Author: Jane Bringolf

Microsoft, Apple and Google: how inclusive are they?

Barriers to digital use are caused by a complex web of intersecting factors. Gender identity is just one of them. Age, education, socioeconomic status, race, physical and cognitive disadvantage all have a role to play. Focusing on one dimension of inclusion does not account for all the complexities. That’s the conclusion two researchers came to after looking at Microsoft, Apple, and Google websites.

The big software industry players have enthusiastically promoted their commitment to inclusive design. But how inclusive are they?

A Microsoft office building with the Microsoft logo displayed on the front.

A paper discussing aspects of their inclusive practice from a gender perspective reveals that it is only a partial response. That’s because gender intersects with many other identities such as age, capability, and ethnicity.

“Regardless of efforts to promote inclusivity mainly in terms of gender, the intersectionality of identities is frequently overlooked and ignored in design.”

A pair of hands wearing red nail polish is holding an iPad with a Google search screen visible.

Microsoft, Apple, Google and Meta

The paper covers the issues of intersectionality and imagery, which is followed by tech industry case studies. Here is a brief overview:

Microsoft’s manual does a great job in explaining why there is a need for inclusive design. However, it is focused on disability and the images maintain the male/female binary. It covers theoretical and practical aspects.

Apple’s site has a detailed description of what the company thinks about inclusive design. It goes further than Microsoft on accessibility an introduces language use and stereotypes. Apple does not provide designers with many practical tools on how to do universal design.

Google acknowledges the need for equity and inclusion in their products by giving voice to the most underrepresented groups throughout the production process. They have a list of diversity segments for designers to consider.

Meta has implemented several key strategies in its design process to create inclusive products. The company is evolving to recognise the importance of accessible and inclusive products for all users. Meta conducts user research on a regular basis to gather feedback for improvements.

Guidelines for gender inclusion

The research resulted in guidelines for designing gender-inclusive tools in technology. They are applicable to both academia and industry. They are also useful for anyone responsible for the look, feel and accessibility of their organisation’s website and digital products.

  • Consider intersectionality: avoid simplifying people to one-dimensional characters. People have complex identities, which go beyond belonging to one specific gender, race, or sexuality group.
  • Avoid propagating stereotypes: attaching typical looks, occupations, and traits to a person based on their gender, race, or sexuality, contributes to social stereotypes that aggravate misogyny, racism, and homophobia.
  • Overcome the gender-binary: avoid producing text and images that reinforce the gender binary and social stereotypes, regarding appearance, jobs, preferences, or skills.
  • Make your text, tone, and imagery consistent and inclusive: it is necessary to maintain efforts for inclusivity throughout your copy, visuals, communication, and products.
  • Show the diversity of each community: make a conscious effort to illustrate how multi-colored communities are, instead of simplifying them to stereotypes.
  • Involve people with that particular identity: diversity and inclusion should be taken seriously. There’s no better person than the one with that particular identity to tell you about their concerns and challenges.
  • Avoid concentrating on a single mode of communication: adapt your copy, images, and communication to different languages, cultures, and levels of complexity.
  • Provide training in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: help your business or organization by providing constant training and mentorship.

The title of the paper is, Gender Inclusive Design in Technology: Case Studies and Guidelines, from the ResearchGate website.

From the abstract

The need for inclusion stems from the fact that the composition of the IT sector reflects a workforce that is not diverse enough. This can result in blind spots in the design process, leading to exclusionary user experiences. The idea of inclusive design is becoming more prevalent. In fact, it is becoming a general expectation to create software that is useful for and used by more people.

With a focus on intersectionality, inclusive user experience (UX) seeks to actively and consciously integrate minority, vulnerable, and understudied user groups in the design.

UX that is based on inclusive design and aims to overcome social disadvantages in all of their intersectional complexities. These arise from gender, sexual orientation, age, education, dis/ability, socioeconomic status, and race/ethnicity, among others. At the same time, gender-inclusive design has challenges and limitations: the idea of gender inclusion in design is not yet a reality.

Our research investigates academic literature, as well as tech industry practices, like the websites of Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Meta. Our analysis shows that intersectionality suffers even when inclusivity is considered. We also offer guidelines for factors that might be explored for a more inclusive design.

