ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

Disponible en ligne sur www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
et galement disponible sur www.em-consulte.com

Research Paper

(Dis)ability and the experience of accessibility in

the urban environment
(In)capacit et exprience de laccessibilit dans un
environnement urbain
Inger Marie Lid , Per Koren Solvang
Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, PB 4 St. Olavs plass,
N-0130 Oslo, Norway

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 29 November 2013
Accepted 3 November 2015
Available online 21 December 2015
Keywords:
Accessibility
CRPD
Biopsychosocial perspective
Universal design
Urban environment

a b s t r a c t
According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, people have a right to participation. The
built environment plays a major role in determining what people
with disabilities can do and be, and Universal Design has become
an important strategy for improving accessibility. The social and
psychological dimensions are important to the experience of accessibility. We have interviewed citizens with sight loss and mobility
restrictions while walking in an urban environment, talking about
accessibility, to gain more knowledge on barriers and accessibility
as experienced in an urban environment. The analysis highlights
how attention to physical details in the built environment and psychosocial factors such as being different, are important. The study
indicates that people with impairments may have a wide range
of needs that require accommodation. These ndings lead to the
conclusion that accessibility must include biological, psychological and social dimensions to provide a sound understanding of the
personenvironment interaction.
2015 Association ALTER. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
All rights reserved.

Corresponding author. Inger Marie Lid, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences,
Norway.
E-mail addresses: ingermarie.lid@hioa.no (I.M. Lid), per.koren.solvang@hioa.no (P.K. Solvang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2015.11.003
1875-0672/ 2015 Association ALTER. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

182

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

r s u m
Mots cls :
Accessibilit
CDPH perspective bio-psychosociale
Conception universelle
Environnement urbain

Daprs la Convention des Nations unies relative aux droits des

personnes handicapes, tous les individus devraient avoir le droit
de participer de facon galitaire la socit. Au regard de ce que
les personnes vivant avec des handicaps peuvent tre et faire,
lenvironnement urbain joue un rle prpondrant, et la conception universelle sest impose comme une stratgie fondamentale
dans lamlioration de laccessibilit. Les dimensions sociales et
psychologiques de lexprience vcue de laccessibilit sont cependant trop souvent ignores, bien quelles y tiennent une place
importante. Dans le cadre de cette tude, nous avons interview
des personnes qui vivent avec des capacits visuelles ou motrices rduites au cours de dplacements dans la ville propos de
laccessibilit. Lobjectif de la dmarche tait dtoffer les connaissances sur les barrires et laccessibilit telles quelles sont percues
et vcues dans un environnement urbain. Lanalyse des entretiens
met en lumire lattention que ces personnes portent aux lments
matriels et physiques dans un environnement urbain, ainsi que
limportance que revtent les facteurs psychosociaux, notamment
ceux lis la diffrence. Ltude dmontre que les personnes vivant
avec un handicap sont susceptibles dexprimer une diversit de
besoins ncessitant des amnagements. Ces rsultats conduisent
la conclusion que pour mieux cerner linteraction entre lindividu et
son environnement, il est ncessaire dapprhender laccessibilit
en incluant ses dimensions biologiques, psychologiques et sociales.
2015 Association ALTER. Publi par Elsevier Masson SAS.
Tous droits rservs.

1. Introduction
There have, in recent years, been three important and interlinked developments in the eld of
disability studies. The rst is a focus on equal accessibility for persons with disabilities, as reected
in international policy documents and legislation. This focus on equal accessibility for persons with
disabilities has not only raised awareness in our global consciousness, but also led to the development
of a conceptualization of disability as a complex interaction between individual and environmental
factors. This second development represents the realignment of the global view of disabilities from the
level of individual responsibility to the interactional and is manifested in the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) article 1 and preamble through the statement that disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental
barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. (United
Nations CRPD).
Thirdly, and of great relevance to this paper, is the evolution of Universal Design (UD). UD is dened
in CRPD, article 2 and is furthermore referred to by Sanford (2012) as a rehabilitation strategy which
promotes the design of environments, products, programs and services which are sensitive to and
accommodate a wide range of individual abilities. UD is therefore a strategy which has the potential
to promote equal participation and enable people by dismantling disabling barriers.
An important element in building up knowledge to support UD strategies is the recognition that
people live with a wide range of abilities and interact with the environment in complex ways. Whereas
some studies discuss UD in general (Imrie & Hall, 2001; Iwarsson & Sthl, 2003), others focus on barriers in the built environment (Castrodale & Crooks, 2010; Gray, Gould, & Bickenbach, 2003; Heylighen,
2012). Few studies however examine how people with impairments experience the urban environment. Studies tend to focus on specic issues in the urban environment such as shared spaces
(Hammond & Musselwhite, 2013; Imrie & Kumar, 2010; Parkin & Smithies, 2012) or a single type of

