Finn Aslaksen
Steinar Bergh
Olav Rand Bringa
Edel Kristin Heggem
The Norwegian State Council on Disability ©
Translation:
Ingrid Bugge from Norwegian
Photos:
Olav Rand Bringa
Edel Kristin Heggem
Anders Dahlquist , Autofill Europe AB, Stockholm
Kjell Norvin
Preface
We must continually
seek new ways to improve the conditions of disabled people. New ideas and
practical solutions must be sought to bring society closer to the ideal
of full participation and equality of status of people with disabilities.
New ideas and practical solutions should be investigated to bring society
closer to the aim of full participation and equal status.
We hope this report represents a step in this direction. We have examined the concept of universal design and discussed it in relation to the principle of equal status, planning, architecture and product design. The report has been prepared by Finn Aslaksen, Steinar Bergh, Olav Rand Bringa and Edel Kristin Heggem commisioned by The Norwegian State Council on Disability, and its contents have been reworked after discussions with the following consultants:
Jørgen Amdam,
The Regional College, Volda
Jon Bottheim,
The Norwegian Federation of the Organisations of Disabled People
Tore Brantenberg,
The Technical University of Trondheim
Jon Christophersen,
The Norwegian Building Research Institute
Else Marie Dahll,
The Norwegian Federation of Interior and Furniture Designers
Tone Gengenbach,
The Norwegian Research Council
Edel Kristin Heggem,
The Norwegian association of the Disabled
Ketil Kiran,
The National Association of Norwegian Architects
Wilhelm Lange Larssen,
The Norwegian Council of Design
Stein Longum,
Norwegian Rail, Department of Design
The council would like to thank everybody for the good execution of the work. We also appreciate the valuable contributions from the following people: Anne Alns, The College of Arts and Crafts/TM, Oslo, Ivor Ambrose, The Danish Building Research Institute, Francesc Aragall, CRID, Barcelona, Spain, Hubert Froyen, Provinciale Hogeschool Limburg, Department of Architecture, Belgium, Guri Henriksen, The Norwegian Association if the Disabled, Oslo, Pip Hesketh, England, Karin Høyland, The Foundation for Scientific and Industrial Research at the Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Tore Lange, The Norwegian State Housing Bank, Oslo, Arne Lein, The Norwegian Association of the Disabled, Oslo, Tone Manum, The Norwegian Association of the Disabled, Oslo, James Mueller, Center for Universal Design, North Carolina, USA, Tone Rønnevig, The Norwegian State Housing Bank, Oslo, Harald Zahl, The University of Helsingfors, Finland, James Sandhu, University of Northumbria, Special needs research Unit, England, Odd Walter Syltevik, The Norwegian Association of the Disabled, Trondheim, C. J. Walsh, Dublin, Ireland, Poul Østergaard, The School of Architecture, Århus, Denmark.
The work has been carried out within the project: "Adaption of the Local Environment", which has been a part of The Government`s Plan of Action for disabled people, 1994 - 1997. The Norwegian State Council on Disability has been responsible for the project, which has been financed by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.
We hope this report will inspire further development of both theory and method to arrive at solutions everyone can use.
THE NORWEGIAN STATE
COUNCIL ON DISABILITY
Oslo, December 1997
Ann-Marit Sbønes
Anne Margrethe Brandt
Chair
Head of Division
Preface
Contents
Introduction
Summary
1.
Universal Design and Equal Status
The Situation Today
The Paradox
The Principle of Equal Status
The Extended Definition of Universal Design
A Holistic and Inter-Professional Planning Process
The Changing Paradigm
2.
From Theory to Practice
A New Emphasis to Existing Ideals
A Challenge to Planners and Designers
Principles of Universal Design
3.
Planning
What is Planning?
How did Planning develop?
What does Universal Design mean to Planning?
What must be done to include Universal Design in
Planning?
The Presentation of Plans and the Basis of Decisions
Participation
4.
Architecture
What is Architecture?
The Historical Development
Architecture Today
The Problem
Could Architecture be developed in the Direction
of Universal Design?
Which Changes must take place within the Profession
The Main Arguments for introducing Universal Design
into the Architectural Process
5.
Product Design
What is Design?
The Historical Development
Different Movements of Design
The Situation Today
Could Product Design be developed in the Direction
of Universal Design?
Which Changes must take place within the Profession?
The Main Arguments for introducing Universal Design
into the Design Process
6.
The Future
Literature
Appendix
1. Universal Design.
Definition, Principles and Guidelines.
The Center for Universal Design, North Carolina
State University, 1995
Introduction
This report attempts
to develop and illustrate the concept of universal design.
The aim of universal design is to develop theory, principles and solutions to enable everybody to use the same physical solutions to the greatest extent possible, whether it be buildings, outdoor-areas, means of communication or household goods.
Universal design opposes, ideologically and politically, all unnecessary and stigmatizing specialized solutions, whether they are intended for people with disabilities or other groups of the population. Equal status, equal treatment and equal merit are key concepts.
The principles and definitions of universal design developed by The Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University in USA, are the basis on which we build this report. Their work has brought us one important step further. The thinking related to "accessibility for disabled people", has not been clear enough to counteract unnecessarily specialized solutions or to encourage equal status. The notion of "design for all" is in many ways synonymous with universal design.
The Center for Universal Design defines universal design and the purpose of the concept in the following way:
"Universal design is the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaption or specialized design"
"The intent of
the universal design concept is to simplify life for everyone by making
products, communications,
and the built environment more usable by more people at
little or no
extra cost. The universal design concept targets all people of all ages,
sizes and abilities."
There are ambitions
as well as reservations in the aim to develop solutions usable by all,
to the greatest extent possible. People with special needs
will require compensatory measures, both in the short and long term, e.g.
wheelchairs or hearing aids, to be able to function on equal terms with
other people in society. Central to our thinking is a coherent planning
process from over
all, long-term planning through to the actual solutions.
The discussion in this
report covers extensive spheres such as planning, architecture and product
design. One may object that we try to cover too large an area within a
relatively brief report. It is therefore important to emphasise that our
main intention is to include more professionals and politicians in the
further discussion of universal design or design for all.
Universal Design and Equal Status
In the concept of
universal design there is both a vision and a concrete attempt to plan
and realise all buildings, environments and products in such a way, that
they could - to the greatest extent possible- be used by everybody, by
children and old people, people of different sizes and abilities, disabled
and nondisabled persons.
Equal status, equal treatment and equal merit are notions central to universal design. Inherent in these notions is the ideal that everybody should have the same possibilities to participate in different areas of life, e.g. education, work and leisure. There is a clearly defined ambition in the ideology and practical work with universal design that: all products, buildings and surroundings shall be made to be used on equal terms by as many as possible.
The notion of equal status forces us to think in a holistic way, and to consider physical and other kinds of planning together.To make explicit the inclusive and holistic as a basis for universal design, we have extended the definition from The Center for Universal Design, where we, in addition to the design of products and environments, to the greatest extent possible, stress the composition of different products and environments.We are about to move away from a split paradigm, where different spheres have focused on part- and specialized solutions, to what we may call a holistic paradigm built on ideals of equal status and equal treatment.
From Theory to Practice.
The interaction between
theory and practice is underlined. The following seven principles are central
to illustrating universal design:
1.Equitable Use
2.Flexibility in Use
3.Simple and Intuitive Use
4.Perceptible Information
5.Tolerance for error
6.Low physical effort
7.Size and Space for Approach and Use
(see Appendix for the full description of the principles and the guidelines)
Planning.
Planning has developed
to include an increasing number of subjects and fields. It now includes
social activities in many areas, from land use to planning related to education,
health- and social services and cultural activities, or planning based
on different groups of the population.
The choice of solutions usable by all, without unnecessary specialized solutions or aids, could be applied in several areas of planning. This applies to over all and long-term planning and planning within different areas. The thinking and principles of universal design have so far hardly been applied within planning. It is therefore necessary to increase our knowledge of what exactly excludes certain groups of the population in different areas of society, and a methodology is needed to throw light on the consequences for different groups of the population during the whole planning process. To achieve more universal solutions it is necessary that these groups genuinely participate throughout the whole process from an early stage.
Architecture
The aim is usability
by all, as an integrated quality of architecture. There are no inherent
conflicts between the definitions of architecture and universal design.However,
architecture has not been characterized by having everybody as the object
of functionality. Other factors have been more decisive for the design.
In the past few years, there has been a development towards considering
groups with special needs. This has often led to specialized solutions
in additon to normal solutions. This leads to a segregation of groups within
the population. The solutions are often minimized, whether they are related
to new projects or adaptions of existing ones. In addition, these solutions
are often more expensive than integrated solutions which take everybody
into consideration.
Society today raises its expectations of environmental design. Functional requirements and demands on resources are becoming increasingly important in architecture and building. To develop the profession of architecture in the direction of universal design, we have to see usability for everybody as one of the factors which gives us a beneficial environment. The principles of universal design could be regarded as one component of a quality-assurance process of functionality, from the start of the project to the final result.
Product Design
Design is a discipline
which is sometimes orientated towards a purely technical aspect, and sometimes
towards aesthetic or purely user aspects. The designer is therefore always
in a situation of choice between idealism, artistic display or a pragmatism
that demands common sense. Traditionally, not many designers have been
preoccupied with ergonomics. Products characterised by good aesthetics,
as well as ergonomic adaption are rare. User-friendly products are often
characterised by having special customers and groups of the population
as objects for the design, as well as having the character of specialized
aids and products.
