The concepts of universal design are expanding to encompass marginalised and disenfranchised groups in our community. In the article A 10-step guide to queer UX, there is a nice quote “There’s nothing revolutionary about technology if it is only for a limited number of people.” Making products and places more accessible for gender non-conforming and trans folk is also making them more welcoming for everyone. Roniece Ricardo writes about her observations and interaction with software as a queer gender non-conforming woman. She makes ten points:
Allow users to change or write in their own gender
Consider not having users specify gender
Allow users the choice to hide or display identifying information from profiles
Don’t assume anything about gender presentation
Don’t assume your user’s pronouns
Be careful with your marketing materials
Don’t make assumptions about who your users date (or don’t)
If you are making a niche product, receive actual feedback from the people in the niche
Michael Small’s Churchill Fellowship report tracks and compares discrimination laws and industry practice in relation to public buildings. He questions whether the control of the Access to Premises Standard is falling more into the hands of industry as Human Rights Commission resources are becoming increasingly constrained.
Three of his recommendations are: that more training is needed for industry to help them understand the standards; more flexibility is needed for building upgrades; and better systems are needed for compliance enforcement and auditing. The title of his report is, Ensuring the best possible access for people with disability to existing buildings that are being upgraded or extended. The countries visited and compared are Canada, United States of America, Ireland and United Kingdom.
Ever wondered what the long term effects of a home modification are? A longitudinal study shows that household improvements in social housing can reduce risk of hospital stays.
The study picked up major improvements in chest and heart health as well as a reduction in falls and burns.
Over ten years, researchers found that modified and upgraded homes correlated with reduced hospital events. That means savings in the health budget or beds freed up for other patients. Obviously it is better for occupants too.
The title of the study is, “Emergency hospital admissions associated with a non-randomised housing intervention meeting national housing quality standards: a longitudinal data linkage study”. Sarah Rodgers et al. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
Universal Design drives Housing Quality
Fundamental changes in the building code and regulations have occurred in Norway. However, it seems that none of this has guaranteed improvements in quality on the usability of homes. Perhaps there are some lessons for Australia in implementing the Livable Housing Design Standard.
Architects, more than any other group in the construction industry are trained to break conventional frameworks. The way regulations are applied is the key to success. This is where the education of architects and building designers comes in.
Changes to the Norwegian building code in 2010 gave a clear framework for the implementation of accessibility and universal design. However, neither increased awareness of accessibility requirements and universal design, nor compliance with the building code guarantees improvement of housing quality and usability.
The Norwegian regulations have gone further in the direction of performance requirements than most other countries. This applies to all types of requirements, including requirements for usability, functionality and accessibility. Hardly any specifications are to be found in the regulations.
Ideally, this lack of specifications should give designers the opportunity to develop innovative answers and to respond to different contexts. Still, many architects and builders ask for clear specifications, to speed up design processes. Many architects understand guidelines as minimum requirements. Consequently, they are reproducing the identical solutions without considering users.
They see accessibility as another regulatory pressure and requirements as restrictions rather than positive incentives. However, there are examples of designers who have internalised the regulatory framework. These designers are able to create and integrate inclusive design in their daily work.
This paper presents examples of practice where dwellings have been developed within a framework of universal design. Focus is on the approach of the design team and their understanding and use of the regulatory framework to create better homes.
Relationship between housing and health
A systematic review of the literature found there is a strong association between housing and health. However, it is not clear that there is a causal link. Findings showed that provision of adequate heating, improvements to ventilation and water supply were associated with improved respiratory outcomes, quality of life and mental health. The title of the article is, The relationship between buildings and health: a systematic review.
From the abstract
The built environment exerts one of the strongest directly measurable effects on physical and mental health. This study provides a systematic review of quantitative studies assessing the impact of buildings on health. In total, 39 studies were included in this review.
Findings showed consistently that housing refurbishment and modifications improved health. Adequate heating, improved ventilation and water supply were associated with improved respiratory outcomes, quality of life and mental health. Prioritization of housing for vulnerable groups led to improved wellbeing.
This review found a strong association between certain housing features and wellbeing such as adequate heating and ventilation.