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

183

impairment (Butler & Bowlby, 1997). In this paper we, however, present and discuss ndings from
a study of how people with impairments interact with the urban environment and fellow citizens.
We have interviewed pedestrians with sight loss or mobility restrictions. Such impairments are key
challenges when moving in urban space, both to those with congenital conditions, those who develop
the impairment in childhood and early adulthood and to the larger number of people who lose mobility and sight in old age. By choosing sight loss and mobility restrictions, we relate our study to the
understanding of disability as a universal human condition that most people experience throughout
their life course (Bickenbach, 2012).
Critical discussions on UD often refer to a lack of experiential knowledge in the epistemological
grounding of universal and inclusive design (Edwards & Harold, 2014; Heylighen, 2008; Lid, 2013).
Imrie & Lucks (2014) call for more studies on substantive matters that relate to the interrelationships
between design and peoples ourishing and suffering within the world (p. 1314). Our aim is to
study how people with sight loss and mobility restrictions experience the city and the challenges they
encounter. The study is conducted in order to increase the knowledge of barriers and of accessibility
from a number of situated perspectives.
This paper is structured into three parts. In the rst part, we introduce the theoretical perspectives
and the studys design and methodology; in the second part, we present how interviewees interact
with both the physical structures of the city and the social relations framing life in the city. In the
third part, we discuss the recorded experiences of barriers and accessibility from a multidimensional
perspective on disability.
2. Perspectives
This study, motivated by the CRPDs focus on access, seeks to identify the disabling processes in
the urban environment that create hindrances to participation. Accessibility means that citizens have
the opportunity to take part in society and social life. We have sought to unfold both disability and
accessibility as compound phenomena. The philosopher Martha Nussbaum argues that public space
is an artifact of ideas about inclusion (Nussbaum, 2006: 117). We have in this study focused on how
public space is experienced from a disability perspective. Accessibility is a prerequisite for participation
for all citizens. We understand accessibility to be the equal opportunity to make use of goods and benets
and to participate in ordinary, common life according to ones preferences. According to CRPD, article 1 and
the preamble, persons, environments and the personenvironment interaction must be included in a
concept of disability. Disability can thus be described as being relational (Bickenbach, 2012; Lid, 2014).
The understanding of disability as relational, as found in CRPD, is today acknowledged by scholars,
activists and policy makers (Bickenbach, 2012).
Disability, where disability is understood to be relational, emerges where there is a mismatch
between individual capacities and environmental demands (Thomson, 1997; Goodley, 2011). Accessibility, on the other hand, describes a situation of congruity between individual capacities and
environmental demands. Accessibility can therefore be achieved through the combination of improving individual abilities for example via education, individual rehabilitation and assistance and changes
in the environment that accommodate people with disabilities. UD is often perceived as being a strategy for improving the physical accessibility of the built environment. Humans are, however, a unity
of biological, cognitive, mental and social dimensions and accessibility relates to both attitudes, social
and psychological elements and the physical dimension (Heylighen, 2012; Gibson, 2014). UD therefore needs to be grounded in embodied experiences of people with impairments and their knowledge
of disability, disabling processes and accessibility. Impairments can be physical, cognitive or mental
and most people experience impairments throughout their lifetime.
Both disability and accessibility emerge as products of an interplay between individuals and their
environment when some kind of activity is performed. Jerome Bickenbach employs a conception of
disability that is both workable and realistic. The realistic dimension implies that individual persons
experience disability in real contexts. He systematizes disability in the following way.
Disability (a) is a multidimensional phenomenon that includes intrinsic features of both the
human body and mind; (b) is the outcome of an interaction between features of the person
(impairments and functional limitations) and features of the overall physical, human-built,

184

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

social, attitudinal, and political environment; (c) is a continuous rather than dichotomous phenomenon; and nally (d) is a universal human condition, rather than the distinguishing mark
of a discrete minority (Bickenbach, 2012: 79)
The minority perspective has importance in raising issues of discrimination. However, we agree
with Bickenbach that emphasizing universality is important to a workable understanding of disability
that underpins an analysis of accessibility.
One model for understanding the multidimensional aspect of the personenvironment interaction
can be found in the biopsychosocial perspective (Engel, 1977; Imrie, 2004). A biopsychosocial perspective on human beings, health and participation provides a rich approach to disability by integrating
the biological level with a psychological and social level. The levels cannot be fully separated, but
possess distinctive properties. Rob Imrie describes the model as a composite of biology, personal or
psychological and social factors (Imrie, 2004: 296). The biological level represents the individuals
physical body, including abilities, impairments and assistive devices. The psychological level relates
to the individuals expectations, insecurity, interpersonal communication, spirit (courage, stamina)
and caution. The social level encompasses social interaction in the social world in which humans
are embedded, including politics, laws, urban planning and shared values. The model is developed
within the health sciences. We found this perspective on human embodiment to be productive when
analyzing barriers and accessibility in order to better identify the complexity of the topic.
According to Bickenbach (2012: 15) disability, as product of an interaction between features of the
person and features of the environment, is an interrelation that we are only beginning to understand
empirically. Our aim here is to contribute to this empirical understanding by systematizing lived
experiences of the personenvironment interaction.
3. Interviews in an urban setting
The studys approach is phenomenological-hermeneutical. We aim to grasp the lived experiences
of people walking in the city and discuss the implications of the recorded experiences (Alvesson
& Skldberg, 2009; Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). Cognitive, physical, psychological and social aspects
are equally important. The term pedestrian used in this paper includes both wheelchair users and
nonwheelchair users. Assistive devices are recognized as being an extended part of the body and
therefore an integral part of the embodied experience of walking in the city.
The method is qualitative in design, with interviews being carried out as dialogues between interviewer and interviewee. There were in total 14 interviewees, all adults between 35 and 75 years of age
and all living in and using the city for everyday life purposes. Some interviewees were recruited from
municipality councils for people with disabilities and other were recruited by snowball sampling. The
interviewees were engaged in paid work or in voluntarily work for Non-Governmental Organizations
(NGOs). Many of them have taken active stances in disability issues and were familiar with the UD
topic and access to urban areas. They were recruited as individuals and not as representatives of organizations. The focus was on the experience of the urban place and on how the built environment can
facilitate or obstruct individuals participation as citizens. The interviewees were people with sight
loss or reduced mobility. We also interviewed a few people without such impairments, whose experiences were included to give us a broader basis for understanding disability, accessibility and barriers.
The interviewees without such impairments provided us with a set of experiences that enrich the
empirical material and gave a clearer grasp of the disability experience. These interviews were not
included for a systematic comparison between impaired and nonimpaired citizens.
Interviews were carried out in two stages. The rst stage was to ask standardized questions to
obtain background information on the interviewees way of using the city. The second stage was to
engage in a dialogue while walking through an urban setting. All interviews were audio recorded and
subsequently transcribed.
This method is inspired by other scholars and their studies of people navigating in and experiencing
the built environment. Nijs and Daems (2012) calls these go-along-interviews and Heylighen, Van
Doren, and Vermeersch (2013: 209) emphasize that the dialogue emerging from such interviews is
embodied in nature, unfolds in situ and involves a knowledge transfer. Go-along-interviews seem

