.

When the remodelling of the park was complete, the final assessment phase showed increased visitation. However, getting to the park was still problematic due to the poor accessibility from nearby streets. This is a key point and something emphasised in the Everyone Can Play guideline that has the three key elements for a successful play space: Can I get there? Can I play? Can I stay?

The title of the study is, The results of qualitative research on health-affirming urban places on example of new planned central park in Gdynia.

Designing public recreational spaces

Urban population growth, climate change, and the energy crisis pose significant challenges for local authorities in shifting policy-making towards sustainable development. The debate on urban planning has centred on the placemaking approach and the implementation of the 15-minute city and smart city concepts. This approach promotes sustainable urban development reliant on links between the natural environment, the economy, and society.

The aim of this study was to explore the possibilities of urban planning solutions that contribute to sustainable urban development. The study was conducted in a medium-sized Polish city where public recreational spaces were redesigned in line with the principles of sustainable urban development.

We propose universal urban development projects that create a sustainable future for society, the natural environment, and the climate. The title of the paper is, The voice of society in designing public recreational spaces in an urban environment. The paper has images of good designs.

Modern homes for Queensland

The Queensland Government is leading the way with their new Modern Homes Standard. Queensland will begin rolling out mainstream universally designed eco-friendly homes based on the new standards in the National Construction Code (NCC) from October 2023. While the energy efficiency requirements might cost more, the universal design features will cost little, if any, more.

The universal design features are a level entry, wider doors and corridors, a toilet on the entry level with extra circulation space, and a step-free shower. The Livable Housing Handbook has more detail.

new home construction site with timber on the ground.

The benefits to consumers are obvious, but the benefits to government perhaps less so. Consumers will eventually have homes that are suited across the lifespan that cater for most life events. Governments stand to save on unnecessary extended hospital stays, and early entry to aged care. They will also save money on government funded home modifications.

However, this has not stopped the housing industry from heavily lobbying against the universal design changes at state level. They claim that the industry has too many problems, it’s technically difficult and it would cost homeowners $40,000.00 more. Are these claims true or are they myths and misunderstandings?

Dispelling the myths

Here are some of the common claims by industry where the cost claims are confused with specialist disability housing or the old adaptable housing standard. So these claims are easily dismissed.

You can download a PDF of this list. 

Myth

Response

You can’t do level entry to the home on steep sites or on small lots.

Steep sites are exempted from dwelling access requirements. Or you can make the entry via the garage.

You can’t do Livable Housing features in a studio apartment.

It’s often easier in studio because they only have 2 doors and no corridors.

These bigger bathrooms really add to the cost.

No big bathroom required because it can be achieved in less than 4sqm. See Livable Housing Handbook.

You can’t do it on narrow lots.

Narrow properties use space smartly with minimal corridors relying on shared circulation and open plan spaces.

Grab rails make the place look ugly.

Grab rails are not required. They can be added later if ever they are needed.

People just want a regular-looking home.

The design tweaks are not noticeable other than a level entry.

People don’t want a disability bathroom.

They won’t get one. The Standard asks for a small extra space in front of the toilet pan.

Some people want a traditional closet WC.

They can have one. Only one toilet pan on the ground or entry level needs to have some extra space in front of it.

People don’t want a front yard full of ramps.

They won’t have one. Access is from the street, parking space or garage.

The extra accessible parking places will add enormous cost to apartments.

There are no changes to parking requirements. Only the internal fit-out applies to apartments.

Door manufacturers will have to re-tool to make new products.

The door sizes are standard already.

Only a few people need these changes.

These provisions are for improving amenity and liveability for everyone. It’s about future-proofing a consumer’s biggest asset.

It’s going to be expensive.

The main cost will be some timber noggins for wall reinforcement in the bathroom.

There’s a cost of living crisis.

That’s why it’s even more important to build homes that protect families from future-shock – the cost of adaptation if life circumstances change. It makes them more sustainable.

I’ve built this kind of home before and I know it costs a lot more.