Feeling safe, walking and wheeling

If we want to get everyone walking and wheeling for their health, and the health of the environment, a few things have to change. If people don’t feel safe walking and wheeling, they will avoid the journey or take the car. Many people who are blind or have low vision fear a collision with vehicles and cyclists. That makes them feel unsafe on our streets, and means they are less likely to venture from well-known routes in their community.

Pedestrians who are blind or have low vision have difficulty knowing when it is safe to cross at non-signalised crossing points. This is compounded by traffic volume and speed. Not every person with low vision uses a cane or dog indicating to drivers they have reduced vision.

Two young women stand at a pedestrian crossing. One is holding the arm of the other. There is a car in the background on the crossing. Are they feeling safe walking and wheeling?

If you want to know more about the issues encountered by people who are blind or have low vision, take a look at the study by Victoria Walks. They conducted a survey of people with vision impairment and carried out some street audits. The aim was to gain a better understanding of the road and footpath safety issues encountered by this group.

“Difficulty in judging whether it is safe to cross the road” was the biggest overall concern, followed by tripping hazards on the footpath. Crossing the road at non-signalised intersections was not an option for many. Given that most mid-block crossings and intersections are not signalised, this severely limits this group’s mobility. But they are not the only ones. People with poor depth perception and some cognitive conditions find it difficult to judge when to cross.

Interaction with other road users

Drivers are required to give way to pedestrians. However, at traffic lights for example, motorists failing to give way was the biggest concern for people who are blind or have low vision. Failing to give way to pedestrians on the footpath across driveways was another real problem. Shared paths with cyclists, pedestrians with dogs, and just other pedestrians were also an issue.

People who are blind or have low vision are not the only ones with poor road and footpath experiences. Consequently, if we can get it right for this group, every pedestrian should benefit.

An older woman wearing a straw hat, carrying an orange bag, and using a walking cane, crosses the road.

Site audit issues for safe walking and wheeling

Issues common to most areas audited were:
– Tripping hazards and obstructions on the footpath such as low hanging tree branches, shop sandwich boards, and outdoor dining.
– Poor kerb ramp design that potentially sends pedestrians with a vision impairment into the middle of an intersection rather than directly across the road.
– Differences between the width of a crossing and the width of the kerb ramp used to access it causing a potential trip hazard.
– Missing or poorly functioning Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) or audio tactiles.

The title of the report is Road Safety for Pedestrians who are Blind or Have Low Vision. There is more detail about each audit location in Victoria and what was recommended. Also more detail from the survey, all of which is instructive.

Shared spaces as successful places

Artist impression of evening in George Street Sydney showing a shared street.
An artist’s impression showing the QVB stop in the George Street pedestrianised zone

What role do shared spaces play in “successful places”? And what are shared spaces anyway? A report compiled by the Transport Research Centre at UTS for the NSW Government attempts to answer these questions. The focus of the report was to understand how shared spaces can enhance the development of “successful places”, a key strategic priority of Transport. 

Varied terminology on the topic of shared spaces is not helpful and needs a standard definition. Another issue is whose opinion counts most. Is it user perceptions or transport performance measurements? And implementation is difficult even though there are many guidelines and there are few case studies.

What is a shared space?

The report offers the following definition.

“A public street or intersection that is intended and designed to be used by all modes of transport equally in a consistently low-speed environment. Shared space designs aim to reduce vehicle dominance and prioritise active mobility modes. Designs can utilise treatments that remove separation between users in order to create a sense of place and facilitate multi-functions.”

 Findings

Broadly, high level critical findings include:

  • The shared space design concept is one tool for forming successful places across the community.
  • A spectrum of intervention and design options are available to transport professionals to achieve a shared space within the road network.
  • Defining relationships between design parameters and performance metrics are key to determining the factors leading to implementing successful shared space.
  • Current guidelines, standards and practical processes limit the application of novel shared space solutions.

The title of the Shared Spaces Review is, Evaluation and Implementation of Shared Spaces in NSW: Framework for road infrastructure design and operations to establish placemaking. Examination of existing Shared Space knowledge. The Transport Research Centre, University of Technology Sydney conducted the research for Transport for NSW. 

The report is comprehensive and detailed with some international case studies to illustrate issues and findings. The report provides recommendations and current best practice for Transport for NSW. 

Intergenerational shared spaces 

Having interaction between generations, particularly older and younger people is beneficial for everyone. Julie Melville and Alan Hatton-Yeo discuss the issues in a book chapter, Intergenerational Shared Spaces in the UK context. 