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

185

to be conducted in different ways. Some include questioning, while others only encourage the person
with an impairment to describe how he or she experiences moving around in the built environment
(Parkin & Smithies, 2012). We, in our approach, open up for a broad dialogue while walking and
recording the dialogue. This proved to be a rich source of information and references to a wider
set of reections on moving around in the city and sensing the urban space together with different
individuals (Ritchie, Lewis, & Elam, 2003; Tuan, 1990: 5).
Interview themes included the disabling processes and the use of assistive devices. Some interviewees used an electric wheelchair and others used crutches. The visually impaired used a guide dog,
a mobility stick or both. Many interviewees combined different devices, changing between wheelchair
and crutches, guide dog and mobility stick, electric or manual wheelchair and different kinds of
walking aids, the choice being based on where they were going and what they planned to do. Most
interviewees who used assistive devices had a pragmatic understanding of which aid to choose in
which situation. We state alongside interviewee comments what devices the interviewee used when
taking part in the walking interview and whether the interviewee otherwise used more than one
aid.
The study used a exible design in which observation, interpretation and analysis were ongoing
parts of the empirical process. Interviews therefore took the form of a reexive dialogue between the
researcher and interviewees (Alvesson & Skldberg, 2009). The rst author transcribed the interviews
after they had been completed and the transcriptions were then analyzed in two stages. The authors
rst worked individually with the material, developing a series of categories into which the different parts of the transcriptions were classied. The authors then met and discussed their categories,
reworking them into a set of three major categories and a set of dimensions for each of the major categories. This analysis process was based on a dynamic interaction between the analytical perspectives
important to the eld of study and the perspectives and ideas that emerged from the interviews (Hsieh
& Shannon, 2005). The biological, psychological and social elements from the theoretical side were
important guidelines for our analyses and our exploration of the rich personenvironment interaction. The personenvironment interactions that we examined and all their nuances and contradictions
therefore became seminal.
4. Living in the city
The study was conducted in Oslo, the capital of Norway, which has a population of 600,000 and
a climate typical of the northern part of Europe. We have classed the interviewees experiences into
three categories. The rst category is how the citys physical structure is experienced and how details
are important. The second category is the need for planning and the need for full concentration (two
important challenges) and demonstrates how accessibility is a prerequisite for participating in urban
life. The third category is the category of ambivalence. This category includes the mixed blessing of
cultural changes in outdoor activities, the ways of experiencing close encounters and the differing
views on being perceived as being different from others. The diversity this shows indicates that there
is a limit to the idea that one design can be created that can accommodate all.
4.1. Experiences of physical structure
One of the interviewees, a female wheelchair user, gave the rst author a very thorough and detailed
account of how she managed when moving between two places in a downtown area. Her experiences
can serve as a case description of the way mobility-impaired interviewees express their experiences.
She uses a motorized wheelchair designed for outdoor use. What is striking in her account is the
attention to detail. She introduces the researcher to the constant assessment of whether spaces are
wide enough for her chair, whether alternatives to the troublesome cobblestones justify the risk,
whether the tram rails will mean that she will not be able to cross the street before the light changes
and many other issues. When she talks about navigating, her attention centers on the size of her
wheelchair and how her wheelchair is a part of her bodily experience. The unevenness of street surfaces
is another physical dimension she reects upon.

