Jane Bringolf, Author at - Page 39 of 109

The benefit of designing for everyone

The assumption that designing for everyone will cost more often goes unchallenged. Even economic arguments for business benefits rarely cut through because of this. If economic arguments for inclusion worked we wouldn’t still be talking abut it. A Centre for Inclusive Design report analyses inclusive business practice and covers some areas not covered before. The report analyses education, retail and financial services and argues inclusive design can drive financial, economic and social improvements. PwC was commissioned for the report, The Benefit of Designing for Everyone.

Jeremy Thorpe from PwC says, “Inclusive design is a no-regrets process that creates significant benefits which are currently being left on the table. It is an overlooked step in maximising the potential of Australian business and ensuring a more productive Australia.” There is also an infographic with the key information, and a summary report and a Word version.

The report analyses three key industries in Australia: education, retail and financial services. Each one can benefit from taking a universal design approach to improve their bottom line.

David Masters, Corporate Affairs Director, Microsoft Australia, said,

“Accessibility is often focused on compliance, and while that is incredibly important, this report clearly shows that inclusion drives economic benefit too. Embedding inclusion in the upfront design phase ensures organisations are delivering products and services for everyone. Inclusive design is driving innovation at Microsoft and is a concept that all organisations should be embracing.”

It is good to see more work being done on the economics of inclusion. However, such arguments over the last ten years have yet to make their mark. The inclusive tourism industry is testament to that as well as the housing industry. Let’s hope someone is listening and willing to act.

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.

Viewing products online with Coles

Anyone buying or selling online wants the best possible view of the product. Buyers want to see relevant size and shape and key information. Sellers want the maximum number of sales. Making visual information clear, and easy to read and understand is key. Coles supermarkets has devised an image guide for suppliers to make products more readily recognised. So viewing products online with Coles should get easier for everyone. eBay sellers should also note.

The Coles guide is based on work carried out some years ago by the Inclusion Design Group at Cambridge University. This work is updated as they continue their research. The Coles guide is easy to read and gives instructions about images that suppliers should send them. These instructions are good for anyone who has a product or merchandise to sell.

The guide covers the use of 2D and 3D images, out of pack images and lifestyle images. The Coles website will feature a first image with the brand with the option for further images with a click. This gives the opportunity to see front, back, left and right side of the product.

A previous post, Smart Phones and Shopping explained some of the background and has a video explaining how it all works.

Housing and health – a much needed partnership

Research collaborations between different disciplines are a good way to build knowledge and share resources. Housing and health is one area where more cross-sector collaboration is needed. But collaboration doesn’t just happen. Stuart Butler and Marcella Maguire say in their article that collaboration needs a supporting infrastructure.

Butler and Maguire argue that health and housing partnerships remain in their infancy compared with other collaborations. So what is holding up the development of this essential partnership? They say it is the need for connective tissue.

“Connective tissue is a way of describing the infrastructure needed to support intentional alignment, coordination, and integration between sectors or organizations that serve the same or similar populations in a community.

By “infrastructure” we mean both tangible elements, such as information exchange systems, financing, personnel, shared language, and the intangible elements of trust and shared goals. Developing systems and trust that address cross-sector needs does not just happen; it requires a deliberate process that moves beyond the individual goals of any one system towards a community-wide approach.”

Why the partnership is important

Housing can be the platform for the range of services needed to promote good health. It is a foundational social driver of health. Housing and health partnerships are particularly valuable for addressing the needs of marginalised populations. Collaboration supports:

- - Ageing in the home and community
  - Meeting future pandemic situations
  - Ending homelessness and housing instability
  - Supporting NDIS participants and their families
  - Addressing some of the impacts of climate change

Components of success

The authors say the components of success include clearly defined goals, network development, and working on projects together. And a good point is made about budgets and cost-shifting:

“Partnerships are often weakened by the “wrong pockets” problem. This exists when one sector needs to invest in a way that benefits another sector but offers little or no direct cost savings to the first sector. In a housing-health partnership, for example, a housing authority might be considering improving safety features in all bathrooms for older residents. But the main cost saving would be to the Medicare program, not to the housing budget.”

The title of the article is, Building connective tissue for effective housing-health initiatives.

See also the WHO Housing and Health Guidelines which includes a chapter on accessible housing.

Built environment, climate and mental health

The Matilda Centre based at the University of Sydney is a collaboration of academics, practitioners and policy makers. The Centre recently ran a webinar on the built environment, climate and mental health. The speakers were Dr Susie Burke, Professor Susan Thompson and Dr Lyrian Daniel.

