Author: Jane Bringolf

Universal design & neurodiversity in the workplace

Business and academic research on inclusive workplace cultures typically focus on race and/or gender. Disability and neurodiversity are often overlooked or excluded from this research and resulting policies and practices. A universal design approach is the way to take a holistic look at the issues and solutions for neurodiversity in the workplace. Indeed, these are good workplace practices for everyone. That’s what universal design is about.

Workplace employee groups can help marginalised groups feel heard, but they can also place an additional burden on individuals to seek workplace improvements.

five young people in the picture, two men, three women. Three are sitting on couches, and two stand behind. They look like they are having a discussion. Four are white, there is one black woman. neurodiversity in the workplace.

A short paper by Preziosa and Hill uses the 7 principles of universal design as a framework for implementing inclusive practices. The authors present the 7 principles in a matrix, and used four principles, briefly outlined below, as an example:

Equitable Use: Avoid the need for people with disability to have separate service or experiences. Eliminate label-based inclusion, such as targeted hiring programs for autistic people. This segregates employees into specific fields and requires them to self-identify any “special” condition they have.

Flexibility in Use: Build in preferences outside the norm such as playback speed options for training videos. Offer to be flexible and acknowledge that individual differences are expected and welcome.

Simple and Intuitive to Use: Avoid unnecessary complexity and repetition of processes, tools, and webpages.

Tolerance for Error: Allow room for mistakes and edits. Ensure digital form, tools and software allow for review and correction.

The authors claim that neurodiverse employees who receive support services show higher retention rates, and most required less than 4 support hours a month. In addition, many benefitted from support with problem solving and organising their work.

Universal design and employment scenarios

The author’s matrix consists of 7 universal design principles and 6 workplace elements. They are: Designing, Hiring, Contracting, Training, Performance Review and Wellbeing. The information is also good for managing groups and teams outside the workplace environment.

The title of the short paper is, What can organizations do to create an environment which successfully supports, engages and retains their neurodiverse employees?

Neurodiversity in the workplace

Foosball or Football Table with red and white teams. Games such as these are cater for workplace neurodiversity.

People with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, anxiety or depression can feel stressed and uncomfortable. Consequently they are less productive. Employers could be missing out by not considering neurodiversity in the workplace. 

As many as one in eight people are neurodiverse according to an article in The Fifth Estate. COVID led to sterile environments. Offices removed their fabric coverings and other soft elements to make cleaning easier. But it makes spaces noisy, clinical and uninviting. 

Even working from home isn’t the answer for everyone. Just because you can work from home doesn’t mean you should. Long hours in a hard chair at the kitchen table isn’t optimum.

The article discusses colour, signage, the size and shape of spaces, textiles and plants. Even games such as Foosball tables have a place.

The solutions are in design of the office, the office culture and inclusive policies. When it comes to neurodiversity we have to ask, what is neurotypical anyway? Workplace designs that consider diversity are good for everyone.

There is more in this article titled, Considering neurodiversity to create better, more productive workplaces. The Fifth Estate also has an ebook for purchase, My (new) Happy Healthy Workplace

Related articles

7 things an autistic person needs in the workplace are:

  • No two people are alike
  • Ditch the stereotypes
  • Ask how we would like to be referred to
  • Be open to having a conversation to discuss what works
  • Be flexible to customise our working environment
  • Help us maximise our strengths
  • Provide us with opportunities to progress

Research on designing technology for neurodiverse users reminds us that this ends up being good design for everyone.

The Autism Research Starter Pack has strategies for including people with autism.

Intersectional stigma for autistic people at work found that white autistic people in western countries are more likely to have jobs. But they were more likely to be designed for autistic people. They also found that feeling that someone cares was more important than any adjustments for support. There are other resources available as well.

From Margins to Mainstream: Embracing Neurodiverse Needs for an Inclusive Workplace. The authors review and critique existing literature on communication styles, sensory environments, social expectations, and discrimination. They focus on autism spectrum condition, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, dyscalculia, and dysgraphia. They apply the neurodiversity framework to challenge traditional notions of workplace ”professionalism” and productivity.