Today`s design is characterised
by trends which often cultivate particular ideologies or fashions. There
is a development towards an increasing number of products and more specialisation,
where the groups which are the object of the design, as well as the requirements
of the product, are decided on before the design process starts.This complicates
the situation. The introduction of the principles of universal design would
make it possible to change and extend the target groups, and also change
the functional requirements of product design. The sphere of product design
is large and includes a vast number of different products. We should therefore
realise that there will always be products characterised by such specialized
user-areas or target groups, that they cannot be adjusted to everybody.
However, products usable by as many as possible acquire a new dimension;
a smaller number of products will be needed, and this may signify an increase
in the marketshares for designers and producers.
The Future
The aim of universal
design for environments and products challenges several professions and
spheres of production. We are on the eve of a further evolution as regards
developing theories and methods, both within and between the professions.
The aim is a constant improvement of solutions for buildings, environments
and products. The solutions and the consequences of the choices which have
been made, must be documented and published. This demands more international
cooperation than has been the practice until now.
1. Universal Design and Equal Status
Today`s situation
During the last 20 - 30 years, a
constant improvement of both buildings and outdoor-areas towards usability
by all, has taken place. This development has been most evident in public
buildings and dwellings with a lifespan standard. The solutions have constantly
improved technically and aesthetically, in particular where accessibility
has been integrated at an early stage of the planning process.
Despite this positive development, we can still observe many defects and poor solutions. Lack of knowledge or money still result in poor accessibility.This also includes measures required by, e.g. the Building Regulations. Some of the measures are carried out inadequately and, as a result, with a lower degree of functionality than necessary.This is related to the knowledge and competence of planners, architects and builders, but it is also related to an understanding of equal merit and possibilities of participation for everybody.
We experience solutions which are exclusive and stigmatizing because people with disabilities have to use separate entrances and are limited to particular seats in trains, cinemas or sports arenas. There seems to be an ambition to achieve a technical accessibility, but less focus is placed on including everybody. The solutions of service dwellings for specific groups of elderly and disabled people may, by their position, design and the use of materials, signal a ghetto consisting of people in need of care (Jørgensen 1991).
There is no doubt, that accessibility for people with physical disablilities has been better taken care of, so far, than the considerations of other groups of disabled people.There are several reasons for this. The needs of people with physical disabilities, wheelchair-users in particular, are easy to see. One step may prevent an individual from entering a building. Research work has been carried out for a long time in this area, there are more concrete proposals for solutions and the activity of information has been higher than in other areas. People with physical disabilities constitute, by far, the largest group of disabled persons. This group also includes people with heart- and lung-conditions, who have problems with stairs and steep slopes. A great deal remains to be done before physical accessibility has been sufficiently developed for people with physical disabilities, in addition to a series of challenges as regards the reduction of barriers in the physical environment for people with limited sight and hearing, people with environmental handicaps (asthma\allergies) or for people with learning disabilities. There are also conflicts that need to be solved between the different considerations. The low level pavement kerb has been the classical problem and conflict between blind people and wheelchair users, but this is about to be solved.
The considerations for disabled people are central to the ambition of universal design. These considerations should also, however, be seen in relation to the needs and wishes of the rest of the population, whether they are children, elderly, women or men, or people of different ethnical backgrounds and traditions. In these areas, there may also be different interests and conflicts in the attempt to apply, to as great extent as possible, a universal design in buildings, outdoor areas and products. The different needs of disabled people are central, but not sufficient when we are to plan and design for the whole population.
More effort in research and development is necessary to understand the various needs and wishes of the population and to develop this into new solutions.
The Paradox
It is our claim that, despite the
many attempts to achieve physical accessibility in buildings and outdoor-areas,
this field is not embraced with great interest by either planners, engineers,
architects, product designers or builders. One of the reasons for this
is that little weight has been put on the subject by the schools and universities
that educate these professionals.Dwellings with a lifespan standard are
still perceived by many, also by planners and designers, as a specialized
solution for elderly and disabled people, and not as a basic standard for
the planning of dwellings usable by all through their entire life.
There is something paradoxical in this situation.
In Norway and other Western-European countries, we estimate that 19% of the population are people with disabilities, having permanent problems relating to essential areas of life. Disability is clearly related to age, 70% of all disabled are over 45 years (Barth 1987).There will be an increase in the number of disabled between now and the year 2005, due to the increase in the share of old people in relation to the population as a whole. A series of investigations show that permanent disability has an effect on the possibilities for education, work and social participation. In addition, there are people with minor difficulties related to movement, sight or hearing, due to the natural process of aging, but who do not appear in statistics as being disabled. Most people are temporarily disabled during their lifetime due to illness or injury.
Accessible buildings, environments and means of communication do not only serve those with different and various degrees of disability. They also facilitate everyday life for e.g. parents with small children, be it elevators in buildings or low floor buses. Buildings and environments where it is easy to find ones bearings, serve, not only persons with physical or cognitive disabilities, but it is something everybody may benefit from. Explicit and logical signboards could serve as an example. This is also of use to people who do not understand the local language. The needs of people with disabilities make several considerations of accessibility more explicit. Heavily polluted air leads to immediate illness among people with asthma, but in the long run may also damage other people`s health.
Despite the fact that accessibility is a positive aspect for a large part of the population, it is still looked upon as a field of specialized care. The sociologist Yngvar Løchen is interested in the word "they" in the article "Weak, marginalised and without power". Løchen says:"The personal pronoun they marks and strengthens the dissociation of disabled persons, and this dissociation indicates that people with disabilities are exposed to an alienating process of being categorised. Through this process disabled people are marked as a group different from others, consisting of similar human beings without individual features. This dissociated group is then being characterized by particular properties, something which is common when we speak of the others - irrespective of whom this category consists of " (Løchen 1996). These, both conscious and unconscious psychological processes, are angled, by the philosopher Harald Ofstad, towards a discussion on "our contempt of weakness", something he believes to be deeply rooted in our Western culture (Ofstad 1979). The social scientist Cristoffer Lasch has a third approach towards this discussion in his book "The Narcissistic Culture" where he claims that, people in Western society become more and more narcissistic (self-centered) and that a significant feature of the narcissistic individual is the fear of getting old (Lasch 1979).
Our conscious and more unconscious reflections in this area are mirrored by the use of the word elderly and disabled . Elderly people who are dependant on a walking frame, will sometimes dispute the fact that they are disabled. Young disabled persons also reject being mentioned together with elderly people. There are good reasons for these protests, because young and old are often put into the same service system. However, our general tendency not to accept getting old also exists as an idea among people with disabilities.
In the new slogan of "planning for our future selves", there is, in many ways, a new comprehension that the consideration of disabled people in planning does not only imply the others, but is actually a more realistic understanding of the entirety of our lives. This signifies a comprehension rather than a displacement of the fact that we are all getting old and thereby more disabled.
The Principle of
Equal Status
The principle of equal status
is made a distinct part of the new professional discussion and development
related to the concept of universal design. This principle is expressed
in the ambition that all physical products and the environment, in a wide
sense, should be usable by all. By equal status we imply that everybody,
including disabled persons, should have the same possibilities to participate
in different areas of life, to the greatest extent possible, e.g. in relation
to education, work and leisure, and not be confined to special solutions
and measures. Equal status also implies equal treatment, which means
that all individuals should have the same right to services. This is ,
in many ways, a further development of democracy with a clear emphasis
on the fact, that people with disabilities should be able to participate
fully in social life on equal terms with people without disabilities. There
are clear parallels to the notion of equal status related to gender and
ethnical background.
It is important to emphasize that equal status and equal merit are not identical. If we only talk about equal status, the result may be that the requirements are laid down by others than the people concerned. This could imply that men lay down the conditions of equal status for women, or that people without disabilities define the aims of equal status for disabled people.
The subordinate clause in the definition, to the greatest extent possible, opens up for a discussion about several aspects of the ideal of equal status. An individual may be dependent on a special solution to be on equal status with others in, e.g. education or at work. Some extencive disabled persons might, for a long period of time, be dependent on specialized means of transport to manage their education or work situation. One disabled person might be dependent on specialized or compensatory measures to have an equal status in working life. If one is left with using general measures only, e.g. if only public transport was available, the aims of equal status related to work , education or leisure could be damaged.
Disability, in relation to the physical environment and products, is
often defined as a disparity between an individual`s ability to function
and the demands of the surroundings. This incongruity, or gap, may
be reduced or conquered through a general and universal design of products,
buildings and environments, and in addition, through specialized and compensatory
measures and adaption, if necessary. The specialized solutions, e.g. hearing
aids or wheelchairs, compensate for individual functional reductions and
contribute to the individual`s functional ability. The use of specialized
aids puts a demand on the design of environments and products, to make
equal status and participation possible. The design of environments and
products on the basis of "the average human being" will increase the need
for special measures, and make the solutions generally more expensive and
more complicated, e.g. the use of lifting-platforms and package-openers.
Universal design is based on the fact that people have different abilities,
and this should be reflected in both the planning process and in the ultimate
solutions. In the ideal of universal design there is a clear ambition that
all products, buildings and environments should, with time, develop in
such a manner that they are usable on equal conditions, by as many as possible.