The authors discuss how the generations are separated by life activities and dwelling places. The design of the built environment is a major concern because is not conducive to sharing spaces across the generations.

While this book is not specifically about universal design, it is about inclusive practice and social inclusion.

Google Books has the full book, Intergenerational Space, edited by Robert M Vanderbeck and Nancy Worth.

What happens when tactiles fail

Taking another perspective, Dean Homicki has some short videos explaining the details that matter and why. His latest video is the placement of tactiles at a railway crossing. He titled it, “Why the chicken shouldn’t, couldn’t and didn’t cross the rail-road“.

Walking in Berlin

A working paper based on five participants with disability highlights the small but important details that form barriers to getting around in the public domain. The results of their neighbourhood movements are traced in a map showing the barriers.

The usual barriers are encountered and are specific to Berlin and most likely representative of suburban neighbourhoods in Australia as well. Another paper to add to the collection.

The shortened title of the report is, An explorative case study involving disabled people in Berlin.

It’s not the bus that’s inaccessible

Imagine you could travel to only 1% of the city where you live – areas that were easily accessible to other residents. The main problem is it’s not the bus system itself that’s inaccessible. It’s all the infrastructure around it such as footpaths and kerb ramps. That’s the claim by researchers in Columbus, Ohio.

“People with mobility disabilities need to get to and from bus stops to use public transportation, and that isn’t easy in many parts of the city.”

The roadway is marked with the words "bus stop" in yellow lettering.

The study of wheelchair users who rely on public transport, found that powered wheelchair users were a little better off than manual users. The researchers used high-resolution, real-time data on the usage of buses by people with and without disabilities.

In one analysis, the researchers found how many of the bus stops could get users to various places in the city within 30 minutes. Manual wheelchair users had 75% fewer bus stops they could use compared with non-disabled users. For powered wheelchair users, they experienced 59% fewer stops. Even when they gave them more time to complete the journey, it was little better. That means wheelchair users are confined to self-segregated parts of the city.

Public transit is not a business, it is not just a social service.  It is crucial urban infrastructure and footpaths are part of that.

Ohio Theatre facade showing a level footpath and kerb ramp for the crossing. It isn't the bus that's inaccessible.

The title of the article is, Why buses can’t get wheelchair users to most areas of cities.

The research paper is titled, Disparities in public transit accessibility and usage by people with mobility disabilities. You will need institutional access for a free read.

From the abstract

Many people with mobility disabilities rely on public transit to access crucial resources and maintain social interactions. However, they face higher barriers to accessing and using public transit.

We used high-resolution public transit real-time vehicle data, passenger count data, and paratransit usage data from 2018 to 2021 to estimate and compare transit accessibility and usage of people with and without mobility disabilities. We found significant disparities wheelchair users’ accessibility relative to people without disabilities.

The city center has the highest accessibility and ridership, as well as the highest disparities in accessibility. We also find that people with reduced mobility using a fixed-route service are more sensitive to weather conditions. Most will ride in the middle of the day rather than during peak hours.

The spatial pattern of bus stop usage by people with disability is different to people without disabilities. This suggests their destination choices are driven by access concerns.

Bus and tram stops by universal design

A young woman is sitting in a bus shelter and looking down the road. The shelter is lit and has an information board. Bus and tram stops by universal design.

Public transport is often perceived as an inefficient way to travel, especially in terms of time taken. Not good for customer service or engagement. A research paper reports on a detailed analysis of bus and tram stop positioning using a holistic universal design approach.

A common story

“To get from my house to the nearest restaurant is a mile-and-a-half walk, which takes me about 30 minutes each way. To get to the same restaurant by bus, I must walk half a mile, then cross a heavily traveled arterial street with no pedestrian protection to arrive at the nearest stop (it’s unprotected) for a route that passes the restaurant.

“Once the bus arrives, I have to ask the driver where the bus is going, since there’s no signage at the stop, pay the fare, and then watch as the bus stops six times in the remaining mile, all of those stops on the same arterial street I just crossed to board the bus. It takes me 10 minutes to walk the half-mile to the bus stop, and according to the Met Transit schedule, it takes the bus another 20 minutes to negotiate the remaining mile to the restaurant, so walking or riding the bus are equivalent in terms of time spent. It’s the sort of bus service that encourages people to drive a car instead.”

