Copyright © E. Steinfeld 1994
By Edward Steinfeld Professor of Architecture
Director, Center for Inclusive Design & Environmental Access State
University of New York at Buffalo
Universal Design is different than accessible design. Accessible design
means products and buildings that are accessible and usable by people
with disabilities. Universal design means products and buildings that
are accessible and usable by everyone, including people with disabilities.
Although these different definitions appear to be simply semantic, they
actually have significant differences in meaning. Accessible design
has a tendency to lead to separate facilities for people with disabilities,
for example, a ramp set off to the side of a stairway at an entrance
or a wheelchair accessible toilet stall. Universal design, on the other
hand, provides one solution that can accommodate people with disabilities
as well as the rest of the population. Moreover, universal design means
giving attention to the needs of older people as well as young, women
as well as men, left handed persons as well as right handed persons.
An entrance that is designed to be "universal" would not have
stairs at all. Instead of only one toilet stall designed for people
who use wheelchairs, a toilet room with a universal design might include
more than one stall with larger space clearances and perhaps additional
facilities such as a changing table for babies. Instead of providing
accessibility to only a men's and a women's toilet room there might
also be a "family" toilet room, one in which men can take
their young daughters or older mother and women can take their young
sons or older father without embarrassment. This bathroom could also
accommodate people with a wide range of physical limitations. Over the
last several years there has been a growing interest in universal design
as an alternative to accessible design. Why has this occurred? In the
highly developed countries there are several reasons:
•An increase in the number of survivors of disability
•Increasing life spans
•Increasing purchasing power among the population
with disabilities
•Development of a "gray market"
•Recognition of the inadequacies of assistive
technologies
•Products and environments that were not designed
with old people in mind.
Data from the United States illustrates these trends.
Between 1970 and 1980, the number of people with disabilities increased
by 50%. This can be attributed to improvements in medical technology
and health care practice. People with disabilities themselves are living
longer and the growth of the older population, particularly the "older
old" has been rapid. It is estimated that, by the year 2030, 20%
of the population in the U.S. will be over 65. The purchasing power
of people with disabilities is significant. It is estimated that 36
million disabled people in the U.S. spend 40 billion dollars on special
products. As they become integrated into general community life, hold
jobs and earn more money, they are beginning to exert influence on design
of mass marketed products. One of the most significant social trends
has been the development of the "gray market." Consumers over
65 have the highest discretionary income in the U.S. It is estimated
that the population over 50 years of age, which includes most middle
age people as well as the aged, amounts to an $800 billion market. This
group controls 56% of all discretionary income. For example, they purchase
60% of all domestic cars and own 50% of all homes. Despite the increasing
economic power of the older population and people with disabilities,
there are many gaps in the market place. Many special products, i.e.
assistive technology, are Band-Aid approaches to deficiencies in general
consumer product design. The same can be said about accessibility features
in public buildings or "adapted" housing. Research on consumer
acceptance of assistive technology has demonstrated that people do not
like the medical/technical appearance of these products. They are also
too expensive, hard to find, unreliable and difficult to repair. Perhaps
one of the most significant limitations is that consumers see them as
stigmatizing; "special" products and environments promote
a negative self concept. Increasingly, the proponents of disability
rights and design professionals have come to realize that the concept
of accessible design has to be rethought. Consumer products and environments
have been designed for Peter Pan and his friends, people who never grow
old and live in Never-Never-Land. The challenge now is to change the
way we think about design of all products and environments. It is important
to note that the term universal design does not imply that everything
in this world be fully usable by everybody. As we shall see, the term
refers more to a goal to be reached and an attitude rather than a strict
absolute. The less developed countries share some of the same trends
as the highly developed countries. They also are experiencing an increase
in survivors of disabilities and, in some cases, increasing life spans.
However, in these countries, assistive technology is much more costly
and hard to find. In some countries it is simply outside the reach of
most people in the population. These countries have a need to control
public welfare costs as well; moreover, the stigma of disability can
be much greater. For these reasons, universal design makes a great deal
of sense as an alternative to accessible design because it can be more
generally available at lower costs than assistive technology or specialized
settings. With the advent of an independent living movement in the less
developed countries, there is an opportunity to avoid the trap of special
products and special places. Universal design also presents an opportunity
for economic development. The creation and production of consumer products
that are easier to use for everybody can improve competitiveness in
the world export market. Moreover, the development of a public infrastructure,
cultural and recreational sites that are usable by all can improve tourism
and contribute to general economic welfare. The first step in operationalizing
the universal design philosophy is designing for a broader range of
people. Whereas accessible design is often focused on the needs of people
who use wheelchairs or have visual impairments, universal design should
consider other differences as well. This may include differences in
strength, intellectual abilities, perceptions and values. For example,
universal design of signs at an airport terminal would include response
to travelers who do not speak the native language of a country. Broadening
the target population for design can be achieved in two ways. First,
individual designs can "forgive" limitations and abilities.
For example, a door handle should be designed for ease of use by a variety
of different grips. Second, products and environments should be designed
to adapt to a range of abilities. So, for example, the walls surrounding
a bathtub can be designed to support grab bars wherever they are needed.
In this way individuals can install grab bars in places that are best
for them. The first approach requires building in certain design features
from the start. The second approach, however, allows for a range of
adaptation depending on individual and household needs. The initial
level of usability might actually be lower than "accessible design"
but the range of adaptation would be greater. An important implication
of universal design is that it has mass appeal. Accessible design often
has a medical or institutional appearance. The lack of good aesthetics
often leads to "technology abandonment" on the part of the
consumer or negative attitudes towards accessibility on the part of
building owners or designers. To insure that universal design will be
accepted, it must have a high standard of aesthetics. In fact the most
successful universal designs often express the usability features of
the product or environment as strong aesthetics qualities and are successful
precisely because they are beautiful as well as useful. Of course, universal
design must be usable and accessible by people who have disabilities.