This is not Specialist Disability Accommodation or housing to the Adaptable Housing Standard. These do cost more. The Livable Housing Standard normalises these common design features. That’s why they are called universal design features. And there is little, if any, extra cost.

It’s bound to cost more because this is all new and we have to learn how to do it.

These features have been applied in seniors living since 2004 and specialist disability homes. Community housing associations apply these features. There is nothing new or onerous.

It’s not a good time for the industry to do this.

It is never a good time for industry. Meanwhile it is a very good time for people wanting to move into a home with no steps.

Why we need it

Building homes based on last century ideas of housing the population has to change and it has to be more than fashion changes. We are living much longer and want to stay put as we age. The pandemic has made people even less eager to go to aged care. People who use mobility devices want to visit family and friends in their own homes. In summary we want homes that are fit for purpose for all family members regardless of what life has in store.

The Livable Housing Design Standard is a tweak to existing designs, but it is these little details that make the difference to longer term liveability for all family members.

The size of Australian homes will easily accommodate all the new provisions in the Livable Housing Design Standard. We wait for Victoria, ACT, NT, South Australia and Tasmania to keep to their promises to follow Queensland’s lead. However, NSW still agrees with industry lobbyists and is saying “no”. ABC News has an article on Queensland’s commitment to housing fit for purpose in the 21st Century.

Benefits and costs of footpaths

Footpaths are an essential part of any travel chain – walking and wheeling are the most basic and universal form of travel. But do we invest enough in footpaths? Compared to investment in roads and cars, probably not. That’s according to an article by Todd Litman. His recent study examines the benefits and costs of footpaths as a sustainable form of travel.

Improving walking conditions can provide many benefits. However, many streets lack footpaths and those that do exist are sub-standard.

A group of people waiting to cross the road on a a sunny day. Footpaths benefits and costs.

Litman’s article looks at cost studies in the North American context. In summary the data indicate that typical U.S. communities spend $30 to $60 annually per capita on footpaths. But footpaths only appear where there are laws to mandate them. That means that not every street has a footpath or has one on only one side of the street. This is an underinvestment in footpaths that needs to be remedied.

People who cannot drive and must use public transport and need a footpath for mobility, are seriously disadvantaged. The article compares infrastructure spending on walking (1%), cycling (2%), public transit (7%), and roads (90%). Comparisons with other factors provide more information in the article and potential funding options are discussed.

Some of the benefits

Other studies showed that increasing walking reduced vehicle miles and reduced crash rates. One study estimated that completing footpath networks would reduce vehicle miles by 3%. This would provide, per capita, about $30 in annual roadway savings, $60 in annual parking savings $180 in vehicle cost savings. Reductions in traffic congestion, pollution and health benefits add to the benefits.

Although the article calls for a significant increase in footpath spending, compared to what is spent on roads and parking, this is a small amount. Completing footpath networks also helps achieve social equity goals. The most physically and economically disadvantaged groups tend to rely more on walking including walking to transit stops.

The title of the article is, Completing Sidewalk Networks: Benefits and Costs.

From the abstract


This study examines the benefits and costs of completing urban sidewalk networks. Most communities have incomplete or lack sidewalk networks. Many of those that do exist are inadequate and fail to meet universal design standards. This is unfair to people who want to walk, and increases costs by suppressing walking and increasing motor vehicle traffic.

Recent case studies provide estimates of sidewalk expenditures and the additional investments needed to complete sidewalk networks. North American communities typically spend $30 to $60 annually per capita on sidewalks. However, they would need to double or triple these levels to complete their networks. Compared with current pedestrian spending this seems large. But it is small compared with what governments and businesses spend on roads and parking facilities, and what motorists spend on their vehicles.

Sidewalk funding increases are justified to satisfy ethical and legal requirements, and to achieve various economic, social and environmental goals. There are several possible ways to finance sidewalk improvements. These usually repay their costs through savings and benefits.

Luminance contrast: a slippery concept

The Technical Insights section of the Autumn 2023 edition of Access Insight is about luminance contrast. This is a hot topic of discussion because it is a slippery concept. What is it and how do you measure it are the starter questions, followed by why do we need it.

