Developing the theoretical content in Universal Design

Lid, Inger Marie

doi:10.1080/15017419.2012.724445

Cited by 51 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet while UD is often accepted as a good thing, we would concur with Imrie [3] that the concept conceals some inherent contradictions and dilemmas (see also [4][5][6]). Chief of these is how the notion of ''design for all'' -which in effect seeks to disregard people's ''age, size and ability'' [7] can take account of the multiple particularities and specificities of human beings and the way in which they interact with their environments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…It emerged as part of the civil rights movements in the US in the 1960s, in which there was a growing consciousness that disabled people faced multiple barriers in accessing and moving around different environments, and that policy solutions, which had tended to operate through codes or standards of building practice, had by and large been ineffectual [2][3][4]. Whereas the history of provision for disabled people had been focused on finding special solutions to the ''problem'' created by impairment, the UD movement proposed that good, accessible design should not draw attention to bodily and/or cognitive difference or impairment, but rather that it should facilitate as many users as possible, thereby limiting the potential for discrimination and stigmatisation of specific groups [1,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as Imrie and others have noted [3,4,16], the growing popularity of UD has taken place with little discussion of the concept's theoretical underpinnings. In a wide-ranging critique of the concept, Imrie ([3, p. 880] argues that while UD may ''contribute, potentially, to a progressive politics of disability'', the epistemological basis of the concept requires greater investigation and discussion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

DeafSpace and the principles of universal design

Edwards

Harold

2014

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While proponents of DeafSpace argue that UD and DeafSpace are not mutually exclusive, nor DeafSpace principles applicable only to d/Deaf people, questions remain about the type of spaces DeafSpace creates, most notably whether they lead to the creation of particularist spaces of and for the d/Deaf community, or reflect a set of design principles which can be embedded across a range of different environments. Implications for Rehabilitation UD as a basis for rehabilitation has been critiqued on the basis that creates "standardised", or universal solutions, thus negating the particularities of the human form. DeafSpace is an architectural paradigm rooted in socio-linguistic understandings of Deafness and the cultural identity of the Deaf community. It challenges UD's technocratic emphasis on minimising impairment and asserts design which is rooted in a more qualitative understanding of individuals' relationship with their environment. DeafSpace seeks to place the user more centrally in the design process and draw on the experiential knowledge of (Deaf) users. However, it has less to say about the often exclusionary socio-political relations which underlie the built environment and shape the diverse experience of deafness. DeafSpace raises questions about how the needs of particular groups can be met through UD principles and in turn whether DeafSpace principles lead to the creation of separate spaces for the D/deaf community.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

DeafSpace and the principles of universal design

Edwards

Harold

2014

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus making a hospital accessible for everyone is a major aim (Lid 2013). Hospitals also have a need for an increased accessibility since the amount of appliances and insufficient space too often results in an unnerving mess of appliances, cables and tubes (Garde and Van Der Voort 2008).…”

Section: Intelligent Buildings Internationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lean design improves both health-care facilities and processes: a literature review

Reijula

Nevala

Lahtinen

et al. 2014

Intelligent Buildings International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a literature review of the challenges and possibilities for Lean design in modern health-care facilities. Many of today's health-care facilities are in dire need of renovation since limited financial resources among health-care demand improved work process efficiency, safety and employee well-being. Lean philosophy has been successfully implemented into hospitals with up-and-running hospital processes, but has not been thoroughly tested as a design methodology. The principles of Lean do not contradict with user-centric, participatory or ergonomic design approaches and thus the possibilities of using Lean as a complementary design methodology to the aforementioned approaches are discussed in this article. Lean fundamentals are also useful when dealing with change management issues. Lean offers a fundamentally solid ideology and a wide range of toolsmany of which seem fitting to solve several urgent design problems in today's health-care design.

show abstract

“…In so doing, I explore questions of what is a person, where the body begins and ends, and how action is made possible [21]; and consider the role of a creative particularism in supporting diverse abilities [4,22]. The paper is divided into three parts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parallels and problems of normalization in rehabilitation and universal design: enabling connectivities

Gibson

2014

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeUniversal design (UD) is oriented to creating products, buildings, outdoor spaces and services for use by all people to the fullest extent possible according to principles of enabling equal citizenship. Nevertheless its theoretical basis has been under-explored, a critique that has also been leveled at rehabilitation. This commentary explores parallels between UD and dominant rehabilitation discourses that risk privileging or discrediting particular ways of being and doing.MethodsCommentary.ResultsDrawing from examples that explore the intersection of bodies, places and technologies with disabled people, I examined how practices of normalization risk reproducing the universalized body and legitimated forms of mobility, and in so doing perpetuates the “othering” of difference. To address these limitations, I explored the postmodern notion of multiple creative “assemblages” that are continually made and broken over time and space. Assemblages resist normalization tendencies by acknowledging and fostering multiple productive dependencies between human and non-human elements that include diverse bodies, not just those labeled disabled.ConclusionIn exploring the potential of enhancing creative assemblages and multiple dependencies, space opens up in UD and rehabilitation for acknowledging, developing, and promoting a multiplicity of bodily forms and modes of mobility.Implications for RehabilitationUniversal design and rehabilitation both risk perpetuating particular ideas about what disabled people should be, do, and value, that privilege a limited range of particular bodily forms.The notion of “assemblages” provides a conceptual tool for rethinking negative views of dependence and taken for granted independence goals.In exploring the potential of enhancing various dependencies, space opens up for reconsidering disability, mobility and multiple ways of “doing-in-the-world”.

show abstract

Developing the theoretical content in Universal Design

Cited by 51 publications

References 14 publications

DeafSpace and the principles of universal design

DeafSpace and the principles of universal design

Lean design improves both health-care facilities and processes: a literature review

Parallels and problems of normalization in rehabilitation and universal design: enabling connectivities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About