Placement and design are critical

The article addresses the placement and design of the stops in detail. There’s some joined up thinking for the eighteen elements identified including: safety, convenience, lighting, routing patterns, width of footpaths and pedestrian activity. The pros and cons of different stop placements are listed in a table. Service frequency and faster travel times were more highly regarded than add-ons, such as WiFi and USB ports. Shelters at stops and up to date information were critical design elements.

A transit stop in itself serves more than one purpose: it signals the presence of a transit service, information about the service, information about surrounding destinations, and a place to wait. This article draws together the many elements that transport designers should consider in providing, what is in essence, a good customer service experience.

The title of the article is: Urban Design of On-Street Stops and Road Environments: A Conceptual Framework.

From the abstract

Transit stops should be situated where they are convenient to use and the safety of passengers and alternative road users has been taken into consideration.

On-street stops and their connecting roads are viewed as a holistic environment, instead of an ordinary place or location to make a stop. This environment includes elements such as: Accessibility through street connectivity, street and road design, and transit stop design. This paper develops a conceptual model that links the various variables together. It highlights how one affects the other and their impact on the overall ability to produce a good passenger experience.

Transit stops are easier to locate when there is high street connectivity which determines how transit passengers gain access to a transit service. The design and configuration of on-street stops and connecting roads lead to increased safety, thereby leading to increased ridership.

Public toilets on every high street

We all have to go sometime and some of us sooner and more quickly than others. The availability of clean public toilets can make or break a shopping trip or social outing. People with bladder problems will restrict their movements to where they know the toilets are. This is not just a social issue, it is an economic one.

The Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design had a good look at this issue. Their report outlines how they went about finding an alternative model for high street toilets. The project was titled, Engaged: a toilet on every high street.

This design research project was about a simple concept of reusing vacant high street units as toilets (plus commercial or community space). It explored the idea before thinking about how to implement it.

A drawing showing a row of toilets in an outdoor setting with a cafe.

The research explored how this idea would fit into current systems and infrastructure. People within retail, community safety, government and urban design were consulted. Then they spoke with council officers to see how they could make it happen.

Pub staff responsible for toilets talked about the problems with toilets. Public toilet provision is complex. A lot can go wrong. The aim therefore was to understand what the public want, what councils can achieve and where the pitfalls are.

The key areas or outcomes for Engaged were the issues of:

  • Closed and Temporary Toilets
  • Future Inclusive Toilets
  • Lootopia and the High Street
  • Toilets in the 24-hour City
  • Talk Toilets
Standard toilet block in a rural area signed as Ladies and Gents.

The report explains these points in detail using case studies. Accessible toilets are included in the discussions as well as criminal behaviour.

Everyone needs a toilet

Everyone needs to use the toilet, and people shouldn’t be ‘designed out’. People who spend all day outside, such as rough-sleepers, rely more on public toilets than most. Yet privately-owned, publicly-accessible toilets may not be accessible to them, either from exclusion or from feeling that they would be permitted. Other groups who may feel excluded include teenagers and people of colour. Discrimination that associates groups with anti-social or criminal behaviour reduces the number of toilets that people can access.

The researchers found their findings match similar surveys by the Bathroom Manufacturers Association, and AgeUK London. ‘High streets’ was the main location where respondents thought public toilets were not good enough (70%), ahead of parks (47%). This data is useful for showing the value that public toilets bring to the high street. If people leave early due to a lack of toilets, that hurts businesses and the wider community. It also limits people’s participation and quality of life.

The title of the report is, Engaged: a toilet on every high street. The Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design did the research published by the Royal College of Art. It is a good example of talking to stakeholders before even thinking about solutions.

Accessible toilets: how are they really used?

Accessible public toilets are constructed to a set standard in many countries including Australia. But has anyone actually asked users if they are truly functional for wheelchair users and others? Access Insight magazine gives an overview of new research into this question.

The UTS project focused on public accessible bathroom design. Falling off the toilet pan while reaching for toilet paper and avoiding public bathrooms altogether are two preliminary findings from the research project. Photo: Phillippa Carnemolla.

An accessible public toilet showing the layout. A toilet roll is placed on the grab rail and the toilet seat is raised.

The current Australian Standard for accessible bathrooms is based on data from the 1970s with a few tweaks along the way. The design favours paraplegia who have good use of their upper body and arms. That means people with higher level needs are excluded from the design.

Apart from falling when trying to reach the toilet paper, users also need shelving near the toilets and sinks. We floors are unhygienic and a slip hazard when attempting a sit to stand transfer. Soap, paper towels, hand dryers, and toilet rolls are often placed in inaccessible positions. Or they can obstruct the grab rail.