By universal design
the gap may be reduced between the person's abilities and the demands of
the environment.
The extended Definition
of Universal Design
The notion of equality of status
related to universal design forces us to think in larger entities, and
to see physical, economic and social planning coherently. The aim is
to participate with others in the various activities of society. The perspective
is to work towards an increasingly greater organisational integration.
Examples of this may be to build dwellings of lifespan standard as part
of ordinary housing areas, and to supply them with the necessary services,
and thereby to avoid specialized housing solutions and care, to the greatest
extent possible.Universal design deals not only with a building or a means
of transport being physically accessible, but it also deals with their
social connections. Making the relation between physical and social planning
visible is called inclusive planning by the architect Jim Sandhu,(Sandhu
1995).
The connections between the different physical components could profitably be a more explicit part of the definition of universal design. We therefore propose the following addition at the beginning of the definition developed by The Center for Universal Design:
"Universal design is the design and composition of different products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaption or specialized design".
One should also discuss, if the definition could be made more obvious as regards equal status; the fact that physical solutions should imply equal terms and possibilities for all. To eliminate unnecessary use of technical aids should perhaps also be a part of the definition.
A Holistic and Inter-Professional
Planning Process.
The combination of the different
components is a central part of the planning process. As mentioned
earlier, the reservation "to the greatest extent possible", forms
a part of the definition of universal design. There are several factors
implied in this reservation, and they form a logical part of the planning
process, from the analysis of the situation to the realisation of the actual
design. In working towards a more universal design, we believe that the
different factors and arguments related to this process should be made
more explicit.
Universal planning and design based on the principle of equal status puts greater demands on inter- professionalism, than before. Professionals in e.g. town planning, architecture and landscape and product designers should acquire a wider understanding of the relation of which their design and products form a part. If the aim is equal opportunities for everybody, all products should be seen as part of a chain, and, as we know, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The equal and inclusive aims may seem new to many of those who are engaged in physical planning and design. Quite often, the subject itself, and the traditions related to it, are the only frame of reference when proposals for solutions are worked out. This leads, in many cases, to solutions far from universal design. It is necessary that the new inclusive perspectives become part of the education for everyone who is going to work with physical adaption and accessibility, and the need for inter-professionalism should be illuminated by concrete examples and subjects. Methods of user-participation is a part of this knowledge (Aslaksen 1995).
The Changing Paradigm.
The aim and demand for equal status
and equal treatment for disabled people forces us to think in greater
entities and connections, which again enforce new physical solutions usable
by an increasing number of people. Lifespan standard for dwellings
and low floor buses are examples of this.
There are still many challenges which have not been solved in the area of accessibility, either because of lack of knowledge about possible solutions, or due to different priorities. At the same time, we see an increasingly clear focus on achieving more coherent solutions based on the perspective of equal status and equal treatment.
In the USA, in the 1990`s, a strong focus, based on the ADA - legislation was put on universal design (Lindberg 1996). In The Americans with Disability Act from 1990, where equal status and equal treatment, as well as prohibition against the discrimination of disabled persons are mandatory, access to public buildings, e.g. educational buildings, workplaces and restaurants are put into a larger social context.The legislation requires, not only public buildings without barriers, but also that the work and services performed in the buildings should be adapted both to the employees and the public. This implies developing different tools usable by all, including persons with disabilities. This applies to e.g. IT - technology, office equipment and tele-communications. Equal treatment implies that the various services should be accessible in the same way as buildings or premises. This, for instance, would imply that an individual with reduced sight may have the menu read, and that the waiter describes how the food is arranged on the plate. The same way of holistic thinking, as well as thinking in terms of equal status, is also related to other types of private and public services, among other things, public transport.
The ADA-legislation is chracterised by what we may call a notion of fair play. This implies that you, as a customer, employee or student, should have the same rights as everybody else. It is possible, that we, in Scandinavia, are more inclined to make people into clients than is the case in USA.
The philosopher Thomas Kuhn says that a new paradigm must preserve a major part of the ability of solving problems that the old paradigm had, and, in addition, open up for new, and so far unsolved problems (Kuhn 1962). The ideal of equal status has brought forward a more consistent way of holistic thinking and the creation of organisationally inclusive solutions. This is the core of the changing paradigm. We seem to be moving from a reductionist or split paradigm, where the focus has been on part - and specialized solutions and practice within different professions, to what we may call a more holistic model or paradigm.
More holistic and inclusive solutions
for different groups of the population depend, to a large degree, on the
welfare policy and the priorities made by the central and local authorities.
Professionals involved in physical planning and design cannot avoid involving
themselves in the development of these policies, if they are going to work
towards a more universal design of environments and products.
(Left) The entrance to, among other things, a
hotel and offices is usable for one part of the population; it is, however,
complicated for a series of user groups, despite the fact that some functional
details have been included. Handrails have been installed, and the steps
have been marked by a contrasting colour. The solution excludes, however,
among others, wheelchair users, and separates them from other users.
An attempt to compensate for this limitation is made by referring this
user group to a subsidiary entrance at the other side of the building.
A picture from Vika Atrium in Oslo.
(Right) The Olav Building Complex in Trondheim
contains a concert hall and a conference centre.
The entrance is one of two main entrances. The solution
is weak on several points in relation to providing good functional
conditions for all user groups. A ramp is provided for wheelchair users
at the outskirts of the entrance and is concealed, at the left of the picture.
To conceal solutions which cater for the needs of one user group, does,
however, not comply with universal design.
Architects: The Group of Architects for the Mellager
District
A New Emphasis to
Existing Ideals.
The theory behind universal design
formulates the perspective of equal status more precisely and extensively
than is usually implied by the notions Planning for Disabled
People. Equal status in the form of social participation has had, and
has, a central position in the motivation towards adapting society for
people with disabilities. So far, most weight has been put on the effect
of the adaptions - the functionality of the technical solutions for disabled
people - and less on the solutions` own qualities in a perspective of equal
status.
A major part of the professions involved in the design of the physical environment has all users as an ideal aim for their work. The objects clause of the Norwegian Planning and Building Act 1985, is an example of this:
§2 The aim
"Through planning and specific
requirements for each individual building project the regulations must
ensure that area usage and buildings are to the best possible advantage
for the individual and society.
Special considerations should be made to ensure that children have the best possible environment in which to grow up."
In reality, there is a gap between the ideal of to the best possible advantage for the individual and society and the actual solutions. Many people experience difficulties in using the outdoor environment as well as buildings. It is also a general feature that many of the plans made by the local authorities, e.g. in zoning and town planning, do not further or adhere to the aim of adaption for the individual, implying every individual in society. Disabled people are one of the groups not taken into account.
Universal design emphasises that the demands of all users are to be valued on equal terms. If some considerations have to be excluded, the choice should be made consciously and on a firmly argued basis.
This is an ambitious objective which demands detailed knowledge of subject areas, solutions and consequences of the choices made. A series of new challenges are implied to solve contradictory demands, to make sure that all accessible possibilities are exploited to include the demands of the users. Considerations must be given to a larger variety of user qualifications such as mobility, sight, hearing, understanding and allergy. The solutions should function equally well for those with average abilities as for people with disabilities. In addition to disabled persons, children should be included among the users who have needs beyond average. Many functional demands are the same for children, elderly persons with reduced functional abilities and persons with disabilities.
A Challenge to Planners
and Designers.
The transition from theory to practice,
where all user groups are included in planning and thinking, is a challenge.
There are several proposals as to how one could be guided through this
process. The Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State University
has developed seven principles. In addition, there is a detailed description
of each principle. These are printed in the appendix. A summary of the
principles is as follows:
Principles of universal design.
1. Equitable use
The design is useful and marketable to any group of users.
2. Flexibility in Use
The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and
abilities.
3. Simple and Intuitive Use
Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user`s experience,
knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.
4. Perceptible Information
The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user,
regardless of ambient conditions or the user`s sensory abilities.
5. Tolerance for Error
The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental
or unintended actions.
6. Low Physical Effort
The design can be used efficiently and comfortably and with a minimum
of fatigue.
7. Size and Space for Approach and Use
Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation,
and use regardless of the user`s body size, posture, or mobility.
In addition to these principles, considerations must be given to a whole series of other conditions in the process of planning and development. These may include social considerations, economy, aesthetic design, sustainable development, cultural qualities etc.
Work is progressing in several countries to develop tools which can help improve standards in each of these areas and the collective result, when all or several factors are seen in context.
In Norway, we have a reasonably extensive amount of instructive material when it comes to planning for different user groups. This refers to e.g. children, elderly and disabled people. Standards, detailed references and norms exist to guide the practical design. These are of vital importance to the development of good solutions which include all users in a holistic perspective. The holistic perspective, as described in universal design, is, however, not developed systematically and consistently in this material. This is necessary, if the theory of universal design is to be put into practice.
Several professions influence the design of environments and products. Of particular importance is over all and long term planning, land use, engineering, architecture and product design, because they have a major influence on the individual parts of the environment and the relationships between them. In addition, ergonomics is a profession which systematically tries to adjust the functional requirements of the environment to human needs.
We shall continue to take a closer
look at how universal design relates to planning, architecture and product
design, to how universal design may be illustrated and the consequences
of it`s inclusion into the various professions.