And a book

The Canary Code: A Guide to Neurodiversity, Dignity, and Intersectional Belonging at Work.

“This groundbreaking book combines the lived experience with academic rigor, innovative thought leadership, and lively, accessible writing. To support different types of readers, academic, applied, and lived experience content is clearly identified, helping readers choose their own adventure.”

Safe children means safe adults

Many parents would like their children to travel to school independently, but they think it’s unsafe to do so. Taking a universal design approach, if we improve pedestrian infrastructure for children, we also make it better for everyone. Safe children means safe adults.

Children are more likely to live closer to school than their parents will live to their workplaces. But do they feel safe to walk? However, walking or riding to school is at the same time workers are driving off to their workplaces – often in a hurry.

School crossing. A man with a child in each hand is crossing the road on a zebra crossing that has a crossing supervisor and an orange flag with the words, children crosing.

Prue Oswin’s survey of parents on the Sunshine Coast revealed their perceived and real barriers to safe walking for their children. Crossing roads without designated crossings was of the most concern. Crossing at roundabouts and roads without a pedestrian refuge island was also concerning. Zebra crossings were the most favoured by parents especially if they were raised. These are the same issues for people with disability and older people.

Pedestrian hot spots tell one story, pedestrian absence tells another. This is where statistical data do not measure journeys not made. Consequently, relying on such data is misleading in the quest to get more people walking and wheeling in their neighbourhoods.

The Safe System approach is about preventing traffic crashes resulting in serious injury. The basic premise is that if a driver or pedestrian makes a mistake, a serious accident is less likely. Oswin’s study shows that there are gaps in this approach that traffic engineers need to address.

Spin offs

The most obvious spin-off from more walking are the health benefits which lead to better concentration and wellbeing. Also if children get walk to and from school independently, parents, usually women, are able to increase their workforce participation. Other beneficiaries are people with mobility impairments, and people who are blind or have low vision. Parents themselves might also be encouraged to walk more.

Designing for people at either end of the age bell curve means that everyone else is included. Consequently, the often forgotten group, children, are key piece of the inclusion jigsaw.

The title of Oswin’s conference paper is, Activating transport to schools with a Safe System, renewable energy and community engagement. There is also a slide deck with lots of photos, graphics and data that underpin the paper and the research.

An academic research paper supports these findings. The paper is titled, Children’s and parents’ perceptions on safe routes to schools: a mixed-methods study investigating factors influencing active school travel.

Abstract

The proportion of children walking or riding to school is dwindling in Australia, while pedestrian injuries are among children’s leading causes of death. A mixed-methods survey was conducted on children and parents of two schools in Australia to understand travel behaviours and attitudes towards active transport to school (ATS).

Results showed that road safety perceptions predicted ATS, unlike distance to school and stranger danger. The design of the routes to school was found to be crucial in facilitating ATS, to address the fear of road danger. Practical implications include the need for more controlled pedestrian crossings and protected bike paths.

Community driven design

Architectural competitions can bring design quality to cities. But the design competition process misses the opportunity to engage deeply with the public. And that means social value could be missing too. The process of community driven design competitions addresses unequal access to design decisions and cultivates social ties.

“Design has a role in building social capital. During a design competition, there are opportunities for placemaking and designing in social connectors.” Georgia Vitale

Image: 11th Street Bridge Park. Courtesy OMA + OLIN

An aerial view of 11th Bridge Street Park which spans a river. It was community driven design.

Community consultation takes many forms, some of which are perfunctory while others are more meaningful. That is, meaningful for the public – the users of places and spaces. The judges of architectural design competitions are other architects. So how does community consultation and engagement fit into this process?

Vitale’s article explores the drawbacks of limited or no meaningful public participation or interaction with users of the building or place or other stakeholders in design competitions. This is at a time for an increased need for social capital to be included in the planning and design process for more socially sustainable communities.