The YouTube video below runs for an hour. The three speakers give their perspectives on climate change and mental health and the role of planners.

Susie Burke talks about the way in which climate change impacts mental health. There are direct impacts, such as the time of a flood or fire, and indirect causes – the flow-on effects. Also, there are vicarious effects – individuals not directly affected but concerned for the effects on others.

Susan Thompson says planners appreciate the importance of the built environment in increasing health and wellbeing. Our health and wellbeing is dependent on how and where we live. And the health of our planet also ultimately underpins our health.

Places that support physical activity are good for mental health across all ages. Getting active for getting from place to place in daily life also supports mental wellbeing. But physical activity and transport needs to be fun and easy to do. And of course, green open space is important for both humans and the planet.

Lyrian Daniel talks about climate change, housing and mental health outcomes and patterns of disadvantage. Poor housing conditions, climate risk and mental health are closely linked. Affordability, especially for rental housing, adds to the mental health burden. Her key point is that housing has a clear role in mental health and wellbeing.

In the short question session at the end, Susan Thompson says we have all the tools and guidelines but no political leadership. So we all need to be advocating.

A framework to understand universal design

If there was an assessment tool for access and inclusion, would this encourage designers to think about population diversity in their designs? If the answer is ‘yes’ then this will be a step forward. But would such a tool become yet another checklist for designers? But perhaps a simple framework to understand universal design would be useful for design and evaluation.

Erica Isa Mosca and Stefano Capolongo embarked on a research study to find such a framework. Their first paper was published in 2018. It is titled, Towards a Universal Design Evaluation for Assessing the Performance of the Built Environment. They concluded that the involvement of users as well as methods such as checklists were needed for the next step.

The next step was a literature review. The researchers’ quest was to find ways to provide design information to architects so that they could go beyond access standards. The literature review is titled, Inspiring architects in the application of Design-for-All: Knowledge transfer methods and tools.

The researchers found four criteria which were critical for translating user needs into design strategies. The diagram below shows the four criteria. Using these criteria, the researchers developed an evaluation framework.

The final stage of the research project produced a useful framework for designers. This framework is about performance and assessing the built environment beyond access codes. The framework aligns with the current universal design thinking by including the concepts of co-design. The framework is shown in the diagram below.

There is more on this framework in another CUDA post titled, Universal design evaluation framework.

Age and workplace competence

If we say older people make more loyal and reliable employees, what does that say about younger people? And anyway, are these stereotypes valid? Ironically, public policy uses age stereotypes to overcome stereotypes about older workers. However, the connection between age and workplace competence is not supported in the research.

One of the key issues here is that there is no clear definition of what an ‘older worker’ is. This makes it difficult to build relevant public policy. The range of ages is between 40 and 64 depending on who is doing the research.

The other issue is how to manage the intersection of age with other characteristics such as gender and work type. So, there is a need for an approach that acknowledges people of a given age are not all alike. The stereotypes are a social construct and have little to do with individuals. Hence, employment programs should be based on individual need rather than age. Indeed, older age based programs only serve to entrench the stereotypes.

Age discrimination is not related to one age group. Younger people face discrimination in the workplace too. The research indicates that the attributes canvased by advocates of older workers are not necessarily those that employers seek.

Firefighters and two firetrucks attending to a fire. — Emergency workers transfer knowledge to new contexts. Image by Jon Pauling.

Public policy that pushes for a longer working life also makes several assumptions. People who work in jobs that cannot be done in later life, are overlooked in this scenario. And ‘productive ageing’ might not mean paid work, or that retirement is unproductive.

Population ageing has brought calls to prolong working lives. This has the potential to be a good thing for individuals and the economy. However, not everyone has a job-type that will support the extension of their paid working life.

Public policy

Philip Taylor and Warwick Smith provide a thoughtful overview of the situation in their conference paper, Rethinking Advocacy on Ageing and Work. Policymaking should aim for measures that support all people in transition, for instance, in entry to work, job loss and re-entry to work, based on the assumption that the needs of young and old are not
much different.

Advocates for older workers might be doing them a dis-service by perpetuating stereotypes. Younger and older workers are not in competition. Consequently both will benefit from efforts to promote their sustained employment.

Examples of stereotyping in reports

Front cover of What's Age Got to do with it? — Front cover of report

Four years ago Per Capita published a report with the title, What’s age got to do with it? It challenged the stereotypical statements about older workers. Although these were meant to be positive statements, they were reinforcing stereotyping. Stereotypes gain currency in society and the result is discrimination.