Low floor buses with entrance from bus stops with
high level platforms to the right are
more in line with universal design because:
* Principle 1 . The design is useful and marketable
to any group of users.
* Principle 2. The design is flexible in use (it
facilitates the user s accuracy and precision).
* Principle a. The design is simple and intuitive
in use (arranging information consistent with its importance).
* Principle s. The design has a tolerance for error
(it minimises hazards and the adverse
consequences of accidental or unintended
actons like falling or taking a false step).
* Principle 6. The design demands a low physical
effort.
* Principle 7. The design provides adequate space
for the use of assistive devices.
Both illustrations are from Oslo, Norway.
Approach
The use of the principles of universal
design is assumed in design as well as in the design of the physical environment.
The main ambition is usability by everybody, or as many as posssible,
in the normal solutions. It would be interesting, however, to evaluate
the implications of this notion within the various parts of planning.
What is Planning?
We start off on the basis that planning
is an activity which seeks to influence the future through actions based
on acquired knowledge, experience and interpretation of the past. Planning
looks both to the future and to the past. Our definition is as follows:
Planning is to influence the future by actions based on knowledge
Planning is, in our context, to influence society by actions based on knowledge. In addition, we comprehend planning as a common denominator for physical and economic planning, as well as planning related to education, culture, health- and social services, environment etc.
The design of products, as well as of services, and measures to implement these, demand planning. There is a distinction between planning and the design of products which may be illustrated by a couple of examples:
Similarly, the development and
design of low floor buses is not planning. The development of transport
plans, however, with objectives, subsidies etc. necessary to the employment
of low floor buses, is a part of planning.
In Norway, there has been a similar development in a much shorter period of time in municipal planning. In 1960`s, it had a physical orientation, with a land use map as one of the most important products. Later, the content also includes an economic plan, and today, various types of social planning are emphasised more and more.
Another feature of the development is the ambition of a holistic way of thinking. As an increasing number of sectors are included in planning, the question is raised as to the relation between the different sectors in long term, over all planning. Some of the municipal master plans have a clear ambition to make these relations visible.
The distribution of planning into an increasing number of areas are
described in the following way by Amdam and Veggeland in " Theories on
Planning" (Amdam/Veggeland 1991):
The modern Western societies are not planned societies. But they
could be characterised as planning societies........The development
of planning societies has been a, more or less, continuing process since
the 1930's, distinguished by planning at all administrative levels, and
by an increasing number of social sectors which have been subjected to
public planning decision making. In earlier periods, forms of work we now
would describe as planning, were also taking place. It was however, a part
of limited and technically characterized areas like
town planning and from military, fire and sanitary considerations
and the planning of roads and railways based on transport needs and technical
economic considerations etc. The new implications are that planning has
developed into a general phenomenon in society, both in public and private
enterprises.
The notion of planning has been extended to imply any kind of socially aimed activities, from zoning to economic, political and sociocultural life. In line with current understanding, planning is not only a project, but also a process, which implies as a consequence, that planning becomes a radical activity in society.
New Considerations and Aims are introduced into Planning.
The considerations prominent in planning have varied according to
different periods of time. The list below indicates what has
been important and which new considerations have been added as time went
by:
Early planning (mainly town planning)
Defence
Fire considerations
Sanitary considerations- Hygiene-Health
The last 50 - 60 years
Economic growth
Full Employment
Equalisation of Living Conditions
The last 10 - 20 years
Environment
Women
Sustainability
Children and Youth
Elderly People
People with Disabilities
There is an increasing Focus on Different Groups of the Population
In recent years more attention has been paid to the subject of our
planning, and there is an increasing acknowledgement that some groups of
the population must be focused on, if they are to be properly taken into
account.
There has been an increasing focus on the conditions of people with disabilities, and accessibility now plays a more central role in planning. This happens, however, often in sector related plans and not as an integrated part of over all and long term planning. In some of the local authorities, which have accomplished a considerable amount in this area, the ambition has, however, been that these considerations, after some time, should be taken care of within the general planning system.
In Norway in 1989, national guidelines for strengthening the interests of children and youth in planning were approved. This is an example that, centrally, one acknowledges the fact that planning does not automatically cater for all groups, and that a special focus is necessary on certain groups and interests.
Accordingly, women, elderly people and marginal groups have been focused on in planning, where the main objective is an equalisation of living conditions. A characteristic feature is however, that no collective survey of different groups of the population is shown. The groups are singled out one by one. Even if this is a positive tendency as regards universal design, we are still far from a complete survey of how the different groups of the population are affected by planning measures.
The Ideology of Garden Cities
The idea of the garden cit es was introduced by Ebenezer
Howard, a theorist on city development, around1900.The ideas were a response
to the crowded and unhygienic housing of the working class at the time..The
thoughts behind the garden cities were based on the idea of
sound and beneficial housing conditions. The houses
were lowrise and in areas with small parks and fresh air.The principles
were employed in the development of several working class housing areas
in England. Even if Howard's theories of the garden city did not seem to
work out in a wider planning context, the deas have been significant in
the development of dormitory towns.
The ideology of garden cities is a true historical example
of the exploitation of physical planning and design in the improvement
of important social and medical challenges.
The illustrations are from Ullevål Hageby (Ullevål
Garden City) in Oslo, Norway, showing Damtorget (The Pond Square)
and a street with houses. Ullevål Hageby was built from 1915
to 1922. The architects were Hals, Jensen, Morgenstiere and Eide.
What does Universal
Design mean to Planning?
Universal design may be relevant
to planning in many areas. A solution complying with the principles of
universal design should be usable by all groups of the population. Translated
in terms of planning, a more correct assertion would be that the measure
should include all groups of the population, except for measures which
are directed specifically towards one group. What we then refer to as measures
may be proposals regarding physical design, economic measures of support
and service supplies, as well as supplies of health and educational services
etc. As we have seen, planning has gradually focused on all these sectors,
and universal design would naturally be related to these kind of plans.
We have taken a closer look at some examples.
Zoning - communication - transport
Physical planning includes everything
from over all and principal guidelines of land use, to actual physical
design of detailed solutions.
To a certain extent, the requirements of design for different groups are part of planning. Demands of accessibility for disabled people are, for example, put on the design of public buildings and road construction. The individual sectors and departments do not seem to recognise, however, that consideration of the whole population is part of their responsibility. For example, the Transport Authorities does not fully accept the responsibility of transportation for everybody, including groups of disabled people. It is looked upon as a responsibility for the Social Services. The main thought behind universal design is not fully catered for, as long as the perspective of equal status is not emphasised. The ambition of usability by different groups is taken care of , but often by offering specialized solutions. When it comes to detailed planning, there is a need to emphasise the principle of equal status, to a larger extent.
Another question is, if equitable use is relevant in relation to a more general development plan, as for example the Municipal Land Use Plan. There is a widely held opinion that, for instance, accessibility for disabled people is something that the planning departments and the design teams should be responsible for, and this is almost uninfluenced, by over all strategic planning.
According to our estimations, this opinion is incorrect. In land use planning as well as in transport planning, many conditions are implied that would influence unequally the usability by different groups of the population. For example:
Areas based on mobility by car are less usable by people who do not use a car. This would include children, adults without a car, and persons with disabilities etc.
The choice of solutions in public transport influences to what extent this system can be used by different groups of the population. Vehicles usable by everybody should be employed, everybody should be able to understand the information of services and timetables. Distance to stops and access design should not exclude any user group.
General zoning and transport policies, and the relation between them, influence the level of pollution. This is a general health and environmental problem, but it is of particular importance to people with asthma. Solutions leading to large concentrations of pollution would exclude people with asthma from participating in society.
Social Planning and other Areas
of Planning
This includes a broad variety of
planning in the "new" sectors which are about to adopt planning, often
according to a pattern based on the more established physical and economic
planning. Planning is governed by different regulations, but at the level
of the local authority, it is the Planning and Building Regulations which
should co-ordinate the different sectors, and which therefore direct the
planning process and methods.
Examples of planning in the "new sectors" are health and social plans, culture plans, plans for the adolescent environment and education etc. Many of the plans consist of a physical and economic part, and one part dealing with the design of services within each sector.
In our opinion, it would also be relevant to include the main principles of universal design in these areas. By this we imply that the plans should be based on the acknowledgement that the population consists of many different individuals with different needs and demands. Furthermore, the products and services which are the result of the plan, should be usable by the different groups. The services should also be designed and located to be used by everybody. In the same way that demands are put on the design of physical products based on the ambition of universal design, similar demands should be put on the design and location of services. The demand for equitable use, flexibility, simple and intuitive use and perceptible information could, in principle, also be applied to services.
What must be done
to include Universal Design in Planning?
The main objective should be to
ensure that different types of plans have solutions which satisfy the demands
of universal design.
To achieve this, we believe an effort is demanded in four areas:
Today, we usually measure the consequences in relation to aims of reductions in noise level, air pollution, economic equalisation between different regions etc. In some analyses, the way the different consequences are divided between the different groups affected (children, road-users etc.) is described. Some groups may get the advantages and some the disadvantages. It would be possible to improve this with a sufficient knowledge about the different groups` functional ability. This may be illustrated by a few examples:
1. Consequences of pollution
We imagine a developmental measure
which will entail a certain level of pollution, which can be estimated
in advance. A traditional way of referring to these consequences may be
as follows: "The measure will entail a level of pollution (........).This
is an increase compared with today`s level, but is below the recommended
limits." If we include the consequences for different groups of the
population, the conclusion may be complemented as follows: "The level
of pollution may, however, be too high for people with asthma to stay in
the area. The measure may therefore lead to the fact that 5% of the population
may not be able to use the area."