The other key finding is how wheelchair users plan their movements outside the home to avoid needing a public toilet. Some would rather forgo social activities than be faced with bathrooms they cannot access.

The research is also published in an academic journal, but you will need institutional access for a free read. It is titled Public toilets for accessible and inclusive cities: disability, design and maintenance from the perspective of wheelchair users.

The title of the magazine article is, New UTS research “lifts the lid” on how wheelchair users access public bathrooms.

From the abstract

Design policy and regulations within our cities can significantly impact the accessibility and social participation of people with disability. Public, wheelchair-accessible bathrooms are highly regulated spaces, but little is known about how wheelchair users use them.

This exploratory inquiry encompasses twelve interviews, delving into how participants utilise accessible bathrooms based on their functional needs.

Findings revealed themes of safety, hygiene, planning/avoidance and privacy and dignity. Many wheelchair users invest significant effort in planning for bathroom use or avoid public bathrooms altogether.

Regulatory standards don’t capture the ongoing maintenance and regular cleaning of bathrooms. However, this is critically important to the ongoing accessibility and safety of public bathrooms for wheelchair users. This points to a relationship between the design and the maintenance and the social participation of people with disability.

These findings can potentially drive innovative and inclusive approaches to bathroom design regulations that include maintenance. As such they can inform regulations, standards and design practices for more socially sustainable cities.

Everybody Poops

A Canadian briefing paper, Everybody Poops: Public toilets are a community issue, covers similar ground. Although these facilities are an important part of the community, local authorities are not keen to provide them. Solutions are around advocacy and partnerships. The paper has a link to The Safer Bathroom Toolkit, which has a focus on people who use substances.

Universal Design Guidelines: Changing Places

This set of guidelines comes from Ireland and aims to take the design beyond minimum standards. It covers every aspect you can think of from planning and building control to management and maintenance. The guidelines explain why some things need to be designed or placed in a certain way.

The design and installation section is comprehensive. The management and maintenance section includes pre-visit information, staff training, and health and safety. The guidelines are downloadable in different formats. Another excellent resource from the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design.

Overcoming bias in AI

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is entering our everyday lives with increased speed and sometimes without our knowledge. But it is only as good as the data it is fed, and the worry about bias is a concern for marginalised groups. AI has the potential to enhance life for everyone, but that requires overcoming bias in AI development. In his article, Christopher Land argues for more advocacy and transparency in AI.

The power of machine learning comes from pattern recognition within vast quantities of data. Using statistics, AI reveals new patterns and associations that human developers might miss or lack the processing power to uncover.

A background of computer code with a female face overlaid. Overcoming AI bias.

Designing for the average is fraught with problems. Statistical averages do not translate to some kind of human average. That’s because statistics don’t measure human diversity. That’s why AI processes are at risk of leaving some people behind. But in gathering useful data there are some privacy issues.

AI shows great promise with robot assistants to assist people with disability and older people with everyday tasks. AI imaging and recognition tools help nonvisual users understand video and pictures.

Christopher Land outlines how AI and machine learning work and how bias is introduced into AI systems if not prevented. He also has some recommendations on strengthening legal protections for people with disability. The paper is not technical. Rather it explains clearly how it works, where it’s used, and what needs to be done.

The title of the article is, Disability Bias & New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. The “Black Box” issue is explained and the need for a “Glass Box” is presented.

From the abstract

Bias in artificial intelligence (AI) systems can cause discrimination against marginalized groups, including people with disabilities. This discrimination is most often unintentional and due to a lack of training and awareness of how to build inclusive systems.

This paper has two main objectives: 1) provide an overview of AI systems and machine learning, including disability bias, for accessibility professionals and related non-development roles; and 2) discuss methods for building accessible AI systems inclusively to mitigate bias.

Worldwide progress on establishing legal protection against AI bias is provided, with recommendations on strengthening laws to protect people with disabilities from discrimination by AI systems. When built accessibly, AI systems can promote fairness and enhance the lives of everyone, in unprecedented ways.

Diversity and inclusion in AI

An Australian book chapter takes a comprehensive and practical approach to how equity and inclusion should be considered throughout development. This should be done at both governance and development levels by applying inclusive design and human-centred design to the AI ‘ecosystem’.

The title of the chapter is Diversity and Inclusion in Artificial Intelligence.

