Current Issue
Adopting the Universal Design Approach Instead of the Stigma That Creates Poorly Accessible Enviroments - 4 July 2008
by Marcelo Guimaraes
Read this article in Chinese (translated by Can Zhao, proofread by Christina Li)
The idea behind Universal Design is to create products and services that can be usable for people of all ages and physical abilities. As well as consumer products, this approach is also applied to industrial products, communications technology, buildings and the built environment – in fact anything that is designed to be used. Sometimes this approach is known as ‘Inclusive Design’ and the terms ‘Inclusive’ and ‘Universal’ can be used more or less interchangeably in this context.
The practice of Universal Design is becoming increasingly widespread, although practitioners and researchers acknowledge that there is still resistance against it from some quarters (Ostroff, 2000: 43.10; Welsh & Jones, 2000, 51.3).
It has been more than half a century since the enactment of the first piece of legislation in the United States to protect the rights of people with disabilities. That legislation (Architectural Barriers Act, 1968, in Steinfeld et al, 1979) was very specific and addressed at the mostly the impact of stairs and ramps. However, the content of legislation has progressed worldwide towards a broader definition of the population who could benefit from the development of ‘user-friendly’ environments, i.e., environments that are responsive to users’ varied abilities. From the political standpoint recognition of the needs of disabled veterans and institutionalized individuals with disabilities was a driving factor. And today the notions of accessibility and usability of built environments have expanded the definition of disability beyond the medical view regarding lack of personal capacity for the undertaking of certain activities.
Therefore, the current definition of user population who benefit from Universal design includes a vast and diverse range of people such as all who temporarily or permanently must cope with extreme, unusual or unique daily challenges to use the built environment. Children, pregnant women mothers with infants and older adults are examples.
Temporarily injured people, distracted pedestrians, unskilled cyclists, and even people who are intoxicated are sometimes included in the definition of people with a “disability.”
On this basis, disability can be seen as a misfit between an individual’s abilities and the supportive resources of products, services or the environment for achievement of functional goals and social acceptance.
However, the main focus has remained on the needs of people with permanent disabilities (Bowe, 1978). In the past, the proportion of people with permanent disabilities was not as high as it is now. There is a strong correlation between age and disability – the older we are the more likely we are to become disabled. This means that as the average age of the population increases, which it is rapidly doing in developed countries, the greater the number of people who benefit from Universal Design.
As people get older most still want to remain active and well adjusted in their local communities, while accessing public buildings and outdoor spaces. This has driven demand for better accessibility features in built and virtual environments.
Moreover, as populations increasingly occupy large dense urban areas in search of better work opportunities and infra-structure, the ‘natural challenges’ of built environments have become more intense and stressful (Coleman, 2000).
Recognizing disability as part of everyone’s issues with the design of built environments requires a fundamental transformation in the way societies have dealt with creating opportunities for each individual, despite disabilities, to live and participate to their full potential. This is at odds with old-fashioned notions of pity, neglect and stigma that has previously been attached to disability, to varying degrees, in many cultures.
As important as the awareness of the stigma itself is the understanding of ways to avoid such stigma that many in the population may experience over time. Such combination of awareness and understanding may constitute the vectors for social change on a mass scale (Rogers, 1983; Preiser, 1991; Marx & McAdams, 1994).
The manifestations of stigmatization of people with disabilities may lead to de facto segregation on certain groups in society (Goffman, 1963), however the stereotype of disability differs from other stereotypes in social conflicts, such as struggles for balance of power among ethnical groups, or in gender relations. It seems to be more subtle and more pervasive, since it may affect anyone, anytime (Weisman, 1992). Rather than being eliminated only by changes of values, attitudes and behavior, the stigma of disability requires changes in the structure of built and virtual environments to grant users equal sharing of opportunities to explore and control the settings where people act and socialize (Weisman, 1999; Sandhu, 2000). Thus, in order to reduce the stigma of disability, it is necessary to change environmental settings so that fair opportunity for all may be possible (Steinfeld et al, 1979).
It seems that both consumers and design professionals are not yet prepared to work continuously for development of new and more socially responsive structures. In general, the part of the population which does not experience disability in personal life may not understand the importance of improving the design features of built environments for distinct ages and abilities. Many active adults in the work force are still reluctant to acknowledge the impact of such issues on their lives, and they are unwilling to assign personal attention and private resources to the development of inclusive environments where they live, work and spend their time with their families and friends. Therefore, the development of inclusive environments may not be a priority for many simply because they do not perceive disability as a problem for themselves.
Other concerns may seem to be more important. It is perhaps natural that priorities in life are established according to personal experience and changes in environment are influenced by certain ‘cultural filters’ that frame people’s perspective (Steinfeld, Duncan & Cardell, 1977). It may take time and unexpected life events to occur before some become actively engaged in producing changes in their own environment (Steinfeld and Danford, 1999; Sommer, 1983).
Given the facts and figures available, one might reflect that it is wise to invest time and resources once in order to obtain successful results immediately and enjoy the benefits through time, rather than wait for a problem to occur. However, compliance with the law does not assure fair opportunities for everyone, since building codes and regulations for use of land and public spaces establish minimum requirements only. These may form only a fragile baseline for accessibility and usability of built environments, products, services, communication and transportation systems.
This process may lead initially to the creation of fragmented minority groups in a community or large national organizations who become specialized experts with respect to specific issues regarding disability. When seen as a problem affecting only certain groups, Universal design initiatives may struggle to exert influence both politically and commercially. Recognizing the widespread nature of inclusive issues is important to bringing about the reforms that will create a more inclusive environment.