2. Location of housing
We imagine a quite normal approach
in Norwegian local authorities: There is a choice between locating a housing
area on flat, cultivated land near the municipal centre (alternative 1)
and locating a housing area in a steep mountaineous area at a distance
from the centre (alternative 2). There are at least three different consequences
which may be described:
a. Developmental
economy as opposed to protection of cultivated land
b. Alternative
2 gives an increase in transport
c. Alternative
1 may be used by a larger section of the population than alternative 2.
Normally, point a would be included, point b might be included, point c, however, would not have been illuminated. Point c must, however, also be solved, if universal design is going to be a part of the consequential evaluation.
Two housing areas, one in steep terrain at a distance
from the city centre. The other housing
area is inside the main city centre. Dwellings as part
of small housing areas in steep terrrain , at a distance from the centre,
lead to a series of problems for people without cars, and who are not
in good shape. There are seldom services (shops, schools etc.) in the areas.
There is a lack of public transport due to an insufficient number
of users, and communication within the area is strenuous. The possibilities
of achieving universal design are greater in densely built-up areas,
where public transport is established and the walking distance to services
is short. The housing area shown at the bottom is from a rehabilitation
area in the centre of Oslo; the flats have lifespan standard.
To the left: Housing area in Bergen, Norway.
To the right: Dwellings in rehabilitation area in
down town Oslo, Norway.
The Presentation
of Plans and the Basis of Decisions.
Functional Aims should be
formulated.
Planning has always been based on those aims and considerations which
the people - who set the tone in a particular period - have valued most
highly. We have mentioned the considerations of fire, defence, hygiene
etc. that characterised the plans of earlier periods. Irrespective of which
philosophy the planning is based on, it is important to develop aims which
function in a particular type of plan. It is particularly important to
focus on the fact that the population consists of different groups and
individuals with different wishes and needs, and to see this in relation
to the aim of equal status. This aim is central to universal design, but
is often not considered in planning today.
This aim must be made functional in relation to different types of plans. We have seen examples where aims to consider people with disabilities are included in the chapter describing the aims, and have disappeared later on in the same document. The aims have thereby not been made functional in relation to the evaluation of different solutions.
The extent to which the aims are achieved must be discussed.
As described earlier, the aim of universal design is to achieve solutions
usable by all, to the greatest extent possible. Consequently,
the demand is not absolute, but should be discussed in relation to other
considerations. It should, however, be required that decision makers, and
others involved in the planning process have knowledge of which choices
and evaluations are made. (See the example of the location of housing).
In practice, solutions deviating from the requirement of usability by everybody,
should be discussed separately. An argument for modifying the requirement
should be available. This implies that "the burden of evidence" should
be on those who form the basis of decisions.
Consequences for different groups should be clearly described.
Today, consequences are often described in relation to different aims
regarding the environment, economy, aesthetics etc. Such a description
does not show which groups would be touched by negative consequences,
or which gains from the initiative. Who is to gain, who cannot
use the proposed solution, how large a part of the population the solution
covers etc. are central questions to be answered, if one is to find out
whether the intentions of universal design have been met. This discussion
presupposes that aims are formulated where the same solutions cater for
different groups. This requires an understanding of the different groups
making up the population, and how the various groups are affected by initiatives
in the different types of plans.
Consequences for those who are not catered for
Even if there is an ambition that the proposed solution should cater
for all the different groups of the population, this is not always possible.
Solutions for those who cannot be included must then be put forward. They
may be catered for by specialized means or by particular support systems.
If we comply with this, a holistic perspective would be demonstrated, and
we have a basis on which to evaluate how far it is reasonable to stretch
the normal initiatives. This is often exposed in separate analyses, and
the possibility of a holistic evaluation is thereby lost.
Participation
Extensive participation is practiced
in a number of areas today. This applies, in particular, to plans related
to physical planning, in developed areas, where there is a clash of interests.
In these cases, participation is often necessary to be able to make
a decision. At the same time, there is only a small degree of participation
in long term, over all planning. In many planning situations there is no
participation except for the minimum required by the planning laws and
building regulations. The introduction of participation is motivated
more by a desire to avoid conflicts than to achieve a better basis on which
to make decisions as well as that of achieving improved plans.
There are two reasons why participation is important in taking care of the regard for universal design:
To achieve a beneficial participation process, it is necessary for the plans to have a content, which the different groups can associate themselves with. An awareness that the population consists of different groups must be present in all levels of planning and during all phases of the planning process. The way we present the plans and the basis of decisions, as described earlier, are not only important for the decision makers, they are also important to enable a good planning process.
The way over all and long term planning creates a framework for the later stages of planning, must be identified. Usability by all seems to be regarded as a task for those who make the detailed solutions, and there is little consciousness as to how one, through over all and long term planning can lay down the conditions as to what degree usability by all may be achieved. A higher degree of consciousness about this will be of significance both to planning itself, as well as to those invited to participate and how this is carried out.
«Old Oslo»,
a central part of the city, demonstrates a well planned and coherent structure
of measures that
provide good accessibility
for all. The area has a developed town centre with all modern conveniences.
There
are people with different
ethnical backgrounds, and there are some areas consisting of medieval buildings.
The solutions of pathways
are coherently and well executed. The township has a large proportion of
lifespan
dwellings. Playgrounds,
kindergartens, schools, shops and public buildings have been repaired
to give
accessibilty and improved
user conditions for everybody. The township is serviced by special minibus
services,
low floor buses and
underground service with good accessibility.
What is Architecture?
In this chapter, we shall try to
unite architecture and the concept of universal design. Two current definitions
of architecture will be presented, as well as the definition of universal
design. Would it be possible, on the basis of these definitions, to integrate
the ideas and the principles of universal design with architectural design
and philosophy?
Definitions:
Architecture has developed according to the prevailing spirit of the
time, tradition, position of the center of power, the power of the church
and religion, and to what kinds of buildings were mostly needed during
the changing conditions. Even if Vitruvius as early as 300 B.C. talked
about suitability as one of the foundation stones of architecture,
- and this has been one of the elements of architecture - architects and
clients have often limited the target groups. The guiding element has not
been that buildings should have equal functionality and usability by all
people. In the styles of earlier times, the craftsmanship, the details
of form, the aesthetical expression and tradition were most important.
The Technical Revolution (1850-): The technical revolution resulted
in new materials and possibilities, and the development of architecture
started to take a new direction. The scientific way of thinking and the
discoveries which followed, led to experimental research, particularly
in construction.There was an "aesthetic of engineers", where construction
and technical and industrial development and new materials like steel and
glass governed design.
Functionalism (1920-1940): As a style, functionalism is characterized as a period ending in the 1930`s, but spiritually, it indicates a turning point in the history of architecture. The technical revolution and the new materials and methods of production result in new ways of thinking. The old problem with a new style is solved in a sensational way; one should not look for any style at all. The character of the period and its expression would develop according to the building`s appearance as an adequate product where all technical and user considerations have been taken care of, and which is relieved of all bungled details. The construction should be simple, logical and consistent with the materials and the use, both in the design of furniture and buildings. Everything should have its form according to the use and the material.
Functionalism is, in many ways, the style which relates most closely to universal design. The demand of functionality is important in both movements. While functionalism is a movement with a clear ideology of cultivating an aesthetic which removes all unnecessary details and demands pure lines where the design is given by the material and its use, and puts functions and people into standardised needs and solutions, universal design is a method as well as a tool which does not put any demands on aesthetics, but only to the functional demands which are to be achieved.
Functionalism maintained that the use and the materials should determine the design; however, no demands were made as to usability of all "products" by all people, including people with disabilities. The architects decided and defined the "use" and the "users" themselves.
Functionalism.
The main notion of
functionalism was that the form should reflect the practical functions.
The
architecture should
develop according to the technical developments in other areas like aircrafts
and cars, and should
be rational, simple and inexpensive. A design for the general population
was to be created,
with the development of housing and plain interior decorations.
Villa in Oslo,
Architect Arne Korsmo 1937.
Architecture
Today
Today, we build in an even more
functionalist way than before. More advanced building techniques, new
use of materials and the production of large elements in factories, lead
to external differences, but the fundamental principles are functionalistic.
There is no longer one over all ideology of architecture or school of thought
which dominates the design and building of today. Architecture today is
based on the main principles of functionalism. But the wish to express
the needs of our time through creating a distinctive architecture of one`s
own leads to increasingly new and different architectural expressions.
Ways of living and the conditions of production are changing in a fundamental
way. Architecture should therefore also be renewed. New materials and forms
are presented, at the same time as elements from previous styles are applied,
but now in a new way and with new materials. Todays modernism is
often about regaining the original with the means of our time.
Society today makes ever higher demands on the design of our environment. Functional and material demands are increasingly more important in today`s architecture and building culture. Today`s planning processes are characterized by: analysis of consequences and needs, infrastructure, efficient construction, conscious use of materials and resources during the building process, user demands, efficient use of the building, fire regulations, flexibility, economy and adaption to and consideration of existing buildings and environments. Laws and regulations in Norway require fire protection, parking - and entrance facilities, indoor climate/ventilation, physical design and, to a certain point, usability by all users.