Design guide for active travel

This design guide aims to improve infrastructure for people wanting to walk, cycle, scoot, and ride mobility devices. That means anyone and everyone who is not a driver of a motor vehicle. This is part of the ACT Government’s policy is to support active travel.

In the Canberra context, unless designated, all paths are shared by people walking, wheeling, cycling and using mobility aids.

Few people fully understand road rules, which is why design treatments must indicate that pedestrians have priority.

A diagram of an intersection taking from the Design Guide .

People using mobility devices and older people are given the label of “vulnerable” pedestrians. This is default language in transport jargon, but serves, unfortunately, to reinforce stereotypes. In reality, all pedestrians are vulnerable compared to motor vehicles.

When all pedestrians are incorporated into designs, we should just talk about “pedestrians walking and wheeling”. And with a Safe Systems Approach there should be no delineation between who is safer than whom.

Movement and Place framework

The Movement and Place framework together with a Safe Systems approach puts people into the centre of the frame. The lens has always been on vehicle traffic flows and the convenience and economics of reducing traffic delays. If we are to have active travel really happening, we have to re-think this priority.

The Design Guide is comprehensive and serves as a “how-to” tool for transport planners. It covers:

  • principles of safe design
  • street types
  • walking
  • cycling and micromobility
  • intersection principles and elements
  • signalisation
  • pedestrian and cycling provision at intersections
  • public transport
  • intersection guidance
Photo of a cycle path from the ACT Design Guide.

The title of the 63 page guide is, Design Guide: Best practices for urban intersections and other active travel infrastructure in the ACT.

Images are from the Design Guide.

Bathroom aesthetics and accessibility

A touch of universal design thinking has entered the design of bathroom design and fittings. Research from many quarters has established that people want to stay home in their later years. Consequently designers need to get on board with designs that are functional and look good too. A whitepaper from Nero Tapware updates designers on bathroom aesthetics and accessibility.

“Accessible living spaces are becoming increasingly important as the majority of Australians, both with and without disabilities, have a desire to stay in their current homes rather than enter residential aged care.”

Photo of a wall hung toilet and gold coloured shower and grab rail fittings. Bathroom aesthetics.

The Nero whitepaper discusses the many aspects of design in the context of the new Livable Housing Design Standard in the National Construction Code. However, their bathroom layout and overall style is similar to the public bathroom design. A universal design approach would use the space creatively and leave out grab rails until, or unless they were needed. That’s because grab rails placement needs to fit the individual user’s requirements.

“By modifications to our built environment, architects and designers can promote usability, participation in activities, and enable older users to live comfortably and independently.”

Shower recess from the Mecca Care range with gold coloured fittings.

It is good to see product designers preparing to align with the new Livable Housing Design Standard. However, the photographs in the whitepaper do not align with the universal design concept of the Standard. That is, each picture shows grab rails which are not part of the Standard. However, reinforcement in the walls is required so that grab rails can be added later at any placement the user needs.

Aesthetics impact wellbeing

The whitepaper nicely spells out all the issues including the importance of wellbeing. It notes that a liveable home must be multifunctional and it must feel like home. Lack of colour matching and styling options can end up looking clinical. The whitepaper argues that end users feel undervalued, neglected and uncared for.

The whitepaper is titled Aesthetics, Accessibility & Ageing: Designing Livable Spaces Without Compromising Function or Style. It was published in Architecture and Design. The full 58 page Mecca Care product catalogue has great pictures and a section on assistive living.

The Mecca range is specifically for people who require assistive living designs. While the photographs show nicely designed bathrooms, grab rails take the look and feel away from a “conventional” bathroom. But if these fixtures and fittings keep you at home for longer then at least they can look good. Wall hung toilet pans, however, are a good idea for any home.

Universal in-wall bodies

A companion Nero whitepaper is A Universal Approach to Bathroom Installation. The in-wall body is an installation that separates the in-wall body from the trim kit – the visible bits. In-wall bodies allow builders and customers to select the right fittings after tilers have finished. Customers can delay their design decision informed by the latest trends. At a later date home owners can update their fittings without affecting walls and tiles.

Images from the Nero whitepaper. This post did not receive any sponsorship and is provided as a relevant item of information.

Thinking of wheelchair users…

Lifemark in New Zealand has a handy little brochure that sets out bathroom dimensions and placement of fittings for wheelchair users. They use the term universal design because the features can be used by most people. However, they do look as if they are specifically designed for wheelchair users. And there is no need to make this look like a hospital.

