Reality Check: Notions of Accessibility in Today’s Architectural Design Practice
Open accessAbstract
Understandings of accessibility have evolved from focusing on wheelchair accessibility to more integrated notions like inclusive design, according to which everybody should be able to use space in an equitable and independent way. In addition, architectural practice witnessed the arrival of new professional actors in project design and delivery, including accessibility advisors. Given these evolutions, the study presented here examines how accessibility is understood and thought of in architectural practice today, what motivates architects to collaborate with accessibility advisors, and what they expect from this collaboration. Interviews with professional architects and accessibility advisors suggest that, in today’s architectural design practice, interpretations of accessibility stretch from strictly following accessibility legislation to a broader interest (displayed by architects) or more integrated forms of advice (offered by advisors). The wish to attend to the diversity of people’s abilities and conditions exists, but is not fulfilled by legislation, and the norms and procedures it imposes. The presence of professional accessibility advice holds potential to reconcile both, provided that a synergy with legal procedures is found and that advisors’ roles can be developed from checking whether design proposals meet accessibility legislation to informing architects about diverse situations of use and offering them best practice examples.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Overall, rather than designing buildings considering the large variety of user needs, there is still a strong focus on design to address physical accessibility challenges.
“Notwithstanding the spread of user-centred design approaches, research suggests that overall, rather than designing buildings considering the large variety of user needs, such as those of neurodivergent individuals or underrepresented minorities, there is still a strong focus on design to address physical accessibility challenges (e.g.wheelchairaccessible entrances, walker-accessible elevators, e”
From Inclusion, diversity, equity and accessibility in the built environment: A study of architectural design practice (2021) · cites this paper as [7]
The Discussion and Conclusion (page not available) describes a limited, fragmented approach to accessibility and says only some architects seek to integrate people’s diversity. The interviews in “From obligation to personal affinity” give wheelchair-related requirements as examples of the technical focus. The paper supports the broad contrast, but the supplied passages do not specifically address the needs of neurodivergent people or underrepresented minorities. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAn uninformed audience was likely to associate Inclusive Design with regulations on physical accessibility.
“The interview findings confirmed that an uninformed audience was likely to associate ID with regulations on physical accessibility [7].”
From Inclusion, diversity, equity and accessibility in the built environment: A study of architectural design practice (2021) · cites this paper as [7]
The Abstract reports that interviews with architects and accessibility advisors found interpretations of accessibility ranging from compliance with legislation to broader approaches. The Methods identify these interviewees as professionals, not an uninformed audience, and the paper does not establish that such an audience is likely to associate inclusive design specifically with physical-accessibility regulations. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Baarda, D., & De Goede, M. (2007). Basisboek interviewen. Houten: Wolters-Noordhoff. Centrum Toegankelijkheid Provincie Antwerpen (s.d.). Wat is toegankelijkheid? [What is accessibility?] . Retrieved May 14, 2013, from http://www.provant.be/welzijn/toegankelijkheid/,
- Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Keates, S., & Lebbon C. (2003). Inclusive Design. London: Springer.
- Cuff, D. (1992). Architecture: The Story of Practice. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
- Gray, D.B., Gould, M., Bickenbach, J. (2003). Environmental barriers and disability. JAPR, 20(1), 29-37.
- Heylighen, A. (2012). Inclusive Built Heritage as a Matter of Concern: A Field Experiment. In: Langdon P. et al. (Eds.), Designing Inclusive Systems. London: Springer-Verlag, 207-216.
- Imrie, R., Street, E. (2011). Architectural Design and Regulation. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Hannelore Wauters Hannelore Wauters studied architecture/engineering at the University of Leuven (KU Leuven, Belgium). In the context of her master thesis, she investigated the collaboration between professional architects and accessibility advisors in Flanders. Currently she works as an architect/intern at architecture firm AR-TE, where she is gaining experience in healthcare and office projects.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zallio, M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2021) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108352 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Ten questions concerning inclusive design of the built environment
Heylighen, A., Van der Linden, V., & Van Steenwinkel, I. (2017) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.12.008 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Wauters, H., Vermeersch, P.-W., & Heylighen, A.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Venue
- Proceedings of DRS
- Publisher
- Design Research Society
- Published
- 2014-06-16
- Pages
- 1482-1491
- ISSN
- 2398-3132 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2521504210
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 2.32
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Proceedings of DRS (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- European Commission (335002)
- FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (201673)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- accessibility, inclusive design, wheelchair accessibility, architectural practice, accessibility legislation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