The situation within the building trade is characterised by increasing competition, stricter deadlines and that one wants increasingly "more for the same amount of money". Economy is often used as an argument to give exemptions, and for priorities that often are at the expense of, for one thing, accessibility by everybody.
At the same time, the new Norwegian building regulations put increasing demands on the qualification of the planners. One has to document internal quality assurance systems, the responsibility is related more directly to the profession and there is a possibility for sanctions and "black listing".
These solutions are equal in principle, and one is as
good as the other considering the technical estimation of accessibility.
Both solutions are worked over thoroughly, and durable, good quality materials
have been chosen. The solution at the bottom is more in line with universal
design, because it does not stigmatise physically disabled persons. The
entrance without steps is designed as a walking-/driving path, and does
not give the impression of being a specialised solution for the
physically disabled. The walking path is equal on both sides.
To the left: A chemist's shop in Middelfart,
Denmark.
To the right: The Courthouse in Oslo,
Norway. Østgaard Architectual Office, 1994
The Problem
There has been a development towards including the consideration of
groups with special needs in society. These considerations, however, have
so far been solved by specialized solutions in addition to the normal
solutions. This is due to the fact that the demands of disabled people
and other groups are often looked upon as specialized demands. Instead
of design for all becoming a natural quality and an integrated part of
the design and the general solution, these are demands made by, for one
thing, the building regulations and by pressure groups, and would often
be looked at in the end or subsequent to the ordinary solutions, and are
often solved by minimalized solutions. Less holistic and minor
solutions are achieved and they often become more expensive than if considerations
for everybody had been integrated into the ordinary solutions. Whether
it concerns the adaption of existing environments or new projects and products
the results are often less attractive solutions which do not comply with
the architecture and the form as a whole. This is a clear expression of
the fact that these are specialized solutions and not for "normal people"
- and a segregation between the different groups of society is created.
Today we may find some examples of good architecture and design, where
accessibility by all is a natural element which enhances the quality of
the prosject. These are, however, the exceptions. Few architects and designers
have, until now, accepted the challenge and task of creating projects where
accessibility and usability by all people are integrated qualities.
Could Architecture
be developed in the Direction of Universal Design?
As mentioned, universal design is not a movement on its own, but a
method or technique to guide and influence the design process.
The principles of universal design may be used to:
The design of our environment is no longer only a question of creating beautiful environments and buildings and good architecture; it also implies, more and more, to satisfy demands of the qualities which should be inherent in the finished project. Good projects consist of several elements, where aesthetics is only one of these. All factors should intermingle and form a totality which together create good environments, architecture and design. Universal design or usability by all people should become a natural and integrated part of architecture.
The lifespan dwelling
is based on directions in line with the principles of universal design.
The lifespan dwelling can be adjusted to different types of architecture
and building, and may be combined with other important social aims. This
detached house has a lifespan standard and has been made of materials accommodating
the needs of people with allergies. The exploitation of energy into heating
has been well adjusted, and proper ventilation has been considered to give
a good indoor climate.
The dwelling is of
universal design because:
* The design is useful and marketable to any groups of users
* The design demands a low physical effort.
* The main rooms are well dimensioned for elderly and disabled people and
for children.
* The use of materials and the indoor climate of the dwelling reduce uncomfortable
conditions.
In addition, the construction
responds to the desire for low consumption of resources and good architecture.
A detached house
at Godeset in Stavanger, Norway. The architect is Kjell Grimsæth,
Sandnes, 1988.
Which Changes must
take place within the Profession?
The concept of universal design should be a part of the whole planning
process, from the analysis of the situation, the sketch design, the aim,
the analysis of consequences, functions and needs, the framework, the proposals
of solutions including the brief and down to the level of detailing, as
well as in all parts of the actual physical execution of the project.
Conflicts
Introducing universal design could imply certain situations of conflict.
This could be a feeling of reduced artistic freedom, opposition against
the introduction of more demands and a fear of standardised arcitectural
solutions. Even if architecture today is continually developing, it is
tied up in traditions and earlier trends. A change in attitude among architects
is needed, as they have a tendency towards not giving priority to this
field. They believe that accessibility for all groups implies limitations
rather than challenges. As regards the fear of reduced artistic freedom,
as well as the ties to earlier traditions, one should look at this as a
challenge and try to find alternative solutions which are usable by all
people. One good example of this is the use of steps, which have been an
important element in architecture for centuries. If one develops an additional
alternative, and makes it an integrated part of the architectural expression,
with a central position and usable by all, the use of steps may be accepted.
The Main Arguments
for introducing Universal Design into the Architectural Process:
Based on the definition of universal
design and the seven principles quoted (see chapter 2 From Theory to Practice),
we have set up the following five instructive points which are relevant
for architecture and the design process. In point 5 we emphasise in addition
the relation between the use of materials and indoor climate.
1. The building should be of
equitable use and accessible for everybody.
The physical design of the building/project
should give all user groups equal possibilities to move about easily and
safely and to use all parts of the building/project. Specialized solutions
for particular user groups should be avoided, the normal solutions should
be usable by all.The main access, entrance and the building`s internal
circulation system should be designed to allow all groups to use the ordinary
solution. If this is not possible, an alternative without steps should
be integrated as an equal part of the normal solutions.
2. The building and its design
should be easy to understand and to use by all people.
Ordinary solutions which cater for
all groups make use simpler. Complexity and specialized solutions should
be avoided. The main access and entrance should be easy to find and to
walk about, and should be usable by all. When the entrance is an alternative
but equal solution, it should be clearly marked to avoid confusion and
unnecessary use of effort. Lifts, staircases, toilets, information etc.
should be easy to find and in a logical position. Patterns of movement
inside the building/project should be natural and logical. Alternatives
and possibilities should be clearly marked. Signs should be made of simple,
clear and well known symbols and, in important buildings, also with tactile
signs and speech. The use of contrasting materials, colours etc. would
be beneficial.
3. The design of the building
should demand low physical effort, and be used efficiently and with a minimum
of fatigue.
Entrance and use of the building/project
should be designed for use by all user groups, which implies that we do
not choose solutions demanding full mobility, great strength and sizes
which are only adjusted to walking/standing persons and to quick pace.
Examples of this would be gentle climbing conditions, ramps with gentle
slopes, entrances without steps, handrails adjusted to both walking and
sitting, doors which are easy to open or automatic door openers. A possibility
of automatic doors with reduced speed, door handles with a large and simple
grip, lifts with automatic doors and well sized compartments, clear signs
and heights adjusted to standing and sitting.
4. The whole building/project
should be designed for use by all people, regardless of users`body size,
posture or mobility.
All parts of the building/project
should be dimensioned for use by all groups. This could imply entrance,
rooms and areas in different parts of the building, doors, corridors, lifts,
toilets, barriers, offices, call boxes, telephone slots etc.
5. The building`s use of materials
and the indoor climate should not lead to uncomfortable conditions.
Use materials which do not damage
the environment and which may be used by everybody.Avoid using materials
which could give allergic reactions, i.e. avoid materials which produce
waste gas. Avoid carpets, materials and elements which collect dust. Clean
the building/project during construction and before it is put to use. Plans
for efficient possibilities of cleaning the building\project should be
made. Correctly dimensioned ventilation and organised and well qualified
supervision of the system of ventilation.
The housing area to the right consists of dwellings
with a lifespan standard and is more in line with universal design
because:
* The design is useful and marketable
to any group of users.
* The design demands low physical
effort.
* The design provides more adequate
space for the use of assistive devices, and it is dimensioned to cater
for everybody.
To the left: Oksval housing area an Nesodden,
a peninsula close to Oslo in Norway.
To the right: Lifespan dwellings at Norås,
Bergen in Norway. Vaardal - Lunde Architectural Office by the architect
Per Oeding, 1979
What is Product Design?
How could the design of products
be adjusted to the concept and principles related to universal design.
Definitions:
Design: There is no design with
a unilateral content and aim. Design has one common denominator: objects
which are formed and created by human beings. Objects in a wide sense,
which are conceived, made and obtained by human beings and constitute their"
artificial surroundings/environment.
The form is far from innocent;
an expression of a functional side, but also an aesthetical side, and valued
by virtue of communicating something. This duality carries the embryo of
the main discussion in design, - which of these sides is to be given priority.
(Aubry/Vavik 1992)
Universal design is the design and combination of different products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaption or specialized design. (The Center for Universal Design, with our addition, see Introduction,chapter 1 and Appendix)
The content of design is strongly related to various stages of development in industrial society. The result is a discipline which sometimes is orientated towards the purely technical aspect, other times towards the purely aesthetical or user aspects. The designer is therefore always in a situation of choice - often between idealism or artistic display or a pragmatism which requires the use of a "healthy rustic sense".
If one takes a look at Eames` definition, where the basis is a way of putting together components with the intention of achieving the best solution to a given problem, the definition of universal design is closely connected. Universal design demands, in addition, to work towards the best solution for all people. Here, both sides of the discussion in design are addressed; the aesthetical and the functional side. To find a balance between these two elements, where both could interact, should be the aim and challenge of the product design of the future.
The Historical Development.
If we look at the current styles
and the design ideologies throughout the ages, -would there be similarities
and common denominators with universal design? Could the definitions and
principles of the concept of universal design be integrated or combined
and linked with some of the existing ideologies and trends in design?