How do you know if your action plan for accessibility and universal design is actually being implemented? The Norwegian Government’s plan to be universally designed by 2025 now has a tool to monitor progress. A standardised method to collect and measure data nationally has been trialled.
The first results show that Norway still “faces many challenges to meet the government’s goals for Universal Design”. Data were collected on buildings and major facilities such as transport hubs, walkways, cycleways and car parks. The techniques are discussed in the article, “Mapping Norway – a Method to Register and Survey the Status of Accessibility“. The authors conclude that while their system is not perfect due to the need to fully standardise and simplify complex data, they believe it will be valuable to municipal and recreational planners and developers. The article and others can be found in the Proceedings of the International Cartographic Association.
The Norwegian mapping authority has developed a standard method for mapping accessibility walking in urban and recreational areas. . All data are stored in a geospatial database, so they can be analysed using GIS software. By the end of 2020, more than 230 out of 356 municipalities are mapped using that method.
The aim of this project is to establish a national standard for mapping of accessibility and to provide a geodatabase that shows the status of accessibility throughout Norway. The data provide a useful tool for national statistics, local planning authorities and private users. The results show that accessibility is still low and Norway still faces many challenges to meet the government’s goals for Universal Design.
Does universal design pursue social justice or is it a marketing strategy? Aimi Hamraie takes a look at universal design from a feminist perspective and claims that this is not a value-free notion and not without symbolic meaning. So, is universal design social justice or just marketing?
If disability is a product of the built and social environments rather than something intrinsic to the body, then universally designing should be the ideal outcome of disability politics. However, the physical environment alone is not enough to account for exclusion. Also, design professions grapple with the idea that universal design is “one-size-fits-all”, which it is not.
This philosophical essay challenges conventional wisdom about universal design. It has a distinctly North American approach underpinned by the civil rights movement. It charts the history of universal design, argues why design matters, and asks, “How can design be universal?” Hamraie concludes that collective access is the way forward – essentially arguing for participatory design, “shifting from value-explicit design for disability to design with and by misfitting bodies more generally.” The title of the article is, “Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal Design”.
Hamraie is also co-author of a new book, Building Access that brings together UD history and architectural history in designing and making built environments usable by all. The authors ask who counts as the everyone of universal design.
Universalism: who does it serve?
Rob Imrie and Rachael Luck discuss universal design from the perspective of the lives and bodies of people with disability. Their philosophic offering is the introduction to a set of eight papers in a special issue of Disability and Rehabilitation. They ask, Universalism: who does it serve?
Some important questions are raised about the role of universalism and the embodiment of disability. For example, proponents of universal design say that users are crucial to the design process. But what does that mean for the skills of designers – will they be lost or discounted? Designers have the power and skills to design for the benefit of some groups and not others.
The focus of universal design is often on techniques and operational outcomes. Is this enough – are there other aspects to think about? Imrie and Luck provide a paragraph on each paper in the edition. It is an open access publication.
Imrie and Luck conclude:
“The papers, as a collective, are supportive of universal design, and see it as a progressive movement that is yet to realise its potential. The contributors provide insight into the tasks ahead, including need for much more theoretical development of what universal design is or ought to be in relation to the pursuit of design for all and not the few. This includes development and deployment of concepts that enable non-reductive conceptions of design and disability to emerge, aligned to political and policy strategies that enable universal design to become a socio-political movement in its broadest sense.”
Emily Steel has written a thoughtful piece about how the thrust of Australia’s National Disability Strategy is languishing while everyone focuses on one small part of it – the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). She argues that the NDIS runs the risk of further marginalising people because it is still treating people with disability as needing special (that is, separate non-mainstream) treatment. This is where the concepts of universal design come to the fore. Yes, some people will need specialised equipment as part of experiencing inclusion, but that equipment doesn’t make for inclusion unless the person can use the equipment to merge into the mainstream. For example, a person with paraplegia needs both a wheelchair and a step-free entry to buildings. One is no good without the other. The good thing is that a step-free entry is good for everyone – inclusive universal design. Only a small percentage of people with disability will qualify for the NDIS and this is also why we need universal design – for everyone, including people with and without NDIS packages. See Emily’s article for some good points on this issue. Emily will be speaking at the 3rd Australian Universal Design Conference. She is Senior Lecturer, School of Health & Wellbeing at University of Southern Queensland.