The Australian Human Rights Commission has re-used the title for their report, What’s age got to do with it? A snapshot of ageism across the Australian lifespan. The research for the report sought Australian thoughts about age and ageism.

The research focused on attitudes about age rather than behaviours. It involved an online survey of 2440 Australians and 11 focus groups. Ninety per cent of respondents agreed that ageism exists. However, some respondents weren’t clear what ageism is.

Making jokes about age was seen as more acceptable than making jokes about race or gender. Many thought the media played a significant role in producing stereotypical portrayals of all age groups. Stereotypes are strongly held by each group and accepted as fact. The report explores this.

Ageism impacts our human rights. We all have a right to health, education, housing and employment. We have the right to basic freedoms and to make choices. Consciously or subconsciously those in power can infringe these rights based on what they believe to be true .

The report was led by Kay Patterson, Commissioner for Ageing and consequently, the report is presented within this context. However the findings support the earlier work by Philip Taylor and Warwick Smith in the Per Capita report. Their work challenged the earlier report, Willing to Work, also published by the Human Rights Commission,

Professor Philip Taylor is a CUDA Board Member and presented at the UD2021 Conference in Melbourne.

Debunking the myths about ageing and work

Age discrimination is illegal in Australia, but when it comes to employment things get tricky. And then there is the question of the government wanting people to work to a later age. However, what are the real facts on this issue? Philip Taylor lists eight myths in a summary of an article for the Diversity Council of Australia.

Debunking the myths:

Myth 1. Age discrimination towards older workers is endemic. Reality: Age discrimination is potentially faced by all workers.

Myth 2: Different generations have different orientations to work. Reality: It is employee life stage (e.g. school leaver, working parent, graduating to retirement) that makes a big difference – not generation.

Myth 3: Older people are an homogeneous group. Reality: Older and younger people have intersectional parts of their identity which impacts on how they experience inclusion at work.

Myth 4: Older workers outperform younger ones in terms of their reliability, loyalty, work ethic and life experience. Reality: Performance is not linked to age – except in very rare circumstances.

Myth 5: Older people have a lifetime of experience that managers should recognise. Reality: Relevant experience, is more valuable than experience, of itself.

Myth 6: Younger workers are more dynamic, entrepreneurial, and tech savvy than older workers. Reality: Older people have a lot to offer the modern workplace.

Myth 7: Younger workers feel entitled and won’t stick around. Reality: Younger workers are more likely to be in insecure employment and to experience unemployment.

Myth 8: Older people who stay on at work are taking jobs from younger people. Reality: Increasing the employment of older workers does not harm and may even benefit, younger people’s employment prospects.

The title of the article on the Diversity Council website is, Myth Busting Age Discrimination at Work. You will have to sign in for the full paper.

The summary is titled, What are the myths (and facts) on ageing and work? and you can find out a little more about the myths listed above.

You might be interested in a related article on including people with disability in the workplace – it’s a lot easier than most people think.

Inclusive Communication Strategies

There are many reasons why some people have difficulty communicating. It can arise from a brain injury, a stroke, or a condition such as motor neurone disease. Inability to communicate easily means that often people avoid social situations due to feeling inferior. The Conversation has an article on inclusive communication strategies.

The Conversation article, We can all help to improve communication for people with disabilities, lists some of the simple things that remove the barriers to communication. They range from the type of devices used by Stephen Hawking, to just giving the person time to finish what they are trying to say. Speech is just one aspect of the issue, hearing is the other. There is useful information under each of the headings in the article:

1. Remove communication barriers
2. Prepare for communication success
3. Build a conversation together
4. Use communication aids and alternative strategies when you talk.

Around 5% of the population, or 1.2 million Australians have a communication disability. It can affect their speech, language, listening, understanding, reading, writing, or social skills.

Communication disability can be lifelong (as for people with cerebral palsy or intellectual disability) or acquired (as for people with stroke and aphasia, motor neurone disease, or traumatic brain injury).

Books for everyone with universal design

Reading is a skill that some people find difficult or onerous, so they miss out on reading for pleasure. But making books more accessible is more than just applying Easy Language. It also requires thoughtful layout, font and use of images. The Books for Everyone Framework describes the book making process from writing to publication.

Matching readers to the “right book” is more than the issue of genre or reading interests. Readers have varying language skills, functional differences and are neurodiverse. So the question for the publication industry is, “How can they work for inclusion of all types of potential readers?”

An article from Norway describes a case study of how the Books for Everyone (BfE) framework was used for five fictional books. These books were written by different authors, illustrators and publishers. The article provides suggestions for the publishing industry to accommodate reader diversity in the future.