The origin of design has traditionally been dated back to the Victorian times in England. The main sources came into being simultaneously with serial production. The idea of uniting art and industry was highly in demand within the leading art movements already in the beginning of the last century.
The Industrial Aesthetics (1929-52)
The extent of technical devices
and the continually increasing number of industrially made products necessitated
studies where design was related to function. It was a matter of, in each
case, to find a simple solution to a technical and functional problem.
Functionalism also puts its mark on product design; furniture as well as
buildings should serve a purpose. The products should be complete, including
all technical and user considerations, and there should be no bungled details.
American Design (1930-1950).
Design was, for the first time,
recognised as a profession in the USA. The industry and marketing limited
the design, and it was characterised by being a compromise with simplified
elements to achieve a more aesthetical form. A fascination with style and
aerodynamical forms characterized this period.
The Italians have influenced the development of product design since the 30`s, and an extensive design policy (presentation of enterprises/image) governed both the development of products, architecture and graphical symbols.
Ergonomics- the Rational Approach
(1949-)
Ergonomics is a common professional
term of initiatives which systematically tries to adjust the functional
demands of the environment to the functional ability of the human being.
Ergonomics is problem-orientated and is therefore the principal method
in participatory rehabilitation. Many prefer to limit the term ergonomics
to work with physical functional demands (Lie 1996).
In 1949 an interdisciplinary group of psychologists, architects and engineers, called the Ergonomics Research Society was formed. The word ergonomics was chosen as a name for the activity which came into being. The profession started developing in the USA during the Second World War, when the military situation exploited the technique and the human being to the utmost. At the same time, man`s capacity and limitations had to be taken into consideration. In Scandinavia and the northern part of central Europe the profession of ergonomics turned away from the psychological aspect which predominated in the USA. In Sweden, they have concentrated on work physiology, along with which a study of industrial design with an emphasis on ergonomics was established at Umeå University. One of Sweden`s largest industrial design offices, "The Ergonomics Design Group" has its basis in the emphasis on ergonomics. In Norway the profession developed with a basis on the research of work and the health service for employees, with an emphasis on injuries due to heavy work load and physical and chemical environmental factors. The profession`s entry into product development and industrial design has been slow.
European Design 1960-1970/The
New Formalism
Most of the designers in the 1960-70`s
were architects. Due to the development in architecture, they were influenced
by an interest in utilizing the materials in the most rational way. This
led to a purification of form and an aesthetical implacability which excluded
any attempt at superfluity and decoration. The craftsmanship was dictated
by the cooperation between designer and enterprise. A movement, practising
a design characterised by briefness and purity combined with a widespread
use of nordic timber, came into existence: Scandinavian Design (1950-60`s).
The functional aspect of the products was emphasised. Series of products
with a strong appeal of identification were created due to competition.The
1980`s brought reactions and alternatives to the rational design .
The water tap to the right is more in line with
universal design than the one to the left. The water tap with
one grip could be used by more people and with minimal effort. It has also
been given a colour which separates it from the white china and makes it
more visible. In additi-
on the tap has a security arrangement to prevent burning.
Water taps with screwing arrangements were universal until the 1 960ies,
but have been gradually replaced by fittings which may be operated
by one grip. The fittings with a screwing arrangement now seem to get a
renaissance as rustic products.
Different Movements of Design.
Artisan Design: The tool decides the form. The individual craftsman came forward with his/her improvements until the tool got its final and perfect design. For example, the tool of the cabinet maker.
Anonymous Design: Objects which are not formed by a designer. The form is the result of suitability and the satisfaction of the user.
Engineering Design: The development of industry is the result of engineers and technicians taking over the enterprise. The industry creates the need, opens up the capacity of production and determines the craftsmanship. Designers, artists and architects are the losers.
Design and "styling": Mainly in the USA in the 1930`s. The designer is only dealing with the external look of the product. This type of designer often neglects the demands of economic considerations and quality.
Marketing Design: Often synonymous with commercial design. The market researchers are autocratic when it comes to deciding on and satisfying the needs of the people, but they also have the main responsibility for the end product. The designer decides on the external form which takes care of this need.
Design without cost: Is best illustrated by military material. Design which purpose is only directed towards appropriate use and maintenance.
Graphic Design: Secure visual identification between a sign or a trademark and what it is associated with.
Environmental Design: The social responsibility of the designer leads to an increasing involvement in environmental questions. This leads to a displacement of responsibility towards social involvement and town planning. A forced growth implies a risk of the natural balance being disturbed, and destruction threatens our existence. Environmentally sound materials.
System Design: Co-ordination of products to achieve a reduction in the existing number of products without reductions of application, or the possibility of extending the applicability of the product. Simplify, unite and eliminate, demands a new and scientific method of analysis. A link in a whole family of products.
User friendly design: Social demands and security studies have, together with the technical development and knowledge of ergonomics lead to a new development of e.g. the work place.Use, the elements of the products and the space at one`s disposal should be considered.
Even if we find some cases of design of ordinary products with good design and good functionality for most people, the really user-friendly and ergonomical products are rare. The combination of user-friendly products and good aesthetical design is even more unusual. Products and objects characterized by ergonomics and user-friendliness are often characterised by having specialized clients and user groups, as well as having the character of specialized products and remedies.
Traditionally, designers have not been engaged in ergonomics, with a few exceptions in the design of furniture, cutlery and china. There could be many reasons for this. Some believe that the knowledge and method of ergonomics would not improve the product, others think they know everything and regard their own work as setting a standard. In the development of products and systems, emphasis was put on technological innovations and market research, without including design and ergonomics from the start. Cooperation between designers and the profession of ergonomics in general design has just started in Norway. Professor Bengt Palmgran at The High School of Design, University of Umeå in Sweden, has put it this way:
Knowledge of ergonomics and certain sciences of behaviour, in combination with the knowledge of the industrial designer on developmental work, will become a key function in the future process of product development". (Aubry/Vavik 1992)
Could Product Design
be developed in the direction of Universal Design?
Universal design is not a design
movement but a method or technique to guide and influence
the design process.
The principles of universal design could,- for product design as well as for architecture-, be used to:
Which changes should
take place within the profession?
Introduction of the concept of universal design with its principles,
would, in many cases, change and extend the user groups and the functional
demands of product design. Introducing the principles of universal design,
including the aim of usability by all, would imply that the idea of usefulness
and equal status follow the whole design process, and thereby securing
the best possible functional result. Universal design as an integrated
part of the whole design process, would secure that functional value would
play an important role in deciding the aims, in analysing the user requirements,
in seeking the solutions and deciding the priority of the different components.
Conflicts
The trend today is towards a greater degree of product specialization
and an increasing number of products with limited and defined user groups.
Often there are particular products within the sector of each group. This
is a development in the opposite direction, and it could stop the development
towards a more universal design. In addition, product design is a large
and heterogenous subject. Some products will therefore continue to have
such specialized areas of use - or user groups, that usability by all will
not be possible.
Designers and producers should, however, accept the challenge to make products usable by all people, because it would add new qualities to the product, demand a smaller number of products and could give them a larger share of the market. Universal design seems, in addition, to be an international trend and may become a future demand within all areas of planning and design.
The Main Arguments
for the Introduction of Universal Design in the Design Process
All the seven principles of universal
design developed by The Center for Universal Design are particularly applicable
in product design (see the principles, chapter 2, and Appendix). Product
design is, however, a vast and heterogeneous area. It is therefore difficult
to describe the area by the use of examples, and all the seven principles
with their guidelines would not apply and be relevant to all products.
Some products would , by their area of use, have specialized user groups
and would not be of current interest to everybody. Therefore, it would
be necessary, in many cases, to adjust and to make priorities within the
various fields of products. However, the principles, as they are defined
today, cover, to a large extent, the fields, where it may be of current
interest to adjust the products to as many people as possible.
Razors from Gillette (to the left) and Wilkinson
Sword (to the right). Due to new developments, the functionality is increasing.
Gillette gives priority to a grip which secures a firm control with the
assistance of rubber ridges. Wilkinson Sword has developed a grip where
the hand is supported by the palm of the hand to achieve better functionality
for larger user groups.
Universal design is one answer to important challenges in society and to challenges which will increase in the future. We have seen that universal design has common traits with several other planning-, architectural- and design movements which have changed our environment. There are no fundamental differences between the general thinking of planning, architecture and product design and universal design. On the contrary, universal design is essential to good functionality and usability aspired to in all design. Universal design does not indicate a direction including an ideal of form, to the same degree as for example functionalism, and does not therefore present itself as a new design language.
The thinking related to universal design discusses the fact that large user groups are not able to use the products and the physical environment which we produce, and that it prevents them from participating in society. The other side of this is that the extension of one product`s user group may give the producers an increase in the share of the market, and the authorities may reduce specialized measures.
At the same time, universal design is directly related to an ideology with key words like, equal status, equal treatment and equal merit. Other basic concepts which are emphasised more strongly in european discussions about universal design or design for all, are democratization and multiplicity. An increasing number of terms are introduced during the process in the attempt to give a good description of the direction of our work. User centered design is only one such term. The discussion about universal design is on the way and should be kept alive.
Functionality in universal design must be introduced together with several other important elements like aesthetics and economy, and it should enter into new social adaptions like sustainable development.