This image, courtesy the Egress Group, shows discrete silver tactiles against a dark red carpet. The light grey stair nosings are also contrasted against a black carpet.

Silver discrete tactile indicators on a red carpet on a stair landing showing good luminance contrast.

Howard Moutrie explains that luminance is the amount of light reflected from a surface. The contrast is the amount of light reflected from abutting surfaces. For example the wall and the floor. This is not the same as colour contrast. Red and green are stark colour contrasts but will often provide the same amount of luminance. Therefore there it is not luminance contrast.

So how do you determine luminance contrast? This is where it becomes slippery. Are you measuring this in a laboratory under controlled conditions? Are you measuring it on the street on a rainy day? Or are you measuring it a nighttime? An appendix to the Australian Standard (AS 1428.4.1) is part of the standard with the most up to date calculation.

Moutrie goes on to explain how testing on tactile indicators is not the same as testing on other surfaces. Then there is the issue of how different instruments provide different measurements for the same thing.

The original requirement for a 30% contrast was based on an integrated tactile where the whole surface provided the contrast. Individual tactiles, such as individual stainless steel ones, are supposed to have 45% contrast. Moutrie is critical of the way luminance is measured but the industry has geared up to meet these measurements. He says more research is still needed.

Why do we need it?

People with low vision need the contrast to navigate the environment, including at home. It helps distinguish a door from a wall, and the wall from the floor. It’s also good for people with impaired visual perception. For example not being able to see a white toilet pan in an all white bathroom.

There is more on this topic in, Luminance contrast: how do you measure it? With the cost of measuring apparatus, much is left to doing it by eye. Or relying on manufacturers claims.

The title of Moutrie’s article on page 22 is Luminance Contrast – is what you see, what you get?

Eco-inclusive house

If you live in Ulaanbaatar in Mongolia, air pollution and staying warm in winter are major considerations for home design. The other major consideration is how to make homes accessible using inclusive design principles. Oidov Vaanchig has done just that and written a short article explaining his eco-inclusive house.

Oidov writes detail about the cost of construction and the carbon footprint. The house relies on solar with minimal electrical consumption. Air quality is controlled with a filtration system because Ulaanbaatar has high levels of air pollution. Replacing the traditional ger and wooden housing stock with homes like this would reduce air pollution by 85%.

Oidov Vaanchig has done a great job in promoting his experimental house to the point where he received a visit from the United States Ambassador to Mongolia.

Oidov Vaanchig stands on the veranda of his eco-inclusive house. The house is of timber and he stands using two crutches.

Social exclusion

The ger areas surrounding Ulaanbaatar present many challenges for inclusion and accessibility. This house serves as a model for inclusive design as well. As Oidov says, implementing inclusive design principles can break the cycle of disability and poverty.

Oidov concludes his article by saying that the house “stands as a beacon of hope” in addressing air pollution and social exclusion. A lesson to all house builders in the developed world.

The title of the article by Oidov Vaanchig is, UB’s Eco-Inclusive House: A sustainable solution for air pollution and social exclusion.

While the design might not meet Western standards for accessibility, it is a groundbreaking attempt at a fully inclusive and passive house in extreme conditions.

The GDI Hub featured the house as a case study and has more detail. The Asia Development Bank supported the study.

Oidov Vaanchig takes a tour through his eco-inclusive house

Design for the autistic community

The Autumn 2023 Access Insight magazine has an article by John Van der Have on designing for autism. He introduces a design guide by Magda Mostafa and her work on design for the autistic community.

Van der Have begins his article with an older medical description of autism (ASD) and some statistics. As many people know, sensory overload is common for people within the neurodivergent community. Too many sights, sounds, smells and tactile experiences can cause stress and anxiety. That’s why the choice of building materials and systems need additional consideration.

Minimising noise and unwanted sounds through good acoustic design is a vital criterion. But how much acoustic insulation is enough, and how much is too much? Questions such as these have implications for construction costs.