Designers can still be creative and provide style with colour and attractive fittings. One thing the brochure does not mention is colour contrast for people with low vision. Contrast between the floor and the wall is important, and for some, contrasting fittings work well.

The title of the brochure is Universally Designed Bathrooms. Of course, the bathroom is only one element in a home that needs to be accessible for a wheelchair user.

Accessibility at neighbourhood scale

There are many tools for measuring environmental sustainability features in the built environment. But measuring access for all, is based on legislation and cost rather than user-based. Indeed, building standards for disability access have filled this knowledge gap but in the process, held back learning at the same time. That’s because you learn how to complete checklists but you don’t gain understanding of the issues this way. This is one reason that architect Mary Ann Jackson says built environment practitioners do not understand disability.

Neighbourhood scale accessibility measurement tools show how improvements can be determined in a planned way rather than ad hoc reactions.

A Melbourne street scene showing pedestrians and a tram.

Built environment knowledge and the lived experience of people with disability need connection. We need a tool that measures the overall accessibility of the built environment by incorporating the lived experiences of people with disability.

Increasingly, assessment of the built environment is becoming interdiciplinary. However, despite all the many built environment performance tools, input from people with disability are often left out of the equation. The move to co-design methods for new work is helpful, but does little to deal with existing built environments.

The title of Jackson’s 2019 article is, Accessing the Neighbourhood: Built Environment Performance for People with Disability. It explains the rationale behind the the development of the Universal Mobility Index. The key aim is to address the fragmented nature of current access across all areas of the built environment.

From the abstract

The existing built environment still fails to meet the needs of people with disability. This is despite rapid urbanisation, population ageing, failing infrastructure, and evidence that the built environment affects health and well-being,

In a parallel universe, improving built environment ‘sustainability’ performance, via measurement, receives much attention. Analysing the built environment at micro-scale (buildings), meso-scale (neighbourhood) and macro-scale (city-wide) is undertaken from various multidisciplinary perspectives.

Built environment performance is measured in many ways, but accessibility performance for people with disability, at neighbourhood scale, is rarely considered.

People with disability continue to experience lack of meaningful involvement in research, participation in decision-making, partnership equality, and direct influence over policy, with the built environment arena increasingly becoming a private-sector activity.

The actors involved, however, have little understanding of either the accessibility needs of people with disability, or the inaccessibility, particularly at neighbourhood scale, of the existing built environment.

This paper explores the design, planning and politics of an inaccessible built environment. Assessing the accessibility of the built environment for people with disability, at neighbourhood scale, is an essential component in the process of built environment accessibility improvement. As a result of collaboration between the domains of the built environment and disability, a new tool, Universal Mobility Index, has emerged and is undergoing further development.

Access Audit Handbook

The Royal Institute of British Architects has updated their Access Audit Handbook in conjunction with the Centre for Accessible Environments. Access auditing is an evolving concept and means different things to different people. Some take it as being compliant with a standard while others consider aspects beyond compliance.

The Access Audit Handbook is priced at £40.00 from either the Centre for Accessible Environments or the Royal Institute of British Architects.

Fortunately, the Ergonomics in Design for All Newsletter explains the content of the document. In doing so, the newsletter provides an synopsis of some of the key concepts in the handbook.

Front cover of the access audit handbook.

Similarly to Australian Standards, British Standards only apply to people with disability and do not cover any other groups in terms of access and inclusion. This is despite other groups who fall under anti-discrimination law. The handbook addresses some of these gaps. For example:

Faith spaces, prayer facilities, features relating to women’s safety and their well-being, including pregnancy and menopause, baby feeding and changing, and non-gendered sanitary and changing facilities.

A woman cradles a new baby in her arms. They are both white skinned.

There is guidance on neurodiversity and reducing sensory overload, anxiety and stress, such as quiet rooms. Designers are asked to plan logical wayfinding with straight lines, and create curves rather than corners.

Technology is evolving on building accessibility, space and wayfinding, and auditors need to keep up with these developments. Lift destination control systems are a case in point where people no longer press a button for their floor. The central control system can be very confusing where there is a bank of lifts.

Case studies

The handbook recommends engaging with building users for insights into the level of accessibility and to keep them engaged throughout the project. There are six case studies: a theatre, a zoo, a parish church, a university science lab, and an outdoor space. The case study of an inaccessible heritage town hall shows how to create an accessible community building.