Universal design has come into existence as a generalization on the basis of design for disabled people. It challenges a series of subjects and spheres of production. It is important to keep all these areas of work , to investigate them continually and to seek new solutions which may vitalise the development. The interaction between theory and practice should be present in the further work on universal design.
There are several areas that can be developed further:
Theory
The theory of universal design may
currently be discussed from different sides. It would be particularly interesting
to look into design that would include everybody in relation to the notion
of democracy, the principles of equal merit, the notion of solidarity and
the discussion on human rights. There is also a need to clarify if there
are contradictions as regards ideology and interests between planning for
disabled people and planning for all. The apparatus of notion should be
clarified, in particular.
It is also desirable to discuss further the user areas of universal design. Are there any areas where the distinctive character of some of the user groups should be expressed more clearly in the design? One example of this may be the environment of children.
Methods
Universal design demands a methodology
to be able to handle a large number of user needs in the development of
solutions. This would also be fundamental in order to put theory
into practice. There is also a need for a basic discussion in this area.
Should we employ the existing analysis of function, norms and standards
for different groups of disabled people and others, and develop a common
specification of demands on the basis of this, or should we seek for completely
different angles of approach? The last approach may imply to liberate oneself
from the notion of diagnosis and groups, and to develop new, general analysis
of function, based on what a representative selection of the population
could manage with a good margin.
Conflicts will arise during the process of handling the different demands of the users. There is every probability that the contradictory demands at issue may seem inextricable. In order to prioritise the effort in relation to practical work, both demands which coincide and those which conflict should be clarified. It is inexpedient to spend a lot of time on what has already been clarified professionally, and this would be important to know when entering into a complicated and time consuming area. A number of people ask for proof of methodology in the shape of check-lists, work-routines, norms, standards and examples. Much emphasis should be put on this in the additional work.
Beneficial solutions cannot be achieved without participation by those who are affected. The work must continue to develop this as an integrated part of the process of planning and design.
Solutions
Imperfection in theory and methodology
should not be interpreted as an obstacle in implementing universal design
in practice. It is basic to the notion of universal design, that we all
the time, as far as possible with the currently existing knowledge and
technology, make the physical environment more usable by all in current
production and development (Bringa 1995).
In addition, the design of projects where it is posible to work with the approach to these problems in particular would be important. Pilot-projects, as well as projects with employed research and experiments would be of great importance. Such projects should be accomplished within each particular profession, as well as, to the greatest extent possible, inter-professional tasks.
Documentation of results and
consequences
Arguments based on the notion of
cost and benefit would be of great practical significance. A documentation
of social economy as well as of business economy would be interesting together
with quantitative and qualitative analysis of living conditions and quality
of life.
Social economic evaluations have been on demand for a long time with the introduction and use of lifespan dwellings. Such analysis should be carried out in this as well as in other sectors. The effect of universal design as a preventive measure is of particular interest in relation to children and disabled and elderly people.
Publicity
To publish ideas and results would
be a key to further development as well as to the accomplishment of the
ideas. Both national and international channels would be used. It is of
current interest to engage both public and private enterprises, as well
as the educational system.
Solutions more in the line with universal design are
made possible by highly specialized technology. Servolink (top) is an infrared
system of warning which can draw the staff's attention to the fact that
costumers at a service station need assistance to fill up. This is mainly
a compensatory measure for people with disabilities.
New petrol pumps with automatic filling are now being
tried out (right). This solution provides the same means for everybody.
The illustrations are form Oslo and Stockholm
Ch. 1 Universal Design and Equal
Status
Barth, Erling: People with Disabilites in Norway, Oslo 1987
*
Jørgensen, Ivar: Satisfactory solutions ?, Oslo 1991
*
Kuhn, Thomas: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago
1962
Lasch, Christopher: The Narcissistic Culture, Oslo 1982
Lindberg, Lars: The American Solution, our Future Model of Handicap
Policy, Stockholm 1996 **
Løchen, Yngvar: The Disabled, Oslo 1996 *
Ofstad, Harald: Our Contempt of Weakness, Oslo 1972
Sandhu, Jim: A Holistic Approach to the Design for All Concept,
Newcastle 1995
The Center for Universal Design: Universal Design, North Carolina
State University 1995
Ch. 2 From Theory to Practice.
Ministry of the Environment/Ministry
of Local Government:
The Planning and Building Act
, Oslo1997
Ch. 3 Planning.
Andam,Jørgen/Veggeland: Theories
on Planning, Oslo 1991 *
Aslaksen, Finn: User Participation
in Planning, Oslo 1995 *
Ministry of Environment: Regional
Planning and the Policy of Land Use,
Parliament white paper no 29, Oslo
1997 *
Ch. 4 Architecture
Brockmann, Odd: Architecture,
what is it ?, Oslo 1986. *
Ch. 5 Product Design
Aubry, Didier and Vavik, Tom: Product
Design, Asker 1992 *
Lie, Ivar: Rehabilitation and
Habilitation, Oslo 1996 *
Ch. 6 The Future
Bringa, Olav: Fairleader- Planning
of Local Environments for people with Disabilities, Oslo 1995; new
edition 1998. *
* only in Norwegian ** in Swedish
UNIVERSAL DESIGN
The design of products and environments to be usable by all people,
to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized
design. The authors are involved in a collaborative effort to establish
and validate universal design principles to guide a wide range of design
disciplines including environments, products, and communications. A working
group of architects, product designers, and environmental design researchers
has identified seven universal design principles for use in evaluating
existing designs, guiding the design process, and educating both designers
and consumers about the characteristics of more usable products and environments.
The seven principles are presented here, in the following format: name
of the principle, intended to be a concise and easily remembered statement
of the key concept embodied in the principle; definition of the principle,
a brief description of the principle's primary directive for design; and
guidelines, a list of the key elements that should be present in a design
which adheres to the principle. (Note: all guidelines may not be relevant
to all designs.)
DEFINITION
Universal design is the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. The intent of the universal design concept is to simplify life for everyone by making products, communications, and the built environment more usable by more people at little or no extra cost. The universal design concept targets all people of all ages, sizes, and abilities.
PRINCIPLE ONE: Equitable Use
The design is useful and marketable to any group of users.
Guidelines:
1a. Provide the same means of use for all users: identical whenever
possible; equivalent when not.
1b. Avoid segregating or stigmatizing any users.
1c. Provisions for privacy, security, and safety should be equally
available to all users.
PRINCIPLE TWO: Flexibility in Use
The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and
abilities.
Guidelines:
2a. Provide choice in methods of use.
2b. Accommodate right- or left-handed access and use.
2c. Facilitate the user's accuracy and precision.
2d. Provide adaptability to the user's pace.
PRINCIPLE THREE: Simple and Intuitive Use
Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user's experience,
knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.
Guidelines:
3a. Eliminate unnecessary complexity.
3b. Be consistent with user expectations and intuition.
3c. Accommodate a wide range of literacy and language skills.
3d. Arrange information consistent with its importance.
3e. Provide effective prompting for sequential actions.
3f. Provide timely feedback during and after task completion.
PRINCIPLE FOUR: Perceptible Information
The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user,
regardless of ambient conditions or the user's sensory abilities.
Guidelines:
4a. Use different modes (pictorial, verbal, tactile) for redundant
presentation of essential information.
4b. Provide adequate contrast between essential information and its
surroundings.
4c. Maximize "legibility" of essential information in all sensory modalities.
4d. Differentiate elements in ways that can be described (i.e., make
it easy to give instructions or directions).
4e. Provide compatibility with a variety of techniques or devices used
by people with sensory limitations.
PRINCIPLE FIVE: Tolerance for Error
The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental
or unintended actions.
Guidelines:
5a. Arrange elements to minimize hazards and errors: most used elements,
most accessible; hazardous elements eliminated, isolated, or shielded.
5b. Provide warnings of hazards and errors.
5c. Provide fail safe features.
5d. Discourage unconscious action in tasks that require vigilance.
PRINCIPLE SIX: Low Physical Effort
The design can be used efficiently and comfortably and with a minimum
of fatigue.
Guidelines:
6a. Allow user to maintain a neutral body position.
6b. Use reasonable operating forces.
6c. Minimize repetitive actions.
6d. Minimize sustained physical effort.
PRINCIPLE SEVEN: Size and Space for Approach and Use Appropriate size
and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use regardless
of user's body size, posture, or mobility.
Guidelines:
7a. Provide a clear line of sight to important elements for any seated
or standing user.
7b. Make reach to all components comfortable for any seated or standing
user.
7c. Accommodate variations in hand and grip size.
7d. Provide adequate space for the use of assistive devices or personal
assistance.
It must be acknowledged that the principles of universal design in
no way comprise all criteria for good design, only universally usable design.
Certainly, other factors are important, such as aesthetics, cost, safety,
gender and cultural appropriateness, and these aspects should be taken
into consideration as well.
THE PRINCIPLES OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN
Version 1.1 - 12/7/95
Compiled by advocates of universal design, listed in alphabetical order: Bettye Rose Connell, Mike Jones, Ron Mace, Jim Mueller, Abir Mullick, Elaine Ostroff, Jon Sanford, Ed Steinfeld, Molly Story, and Gregg Vanderheiden
Major funding provided by: The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of Education
Copyright 1995, The Center for Universal Design, NC State University