A man is placing headphones over his ears. He is facing away from the camera. The background is blurred from traffic or public transport.

Biophilic principles are beneficial for everyone, but for the autistic community, these elements can enhance their sense of wellbeing. Natural lighting, natural ventilation and views of nature are especially helpful.

Van der Have discusses educational settings and a time-out room where children can still learn in a supportive environment. A calming space at home, as well as a room fitted out to suit a child’s preferences is also a good idea.

As we begin to understand autism and neurodiversity, it’s possible there will be moves to regulate suitable designs. However, regulation should not be needed if designers take action themselves to be more inclusive. Van der Have’s article is on page 18 of Access Insight. It is titled, Design for People on the Autism Spectrum and introduces the work of Magda Mostafa.

Autism friendly design guide

Magda Mostafa, an architect and researcher, developed a design framework for incorporating the needs of the neurodivergent community. The framework is based on 7 design concepts:

  • Acustics
  • Spatial Sequencing
  • Escape
  • Compartmentalisation
  • Transition
  • Sensory Zoning
  • Safety
A girl is lying on her bed wearing a bright pink headset. She looks like she is listening quietly.

In Cities People Love, Mostafa talks about her experiences as an architect working as an autism design consultant. She says designers have to rethink the tools they need. A human-centred approach to design, such as focus groups, assumes everyone is able to speak and participate. She wants to see the principles from the Autism Friendly University Design Guide applied more widely.

The Autism Friendly University Design Guide was developed in collaboration with the Dublin City University and is applicable in other settings. The first half of the 116 page detailed guide covers the research, and the second has the guiding principles. Mostafa’s work is worth following for anyone interested in designing for neurodivergence.

This Autumn 2023 edition of Access Insight also has an article on water safety for autistic children on page 4.

Autism: What we have heard

The Olga Tennison Autism Research Centre has responded to the NDIS Review Committee’s interim report, What we have heard. In responding they draw on evidence from their research and from autistic people.

The report has 29 recommendations that go beyond the NDIS review to all sections of society. The focus is on children – one in ten Australian children are participants in the NDIS. The recommendations are based on providing supports in everyday early childhood settings and with collaboration across governments and community services.

Longer term support needs are minimised if neurodevelopment vulnerability is detected early and community-based supports are put in place.

Front cover in red and white of the What we Have Heard Report.

When setting up the NDIS the Productivity Commission’s assumption was that about 1 in 150 children would need support. Research at that time showed it was closer to 1 in 69. Currently the estimation is 1 in 31 children are autistic. This figure is similar to those in other countries and indicates diagnoses not prevalence. In addition, autistic people are just as likely to have some of the same challenges neurotypical people face. Intersectionality applies here too.

Community supports in everyday settings

With the right community supports, children can make significant developmental gains and increase their chances of participating in mainstream settings. State and local governments should be key players in the quest to include autistic people in community activities, education and employment.

The title of the report is, Olga Tennison Autism Research Centre: Response to ‘What we have heard’ report. The research centre is based at La Trobe University. They aim to support autistic people to realise their full potential, and to actively participate in the community.

La Trobe University pioneered an autism screening tool which is used on children as young as 11 months. The SACS-R tool, or Social Attention Communication Surveillance Tool, is based on 15 years of research. Key points are infrequent or inconsistent use of:

  • gestures (waving, pointing)
  • response to name being called
  • eye contact
  • imitation or copying others
  • sharing interest with others
  • pretend play
A young boy in a white T shirt is pointing at something in the distance. The background shows he is at the coast.

La Trobe University has devised a free app, called ASDetect to help parents detect autism in their child. the App is 83% accurate and is for children from 11 to 30 months.

This research paves the way for more autistic people to participate in everyday life and feel included.

University lecture theatres

An article from the UK discusses the different design elements needed for students to feel comfortable in university lecture theatres. Autistic students were asked about their experiences in higher educational settings.

An empty lecture theatre. The seats are folded up against the backrest.