186

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

This street slopes upwards on each side towards the middle. I drive in the middle so I can avoid
sitting lopsided in the chair. If I drive on the sides, then I have to compensate which is much
harder for me.
Woman (1) electric wheelchair user
Users of personal devices experience their use as the fusion of body and technology, a fusion that
sees the person as more than a defective body rehabilitated with assistive technology. The person
is a being in the world with the individual device, intimately connected to the device. The persons
sensing of the environment is thus a sensing through a diversity of technologies (Campbell, 2009: 45ff.;
Moser, 2000). This woman, through her comments, describes her situated perspective, her sensing of
the urban area as a wheelchair user. Her perspective is thus an embodied and situated perspective
and not one that is based on her comparing herself with an imagined so-called normal pedestrian.
She illustrates disability as a multidimensional phenomenon and as an outcome of the interaction
between a person with impairment and the environment (Bickenbach, 2012: 79). When referring to
the temptation to take risks, the interviewee also demonstrates the importance of the psychological
dimension of health and participation. Sometimes she avoids the sidewalk and drives along the road
with vehicle trafc around her. This involves risk, but her spirit here comes into play: it can get a
bit crowded, but I cant resist the temptation to do it. She elaborates further on the psychological
dimension when describing the challenges she experiences in social interaction.
There are some benches there which I can sit by. But it is often a bit narrow where there are
caf tables. Its possible. But its difcult to get in. It creates a commotion, people have to move.
And me, I dont like that kind of thing.
Woman (1) electric wheelchair user
Her experiences and reections represent an insight into the spatial interaction with the built
environment and the social interaction with people in the city and shows how interviewees
with impairments experience maneuvering in the city. Her comments illustrate the importance of
bodyenvironment interaction in understanding the interwoven dimensions of disability. Her experiences and the relation between her temperament and deciding how to handle barriers in the built
environment, provide insights into how the psychological component of the biopsychosocial comes
into play.
Interviewees with sight loss also paid a great deal of attention to the citys physical structuring.
They, for example, constantly evaluated the tactile quality of the pavement when navigating in the
urban setting. One of the interviewees with sight loss was a vivid storyteller and her way of expressing
experiences can serve as a case for the personenvironment interaction. At one location, she points
out that the big, rectangular shape of the inlaid stones is a good structure because it gives clues in
her endeavors to orientate herself, which rely upon the tactile relationship between the body and the
ground, also mediated by technical aids.
Whats important is the walking stick and what I feel with my feet. At this street crossing I can
feel the sloping of the paved surface and the audio signals are good.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
Accessibility also includes the citys soundscape. The interviewee immediately goes on to comment
on sound as an orientation device.
I use the sound from the buildings around me. They cast a shadow of sound, the sound is blocked
out in a way. That is the sound I sense from the side. It is very important to me when I walk
alone.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
Soundscapes can be used by people with sight loss as orientation devices, a practice often referred
to as echo-localization.
A third orientation clue is smell. Both ower shops and small stores selling coffee and tea, when
their doors are open, were referred to as important orientation points. The city does not smell much,
but interviewees with sight loss singled out distinct smells and mentioned this as a quality that they
valued.

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

187

You can smell the cafes and restaurants and now I hear the clatter of cups. Then I know for sure
it is a caf or restaurant. I can hear it when I concentrate. Now I can hear the people sitting here.
That gives me more signals.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
Personenvironment interactions of persons with sight loss, as experienced by the woman above,
are referred to in a study of visually impaired people and their daily life as alternative ways of orienting
in and relating to space Anvik, (2009: 155). We wanted, in our study, to deepen our understanding
of this specic way of orientation and asked the interviewees to explicitly describe the way they
orientate themselves. It is important to include these kinds of orientation practices when discussing
urban qualities and way nding. Orientation practices include the use of sound, tactility and smell,
aspects which not only promote but also hinder accessibility. The insights articulated by the woman
with sight loss deepen our understanding of the physical and built environment and underline the
accessibility aspects of the built environment.
The citys soundscapes and smells are not only experienced as being important to orientation. They
are also qualities of a lively city experienced, for example, when lying in a hotel room with a window
open on to the street or sitting on a balcony facing a street (Lefebvre, 1996). Most hearing persons can
easily identify with this interviewees impression.
I think this street is fun. You can hear street musicians and sometimes pedestrians with rolling
suitcases.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
The stories told are not only about a heightened awareness of structure, sound and smell. They
are also, however, stories about exclusion and discrimination. Most individuals explain that they
sometimes refrain from going out into the city because of barriers and an inimical environment.

4.2. Challenges in the social-spatial interplay

Interviewees with impairments nd it necessary to carry out thorough research when planning a
trip or planning to visit new places. This type of research is also necessary for people without impairments. However, the attention to detail is greater and the hindrances that have to be negotiated are
larger, both in number and complexity, for people with impairments (Koch, 2005; Kriegel, 2004). This
is reected in the words of a woman with sight loss.
I need to learn about new places, to check it out on the map, to get an understanding and ask
questions when on my way.
Woman (5) sight loss, uses guide dog (and mobility stick)
This woman with sight loss nds these aspects and the overall need to raise my psychic strength
annoying and this feeling of annoyance hampers her participation in urban life. She also sees the
frequency of spontaneous trips to unfamiliar parts of the city as changing throughout her life course.
Both she and her friends, as young students new to Oslo, had a more experimenting attitude towards
the city than today in their 30s. This clearly illustrates disability as a continuous phenomenon and
one that is dependent on attitudes which vary throughout the life course. It furthermore illustrates
the psychological dimension of accessibility and the signicance of courage and stamina. A female
wheelchair user also voiced these challenges when reecting on changes in her impairment level.
I seldom do anything unexpected. I do unplanned things much less often than before. It is
getting more difcult, as I am weaker and experience more fatigue. I get tired of being unsafe
and insecureit is demanding both mentally and physically.
Woman (1) electric wheelchair user
Her comments illustrate the effect her impairments have upon her life which stem from the personal experience of bodily conditions and body changes which the environment can only to a certain
extent accommodate. This illustrates that the role of accessible environments is not to eradicate all
the consequences of impairment, but to enable an active living style with impairments.