Four principles can help to assure that this goal will be achieved:
•insuring a wide range of anthropometric fit
•reducing energy expenditure
•clarifying the environment
•using the systems approach
Products and environments should be usable within
the comfortable reach of the intended users, including those who are
seated and those who are standing. Circulation clearances and environments
should be large enough to accommodate wheelchair and walking aide users.
Grip sizes and clearances should be within the range abilities of people
who have limited grip or have to use alternatives to the standard grips.
Often we think that accessibility can be achieved best through larger
spaces; however, reducing energy expenditure is often just as important
as providing enough clearance for wheelchair movements. In particular,
older people need an environment that eliminates unnecessary expenditure
of effort. This can be achieved by organizing space and designing devices
to simplify the tasks of using them and may mean keeping spaces from
getting too large. Useless movements should be eliminated. Hands-free
operation can be an excellent way to reduce energy expenditure. Operating
forces on controls and hardware should be kept to a minimum. Finally,
products and environments should be designed to reduce bending and stretching.
The legibility of the environment and products are critical to their
successful use. Clarifying the environment includes the use of color
and texture contrasts to identify different controls or improve the
perception of spaces. Enough light should be provided to see things
easily and glare should be kept to a minimum. Clarifying the environment
also involves simplifying cognitive tasks associated with perception
and operation of devices. This can be achieved by making the way things
work visible, providing "information in the world" instead
of requiring people to memorize operations. Natural mapping should be
used to make the relationship between controls and their effects more
understandable. Providing redundant queuing, for example visual signals
as well as audible signals, reinforces communication about the operation
of devices. In general, the level of technology should be kept as simple
as possible and good feedback for the effects of one actions should
be provided. Universal design does not necessarily mean that the product
or environment is designed to be usable by all people from the beginning.
The systems approach can be used to provide an adaptable environment,
one that can be easily adjusted to meet the need of any person. There
are many ways to accomplish this. Interchangeable parts allow for substitution
of features to accommodate different levels of ability or different
ways to use a device or place. For example, most computer systems allow
the interchangeable use of several input devices, e.g. track ball, mouse
keyboard, joy stick or laser pointer. Another approach to adaptability
is the use of add-on options. For example, a bathtub that could have
fittings that allow the installation of grab bars or seats. A consumer
could purchase the basic bathtub first. As they got older, they could
buy additional options that easily attach to the tub. The design of
a system with uniform aesthetics would reduce the negative connotations
associated with typical bars and seats. Another important aspect of
the systems approach is the interface of mass market products with assistive
technology. A good example is the design of a telephone headset that
can be usable with a TDD. There are many good examples of universal
design. Let me finish with two, one product and one building.
Fig. 1 Knife
Fig. 2 Duquesne Student
Union 
The knife in Figure 1 was originally designed for people who have arthritis.
Rather than designing an add-on gripping system for ordinary knives,
the designers rethought the entire product design. The result was a
knife that was not only easy for people with arthritis to use but much
easier for everyone to use. The hand grip can be used with the hand
in the neutral position without adduction. A variety of different grip
types can be used to hold it including an open hand. The slanted handle
allows the user to exert force much easier on the cutting surface. The
attractive design of this knife made it successful in the broad consumer
market. In fact, it won a design award and is now part of the collection
of Museum of Modern Art in New York. Figure 2 is a building designed
by the Architect Paul Schweickher, the student union at Duquesne University
in Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Rather than simply fulfill minimum requirements
of accessibility, the architect used accessibility as a driving force
behind the basic form of the building. There is an elevator in the building,
but emergency egress can be achieved through ramps along each side.
The main entry to the building is underneath a huge cantilevered stairway.
The architect expressed the movement inherent in using ramps by creating
long cantilevered structures, that are striking architectural forms.
They give the building a unique dynamic character. Entering this building
is like passing through the mouth of a whale or a deep cave-an exciting
activity fitted with anticipation. Rather then making the accessibility
features "necessary evils", Schweickher used them as an inspiration
and generator for an exciting aesthetic experiences. In summary, universal
design is very different than accessible design. Whereas accessible
design simply provides a token response to the needs of people with
disabilities, universal design integrates the accommodation of disability
with the basic concept of the design. Beyond that, accessibility is
also expressed as an important element in the aesthetics of the product
or building. Accessible design acknowledges that people with disabilities
have a right to access and use of products and environments, but it
doesn't go far enough because it doesn't express social integration.
Moreover, it doesn't acknowledge the social trends that are changing
our societies. It will never be a completely adequate solution to accessibility.
Universal design promotes full integration in every way. Moreover, it
symbolizes that integration. Universal design makes a place for people
with disabilities alongside everyone else. It acknowledges disability,
aging and other differences as a part of everyday life. Note: This paper
was presented at the Sixth Ibero-American Conference on Accessibility,
June 19, 1994, Center for Independent Living, Rio De Janeiro.
Other Articles Available for
Free
Automated
Doors: Towards Universal
Architectural Barriers to Normalization:
The Acoustic Environment of Group Homes
Hyperhomes:
A Technical information Manager for Home Modification Service to Older
People
Bathing
For Older People with Disabilities
Enabling
Home Environments: Strategies for Aging in Place
The Concept of Universal Design Close
Window
|