A universal design perspective

At the beginning of 2000, books in Norway aimed at adults with dyslexia were often simplified versions of more complex books that were already published. Taking a universal design approach led to an awareness that books should still aim for high quality.

Rather than just simplifying text, more attention was given to how Easy Language can create high level literature. Consequently, BfE started cooperating with highly qualified authors, graphic novel designers, illustrators, and publishing houses in making new books.

The target groups for Easy Language books was broadened from people with cognitive impairments to everyone who will benefit. The primary target group determined the main adaptation approach applied. At the same time, these adaptations would most likely benefit other readers. Consequently, the universal design aspect of Easy Language was incorporated into the BfE framework.

It is interesting to note that in the last 22 years, Norway has embraced universal design across the built and digital environments. Consequently, it is no surprise that they are now applying the concepts more broadly.

The processes and framework are described in more detail in the article, The Development and Production of Literature Within an Easy Language and a Universal Design Perspective. The article is open access.

Abstract

Finding suitable books for pleasure reading is difficult for many people with reading challenges. Consequently, authors and publishing houses must consider user diversity when developing books.

Easy Language comprises an important component, which is closely related to other elements which together constitute accessible books, such as layout, fonts and use of images. Moreover, extensive user testing and involvement must ensure that the books meet the requirements of the readers.

This paper presents The Books for Everyone (BfE) Framework, which describes the process from initiation to publication and promotion of Easy Language books, using Norway as a case study. The BfE Framework is illustrated through examples from books and related to the reception and understanding of various user groups.

Including people with intellectual disability in co-design

Picture of a large family looking jubilant outside their house

People with intellectual disability are often left out when it comes to design. Whether it’s built or digital environments, services or products, this group is often overlooked. However, with co-design methods, people with intellectual disability could and should be included. But, this is still a new idea and there is very little literature or case studies on working with this group. The literature review found the following gaps in knowledge:

- General lack of literature on co-designing with people with an intellectual disability
- No specific literature encapsulating the co-design process, in the context of intellectual disability, and housing
- No frameworks or benchmarks on co-design with people with disability
- Lack of evaluation of the design outcomes of co-design process
- Lack of research that can assist parents plan for their ageing children.

Housing design for people with physical disabilities has evolved over time but is not easily adapted to suit people with intellectual disability. There is an obvious need to consider people with both intellectual and physical disability. The title of the article is, Co-designing in Australia housing for people with intellectual disability: an integrative literature review“. You can download the web version or the PDF version.

Intellectual disability and social inclusion

Local government authorities are exactly that – local. They are the tier of government closest to the everyday lives of people. Local neighbourhoods are where people feel either socially included or not. People with intellectual disability are much more likely to feel socially excluded. A research project undertaken by the University of Technology (UTS) took a novel approach to the issue. To begin, they recruited researchers with intellectual disability to participate in all aspects of designing and carrying out the research. This was a key step for informing the research process. The purpose of the study was to understand the experiences of people with intellectual disability in their local community. They found that people with intellectual disability have valuable information to share. However, their voices are unheard and consequently their needs not understood. The discussion starter was the question, “What would you do if you were boss of your local council?” The answers were that they want their council to:

- - Provide accessible information in a range of formats about what is happening in the community and how to participate.

- - Provide someone to speak to – or even better, face to face contact.

- - Employ people with intellectual disability.

- - Help them access better transport and find ways to make them feel safer and more welcome.

- - Improve public toilets and offer quiet spaces at noisy, busy events.

A framework for change

The researchers adopted the framework the WHO Age Friendly Cities program. which is pitched to community life at the local level. This is a good framework for councils to use with people with intellectual disability as well as older people.

WHO 8 Domains Framework

Participants wanted to know what is available and how to get around the community. They also wanted respectful interactions with others in the community and said familiar faces and places were important. These findings have some important information for councils and their social policy. Grouping people with intellectual disability under the generic term “people with disability” risks leaving them out. Councils should adapt communication and engagement strategies to suit people with intellectual disability. The title of the article is, Opportunities to support social inclusion for people with intellectual disability at a local level. Published in the Design for All India Newsletter. It is based on a published study, If I Was the Boss of My Local Government: Perspectives of People with Intellectual Disabilities on Improving Inclusion. The author is Dr Phillippa Carnemolla who is also a CUDA board member. This is a comprehensive article with recommendations for local government.

Author: Jane Bringolf

The benefit of designing for everyone

Like this: