Category: Research papers for built environment

Academic papers and publications

LGBTQIA+ perspectives on inclusive public space

A study by the University of Westminster and Arup revealed some important information about LGBTQIA+ perspectives on inclusive public space. Public seating featured in many of the responses to different survey questions along with design features everyone would like. Consequently, this study is a good example of how focusing on a marginalised group can improve the built environment for everyone.

“A legacy of Victorian design culture means that they continue to express institutionalisation, not inclusivity.”

In the past, buildings such as law courts were designed to express authority and to intimidate. This creates feelings of exclusion. Image from Historic England Blog

Manchester town hall and St Peter's Square - a public space designed in Victorian times.

A survey found that LGBTQIA+ people had a lot to say about public space and buildings. For example, they regarded hospitals as uncomfortable places – they felt impersonal, soulless, and alienating. The most important factors shaping inclusivity were street furniture to relax on, green spaces, easy access to transportation and quality lighting.

Paradoxically, traditional security features such as CCTV felt like hostile architecture because they made the place uncomfortable. It’s about the sense of what is being protected and who is being policed.

The survey report discusses gaybourhoods with mixed thoughts on advantages and disadvantages.

“The prevalence of queer imagery such as the Pride flags were generally seen as welcoming features. However, some respondents raised concerns that there may be a greater risk of hate crime when leaving the space.” Image from report, Janet Echelman TED 2014 Sculpture.

A giant brightly coloured aerial sculpture that looks like a closely woven fine web of threads. It soars above the urban space below. LGBTQIA+ perspectives on public space

Visibility and privacy

A common theme from the study is the ability to see the whole area and exits without being viewed themselves. For example, street seating behind low walls or screened by shrubs. In effect, a cosy corner without feeling watched.

Rather than active surveillance, respondents prefer busy and diverse spaces with lots of people so they can blend in without fear of being targeted.

What makes public space inclusive?

The survey respondents were far more receptive to sounds, smells and visual ambience of space than heterosexual men. It’s interesting to note that people who are neurodivergent also rate these factors as important. In terms of public monuments, respondents felt more diverse representation would change street ambience to be less intimidating.

Bus stations and hospitals

To some degree the survey respondents were likely expressing similar design dislikes to many others. Bus stations with low roofs, noise and fumes, and poor wayfinding were mentioned in the survey. Entry to hospitals with long blank concrete walls reinforced the messages that this place is about procedures, not people.

The title of the full report from Arup is Queer Perspectives on Public Space. Or you can read the shorter version from the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) titled LGBTQ+ perspectives on safety and inclusion in public space.

Queering cities in Australia

An earlier publication by Arup asks the question, ‘How could we make public spaces more inclusive for LGBTIQ+ community?’ Queering Cities in Australia is a collaborative research project with Australian universities. This follows a similar project in with the University of Westminster.

You can download the publication and other Arup reports on their Insights webpage.

Front cover of Queering Cities in Australia featuring to men and a girl child.

A Canadian policy response to LGBT housing

Below is the abstract from an article in the Canadian Planning and Policy Journal about housing. The title is, Identifying barriers associated with LGBT seniors’ housing: Opportunities moving forward in the Canadian context.

From the abstract

This paper discusses housing implications for planning and operating LGBT-inclusive housing. Barriers identified by older LGBT people include: fear of discrimination, homophobia, transphobia and violence from staff and residents, housing affordability and availability, health challenges, feeling unsafe, intersectional barriers, and building maintenance.

Barriers identified by housing service providers include: no current inclusion practices at their workplaces, lack of LGBT information for staff and residents, health challenges for older people, and housing affordability.

This research was based on a qualitative analysis of a survey of 970 older LGBT people and housing providers across Canada. We discuss the role of housing service providers, health care providers, planners, and others in creating inclusive housing accommodations and services

It is critical to provide better information on housing choices for older people, and implement anti-discrimination policies and LGBT competency training for housing providers and staff. Engaging the older LGBT community in the development of housing and housing policy, is essential.

Autistic-led insights on airport accessibility

Airports are typically noisy, busy, and confusing all adding to the general travel anxiety many people experience. But for many autistic people the crowds, noise and confusion is even more challenging. So finding out more about their experience could lead us to better experiences for everyone. A study analysing reports from six Australian airports revealed some autistic-led insights on airport accessibility.

Taking a flight for a holiday, a business trip, or a family visit, requires navigating an airport environment. Preparing for the trip and getting to the airport can be stressful at the best of times. Then comes the ordeal of the airport itself.

Long view of the inside of an airport building.

The study analyzed reports produced between 2017 and 2024, to find ways to make airports better for autistic travellers. These reports were based on assessments led by autistic people and evaluated areas like sensory experiences and communication needs. The study found that reducing sensory challenges, like loud noises, and improving communication and wayfinding could make things easier.

Insights and recommendations

The way autistic people manage an environment depends on the type, intensity, and duration of sensory inputs and whether a place feels open or confined. Predictability helps reduce uncertainty and anxiety by ensuring that sensory and environmental cues remain consistent. Sight, sound and smell are key design elements to consider:

  • Choose natural lighting over harsh fluorescents
  • Reduce glare and reflective surfaces
  • Select neutral colour palettes (except for signage)
  • Use sound absorbing materials
  • Create neutral scents

Clear communication and predictability is the second theme emerging from the study. Autistic people need to plan and prepare every part of their journey so they know what to expect. Knowing what to expect reduces uncertainty and anxiety and helps with maintaining confidence. Every airport is different. That makes understanding airports difficult. Pre-travel information is key to creating a level of predictability. And when at the airport, wayfinding and signage become important.

Clear signage, colour-coded pathways, and pictorial instructions also serve as alternative modes of communication. But these must be consistent too. This image is of a bus station in Singapore designed with people with dementia. It serves as an example of a visual wayfinding system.

Long view of a Singapore bus interchange showing the different coloured directional arrows on the floor. Public transport and dementia.

Crowd levels and general noise cannot be fully controlled, but providing recovery spaces can help. These are places where individuals can temporarily retreat to manage sensory overload. They support their ability to re-engage with the environment and continue their journey.

However, an autism-friendly environment also requires an understanding from staff and the public. They play a key role in recognising and accommodating sensory and social needs to foster a more inclusive and accessible space for autistic people.

This study shows the importance of involving autistic people in the design of more inclusive public spaces – for everyone. An important factor as the tourism and travel industries continue to evolve to create more accessible destinations and experiences.

The article is titled, Autistic-led insights on airport accessibility: A retrospective analysis of environmental assessments

From the abstract

Autistic people often encounter overwhelming sensory environments, stringent security procedures, and crowded spaces in airports. This study retrospectively analysed reports from Autistic-led environmental assessments conducted at six Australian airports between 2017 and 2024.

The assessments focused on eight key elements, including sensory adaptations, communication supports, and preparation and predictability. Analysis revealed two key themes: (1) navigating the sensory landscape and (2) helping passengers navigate with confidence.

Our findings underscore the importance of sensory adjustments—such as natural lighting, quiet spaces, and clearer visual aids and communication supports. Importantly, this study offers practical, evidence-based recommendations for more inclusive design. This research highlights the need for participatory design approaches to create public spaces that are genuinely accessible and supportive for Autistic travelers

Try before you fly

One of the barriers to flying for neurodivergent people, is not knowing what to expect. So having a practice run makes a lot of sense in terms of minimising stress when the flight day comes. Air New Zealand has a program that replicates all the steps people take at airports before they take off. That is, check-in, security screening, and boarding processes.

The Air New Zealand media release says:

“Air New Zealand is helping remove the unknowns of air travel for neurodivergent children and their families by creating a safe, supportive environment to practice the journey – before even taking to the skies.  In a first for the airline, and in partnership with Autism New Zealand and Acorn Neurodiversity, it has hosted a flight familiarisation experience for neurodivergent children and their families.”

Practical wisdom for accessible cities

Practical wisdom, knowledge and experience is a key factor in co-design processes. People with disability have their own lived experience of cities which is essential knowledge for the ongoing design and redesign of urban environments. But it has to mesh with other wisdoms and experiences and here we find tensions between stakeholders. A study from Sweden revealed three kinds of knowledge at play.

Workshops held in three Swedish cities revealed three kinds of knowledge. They are: fact based knowledge, professional knowledge, and practical wisdom (episteme, techne and phronesis).

A woman with long blonde hair is reaching across the meeting table to point to a piece of paper. Three other people look on. Sharing practical wisdom.

Knowledge creation is an ongoing endeavour and collaboration between stakeholders is essential for overcoming tensions and working for good outcomes. But personal experience is not well regarded as it cannot be ‘measured’ and quantified.

Tensions and practical wisdom

‘Officials viewed personal narratives about disability as the source of valuable knowledge, helping them understand the reasons behind accessibility requirements – ‘understand in practice’, as one official said. She recommended this for practitioners as a way to avoid building errors.’

Structural tensions centred around resources and who had access, including disability organisations. This creates power imbalances. In some municipalities officials sent people with disability questions to confirm their decisions. Other structural tensions are more mundane such as the best time of day to get the best citizen participation rate. People with disability reported officials’ resistance to applying accessibility standards as another factor.

Categorical tensions centred around the notion that accessibility is an overarching label as being for people with impairments. Proposals about roads, public art or street furniture did not belong to accessibility. Categorising accessibility as a minority interest made it a ‘soft issue’, not like emergency services – a firm box to tick.

Tensions around interpretation revealed uncertainties about judging personal stories in relation to urban experiences.

‘What we can perhaps see as the disadvantage of this way of working: being on site with a somewhat small group – is that it depends a lot on the people involved. After all, it is your personal opinion that you are expressing. And it can then vary, we think, from project to project depending on who is involved … There is still a risk that we interpret something wrong … You don’t know if it’s personal opinions … It’s hard to know whose voice you’re hearing.’

Universal design seen as disability design

So, where does universal design fit into the discussion? While universal design encompasses more than disability, it remains closely associated with it. When interpreted as accessibility, it becomes an afterthought at the end of the process. However, a universal design approach takes inclusion seriously from the outset of a project.

What cannot be quantified and measured “rationally” is seen as ‘soft’ evidence by officials. Nevertheless, universal design endeavours to explain the reasons behind access requirements and why minimum compliance is insufficient.

Handwritten word on glass saying regulations.

The title of the paper is, Practical wisdom for accessible cities: Creative tensions in universal design processes for Swedish urban development. An important exploration into why we cannot move past minimum compliance both in Sweden and Australia.

From the abstract

This paper explores knowledge creation in universal design processes that aim to make cities accessible to all. It contributes insights into the practice of urban development in Sweden. Workshops and qualitative interviews were conducted in three mid-sized cities re-designing a city square, a street, and a new library.

We found that different kinds of knowledge were in play in local collaboration. Universal design was akin practical wisdom. Imbalances of power and divisions between stakeholders caused tensions. The perception that accessibility is limited to a specific target group also played a part. To overcome these tensions, we propose that disability organizations be contributors rather than commentators.

Are we there yet? Norway universally designed 2025

Olav Rand Bringa is credited with bringing a universal design approach to Norwegian planning regulations back in 1999. The result was a forward thinking document, Norway Universally Designed 2025. Bringa has followed the evolution of universal design thinking for 25 years until his retirement last year.

Bringa has given a lot of thought to the evolution of the universal design concept, the language we use, and it’s application. He was part of the early movement and wrote about the processes in, Universal Design and Visitability: from Accessibility to Zoning (page 97). Although it began with the built environment it soon included the digital world.

Front cover of the book.

Here are past posts that refer to Bringa’s work and the landmark document Norway Universally Designed 2025.

Norway universally designed by 2025

Top half of the front cover of the Norway Universally Designed 2025. The graphic is various shades of blue with a woman operating an automatic teller machine.

The Norwegian Government took the principles of universal design and applied them across all policies to create maximum inclusion. This made everyone responsible for inclusion at every level – in the built environment, outdoor areas, transport, and ICT.

In 2008, Norway launched its first Action Plan 2009-2013 with the goal of a universally designed Norway by 2025.

The focus on was on people with disability, accessible built environments and minimising discrimination. The plan covered the actions of the public service and all ministries. “The Government’s work is based on universal design. Universal design is an expression of a value put on equality by society.“

In 2010, Norway amended its Planning and Building Act, among others, to include universal design. The plan was to take a staged approach to upgrading public buildings and spaces. 

The Delta Centre took responsibility to coordinate the actions in Norway’s 2015-2019 plan in 2016. This plan covers ICT and communications to a more detailed level.

Picture of the front cover of the Norwegian Action Plan on universal design.

Olav Rand Bringa provides extra insights in his paper, From Visions to Practical Policy: The Universal Design Journey in Norway. What did We learn? What did we gain? And what now?

He outlines the remaining barriers to implementation along with the successes. This paper draws together Bringa’s extensive experience in the field of universal design.

A guide for universal design is not enough

Guides give guidance, but you need to know the point of universal design. Knowing the point is a key success factor in taking a universal design approach. That’s why a guide is not enough – you need to know the point of it.  

The point is inclusion – it’s about society, not just design. The focus on compliance with standards does not tell you the reason, only what to do.  An article in Citylab provides some examples of how Norwegian designers are embracing the principles of universal design.

An aerial view of a hospital courtyard showing gardens, seating and children's play equipment.

St Olav’s Hospital in Trondheim is a good example of implementing universal design across the whole hospital setting. That’s from the outdoor and external features through to the internal design. The Chief Architect says, “Guidelines are not enough, you need clear intentions. You have to know what’s the point of this”. 

relates to With a Deadline In Place, Norway Warms Up to Universal Design

“It looks like a nice urban environment,” said Onny Eikhaug, Program Leader at the Norway Design Council. “It doesn’t look like a hospital, it doesn’t smell like a hospital.” DOGA, The Innovation Award for Universal Design.

Accessibility by another name – does it work?

Norway uses the term “accessible” to signify solutions specifically for people with disability when not required generally in the population. An interesting distinction by Olav Rand Bringa using his 20 years of experience working in the field of universal design.

Bringa says succinctly, “The term accessibility for people with disabilities does not broadcast an understanding of qualities beyond the targeted user group”.  Consequently other terms try to compensate for this. The image is of the Olso Opera House with a universally graded access.

picture of a modern building. Norway Opera House has a wide graded access and no steps.

However, it is difficult to move away from “accessibility” because it is perpetuated in legal and other statutory documents. Bringa writes thoughtfully about the issues of getting language right to get inclusion right. An important contribution to the quest for inclusive societies. The title of the article is, Universal Design as a Technical Norm and Juridical Term – A Factor of Development or Recession? it’s open access.

From the abstract

Norway introduced universal design as an ideological and technical concept in Norway in 1996. Since then universal design has replaced accessibility for people with disabilities in national policies, laws, regulations, standards, projects and everyday language.

“Accessibility” characterises solutions made more exclusively for people with disabilities. Few countries have made extensive use of the concept of universal design with challenges from lawmakers, architects, economists, user organizations, and entrepreneurs.

This paper reflects on more than 20 years of extensive use of the concept of universal design. It asks the question: Is universal design an academic invention with little extra positive impact compared to accessibility for people with disability? Or does the concept defend its supposed role as a step towards a society with equal opportunities for all?

Legal documents favour visible disabilities

Previous papers have highlighted successes and where there is room for improvement. A 2024 Norwegian study looks at universal design through a legislative lens and finds legal documents favour visible disabilities. 

In more recent years, people with invisible disabilities have raised their voices in the disability rights movement. However, their voices are yet to be incorporated into legislative documents.

A man's hand is writing the word regulations in large script style writing.

Historically, people with mobility and vision impairments led the way in disability rights. Consequently, legilsation was formed with their needs in mind.

The Norwegian researchers wanted to find out if there is a “disability prestige” at play. This is where some disabilities count more than others. Or is it something as basic as just having your disability visible to others? The researchers concluded that visibility was more important to explain discrimination between groups. 

In Australia the Access to Premises Standard also favours people with mobility and vision impairments. 

The context of the study was transport. They discuss the wording of documents and how terms such as “reduced mobility” are interpreted. It can mean a person with a physical and/or a cognitive impairment. In legislation, it is most often linked to bodily movement. 

Prestige versus visibility

Mobility impairments are mentioned more frequently than other disabilities in Norwegian documents. Vision impairments, also frequently mentioned, come in second. The conclusion is that discrimination between disability types is mostly explained by the visibility of a disability.  

Why does this matter? When provision for other disabilities and long term health conditions are absent in legal documents, businesses and services don’t consider them. 

The title is, How laws of universal design discriminate between different types of disabilities – Lessons learned from Norway.

Inclusive streetscapes

There is a statistical link between disability and loneliness according to the UK Office for National Statistics. The more pronounced the disability, the greater the likelihood of loneliness. So what do streetscapes have to do with this? Every journey, for any reason begins with leaving the house and directly interacting with the street. A study of lived experience found that people with disability:

> felt invisible and unheard because of inaccessible streetscapes

> found inconsistent electric vehicle noise complicates navigation, and

> engagement is vital in addressing accessibility and enhancing communication.

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?

The study documents how researchers gathered information from participants with disability and lists the questions asked.

“Planners responsible for streetscapes, as well as the public, need stronger education on disabled people’s needs and barriers.”

A white SUV is parked across the footpath nosing into a driveway

Inclusive streetscapes – the challenges

The study revealed challenges with societal design, pavements, societal behaviour, street furniture, wayfinding, and roadworks. Each of these themes are explained in more detail. For societal design, poor consideration of needs and design inconsistency topped the list.

In terms of footpaths, the surfaces, insufficient kerb ramps and footpath camber rated highest. Parking on the footpath was the greatest behaviour gripe followed by aggressive behaviour by others.

Rubbish bins and outdoor dining and chairs were the worst street furniture offenders, and accessible routes are often longer than they need to be. Difficulty navigating temporary paths during roadworks is a key element for improvement.

Providing accessible parking spaces without providing a kerb ramp is considered poor and thoughtless design. Street repairs can make the situation worse.

It’s about the footpath

Participants regularly mentioned poor pavement surfaces, lack of maintenance, the angle of the camber. Shared spaces are particularly challenging. They make it difficult for them to recognise priorities on the road. This is a source of anxiety which is at odds with claims that shared spaces are safer.

There is much more to unpack in this paper about all the other elements including street furniture and wayfinding and navigation. Another key element is the extra energy required when already working from a low energy base because of their disability.

The title of the paper is, Inclusive Streetscapes: Embedding disabled people’s lived experience into street accessibility.

From the abstract

Urban streetscape design has to do more to enable the independent movement of disabled people. Few studies have attempted to capture the lived experience of a disabled person using the streetscape. 

We interviewed 26 people with lived experience of a disability (from around the UK) to define the streetscape barriers faced. The systemic reasons as to why these issues exist are identified and we propose a new path forward.

We provide recommendations for streetscape design with direct relevance for local authorities, policy makers and designers for more accessible streetscapes. Embedding people with disability into the decision making is essential. Future work must assess the barriers in collaboration with disabled people, to prioritise actions and aim for an equitable streetscape for all.

Staying put and walking more

An Australian study found that older people who live in separate houses walk more than those in retirement villages. The Curtin University study accounted for several factors before coming to this conclusion. It adds to the literature that for most people, staying in your own home is the best way to age. Of course, we need homes and neighbourhoods designed to support this. While the study has some limitations, it is another angle on staying put versus age segregated living arrangements.

The title of the article in Sage Publications is The Potential Importance of Housing Type for Older People’s Physical Activity Levels. You will need institutional access for a free read. 

An older man and woman are walking away from the camera down a street. They are wearing backpacks and holding hands. Where do you want to live when you grow older?

Understanding inlcusion – how can we make it happen?

Architect Mary Ann Jackson has written a thoughtful article about built environment practitioners and their continued lack of understanding of our human diversity. She says that little is known about the extent of inaccessibility. Legislation is all very well, but it doesn’t reflect the real lives of people.

Shows the street of a new housing development with driveways for cars but no footpath for people

Jackson’s article explores the question of how might an understanding of models of disability and human rights inform the improvement of access at a neighbourhood scale? She argues that built environment practitioners must engage with users, with people with disability to inform their understanding of what makes (unintended) barriers to access and inclusion. There are links to related articles on the page.

The title of the paper is, Models of Disability and Human Rights: Informing the Improvement of Built Environment Accessibility for People with Disability at Neighborhood Scale?  It’s an open access article. You can download the full text.  

Empathy driven design

Empathy driven design is a catalyst for social change. It challenges architects to consider the broader impact of their designs on social equity to make spaces more inclusive. By integrating empathy into the design process, architects can create more equitable, caring environments that serve the common good. Despite the challenges, empathy driven design is a paradigm shift in architecture, moving away from top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions.

Empathy driven design is based on collaboration. That is, engaging with communities to understand their unique experiences and challenges. The architect becomes a listener and participant in the co-design process. Image courtesy of MASS Design Group from ArchDaily.

A man in a blue shirt is pushing a wheelbarrow downhill beside the construction of a high stone wall of a hospital

An article in ArchDaily explains more about designing with empathy and for social equity. Examples of empathy driven design include, among others, a hospital in Rwanda and a housing project in Chile. Projects in developed countries require the same thought as these examples and show what’s possible.

Challenges and opportunities

One of the most significant hurdles is balancing empathy with practical constraints such as budget, time, and regulatory limitations. Many projects that aim to serve disadvantaged communities are often restricted by tight budgets.

The key issue is the cost of time and project deadlines. Navigating this tension requires creative solutions that make the most of available resources without compromising the project’s empathetic core.

Design alone cannot overcome deeply entrenched societal inequalities. The success of designs depend on both the built environment and broader support systems, such as social services or public policy changes.

The title of the article is, Designing with Empathy: Architecture for Social Equity.

Empathy: the key to inclusive design

Loughborough University has a good track record for inclusive design research. Low vision and manual dexterity are the most common losses for people as they age. Consequently, the study focused on these factors to improve architects’ empathy and understanding of users.

The method involved using glasses and gloves that simulate loss of vision and loss of hand dexterity. Participants wore the glasses and gloves and then given reading, writing and dexterity tasks.

The results show that the tasks challenged their traditional view of disability. Participants began to see it more as a continuum and effecting a wider population.

Key themes

  • Inadequacy of the current building standard.
  • There is no incentive for developers to go beyond minimum compliance.
  • Developers often commission design briefs so the end user is often unknown.
  • In the absence of knowing their end user, they tend to design for themselves.
  • They feel there is a stigma associated with accessible designs and this reinforces the disability-centric concept of able bodied versus disability designs.
  • It challenged their traditional view between ‘able-bodied’ and ‘disabled-users’.
  • A lack of inclusive design training within their undergraduate and post graduate training.
  • Participants felt strongly that commercial, accessible design decisions, mainly addressed physical impairments.
  • All participants reported an increased awareness of the psychological effects of the simulated capability loss, reporting frustration and fatigue.

The title of the article is, How ‘Empathetic modelling’ positively influences Architects’ empathy, informing their Inclusive Design-Thinking.  Arthritis affects one in seven Australians. Opening packages, lifting the kettle and turning door knobs can be difficult and painful. 

The video below shows the gloves and glasses in action.

Designing for empathy

A distant view of a circular seating arrangement in a huge room for the parliamentary members. Designing for empathy in Finland.

Human centred design and inclusive design processes focus taking an empathetic approach to the users. But what if you turn that around and think about designing for empathy itself? To shift from being the empathiser to become an empathy generator? That was the question a team of designers in Finland wanted to know the answer to. Using socio-cultural design tools rather than physical empathy design tools, they created a co-creative process with the Finnish parliament. 

The title of the paper is, Design for Empathy: A co-design case study with the Finnish Parliament. 

From the abstract:

Globalisation and the mixing of people, cultures, religions and languages fuels pressing healthcare, educational, political and other socio-cultural issues. Many issues are driven by society’s struggle to find ways to facilitate more meaningful ways to help overcome the empathy gap which keeps various groups of people apart.

This paper presents a process to design for empathy – as an outcome of design. This extends prior work which typically looks at empathy for design – as a part of the design process, as is common in inclusive design and human centered design process.

We challenge the role of the designer to be more externalised, to shift from an empathiser to become an empathy generator. We develop and demonstrate the process to design for empathy through a co-creation case study aiming to bring empathy into politics.

The Parliament of Finland is the setting for the project. It involves co-creation with six Members of the Parliament from five political parties. We discuss the outcomes of the process including design considerations for future research.

Inclusive public toilets: a book

Public toilets play an important role in our lives outside of home. However, they are often neglected as an aspect of a inclusive society. A new book based on 20 years of research looks at the issues. More than 500 people contributed their perspectives to this critical overview. It presents an urgent need to re-evaluate the accessibility of, and culture around, these essential spaces.

The authors explore the complexities around using public toilets. They draw from a rich body of research into public toilet design, public services, accessibility and social injustice. They examine a diverse array of design considerations related to age, disability, neurodiversity and gender.

Front cover of the book, Designing Inclusive Public Toilets: Wee the people. Blue background with white and yellow text.

The authors look at the development of toilet design in the UK, discussing examples of successful and failed designs. They present an innovative approach for the future that reframes a space associated with unpleasantness and inaccessibility as one that is essential and respected.

This rigorous study considers the body’s needs and decision making on leaving home. That includes issues of navigating, locating and entering facilities, and issues related to cubicles, fixtures, products and hygiene. The authors present an inclusive design approach that can help designers, planners and managers create these spaces more effectively and understand what every prospective user might need, with a sense of safety, comfort and dignity.

The title of the book is, Designing Inclusive Public Toilets: Wee the People. Both authors are from the Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design at the Royal Collage of Art, UK.

Public toilets by universal design

A row of handbasins in a public toilet.

We all have to go sometime. Accessible public toilets have their own Australian Standard. It spells out how to design it and what fittings go where. But an accessible toilet doesn’t solve all our toileting issues. It’s time take a universal design approach and re-think the business of public toilets.

Thinking more broadly than people with limited mobility is important if we are to be inclusive. Katherine Webber’s Conference paper explains where the design of public toilets are letting some people down. She discusses the taboos, policy and legal barriers in several countries. Katherine lists the many issues people found with public toilets and they go beyond those of wheelchair accessible toilets. She proposes that a universal design approach be taken to the design and placement of public toilets. 

Katherine recently visited Canberra to talk to policy makers how our public toilets should better. ABC News has written a short piece on her visit and some of the findings from her Churchill Fellowship research. 

The title of Katherine’s paper is, Everyone, everywhere, everyday: A case for expanding universal design to public toilets. She will also lead a discussion group at the lunchtime Table Topics session at the conference.

Perceptions of safety in public space

Perceptions of safety in public space impact on the way women and girls carry out everyday activities. If women (or men) feel unsafe or stressed in public space, it can outweigh the benefit of being there. Plus it impacts on activities such as employment, education and access to health services.

One of the targets for the gender equality goal (SDG #5) is “the elimination of all forms of violence against all women and girls in public and private spheres”.

SDG Goal 5 Gender equality. A square with a red background with white graphics depicting gender equality which is required for safety in public space.

The issue of gendered violence is rarely out of the news. The UN’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) number 5 is about gender equity. This is not just a human right, but a foundation of a peaceful world. In 2025, globally, we are clearly a long way from this.

Researchers at Monash University used a crowd mapping system to understand women’s equity and access to public space. Two case studies were carried out – one in Victoria and the other in New South Wales. The name of the project was YourGround.

The Victorian project surveyed women undertaking exercise and recreation activities. The New South Wales study included engagement by women and gender diverse people. This one looked at any type of activity in public spaces – streets, parks and transport hubs.

Voices of marginalised people

Digital technology and smart phones enable researchers to collect information about the real lives of individuals. It is a good way to overcome the standard data-gathering techniques that have left marginalised voices unheard.

YourGround was web‐based, accessible by digital/smart devices, and designed to reduce the barriers to engagement by using interactivity and visuals. Easy access to the survey and anonymity was critical for harvesting the stories and concerns of as wide a range of women as possible.

Monash University logo for the YourGround project on perceptions of safety in public space. A young woman is cast over a multicoloured background.

While this method relies on access to smart phones, the usage in Australia is extensive, although noted there are some internet gaps in rural and regional areas.

Women scan and read the environment

Women learn to ‘read’ public spaces for clues relating to the risk of being there. They read both physical and social aspect for these clues. Women look for lighting, space conditions, amenities and facilities. They check out what others are doing in the space and how many there are. This scanning is often in the context of the personal history of each woman.

Women are sensitive to the ‘vibe’ of a location and concerned with visibility. Along with gender-diverse people, women experience feeling of being unsafe and excluded in public space. They need a strong sense of belonging to exercise their right to be free of the threat of violence from men.

Women limit their engagement with public space

Public spaces that encourage longer stays and diverse activities received positive reviews from participants. In contrast, unsafe places were predominantly used for a single activity, suggesting that these locations were far less welcoming.

If a place felt unsafe, participants were reluctant to do anything there but pass through. Some noted that they did so as fast as possible if they were unable to avoid the location. Participants also avoided some places if they could, or only go with someone else. Tunnels and underpasses felt particularly unsafe along with poorly maintained pathways.

The title of the article is, Participatory Interventions: Digital Crowd Mapping Perceptions of Safety in Public Space. It is in a special edition of Urban Planning, 2025 Volume 10 titled, The Role of Participatory Planning and Design in Addressing the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

From the abstract

Current estimates indicate the world will not achieve the United Nations SDG goal of gender equality by 2030. It’s more likely to take another 70 years. The number of global crises bring a sharp focus to gender disparities. The issues of unequal access and opportunity are more stark. Prioritisation of gender equality is imperative to the sustainable development of cities, regions, and rural communities.

This article presents a case study of the YourGround project using an interactive, geolocative digital crowd‐mapping platform. This is a participatory method for gathering insights into perceptions of safety among women and gender‐diverse people in public spaces in Victoria and New South Wales, Australia.

The YourGround method of data collection and feminist co‐design democratises the research process. It amplifies marginalised voices, and avoids the hazards of the technology controlling the methods.

The findings underscore the nuanced and context‐specific nature of gender inequality in public spaces. They highlight the pervasive impact of social and environmental factors on safety perceptions and access in both urban contexts and rural areas.

The YourGround project provides city planners, urban designers, and community members, with a gender‐sensitive lens developed by the expertise of people from the community.

Universal design for future mobility

A literature review from Norway takes an older person’s view of transport equity and accessibility. Being able get out and about on a daily basis to shop, visit friends, and medical appointments is essential for everyone. As people age, this ability becomes even more important in terms of maintaining health and independence. The review proposes that local government implement universal design for future mobility.

Older people who do not have access to private transport need to use public transport. Yet they face barriers in the built environment and public transportation infrastructure such as:

  • Poorly built public vehicles and road systems
  • Insecure and unsafe services
  • Lack of wayfinding and walkability assistance
  • Reduced accessible transportation options
  • Undesirable attitudes of the general public.
Inside a bus looking down the aisle towards the front of the bus with seats on both sides.

The research paper covers the method for the literature review and the search terms used. A three tiered system is one way of solving the problem. First, a traditional fixed route service that suits people with no, or low level limitations. Second, fixed route services offering some flexibility with low floor buses. The third option is a special transport service. The bottom line is that a “one size fits all” is not the answer.

Implementing an equitable mobility design involves an integrated method to address the weaknesses of traditional design approaches. However, this requires a user-centred approach that involves older peoples’ requirements. Hence a universal design approach with co-design methods for future transport.

Several factors impact the mobility of older people: psychological state, health, and physical ability that can vary from day to day.

“Thus, for any public transportation system to achieve social inclusion or equity and equality its accessibility must be universal for everyone in society.”

An arial view of a bus stop shelter with autumn leaves. A woman is standing and another person is seated.

Conclusions

The research paper compares policies and strategies in the UK, Canada and European countries. Investment at a local level is essential for features such as wind shelters, accessible vehicles, level footpaths, and appropriate ways to provide transport information.

Another paper that recommends that the design of public spaces should consider older people at the outset of the design. That is, they should involve older people in the design and redesign of pedestrian and walkway networks. The findings highlight how to employ universal design for mobility equity and compare mobility policies for older people.

The title of the paper is, Exploring mobility equity, equality, and accessibility for older people in the local environment.

From the abstract

The ability to travel independently and freely to participate in society is crucial for our quality of life. The question of how to maintain mobility equity and equality for older people is, however, a complex one.

This is because older people are often faced with physical barriers around the public transportation and built environment. Municipalities have not involved older people in the design of mobility accessibility initiatives.

The findings from our study present factors influencing local environment in achieving mobility equity from the perspectives of older people. Evidence underpins guidelines grounded in a universal design framework to help inform urban transport policies.

Transportation in the future

The language of transport has shifted from discussions about infrastructure to the mobility of people. It’s therefore essential to consider the the diversity of our population in future thinking and designing. But what would people with disability want from transportation in the future to make mobility easy and useful? A group in Europe decided to find out. 

An interactive, real time, accessible journey planner was the most popular idea. This is because it would make travel more convenient and safer and enable independence. On the other hand, bike sharing, e-scooters and motorbike taxis were not popular with respondents.

People with vision impairment and hearing impairment weren’t that interested in an accessible journey planner. Two-wheeled solutions weren’t popular either with these two groups. Women had the most reservations around transport and different modes of mobility. 

Cycle lanes received a luke-warm response across all disabilities. However, accessible cycle lanes were relatively more popular. 

People with disability are open to using robots, artificial intelligence alerts and wearables. Therefore, designers of environments and systems need to work together for seamless integration.

As we know, what is good and useful for people with disability usually ends up being good for everyone. Consequently, the white paper is a useful resource with good recommendations for transport planners.

The white paper title is, Views of people with disabilities on future mobility. The research was funded by the European Union. The white paper explains their survey methods and findings, the issue of gender balance and future recommendations. It also offers design directions and policy and industry recommendations. Bottom line – we need universal design for future mobility.

Front cover of the TRIPS White Paper on the Future Mobility.

Key points for future mobility

  • Getting on and off the means of transport
  • Reaching the transport mode
  • Using station facilities
  • Travel delays
  • Comfort on board
  • Limited access to information
  • Autonomy
  • Social barriers
  • Accessing help
  • Friendliness of the surrounding environment
  • Getting users oriented

Age Friendly Ecosystems: A book

This book examines age friendliness from a place-based approach. It looks at neighbourhoods, campuses and health environments. The topics covered are:

  • Creating an Age-Friendly Environment Across the Ecosystem
  • Age Friendliness as a Framework for Equity in Aging
  • Age-Friendly Voices in the Pursuit of an Age-Friendly Ecosystem
  • Age-Friendly Futures: Equity by Design
Front cover of the Age Friendly Ecosystems book.

The book emphasises the connection between design and health, examines the age-friendly movement and resources for equity and environmental justice. The full title is, Age-Friendly Ecosystems for Equitable Aging by Design. This is not open access.

The role of public toilets

Most people need a toilet every 2 to 3 hours. Anyone with a health condition that affects the bladder or bowels usually needs a toilet more often. And it’s surprising how many health conditions that includes. Consequently, no clean public toilets means no going out for more than an hour. The role of public toilets is far more important than many urban and transit planners realise.

A Norwegian study looked at the depth of the issues from the perspective of people with digestive and urinary tract disorders when travelling. They wanted to come up with solutions for this group as it would include the needs of most others.

This study highlights the role of public toilets in everyday life. Having a physically accessible transit system is only half the story. This study provides the other half.

Three toilet cubicles with the doors closed in a public toilet.

Previous studies have looked at toilet design, particularly for people with mobility restrictions. The recommendations are based on accessible toilet facilities, signage and information. However, this is not enough to create a universally designed public environment.

Main barriers

The main barriers for people with gastrointestinal problems is the physical need for a toilet, anxiety and pain. This group might need a toilet as much as 20 times a day depending on whether they are having a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ day. What makes it more difficult is that they can become unwell during a journey. Using a car becomes a better option at times.

Not finding a toilet in time is embarrassing. “Such unpleasant experiences can have significant consequences not only on self-esteem at that moment but also on the willingness to travel and participate in future activities.”

A row of white handbasins with a single tap and spout.

The research paper covers the three main barriers in more detail. The stories from participants are illuminating and highlight the need for better toilet provision. Participants discussed the differences between trams, subways, light rail, trains, ferries, buses and aircraft.

People with an increased need for a toilet have an invisible disability. Their level of pain sometimes means they would like improvements such as using disabled seating in station areas. The most critical factor is to increase toilet availability as a means of creating universally designed public transit systems.

This study shows why improving the design of buses and trains, stations and stops is insufficient to make transit systems universally designed. Toilets are an essential aspect of being able to travel often and comfortably.

The title of the paper is, The role of toilets in public spaces: An interview study with individuals experiencing gastrointestinal issues. Some of the toilet availability issues are specific to Norway, and perhaps similar in other European countries. In Australia public toilets are free to use and do not require payment. Nevertheless, an illuminating study on why we must join the dots for an inclusive world.

The New South Wales Parliament has extended the submission date on its Inquiry Into Public Toilets. The closing date is now 2 December 2024.

From the abstract

This Norwegian study addresses the issue of inadequate access to toilets in public spaces and transportation systems, particularly individuals who have heightened needs of toilets. The study interviewed individuals experiencing various gastrointestinal issues, including bladder-related problems.

Telephone interviews avoided potential travel difficulties and also leveraged previous successes with sensitive topics. A sample size of 10 interviews was chosen based on prior research indicating that key themes typically emerge within this range.

Key findings indicate significant barriers to participation in societal activities due to insufficient toilet facilities. For transport in particular, boats and trains emerge as preferred modes over buses, trams and subways due to the presence of onboard toilets.

Notably, urban areas, parks and beaches suffer from a lack of restroom facilities. In order to improve these facilities, informants highlighted measures such as provision of open, hygienic toilets with barrier-free access. These measures also need clear signage and awareness campaigns regarding toilet facilities tailored to individuals with diverse health needs.

The study highlights the critical role of toilets in maintaining public health and acknowledges the right to access toilets as recognised by the United Nations.

Testimonials from individuals with disabilities underscore the profound impact of toilet accessibility on their daily lives. They reveal instances of social isolation and restricted activities due to inadequate facilities. Proposed interventions encompass improved hygiene standards, increased toilet availability, and enhanced staff training to cater to the diverse needs of users. The study advocates for legislative reforms and policy guidelines to address the pressing issue of toilet accessibility, aiming to foster inclusivity and equal participation in public life for individuals with disabilities

Toilets and social participation

Outback dunny in a field of orange grass against a deep blue sky. But not a public toilet.

Public toilets are not dinner party conversation, but they are essential to our wellbeing. They are costly to build and maintain yet we need more of them. They also need to be fit for purpose because they are about social and economic participation. The Changing Places toilet campaign is a case in point. There wouldn’t be many people passionate about public toilets, but Katherine Webber had plenty to say at the UD2021 Conference. 

Katherine’s presentation was titled, Access and Inclusion in Public Toilets: Impacts on social and economic participation. The presentation slides show lots of different examples. Toilet design is often dismissed as just needing to be functional and designs vary little. But public toilets are “difficult to get right. And no wonder. They are mired in cultural baggage, struck in the fixedness of fixtures and bound by massive, often ancient infrastructure (Lowe 2018:49). 

Public amenities also support tourism and economic development, night-time economy, and access to public spaces and public art. Toilets also need good signage, clean conditions and be regularly available .

Katherine describes more in her written paper on this topic based on her studies in other countries as part of a Churchill Fellowship.