Champions of universal design are often told that to effect change you need a good economic argument. Several such arguments have been written, but have met with little success in terms of gaining greater acceptance of universal design and inclusive practice. Shops, buses, buildings, hotels, meeting places, schools, parks, tourist destinations, and homes still remain inaccessible to many. The tourism sector has recognised that telling hotels and holiday businesses that they are missing out on a significant market is not sufficient of itself to make change. What is needed is more “How to…”. The latest publication discussing economics, is on the purchasing power of working age people with disability. It travels over familiar ground with the latest statistics, facts and figures relative to the United States. It compares the disposable income of people with and without disability and with different disabilities, and goes on to discuss the data from a marketing perspective.
The full title of the paper is, A Hidden Market: The Purchasing Power of Working-Age Adults with Disabilities, by Yin, Shaewitz, Overton & Smith. Published by the American Institutes for Research. You can download from Researchgate.
Note: The economics of universal design in housing by Smith, Rayer, Smith (2008) is an excellent example of economists applying their skills to a social problem. Nothing has changed yet.
Hobsons Bay City Council is situated south-west of Melbourne with a significant stretch of coastal area. As with many local councils in Victoria they are keen to embrace the principles of universal design in their planning policies. As part of their access and inclusion strategy they plan to implement universal design principles in new buildings, buildings with significant upgrades, retrofits of existing buildings, features and public open space. They started with a Hobsons Bay Universal Design Policy Statement.
The policy statement includes a table where the 7 classic principles of universal design are translated into specific guidelines for council staff. The policy statement discusses the myths, regulatory framework and how to implement universal design, and how to go beyond compliance.
A short document and a good template for other councils to use. Policy statements don’t need to be long and wordy. This one gets to the point.
The notion of “third places” is about places in the public domain that encourage informal and casual social interaction. The “first place” is home, and the “second place” is where significant time is spent in a formal sense such as the workplace. Community gardens and town squares are an example of a “third” place.
The Dutch idea of the Woonerf has been picked up again, this time by Jenny Donovan of La Trobe University. Using some graphics, she shows how design can affect our decisions to either walk, drive, use public transport or not, and whether you feel welcome in the environment. She covers the key elements of a Compassionate City where various design elements can meet the needs of a range of people and create more harmonious behaviours. There are several links in the article to other related reports and articles. The article originates from The Conversation.
Urban design and social responsiveness
It’s one thing to be accessible, but what other features make a place socially responsive? According to aresearch paper from Singapore, top of the list is footpaths followed by seating for resting. Concerns over the mix of cyclists and pedestrians and good lighting also feature. The article outlines a method for assessing accessibility and useability of environments. Apart from the method, the results support many other papers on this topic.
Creating a more responsive urban environment enables social integration of people into active public life. This is especially the case for people limited physical abilities.
The author presents a research-based methodology for analysing and evaluating accessibility in public areas of a big city. The originality of the method lays in empowering the disabled persons to play the active role of experts in measuring and evaluating accessibility according the developed assessment tool.
The methodology enables evaluation of accessibility on different urban scales: urban landscapes, in buildings, and in their interiors. The case study performed in Singapore explores the quality of access that people have to public spaces, metro stations, hotels and café.
The paper presents recommendations for improving accessibility in the city by improving the architectural design of buildings. Updating building regulations is also required as well as the maintenances of open spaces and buildings.
The results of this research provide the comprehensive action plan for eliminating barriers in the specific Singapore’s environment and in the other cities. Conclusions present a coherent accessibility monitoring tool and improvement programme to create a socially responsive urban environment.
Service design is yet to get on board with universal design according to a Norwegian Masters thesis study by Oda Lintho Bue. Norway leads the way with its overarching policy and commitment in their policy document, Norway Universally Designed by 2025. So it is no surprise to see this study undertaken here. Universal design is not a profession in its own right, but many projects need a UD champion on the team. Committing resources on universal design early in the project will most likely ensure that there will be no need for resources used on redesign later. This point is well made in the thesis. Given that Norway has such a strong stance on UD, it is interesting to note that even Norway is struggling with getting implementation across the board.