Social infrastructure, shared spaces and streets, and public transport are the outputs of design. However, community engagement with diverse community members helps create new connections. it also encourages people to become involved in the lives of their neighbours. That’s the social benefit of community driven design competitions.

Case Study

Vitale uses 11th Street Bridge Park DC as a case study. The goal is to knit together the two communities on either side of the river. And that’s without displacing people in the marginalised neighbourhoods on the eastern bank.

Bridging community and design: a new way forward is the title of the article in The Fifth Estate. See the original article for links to cited research and case study.

Fair share for walking

Are pedestrians getting a fair share for walking and wheeling on our streets? Or are they forced to drive because footpaths are either not present or poorly maintained? Lack of seating, shade, and too few pedestrian crossings all add to a preference to take the car. More significantly, poor pedestrian infrastructure prevents people with disability and older people from making the journey at all.

Most people value walkability, yet most communities underinvest in pedestrian facilities. We need more investment in footpaths and pedestrian crossings to better serve community.

A black car is approaching a pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian and background are blurred to give the appearance of speed.

Todd Litman summarises the key points in a research paper from the US, which looked at walking rates among countries. The graph below shows Australia and the US at the bottom of the list.

Graph showing Australia and USA at the bottom of the walking list with European countries doing much better, led by UK.

The percentage of total trips made by walking by country

People who cannot drive or own a car are most disadvantaged because they have little choice but to walk or wheel. If the infrastructure is unsupportive or feels unsafe, many will avoid an area or just not make the journey. Consequently the prevalence of disability is invisible to planners.

Assumptions about older people all living in aged care also makes invisible the 95% of older people living in the community. However, plans or designs recommended as suited to aged care locations can, and should, be applied throughout the community.

Why people don’t walk

A graph from Litman shows the reasons people don’t walk by age group. The graph supports statistics of prevalence of health issues in the community. While it is expected that older age groups would cite health as a reason for not walking more, 25-30% of younger age groups also cite health.

Graph showing the reasons different generations don't walk more than they do. Older people cite their health in greater numbers than other generations, but younger cohorts are in the 25% to 305 range of health condition too.

Not feeling safe due to traffic is another factor with an average of 40% saying this is an issue. The lower statistical count on this question for older people is likely due to only making journeys where they feel safe as they are more risk averse.

Walkability solutions

The solutions rest on a connected network of footpaths and to services such as shops, cafes, and medical centres within walking distance. These footpaths need to clearly separate pedestrians from cyclists and motor vehicles. Shared paths are particularly problematic for older people, people with dogs, and people with vision and hearing impairments.

The title of the Todd Litman article is Fair share for walking. He mentions universal design standards for footpaths that are smooth and wide. They also need kerb ramps compliant to standards for all pedestrians. Cost arguments need to be met with counter arguments of the human and environmental cost of not creating pedestrian environments that encourage walking and wheeling.

The research paper mentioned in the Litman article is titled Overview of Walking Rates, Walking Safety and Government Policies to Encourage More and Safer Walking in Europe and North America. European countries have shown the way on how to encourage walking and wheeling.

From the abstract

This paper documents variation in walking rates among countries, cities in the same country, and in different parts of the same city.

Our international analysis shows that walking rates are highest for short trips, higher for women than for men, decline with increasing income, and remain constant as age increases. Walking fatality rates are much higher in the USA compared with the other countries we examined, both per capita and per km walked.

Government policies for increasing walking rates and improving pedestrian safety include: integrated networks of

  • safe and convenient walking infrastructure;
  • roadways and intersections designed for the needs of pedestrians;
  • land-use regulations that encourage mixed uses and short trip distances;
  • lower city-wide speed limits and traffic calming in residential neighborhoods;
  • reduced supply and increased price of parking;
  • traffic laws that give priority to pedestrians;
  • improved traffic education for motorists and non-motorists;
  • tax surcharges on large personal vehicles; and
  • strict enforcement of laws against drink and distracted driving.

Teenagers and architecture

How about introducing architecture to children and teenagers in school as a means of getting better architecture? Teachers can use architecture as a learning resource for other subjects as well. De-a Arhitectura Association thinks bringing teenagers and architecture together is a good idea. It’s also a good way to give voice to children and teenagers and what they want from the built environment.

De-a Arhitectura has a network of built environment professionals who share knowledge with children and teenagers.

Image from a De-a Arhitectura workshop.

A picture from the De-a Ahitectura workshop. A teenager is putting a pin on a large map on a wall

The way professionals understand the built environment and the way the public see it are quite different. One group often left out of consultations is teenagers. Consequently, De-a Arhitectura set about finding out how to give voice to teens.

Using workshop methods, participants analysed their city for facilities and how it feels to be in the city. One workshop focused on the experience of pushing a stroller, being in a wheelchair, and pulling luggage. The research paper describes the workshop methods used in the project.

The follow up project provided a way to raise awareness that teenagers perspective should matter. Teenagers have a language of their own and the researchers found they had energy and innovative ideas. They engaged younger and older people in their lives in the stories they create. And they provided a fresh angle or perspective on things.

The researchers conclude that teenagers have their own visions and benefits from interacting with public space and the activities they carry out.

The title of the paper is, Empowering Teenagers Through Built Environment Education While Experimenting (In)The Public Space. Published in the proceedings of the 2023 World Congress of Architects.

From the abstract

Teenagers may not be the most obvious left-out category of people, but in the design and use of public spaces they are often left out. Public space belongs to everyone, yet teenagers have few ways make their voices heard. How do they demand their own space, which represents their identities and offers a creative and comfortable environment in which they can socialise and evolve?

De-a Arhitectura Association began to develop the Urban Up educational program in 2016. It was a starting point in diversifying its portfolio with teenagers, aiming to be inclusive of all categories and backgrounds.

Throughout the past years, Urban Up has tried to hear their wishes and expectations from the built environment and the public spaces they use. We used different hands-on activities (extracurricular) and with a design thinking methodology for improving their schools.

Trying to constantly find better communication channels and to reduce the generational distances, we started a fellowship program for students in different study fields connected to the built environment (multidisciplinary teams), in order to bring teenagers and young adults together.

The students became mentors for the high school students, in workshops they co-designed, aiming to engage them in better understanding and using public spaces. It is our belief that the more aware and involved teenagers are today, the more active and responsible citizens they will be tomorrow.

A neurodiverse perspective

Mollie Pittaway gives a neurodiverse perspective on the world in a Medium magazine article. She describes 10 ways autistic people are different to neurotypical people. She makes it clear in the beginning that she doesn’t speak for all autistic people. Pittaway just wants to emphasise cultural differences. Understanding these differences are useful in the workplace for managing and interacting with staff who might be autistic.

Understanding how autistic or neurodiverse people see the world and process information is key to being inclusive in any situation. They don’t need to be the odd one out.

A pack of 12 eggs. 11 are brown and one is white. It represents a neurodiverse perspective of the odd one out.

We all have different ways of experiencing the world and interacting with one another. However, sometimes it is difficult to empathise with each other when our experiences are quite different. Pittaway presents ten differences to neurotypical people are briefly outlined below. See the article in Medium for a more detailed explanation.

10 ways autistic people are different

Small talk: This can feel fake or unimportant, because autistic people want to talk about deeper, meaningful things. Consequently, they don’t join in conversations about pop culture, TV shows or sports games. This means they appear shy or aloof.

Eye contact: Eye contact is considered “normal” and courteous to neurotypical people. Pittaway says she loses her train of thought when looking at someone. This makes it look like they are bored or indifferent.

Directness and empathy

Directness: Neurotypical people can deal with ambiguity in communication rather than saying exactly what they are looking for. Pittaway says she needs as much clarification as possible and finds it difficult not to be direct. This can be perceived as being blunt or rude.

Empathy: When someone is upset many neurotypical people listen and talk things through. Pittaway, however, says her way is to talk about her similar experiences as a way to show she understands. Finding the right words is difficult. However, this can be viewed as moving attention to themselves and therefore being selfish.

Social situations

Social connection: Pittaway says that in comparison to neurotypical people she has a low “social battery”. This means she doesn’t seek frequent social connection such as going to the pub or a party. Recharging her social battery might mean refusing invitations to events.

Interests: Differences are less obvious when it comes to talking about interests. Some autistic people can remember a wide range of facts, but these facts can be boring to others. Everyone has the ability to bore people with their special interests.

Spontaneity: Last minute plans or sudden changes in plan can be challenging for autistic people. Changing routines is difficult and can take extra energy when recharging is required.

Sensory overload: Background noise, traffic, nightclubs and crowding make it a struggle for autistic people to concentrate. They can’t filter the information in the same way as others and just try to hide their distress.

Morals and conforming

Hypermoralism: Autistic people see things in black and white whereas neurotypical people see nuance in things. Pittaway says holding the high moral ground is one of the best traits because they want the best for others. However, they might be seen as the “goody two-shoes” and their concerns are ignored.

Conforming: Going along with the status quo is difficult because autistic people need to understand why things need to be done a certain way. That can make for a lot of questions. This makes it inconvenient for those at the top because it feels like their authority is being questioned.

Pittaway concludes by saying there isn’t any right or better way to communicated. But it is important to respect differences.

The title of the article is 10 Significant ways autistic people are different to neurotypical people. As stated above, this is one person’s experience of being autistic. However, the autism spectrum captures many types of neurodiversity. This is one view.

Neurodiversity is an identity not a disorder

Psychologist John Elder Robison provides a personal view of neurodiversity in his writings. A review of his book in the Psychology Today blog outlines his experience. A key point is that if one in seven children in the US are now identified as neurodiverse, is this really an exception to “normal”? The title of the book is Look me in the Eye: My Life With Asperger’s.

Selwyn Goldsmith and Universal Design

Architects Selwyn Goldsmith and Ronald Mace were leaders in the field of universal design. Both contracted polio in their childhood but this did not stop them from championing the disability rights movement. Today, Mace is widely recognised in the universal design movement. However, Goldsmith was very active in the UK and wrote four books. The last of which was in 2000, titled Universal Design.

Although the book is more than 20 years old, it remains a good reference for architects with some wise advice on attitude.

“The architect does not start with the presumption that people with disabilities are abnormal, are peculiar and different… [or] packaged together with a set of special-for-the-disabled accessibility standards, … presented in top down mode as add-ons to unspecified normal provision.” Image from The Guardian

Head and shoulders of Selwyn Goldsmith. Photo from The Guardian.

Today’s universal design campaigners still find this attitude within the general design community. The resistance to that paradigm change Goldsmith discusses remains 25 years on.

From the Routledge book description

“Universal Design presents detailed design guidance for architects in an easily referenced form. Covering both public buildings and private housing, it includes informative anthropometric data, along with illustrative examples of the planning of circulation spaces, sanitary facilities, car parking spaces and seating spaces for wheelchair users in cinemas and theatres. It is a valuable manual in enhancing understanding of the basic principles of ‘universal design’.

The aim – to encourage architects to extend the parameters of normal provision, by looking to go beyond the prescribed minimum design standards of the Part M building regulation, Access and facilities for disabled people.”

The contents of the book include:

  • Building users: Mobility Equipment; Ambulant disabled people; Wheelchair users; Scooter users; Pushchair users;
  • Anthropometric measures; Ambulant people; Wheelchair users;
  • Heights of fixtures and fittings; Mirrors; Windows; Shelves; Work surfaces; Digital code panels; Socket outlets; Vertical Circulation; Steps and stairs; Ramps; Handrails; Spaces for wheelchair manoeuvre; Movement through door openings; Entrances to buildings; Entrance lobbies;
Front cover of Selwyn Goldsmith's book, Universal Design. Purple blue background with white text and graphic images.
  • Sanitary facilities; Cloakroom lobbies; WCs; Wash basins; Baths and bathrooms; Shower and shower rooms; Changing rooms and dressing rooms; Lifts; Platform lifts and stairlifts; Seating spaces; Kitchens; Bedrooms; Car parking spaces.

Goldsmith’s first book was in 1963 titled Designing for the Disabled – an entirely new concept at the time. He expanded this publication in 1967. A third book in 1992, Designing for the Disabled – The New Paradigm, expanded his focus to children and prams. His research led to the first kerb cuts in the UK. Selwyn Goldsmith died in 2011.

Walking – tourists and locals compared

A group of researchers compared the walking experience of tourists and locals in two New Zealand cities. The research was in the context of accessibility and active travel. They chose to compare Christchurch and Wellington because of their differing topography and architecture. There are no surprising results from the study, but they confirm the need for good footpaths and wayfinding for everyone.

Overall, both tourists and locals were generally “satisfied” with their walking experience in both cities. However, the age of participants was skewed to younger age groups.

Image of Christchurch Post Office.

Christchurch post office a tourist destination.

Participants were asked to rate the presence of a good and wide walkway condition, absence of closed roads (culs de sac), signage, flat terrain, and accessibility for wheelchairs and prams. Overall, both locals and tourists appreciated well designed level walkways with good signage for wayfinding. However, walkers would like to be alerted to construction works so they can take alternative routes in the same way as motorists.

In Wellington, tourists indicated that they expected more accessible routes so that people with differing abilities could walk or wheel. This was the most significant finding in the survey because it was the only score to fall below the statistical neutral line.

Image of Wellington.

View of Wellington harbourside showing the hilly terrain in the background and yachts moored in the foreground.

Christchurch has less steep terrain which means it could satisfy the accessibility criteria better than Wellington. Tourists liked the grid pattern of the city which removed the culs de sac that existed before the earthquake. However, poor or narrow footpaths were a concern for both tourists and locals in the central area. Lack of signage at intersections was not regarded well by tourists either.

In Wellington footpaths and signage were also a major concern for locals and tourists alike. While the footpaths were wide, they were poorly maintained.

More signage for tourists

It’s not only signs that people need – landmarks work as well. Wellington has a good natural landmark in the form of the harbour. The Avon River in Christchurch also helps with navigation. However, tourists would like more signage, especially at intersections.

The title of the paper is, The walking tourist: How do the perceptions of tourists and locals compare?

From the abstract

This research addresses the question of how visitors perceive and evaluate the city they are visiting when they walk. Comparisons are made with the experience of local residents. The paper examines the relatively overlooked domain of tourist walkability and investigates the extent to which accessibility and topography may influence walking experiences.

Data were gathered from a Walk Diary in which respondents evaluated the environment along a single walk. Responses were received through convenience sampling from 132 people in Christchurch and Wellington. The Walk Diary provided an effective way of capturing differences between locals and tourists when they walk. Insights from this study will be particularly useful to those tasked with enhancing people’s urban walking experience.

Inclusive user account playbook

Most people know that digital platforms, such as Facebook, collect personal data about their users. When setting up user accounts, platforms ask users to choose various preferences which are not necessarily inclusive. These options often misrepresent gender and sexual orientation of users, which disproportionately affects the LGBTIQ+ population. Three researchers tackled this issue and came up with an inclusive user account playbook.

Creating a user account is one thing, creating a profile is another. A user account has demographic information about the user’s preferences or interests. This can apply to user groups as well.

Two rainbow flags indicating the LGBTIQ+ community.

The User Account Playbook is structured as an online learning tool on “how to”. It begins with instructions on how to use the guide followed by an overview of the content. There are three key ideas underpinning the guide. Understand the social issues related to LGBTIQ+ and user accounts; design with these in mind; and implement inclusive practices across the organisation.

This Playbook will equip you with knowledge on creating Inclusive User Account Experiences for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning+ (LGBTQ+) Community .

Banner for the Playbook to be Proud of. Pale purple with white text.

The problems the playbook aims to solve are related to how data is collected and used, and not relying on LGBTIQ+ co-workers to “educate” them. It also aims to challenge industry norms and design with and LGBTIQ+ users. The video below does not have captions.

The playbook is the result of a study of digital platforms such as Facebook. The title is, A Playbook To Be Proud of: LGBTQ+ Inclusive User Account Design Guide.

From the abstract

Digital platforms utilize data collection processes to assess demographic data about their users through user account creation. These platforms require users to select preferences that provide options which oftentimes misrepresent gender and sexual orientation identities of users. This disproportionately affecting the LGBTQ+ population.

This research uses academic literature that focus on LGBTQ+ inclusivity, and surveys and interviews from LGBTQ+ technology users. The authors detail their thoughts on a Facebook user account case study.

Product team experiences about work flows surrounding inclusion informed the creation of the digital playbook that rests at the following link: bit.ly/LGBTInclusive_UAGuide. Implications for this work lie in the possibility for impactful industry change within company cultures and individuals for the benefit of LGBTIQ+ users of technology.

Parkinson’s home design study

We know that as people grow older, the desire to stay in their current home increases. Different health conditions begin to emerge as we get older, and home design becomes an important factor in managing these conditions. Researchers from Italy chose to explore Parkinson’s disease in relation to home design using inclusive design methods.

Parkinson’s disease is one of the most frequently occurring neurological conditions along with dementia. Parkinson’s disease affects voluntary movements which make daily tasks more difficult.

An older woman in a red jacket uses a cane to walk with a younger woman along a pathway.

Similarly to other studies, the researchers found the size of the bathroom the main area of difficulty. This is for manoeuvring in a wheelchair or shower chair and placement of a shower seat.

People with reduced mobility find stairs difficult. But the visual impact of stairs can reduce “freezing” in people with Parkinson’s disease. However, overall, participants in the study preferred a single level dwelling. Being able to work in the kitchen from a seated position was the third most important factor. The design of kitchen appliances also emerged as a design factor along with furniture design.

The article has some explanatory drawings and pictures depicting their design solutions. Many of these solutions are beneficial for other health conditions and disabilities. Circulation space within the home is the main criteria for all of them.

Assistive devices

Participants reported frustration with products immediately identifiable as “products for the disabled”. The authors note that although these products are useful, they are stigmatising. Consequently they are often rejected by those who could really benefit from them. Their appearance makes them different from “normal products”.

As with the universal design approach and co-design methods, places and products for people with disability are good for everyone.

“…designers often forget the meaning and full force of the words human-centred design as a fundamental affirmation of human dignity…”

Designers have “the responsibility to continuously search for what can be done to uphold and enhance the dignity of human beings as they lead their lives…”

A blank sheet of paper with an eraser, two pencils and a light globe.

The title of the article is, Inclusive Environments: Utopia or Reality? How to
Create Inclusive Solutions Starting From People’s Needs.

A note on terminology

Note that the authors make reference to inclusive design being different from universal design and design-for-all. Their distinction is based on the notion of universal design being only for people with disability. This is often the case in the United States, but is not the case in Australia. The term universal design is embedded in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. However, this does not mean it is exclusive to people with disability.

Consequently, the terms inclusive design and universal design mean the same thing. Human-centred design also has the same goals, but has emerged from the ergonomics literature.

From the abstract

Inclusive design is an approach that puts users at the centre of the design process. This means working with people rather than working for them. This article focuses on the application of inclusive design and human-centred design approaches specifically aimed at Parkinson’s disease.

The article describes a case study of the applied methodology for solving challenges posed by Parkinson’s disease. The case study shows how an inclusive design mindset favours a holistic and creative approach, capable of bringing together different user groups throughout the various stages of the design process.