The handbook has 32 checklists for the external environment, internal building space, management and communication.

Thanks to Isabella T. Steffan and Ergonomics in Design for All for the content of this post.

Older people: ageism influences digital design

Do stereotypes of older people affect how digital technology is designed? A team of researchers found that ageism influences digital design in negative ways. However, they found co-design partnerships overcame ageist attitudes and produced needed and used digital technologies.

Ageism can have a detrimental role in how digital technologies are designed. Participating with older people in the design process has the additional benefit of countering stereotypes. Image shows a group of older people on a desert camping expedition.

Of a group of older people having fun together on a camping tour.

Older people said the “ultimate partnership” in co-designing is to involve them from the beginning through to the end of the design process. Sharing control over design decisions was an important part of the process. They are more than informants – they are equals who have valuable contributions.

The researchers noted that although this vision of co-design is shared by designers, it is not always the case in practice.

Image shows older people working together on a workshop question.

Older people sit at round tables discussing questions. There are four round tables shown in this picture.

Older people in the study also said that ageism emerges in implicit and explicit language about ageing. And ageist images can influence the design process. Consequently, the researchers say it is important to view the diversity of older people.

Co-design with older people

How and when to involve older people in digital design is also important. Understanding co-design with older people has the potential for avoiding insufficient prototyping, biases and errors in the design process.

The title of the article is, An “ultimate partnership”: Older persons’ perspectives on age-stereotypes and intergenerational interaction in co-designing digital technologies.

From the abstract

There is a gap between the ideal of involving older persons throughout the design process of digital technology, and actual practice.

Twenty-one older people participated in three focus groups. Participants experienced ageism in their daily lives and interactions with the designers during the design process. Negative images of ageing are potential influencing factor on design decisions. Nevertheless, positive experiences of inclusive design pointed out the importance of “partnership” in the design process.

The “ultimate partnership” in co-designing is to involve older people from the beginning, iteratively, in a participatory approach. Such processes were perceived as leading to successful design outcomes, which they would like to use, and reduced intergenerational tension.

Older people and internet use

A pair of hands belonging to an older man hold a mobile phone.

2020 has been a year of digital connectedness. Many of us relied on the internet to keep working and stay connected to family and friends. Access to virtual health services turned out to be important too. But access to the internet and digital connection wasn’t available to everyone. It’s assumed that older people are unable or unwilling to use digital communications. The assumptions by others about the capabilities of older people doesn’t help. It reinforces a negative mindset in both older people and their younger family members. 

Understanding older people’s relationship with the internet was the subject of a survey in rural Queensland. 1500 households were surveyed and asked about the general adoption of internet use. Within this survey, respondents were asked to indicate their understanding of older people’s relationship with the internet. Researchers found three general assumptions: older people aren’t interested in the internet, and they generally can’t use it. However, family members did believe the internet would be useful for older people.

If family members act on these assumptions they are unlikely to assist older members of the family to use the internet to communicate with others. If society continues to assume older people incapable or disinterested in internet communications it will lead to reinforcing the digital divide.

The researchers conclude that distinctions should be drawn between older people in rural areas and the tendency to apply urban norms to this population. 

The title of the article is, Perceptions of older age and digital participation in rural Queensland. It is academically dense in parts but the issue is clear. Older people will be unable to join with younger cohorts in independently using internet technology if we continue to apply these assumptions.

Abstract

Participation is thought to build and sustain individual and community resilience. What constitutes participation today significantly involves networked digital communications. With Australia’s ageing population set to increase exponentially, and with a growing concentration of older people living outside of larger cities and towns, a need exists to address how participation in later life is understood and facilitated. Coupled with the need for regional communities to find relevant change processes that build resilience, this multidisciplinary paper highlights variations in perception about older people’s digital abilities in regional Queensland.

Following the general increase in appeal of digital devices to older people, defined here as those aged over 65, the paper suggests that how older people’s digital connectedness progresses is foundationally influenced by the speculative, antithetical and potentially ambivalent perceptions of others. In doing so, we seek to understand rural connectedness in later life through a suite of literacies informing digital participation.

There’s a related article from 2015, Internet use: Perceptions and experiences of visually impaired older adults. Published in the Journal of Social Inclusion, it provides some excellent qualitative research – the comments from older people with vision loss are especially revealing.