Hi everyone,
I would like to understand better the definition of 'Inclusive Design'. And personally would like to be able to quote the most 'well defined' one. (As I am currently researching 'Accessibility to Historic Public Buildings').
Here are some assumptions that I wish to validate (or at least discuss further) within this egroup about the definition.
Based on what Marcus had written earlier, the phrase ' by working with users', if omitted will not make the definition complete. For example, if a representative of the users (for example an access officer) or an access advisory group (of different users and abilities) were not involved in a pre-planning stage or early stage of design, the product of the design (such as a building) would deem to be non-inclusive. At best, the end product would only be partially inclusive or just plainly accessible?
And with reference to Marcus's comments again, giving the example of ' a stair platform lift is not an inclusive design solution', would further emphasise the definition clearer, as 'users being involved earlier on in the design process of the built environment' would make it inclusive, hence the 'access feature' added on, ie the lift, would not have been there in the first place (if they had the choice earlier on), as the users would have insisted on a more gradual rather than an abrupt approach to the change of levels.
If a definition becomes a measure of how inclusive a design product is, we find many to be non-inclusive, especially historic and listed buildings and there are evidently many compromises needed to be made to make them partially inclusive or accessible even.
Does inclusivity only concentrate on design (or implicit solutions) or does it also include services or management solutions, which leans away from the idea of 'independence'.
Hence, in my opinion, inclusive approach is easier to define than inclusive design, and if wanting to make it more acceptable, I would began to think inclusive design as an approach rather than a product, but would that be compromising too much?
In a way, Marcus's definition of inclusive design by using the phrase ' a way of' is actually saying 'an approach that', which to me is more towards the 'inclusive approach', and the word 'design' should not indicate a 'product' but more of a 'process'. Somehow the definition has managed to do all that.
I look forward more thoughts on this matter.
Cheers,
Naziaty Yaacob, PhD Researcher
Peace Be Upon You
>From: Marcus Ormerod <
[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Accessibuilt list <
[log in to unmask]>
>To:
[log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: definitions
>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:51:46 +0100
>
>Hi all
>
>I feel that the distinction between auditor and consultant either needs
>to be clearer, or it needs to be said that the terms tend to be used
>interchangeably. Whilst the distinction is made by the National Register
>of Access Consultants (NRAC) www.nrac.org.uk <http://www.nrac.org.uk/>
>is that the interpretation generally in the commercial world in the UK
>and elsewhere?
>
>I would also add in the terms
>
>Access Appraisal - an assessment of design information for a new built
>environment structure to determine accessibility issues and possible
>barriers to inclusion. This is usually carried out by inspection of
>drawings and specifications.
>
>Inclusive design - Inclusive Design is a way of designing products and
>environments so that they are usable and appealing to everyone
>regardless of age, ability or circumstance by working with users to
>remove barriers in the social, technical, political and economic
>processes underpinning building and design.
>
>(An accessible solution may be inclusive, but may also not be inclusive
>in its approach - retrofitting accessible solutions into an existing
>building is less likely to produce an inclusive design approach, but
>will remove the barrier. A stair platform lift is not an inclusive
>design solution but is much better than no access at all.)
>
>Just some thoughts
>
>Marcus
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>Of helen
>Sent: 23 June 2004 18:43
>To:
[log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: definitions
>
>Sorry - am I being fussy? Additions and changes as marked.
>Regards
>Helen Allen
>HADA Ltd
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
>Croft Consultants
>Sent: 23 June 2004 08:27
>To:
[log in to unmask]
>Subject: definitions
>Hi All
>has anyone any opinion about the following definitions, any changes,
>additions subtractions etc.
>
>Thanks
>Dave Croft
>
>p.s. anyone have any comments about the access statement guides I put
>out a couple of weeks ago?
>
>
>Access Audit - a check and assessment of a premises, it's equipment,
>documentation and procedures in relation to accessibility and
>legislation?.
>Access Auditor - a person who undertakes an access audit and informs
>the owner where changes should be made or considered.
>Access Champion - a person or company who is employed by the owner to
>ensure a new building and it's facilities are designed and built as
>close to the best practice criteria as is reasonably possible and
>ensures that the building is managed appropriately .
>Access Consultant - a person or company which undertakes audits and
>produces recommendations to improve the accessibility of the building' ,
>it's equipment and all phases of the organisation's operation and
>procedures. Something more needs to be said about the advisory role a
>consultant plays re interpretation of the law. What about the NRAC
>definition?
>Accessibility - a measure of the ease in which all people may use a
>building', it's equipment, work arrangements, documentation and services
>and safety .
>Reasonable adjustment - an action taken by an employer or business
>owner/operator to ensure that all people may use their premises or
>services equally and without disadvantage to some individuals or groups
>of individuals. The 'reasonableness' of an action needs to be balanced
>between the number of potential beneficiaries, the cost in relation to
>the organisation's fanatical (financial?!) capability, the structure
>of the premises & any problems with the site and the safety of staff and
>users.
>
>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
>and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
>whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error
>please notify the administrator on the following address:
>
[log in to unmask]
>
>Mae'r e-bost hwn ac unrhyw ffeiliau a drosglwyddir gydag ef yn
>gyfrinachol ac at ddefnydd yr unigolyn neu'r corff y cyfeiriwyd
>hwy atynt yn unig. Os ydych wedi derbyn yr e-bost hwn drwy
>gamgymeriad, dylech hysbysu'r gweinyddydd yn y cyfeiriad canlynol
>
[log in to unmask]
>----------End of Message----------
>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the
>distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme
>visit:
>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>----------End of Message----------
>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the
>distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme
>visit:
>
>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>
>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
>
>----------End of Message----------
>
>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
>
>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>
>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