Several elements were reported as distracting such as bright lights, echoey rooms, smells, and textures of seats. Coping strategies were also explored. The title of the article is,

How does the built environment affect you? Autistic students’ experiences of University lecture theatres and teaching spaces.

From the abstract

The aim of this study was to explore autistic university students’ lived experiences of teaching spaces and how aspects of these spaces affect them.

We conducted a qualitative study comprising one-to-one semi-structured interviews with 10 autistic students from three UK universities. Participants were asked about the aspects of teaching spaces that affect them, the effect these aspects have, and the adaptations they would consider helpful.

We identified 3 themes: Aspects of Teaching Spaces, Outcomes, and Coping Strategies and Adaptations, each of which contained sub-themes. Aspects of Teaching Spaces included sensory aspects, people, seating, screens, and predictability and control. Outcomes included physical symptoms (e.g. headaches, nausea), mood (e.g. anxiety) and cognition (e.g. attention). Coping and Adaptations included personal coping strategies (e.g. wearing headphones, dressing in layers) and environmental modifications (e.g. have dimmer switches).

This study identifies both personal and environmental modifications and adaptations that would support university students’ learning experiences.

Assistive technology and universal design

All the universally designed places, spaces, and services are of no use if a person cannot access them due to lack of the assistive technology they need. On the other hand, a wheelchair, for example, is of little use without level access in the built environment. Together, assistive technology and universal design form the disability inclusion continuum. Both are needed but are rarely discussed together.

The assistive technology and universal design continuum showing AT at one end an universal design at the other. In between the two meet for inclusion.
Assistive technology and universal design work together for disability inclusion

Together, assistive technology (AT) and home modifications are essential for independent living. But access to the funding schemes is somewhat haphazard, especially for the majority of people who are not NDIS participants. The cost of AT and home modifications is the cited as the reason for letting the status quo remain. But who is really paying for NOT funding AT for the people who need these devices? Until now, there has been little research on this issue.

A team at Monash University set up a study to identify the many AT and home modification schemes in Australia. They also conducted an economic analysis of the data they collected to form policy recommendations. The fact that there are 88 government funders administering 109 schemes tells us there is a problem here. Difficulties obtaining data from these schemes confounds the issues further.

Recommendations

The NDIS, and the misplaced assumption that it will cover everyone with a disability, has caused greater inequity in the provision of AT. It now makes the matter more urgent.

The most obvious recommendation is to take a whole of government approach to tackle the inequity of access to AT and home modifications. The second, is to devise a way of capturing data for more informed decision making. Data are essential for measuring needs and outcomes. The third recommendation is to co-design – a universal design concept – with stakeholders.

Governments cannot expect to achieve significant change within Australia’s new Disability Strategy unless people with disability have access to AT and HM they need. The current study offers new evidence to inform government responses to realise the potential of AT and HM through public policy reform.

Assistive technology was peviously known as “aids and equipment for people with disability”. That’s because it is not mainstream equipment such as a pair of scissors, or a bicycle. Anyone requiring assistive technology requires a prescription by a health professional to access a funding scheme. The same goes for anyone requiring a home modification so they can live safely at home.

The title of the paper is, It is time for nationally equitable access to assistive technology and home modifications in Australia: An equity benchmarking study. It is open access.

From the abstract

Australians with disability have inequitable access to assistive technology (AT) and home modifications (HM). This is inconsistent with human rights obligations and fails to capitalise on internationally recognised potential return on investment.

This study quantifies the public provision of AT and HM in Australia by identifying all publicly funded schemes and comparing data on the spend per person.

An environmental scan and data survey identified 88 government funders administering 109 schemes. Data were available for 1/3 of schemes. Economic evaluation of available cost and participant data estimated the annual AT/HM spend per person per scheme.

Data demonstrated significant AT/HM spend variability across schemes. Modelled costs are presented for a $16 billion national scheme where all Australians with disability are funded NDIS-equivalent. There are substantial service provision gaps and an urgent need for change in disability policy. A cost model and policy principles are proposed to achieve economies of scale and equity in the provision of AT and HM.