The global growth of the ideology of Universal Design has caused its meaning to fluctuate in each culture according to the level of social development and industrialization. It is recognized that people in different parts of the world have adopted distinct terms to express the universality of certain design ideas, such as: “design for all,” “user-centered design,” “trans-generation design,” or even, “design for everyone” (Ostroff, 2000b).
Many examples exist where the diversity of user’s needs are accommodated in a universal framework, since applying Universal Design principles at preliminary stages of a design process helps keep down high production costs while, at the same time, enabling users to engage successfully in social interaction and meaningful activities (Steinfeld, Duncan & Cardell, 1977). In addition, changes in the built environment which make it more inclusive may reduce everyone’s levels of stress and contribute to raising the overall quality of life (Deasy, 1974; Sandhu, 2000). Creating Universal Designs from the start is more cost effective than adaptation at a later stage, meaning that there are also strong economic arguments for building more inclusive environments (Steinfeld et al, 1979).
Beyond economics and ideology, there is a scientific mass of knowledge that is related to development of technological resources for universal approaches to mass produced designs so that minimal adaptation is necessary for adjustments that respond to the needs of varied user groups (Steinfeld & Danford, 1999).
The attributes of Universal Design in architecture and urban settings encompasses the interconnection of systems, technology, user behavior and structures that give form to buildings, interior ambiences and outdoor spaces. Thus, Universal Design can be easily associated with ideas about smart design, sustainable design and the design of healthy communities (Ostroff, 2000a). It may exist both in small and large scale built environments, including individual objects, installations, buildings and outdoor environments, as well as system networks such as transportation and communication. Recently this approach has been extended to virtual environments.
Considering the development of a Universal Design approach involves contrasting unique design solutions that respond to uncommon ways people function, move about, handle objects, perceive, process and respond to built environments. Then, the next step is to pay attention to mobility impaired people overcoming their disability for simple task performance and socialization, and to check for compatibility of ideas so that combined design solutions can address the needs of all users as a whole. The point is that Universal Design applications are possible when there is an attempt for design solutions to be socially inclusive at the conceptual level. Addressing uncommon usage patterns may become the seed for flexibility of general rules in design ideas
In summary, Universal Design can be thought of as a contemporary philosophical movement that addresses trends in the growth of the aging population and diversification of user abilities around the world. Stakeholders rely on designers, planners and managers as decision makers leading the drive to create non-segregated environments that help users and eliminate the stigma of disability. However, it seems necessary that everyone involved in the design process becomes aware and willing to bring about change. Therefore, the preparation of design students as well as users to understand the scope of Universal Design must be based on strategies that counteract the continuation of the stigma of disability in the mindset of designers and others who can bring about the changes required to create a more inclusive world.
References
Bowe, F. (1978), Handicapping America: Barriers to Disabled People. New York: Harper & Row.
Coleman (2000), “Designing for Our Future Selves.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by E. Ostroff and W. Preiser. New York: McGraw-Hill. 4-1,4.25.
Deasy, C. (1974), “How our surroundings affect our Actions,” in Design for Human Affairs. New York: Schenkman / John Wiley & Sons, pp 43-58.
Goffman, E. (1963), Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Marx, G. & McAdams, D. (1994), Collective Behavior and Social Movements: Process and Structure. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ostroff, E. (2000a), “Universal Design Practice in the United States.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by E. Ostroff and W. Preiser. New York: McGraw-Hill. 43-3,43-31
_______ (2000b), “Universal Design: The New Paradigm.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by E. Ostroff and W. Preiser. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1-3,1-12
Preiser, W. (1991), “Design Innovation and The Challenge to Change,” in Design Intervention: Toward a More Humane Society. Preiser, W., Vischer, J. and White, E., editors. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. pp 335-352
Rogers, E.M (1983), Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd edition. New York: Free Press.
Sandhu, J. (2000), “An Integrated Approach to Universal Design: Toward the Inclusion of All Ages, Cultures and Diversity.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by E. Ostroff and W. Preiser. New York: McGraw-Hill. 3.3-3.14.
Sommer, R. (1983), “Direct Participation of Occupants” in Social Design: Creating Buildings with People in Mind. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. pp 109-129
Steinfeld, E. & Danford, G. (1999), Enabling Environments: Measuring the Impact of Environment on Disability and Rehabilitation. N.Y.: Kruwer Academic and Plenum Publishers. Steinfeld, E., Duncan, J. and Cardell, P. (1977), “Towards a Responsive Environment: The Psychological Effects of Inaccessibility” in Barrier-free Environments. Bednar, M., ed., chapter 1, Community Development Series, v. 33. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross. pp 7-16.
Steinfeld et al (1979) Access to the Built Environment: A Review of the Literature. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Washington: G.P.O, pp 104.
Weisman, L. (1992), Discrimination by Design: a Feminist Critique of the Man-made Environment. University of Illinois Press.
Welch, P. & Jones, S. (2000), “Advances in Universal Design Education in the United States.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by E. Ostroff and W. Preiser. New York: McGraw-Hill. 51-3.
Dr. Marcelo Pinto Guimarães is a Ph.D. professor of architecture at Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) in Brazil. His academic work is dedicated to developing the knowledge basis of sustainable architecture that is fully accessible to all people, regardless of age, gender, experience or uncommon abilities. Being a wheelchair user due to Polio, he has participated in advocacy work for independent living and civil rights of people with disabilities in Brazil. Now, he develops research on multimedia representation of the experience of accessible environments and promotes course work about assessment of buildings and urban environment that compares compliance with technical standards and the holistic perspective of universal design applications. Moreover, his students face the challenge of designing innovative concepts for built environments that reflect the meaning of barrier-free architecture in truly inclusive societies.
Comments made
Possible Related Articles:
Latest Comments