188

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

All the interviewees with impairments described that their full concentration was needed to
navigate and negotiate the environmental challenges. A man using crutches described the need for
concentration as follows.
I have to concentrate both on walking with crutches and on avoiding hindrances. It takes a great
deal of my brain capacity. You focus fully on what you are doing, the practical aspects of going
from one place to another.
Man (4) mobility restrictions, uses crutches
He began using crutches in adult life and nds that he now is not as much a part of the urban street
life as he wants to be.
I cannot be a neur and just stroll around as I did before. I think about being in the city in a
way that is very different from when I was younger, when I did not have the impairment. Then I
could go into town just to take a walk. Today I always have a specic thing to do and then come
straight home again.
Man (4) mobility restrictions, uses crutches
What this man says further emphasizes the differences in the level of concentration required by
those with and those without sight loss and mobility impairments. Interviewees with mobility restrictions or sight loss spent much energy on orientation and on details. Interviewees without mobility
impairments or sight loss were, however, more focused on the experience of the city as a whole and
on the aesthetic experience.
I hope the city will surprise me. I hope it will give something that can prove to be joyous. This
is why I often walk. To experience something. You might see an old woman going about her
business, young people doing their thing or architecture in changing weathers and different
lights.
Man (14) without sight loss or mobility restrictions
The experience of pleasure derived from using the city and of being in the city is of great importance to many. Interviewees with impairments, however, encountered more obstacles and therefore
described using the urban environment in a more ambivalent way.
The need for planning and the need for full concentration are examples of how the lack of accessibility affects the day-to-day life of interviewees. Interviewees, through their mentioning of such
needs, show the importance of a more inclusive environment. They, at the same time, highlight
challenges that are impossible to avoid completely. What emerges from this is the need, in urban
planning, to be aware of the constant presence of the heterogeneous body, a presence that needs a
more inclusive space for spontaneity and for individuals as vulnerable embodied persons in the urban
environment. Urban planners therefore need to become aware that disability is a universal human
condition if they are to more successfully include accessibility in their planning work. Improving
the accessibility of the built environment is, furthermore, not only about removing disabling barriers, but is also a strategy for facilitating an active and self-determined lifestyle when living with an
impairment.
4.3. Ambivalence
The use of cities in northern Europe has changed over the last 30 years. Cities have become more
crowded and there is more activity in public areas. Parks are used more intensively most of the year and
sidewalks and pedestrian streets are lled with caf tables, signs, artists, fruit stands and beggars (Gehl,
2006). These developments make the city more exciting, more diversied and entertaining. They,
however, make the city more difcult for people with sight loss. The experiences of the woman cited
in the rst section, of navigating with visual impairment, show her welcoming attitude to increased
urban street life and outdoor caf tables. Most interviewees with sight loss and some of the wheelchair
users are however more ambivalent to this increase in urban street life, this ambivalence being the
rst aspect we want to highlight. Changes in the urban environment are, however, also perceived as
being problematic, as reected in the comments of a blind man.

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

189

These elements [advertising, shop stands and caf tables] make it impossible to walk alongside
the walls anymore and nearly impossible to nd a door because there is a zone between the
wall and sidewalk where it is dangerous to walk. On the outer side of the sidewalk there can
also be poles. These changes are for the worse and are dramatic changes.
Man (2) blind, uses mobility stick
This man even plays with the idea of the ideal city being as sparsely crowded as it was in the 1970s.
He also talks about restricting activities to achieve a more uniform soundscape.
The second ambivalence relates to the need for, on the one hand, a barrier free environment and,
on the other hand, the experience that obstacles can contain valuable information about city life. All
interviewees describe what they nd valuable in their experiencing of the city. They expressed this
through describing both the qualities of accessible city life and the problems associated with limited
access to such qualities due to an inimical environment. Interviewees with sight loss added a further
dimension through describing the difference between walking with a guide dog and walking with a
stick as an assistive device. A blind woman brought up this aspect. She pointed out that a dog helps
her avoid hindrances, but that avoiding hindrances is not necessarily just a good thing. You experience
other things when using a mobility stick than when walking with a dog. This difference in experiences
was clearly illustrated when she was involved in training for mobility with other visually impaired
people.
Not long ago, we were talking about nding some scaffolding for mobility training. Then someone told us that there was scaffolding in a street we passed through nearly every day, but had
not noticed because the dogs had done their job. Walking with a dog reduces your experience
of the city.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
Many hindrances can be avoided more easily with a guide dog. However, avoiding obstacles interestingly also has a price. This does not mean that a guide dog should not be used, but adds nuances to
how mobility, assisting devices and help are understood. On the one hand scaffolding is a hindrance
and a potential danger that is avoided with the assistance of a guide dog. On the other hand, scaffolding
tells the story about what is going on in the neighborhood, a participation that the blind person enjoys
but is excluded from due to using a guide dog as an accessibility device.
A third ambivalence that emerged from the analysis is the experience of being different. A visually
impaired woman describes what happens when traveling on public transport to and from work. She
points out that people do not relate to her as an ordinary passenger. Complete strangers come up to
her and tell her that her train is arriving. They have seen her on the subway route and assume that she
takes the same journey every day. She reects on the ambiguity of this experience.
You could become very paranoid, but I also think it is fun. You have to remember that you are
not quite an ordinary person. People do not relate to you normally. It is as if you are wearing
some kind of sign, that you represent all the visually impaired.
Woman (5) sight loss, uses guide dog (and mobility stick)
This experience of being different and of being noticed was described ambivalently by interviewees.
The white cane can, in some situations, be an important symbol that can help ensure that people with
impairments receive the help they need. When an arriving subway train is not announced on the PA
system, then a blind person needs to be able to get the attention of another passenger and to ask which
train is arriving.
I think you must have guts to stand this. I would not dare to walk here without a mobility stick,
because people would not have understood.
Woman (9) sight loss, uses guide dog
The mobility stick becomes, in this situation of uncertainty, a signal of sight loss that is important
to give. It at the same time singles you out as being different. This ambivalence is also referred to in
Butler and Bowlbys (1997) study of visually impaired peoples experiences of public space. The sticks,
dark glasses and dogs prevent hostile reactions from others when the visually impaired act in unexpected ways. They are, however, at the same time devices that mark the person out as being disabled.

190

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

This balance is a core element in disability identity discourse. Living with a disability is both about
differing from a expected normality and about dealing with ones status as different (Shakespeare,
2006; Solvang, 2000), important facets in the psychosocial dimensions of disability.
The fourth and nal type of ambivalence is shown by the difference between the two impairment
groups descriptions of what is accessible design. Our rst example is from a woman who is explaining
how she navigates at a specic location using tactile forms in the street pavement and sidewalks.
Here I have to work a little to nd the curb in this busy street. It is cut very low. Here we and
wheelchair users have opposite interests. We would like to feel the curb. Wheelchairs, bikes
and prams must however move easily over the curb. It is very low, two centimeters, not easy to
feel and when the pavement and the street paving are varied, it becomes too much for me.
Woman (11) sight loss, uses mobility stick (and guide dog)
Another of the blind persons interviewed describes a change made to the sidewalk of a street that
leads to a popular park-like square. He ironically mentions that the local Disability Council wanted to
award a prize for the park entrance, because the sidewalk had been lowered.
Different groups have different opinions. It is however the level of knowledge that causes antagonism. Well-educated people among both the mobility impaired and the visually impaired can
nd solutions that take into consideration the needs of both groups. There are different opinions.
Some people do not want a physical edge to the sidewalk, just want it to be visible. The visually impaired however need the physical element. The visual side very often tends to dominate
reasoning.
Man (2) blind, uses mobility stick
The power difference he refers to relates to the dominant position of the wheelchair user in accessibility thinking. There has been a tendency to conne accessibility and UD to just wheelchair access
(Imrie & Hall, 2001: 10). Ambivalences such as this illustrate that accessibility in the built and the social
environment needs to take into consideration the contradicting needs of people with impairments.
Some want to be recognized as different and in need of attention when in public places, some do not.
Some people want all curbs to be removed, some want them left as they are.
The four sets of ambivalences outlined above show that accessibility issues are embedded in the
relationship between biological bodies, assistive technologies, ego orientations and relations in the
public and built environments. There is not just one solution to accessibility development. Scholars
therefore suggest that accessibility and UD must be seen to be more a process than a specic result
(Imrie & Hall, 2001; Iwarsson & Sthl, 2003; Steinfeld & Maisel, 2012).
5. Discussion
The aim of this study is to increase our knowledge of accessibility from a number of situated
perspectives and to deepen our understanding of environmental factors in the personenvironment
interaction. We began this by organizing and interpreting the ndings from the interviews. We, however, in this discussion would like to highlight some of the dimensions brought forward by the ndings
and relate them to previous studies on accessibility and to multidimensional perspectives on disability.
Interviewees demonstrated that it is important to include a wide range of intersects between
individual practices and the environment. We have shown that these interactions take place at both
a social, psychological and physical level. Close encounters with the environment are a product of
friction and provide an embodied experience of the urban materiality. Therefore even smells and colliding with obstacles can be important sources of information on what is going on in the neighborhood.
Exploring this embodied experience, as a locus of situated knowledge, is therefore a key aim in our
study. Personenvironment interactions are difcult to express in simple terms, as they are multidimensional and because of the difculties associated with isolating the numerous factors in such
complex interactions (Bickenbach, Chatterji, Badley, & stn, 1999). An understanding of the physical
accessibility of places alone cannot therefore provide a full understanding of accessibility.
Psychosocial dimensions of accessibility stood out as being crucial to the understanding of the
personenvironment interaction of interviewees and their reections on accessibility when moving

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

191

about in the city. Interviewees described psychological traits such as the willingness to take risk and
to cause a commotion as being important factors in determining their level of access. Interviewees,
through this, thereby emphasize the spatial dimension of self-esteem. The social and spatial environment can support or hamper citizens self-esteem and thus affect their opportunities to participate in
society. The level of courage and stamina the interviewees was willing to exercise stood out as being
crucial when the physical environment presented hindrances to mobility and participation.
Mobility devices that identify the impairment, such as the white cane, can be experienced as being
stigmatizing and as drawing constant attention to the disability, as pointed out by other scholars
(Butler & Bowlby, 1997; Imrie & Hall, 2001: 45). Such social interactions are however ambivalent
and their full complexity must be taken into consideration. The white cane may, for example, be
stigmatizing. However, it also creates a feeling of security. The ndings demonstrated that a blind
person can expect fellow citizens to provide the assistance they require when signaling their sight
loss through using a cane. A further dimension of interpersonal relations in public areas is highlighted
by Rosemarie Garland-Thomson (2009) in her study of staring. People with visible impairments are
accustomed to the impossibility of anonymity when among strangers in public areas, because they are
stared at. Garland-Thomson points to the potential for a relationship of shared humanity emerging
between the person staring (starer) and the person being stared at (staree). Staring, she suggests, can
be understood as being a psychosocial arena for increasing the awareness of human variation and for
highlighting that differences in ability and physical stature are part of being human and an aspect of
human embodied diversity.
The ability to relate to other people when walking and the ability to enjoy the experience of city life
are two further dimensions of psychosocial relations. The pedestrian is embedded both in the social and
the material environment by the act of walking. However, the need to concentrate on details in the built
environment, as pointed out by several of the interviewees with sight loss and mobility restrictions,
puts a restriction on social relations and thereby emphasizes walking as relational. Pedestrians move
through the urban place and in this moving through relate to themselves, to the built environment,
to nature and to other people.
The practice of walking therefore implies a material relation between a person and an environment and a social relation to other persons in the city, the need to concentrate more intensely on
the material relation however hampering the social relation and the opportunity to experience the
city as a neur. The materiality of the city must reect the plurality of its citizens as embodied
beings. Walking as a social and spatial practice is relational because the individual is embedded in
the cities social and material environment (de Certeau, 1984). Planning a city therefore involves
both thinking about human plurality and knowing how to articulate this thinking (de Certeau, 1984).
Urban planning as a practice thus builds upon basic values such as democracy, citizenship and equal
status.
The encounter between UD and urban planning is an encounter between concept and reality. Urban
planning is a pragmatic practice in the balancing of values, possibilities and regulations and the city
as an urban place is real in a material sense. The UD concept is, however, normative and value based.
Where operationalized, values can be experienced through equal accessibility in the urban environment where the built environment supports participation. The signicance of our ndings lies exactly
here. They contribute to the articulation of the biopsychosocial levels and contradictions in how the
environment facilitates human diversity when the goal is equal opportunities for participation.
Our study explores accessibility for pedestrians in urban areas. Other studies indicate that a well
designed built environment supports accessibility and thus social activities and participation (Gehl,
2006). We found that individuals with sight loss and mobility restrictions refrain from using some
urban areas when the environment is too inimical. As Bickenbach (2012) asserted, disability emerges
as a product of the personenvironment interaction. Pedestrians with mobility restrictions or sight
loss whose access to urban areas is hampered are therefore also denied access to the urban social life.
If one has to go from one place to another using a taxi because the streets are difcult to navigate
or the surface and pedestrian crossings act as hindrances, then the individual loses the opportunity
to be one pedestrian among other pedestrians. As a citizen, the person with impairments is thus less
apparent in urban public places and is in risk of living on the outside of important arenas of socially
integrative interactions.

192

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

All interviewees referred to the changes they experienced in their abilities in adulthood and
throughout their life course. The lifespan as experience therefore becomes relevant to the understanding of ability, disability, accessibility and hindrances. The interviewees gave examples of how
health and functional abilities change during lifespan. People with disabilities nd different life
course phases as being important in determining how they experience accessibility. Courage and
stamina is greatest when they are young adults and least in old age. This adds depth to the
understanding of disability as a continuous and universal human condition (Bickenbach, 2012). Disability and inaccessibility are experienced both as relative to the environment and to life course
phase.
Equal citizenship is based on the opportunity to inuence the design of public places, being met
with respect as a citizen and being included in political processes (Nussbaum, 2004; 2006). Several
of the interviewees discussed barriers in the environment and interpreted them as being the result
of poor planning processes and regulation. Some also were concerned about not being paid attention
to in planning processes. One reason is that there are a number of different perspectives that have
to be taken into consideration or that specic perspectives are regarded as marginal. Accessibility is,
according to the CRPD, a basic factor in each persons right to live independent lives in communities.
It is therefore important to also promote participation in local communities when legislation changes
and discrimination acts are adopted.
The situated knowledge from individuals with impairments is however important when developing
knowledge bases for strategies for inclusion, such as UD, and when assessing accessibility in the built
environment (Imrie & Hall, 2001; Steinfeld & Maisel, 2012). The complexity and changes described in
the interviews therefore need a theoretical framing that includes such changes. The biopsychosocial
perspective employs different levels in the interplay between the person and the built environment
in which disability as a phenomenon emerges. The built environment, geography, politics, attitudes,
values and economic factors are important to this emergence of disability (Sayer, 2011).

6. Conclusion
The CRPD situates accessibility within a human rights perspective. Building a knowledge base for
practicing citizenship requires a knowledge of hindrances and barriers and of the factors that facilitate
orientation, mobility and safety. The reections of pedestrians with sight loss or mobility impairment
create stories about urban practice that complement existing narratives on the use of urban places.
We have therefore highlighted in this study how (dis)ability emerges in specic situations in real-life
contexts. Informed by Bickenbachs four-dimensional conception of disability as quoted earlier, we
have tried to demonstrate how disability emerges as a product of a personenvironment interaction.
We have been most interested in unfolding the person as a unity of biological, psychological and
social dimensions in order to understand the personenvironment interaction within this multilevel
approach.
The interaction between individuals and the urban environment varies in many ways due to differences between humans. In order to develop knowledge about barriers and accessibility from new
perspectives, research must be framed by theories that include both individual and environmental
factors and the incorporated individual physical, psychological and social dimensions. We have tried
to deepen the understanding of some aspects of disabling processes in the personenvironment interaction. In this study, a biopsychosocial perspective has been demonstrated as productive in enabling
a unied approach to (dis)ability and accessibility as interrelated phenomena. One important nding
is how relations between the individual and built environments have psychosocial aspects. This adds
to the importance of a stronger focus on the psychosocial dimensions in further research on UD and
equal accessibility.

Disclosure of interest
The authors declare that they have no conicts of interest concerning this article.

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

193

Acknowledgement
The study has been nanced as a part of the rst authors Ph.D. scholarship from Oslo University
College, Urban Research Program and Faculty of Health Sciences.

References
Alvesson, M., & Skldberg, M. (2009). Reexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.
Anvik, C. H. (2009). Embodied spaces in the making: visually impaired people, bodies and surroundings. Scandinavian Journal
of Disability Research, 11(2), 145157.
Bickenbach, J. E. (2012). Ethics, law and policy. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
Bickenbach, J. E., Chatterji, S., Badley, E. M., & stn, T. B. (1999). Models of disablement, universalism and the international
classication of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Social Science and Medicine, 48(9), 11731187.
Butler, R., & Bowlby, R. (1997). Bodies and spaces: An exploration of disabled peoples experiences of public space. Environment
and Planning D: Society and Space, 15, 411433.
Campbell, F. K. (2009). Contours of ableism. The production of disability and abledness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Castrodale, M., & Crooks, V. A. (2010). The production of disability research in human geography: An introspective examination.
Disability and Society, 25(1), 89102.
de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Edwards, C., & Harold, G. (2014). DeafSpace and the principles of universal design. Disability & Rehabilitation, 36(16), 13501359.
Engel, G. L. (1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129136.
Garland-Thomson, R. (2009). Staring. How we look. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gehl, J. (2006). Life between buildings: Using public space. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press.
Gibson, B. E. (2014). Parallels and problems of normalization in rehabilitation and universal design: Enabling connectivities.
Disability & Rehabilitation, 36(16), 13281333.
Goodley, D. (2011). Disability Studies. An interdisciplinary introduction. London: Sage.
Gray, D. B., Gould, M., & Bickenbach, J. E. (2003). Environmental barriers and disability. Journal of Architectural and Planning
Research, 20(1), 2937.
Heylighen, A. (2008). Sustainable and inclusive design: A matter of knowledge? Local Environment, 13(6), 531540.
Heylighen, A. (2012). Inclusive built heritage as a matter of concern: a eld experiment. In P. Langdon, P. Langdon, et al. (Eds.),
Designing Inclusive systems. London: Springer-Verlag.
Heylighen, A., Van Doren, C., & Vermeersch, P. (2013). Enriching our understanding of architecture through disability experience.
Open House International, 38(1), 719.
Hammond, V., & Musselwhite, C. (2013). The attitudes, perceptions and concerns of pedestrians and vulnerable road users to
shared space: A case study from the UK. Journal of Urban Design, 18(1), 7897.
Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 12771288.
Imrie, R. (2004). Demystifying disability: A review of the International Classication of Functioning and Health. Sociology of
Health and Illness, 26(3), 287305.
Imrie, R., & Kumar, M. (2010). Shared Space and sight loss. Policies and practices in English Local Authorities. Thomas Pocklington
Trust.
Imrie, R., & Lucks, R. (2014). Designing inclusive environments: Rehabilitating the body and the relevance of universal design.
Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(16), 13151319.
Imrie, R., & Hall, P. (2001). Inclusive design: Designing and developing accessible environments. London: Taylor & Francis.
Iwarsson, S., & Sthl, A. (2003). Accessibility, usability and universal design - positioning and denition of concepts describing
person-environment relationships. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25, 5766.
Koch, T. (2005). The Ideology of Normalcy: The Ethics of Difference. Journal of Disability and Policy Studies, 16, 123129.
Kriegel, L. (2004). Beloved enemy: a cripple in the crippled city. In R. OBrien (Ed.), Voices from the edge (pp. 121136). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles: Sage.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities. Malden: Blackwell.
Lid, I. M. (2014). Universal Design and disability: An interdisciplinary perspective. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(16),
13441349.
Lid, I. M. (2013). Developing the theoretical content in Universal Design. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 15(3),
203215.
Moser, I. (2000). Against normalisation: Subverting norms of ability and disability. Science as Culture, 9(2), 201240.
Nijs, G., & Daems, A. (2012). And what if the tangible were not and vice versa? On boundary works in everyday mobility
experience of people moving into old age: for Daisy (19092011). Space and Culture, 15(3), 186197.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2004). Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, Shame and the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press.
Parkin, J., & Smithies, N. (2012). Accounting for the needs of blind and visually impaired people in public realm design. Journal
of Urban Design, 17(1), 135149.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Elam, G. (2003). Designing and Selecting Samples. In J. Ritchie, & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice.
A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers (pp. 77108). London: Sage.
Sanford, J. A. (2012). Universal design as a rehabilitation strategy. New York: Springer.
Sayer, A. (2011). Why things matter to people: Social science, values and ethical life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London: Routledge.

194

I.M. Lid, P.K. Solvang / ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016) 181194

Solvang, P. (2000). The emergence of an us and them discourse in disability theory. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research,
2(1), 320.
Steinfeld, E., & Maisel, J. (2012). Universal design: Creating inclusive environments. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.
Thomson, R. G. (1997). Extraordinary bodies: Figuring physical disability in American culture and literature. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Tuan, Y. (1990). Topophilia: A study of environmental perceptions, attitudes and values. New York: Columbia University Press.
United Nations. (2007). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In United Nations Enable. http://www.un.org/
disabilities/default.asp?navid=12&pid=150