Measuring economic benefits of accessible spaces to achieve 'meaningful' access in the built environment

A review of recent literature

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v11i2.274

Abstract

The level of accessibility in the built environment in most cities is still far from optimal. To enable people with a wide range of abilities to fully participate in social and economic activities, a more holistic change is needed in all spaces in which people interact on a daily basis. Building industries—developers, construction companies, and building owners—play a crucial role in accelerating this change. However, without a way to benchmark clear, more direct, and comprehensive economic benefits for these industry stakeholders, the effort of making our built environment more ‘meaningfully accessible’ will not get far. The purpose of this paper, therefore, was to learn how economic benefits of accessibility-related to the built environment has been conceptualized and measured in the empirical literature. Building on the findings, a clearer cost-benefit analytic framework for creating accessible buildings and outdoor spaces may be formulated. Our literature scan of studies published in the last two decades yielded 19 papers, all but two of which are from tourism and transportation research. We found three main approaches to conceptualizing economic benefits: 1) as market potential of accessible sites and services projected at the population-level (mainly in tourism); 2) as cost saved from having accessible infrastructure (mainly in transportation); and 3) as hypothetical return of creating accessible spaces (transportation, housing and urban design) based on users’ willingness-to-pay. The papers ubiquitously agree that there are far-reaching overall benefits of making products and services more accessible for society. But many also acknowledged the data and methodological limitations in current cost-benefit analysis frameworks. Efforts of improving data availability and methodology through cross-disciplinary dialogues are strongly desired. Similarly, a strong voice of public demand for change in the built environment will be critical in fostering the dialogues.

Author Biographies

Mikiko Terashima, School of Planning, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Mikiko Terashima is an Assistant Professor and Director of the Planning for Equity, Accessibility and Community Health (PEACH) Laboratoryat the School of Planning, Dalhousie University.  Mikiko's research connects planning and public health to formulate a more holistic strategies to reduce health inequity stemming from social and built environment.    

Kate Clark, School of Planning, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Kate Clark is a research analyst and project coordinator at the Planning for Equity, Accessibility and Community Health (PEACH) Laboratory at the School of Planning, Dalhousie University.  Kate holds a Master's degree in planning, and her research has focused on complex relationships surrouding heritge and accessibility in the built environment, as well as meanings of equity and inclusivity in participatory research methodologies.   

References

Akinci, Z. (2013). Management of Accessible Tourism and its Market in Turkey. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 2(2), 413–426. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261875914.

Alonso, F. (2002). The benefits of building barrier-free: A contingent valuation of accessibility as an attribute of housing. European Journal of Housing Policy, 2(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616710110120577.

Andersson, J. E., & Skehan, T. (2016). Accessibility in Public Buildings: Efficiency of Checklist Protocols. In Universal Design 2016: Learning from the past, designing for the future, edited by Helen Petrie, Jenny Darzentas, Tanja Walsh, David Swallow, Leonardo Sandoval, Andrew Lewis, & Christopher Power, 101–110. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press BV. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-684-2-101.

Aslaksen, F. (2016). Upgrading existing buildings to Universal Design. What cost-benefit analyses can tell us. In Universal Design 2016: Learning from the past, designing for the future, edited by Helen Petrie, Jenny Darzentas, Tanja Walsh, David Swallow, Leonardo Sandoval, Andrew Lewis, & Christopher Power, 101–110. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press BV. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-684-2-101.

Aslaksen, F., Steinar B., Rand B. O., & Edel, K. (1997). Universal Design: Planning and Design for All. Oslo, Norway.

Bah, Y. M. (2016). Economic incentives of a non-handicapping built environment (Case study: tourism sites). Business Research Review, 2(2), 60-89. Retrieved from: https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JTHS/article/view/34374.

Barnes, C. (2011). Understanding disability and the importance of design for all. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 1(1), 55–80. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v1i1.81.

Bowtell, J. (2015). Assessing the value and market attractiveness of the accessible tourism industry in Europe: a focus on major travel and leisure companies. Journal of Tourism Futures, 1(3), 203-222.

Bringolf, J. (2011). Barriers to Universal Design in Housing. PhD diss., University of Western Sydney.

Burdett, B., Locke, S., & Scrimgeour, F. (2017). The economics of enhancing accessibility: Estimating the benefits and costs of participation. International Transport Forum Discussion Paper, Issue 1, 5-21.

Carr, K., Weir, P.L., Azar, D., and Azar, N.R. (2013). Universal design: A step toward successful aging. Journal of Aging Research, 2013, 1-8.

Darcy, S., & Dickson, T.J. (2009). A whole-of-life approach to tourism: The case for accessible tourism experiences. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 16, 32-44.

Darcy, S. et al. (2008). Chapter 4 – Economic contribution of disability to tourism in Australia. In S. Darcy, B. Cameron, L. Dwyer, T. Taylor, E. Wong, and A. Thomson (Eds.), Technical Report 90040: Visitor Accessibility in Urban Centres (pp. 15-21). Gold Coast: Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre.

Demiris, G., & Hensel, B.K. (2008). Technologies for an aging society: A systematic review of “smart home” applications. IMIA Yearbook of Medical Informatic.

Devine, A., & Kok, N. (2015). Green certification and building performance: implications for tangibles and intangibles. The Journal of Portfolio Management Special Real Estate Issue, 41(6), 151-163. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.2015.41.6.151.

Fearnley, N., Flügel, S., & Ramjerdi, F. (2011). Passengers’ valuations of Universal Design measures in public transport.” Research in Transportation Business and Management, 2(2011), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2011.07.004.

Federing, D., & Lewis, D. (2017). Towards a Framework for Identifying and Measuring the Benefits of Accessibility. International Transport Forum, Discussion Paper 2017-03.

Fuerst, F., & McAllister, P. (2011). “Green Noise or Green Value? Measuring the Effects of Environmental Certification on Office Values.” Real Estate Economics, 1(39), 45–69. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/j.1540-6229.2010.00286.x.

Gassiot Melian, A., Lluis, P., & Coromina, L. (2016). The perceived value of accessibility religious sites – do disabled and non-disabled travellers behave differently? Tourism Review, 71(2), 105-117.

Glanz, K., Handy, S.L., Henderson, K.E., Slater, S.J, Davis, E.L, & Powell, L.M. (2016). Built Environment Assessment: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Social Sciences & Medicine-Population Health, 2, 24–31. https://doi.org/doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.02.002.

Hamraie, A. (2016). Universal Design and the problem of “post-disability” ideology. Design and Cultural, 8(3), 285-309.

Hartje, S.C. (2017). Universal design improves the quality of life for individuals, families, and communities. Universal Design: FCS Practices for the Well-Being of All, 109(4), 7-13.

Hirose, K., Lee, S., & Matsumura, T. (2017). Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility: A Note on First-Mover Advantage Under Price Competition. Economic Bulletin, 37(1): 214–221.

Iwarsson, S., & Stahl, A. (2003). Accessibility, usability and universal design-positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(2), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963828021000007969.

Jensen, M.C. (2002). Value maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.

Joines, S. (2009). Enhancing quality of life through universal design. NeuroRehabilitation, 25,155-167.

Kadir, S.A. & Jamaludin, M. (2013). Universal design as a significant component for sustainable life and social developments. ASEAN Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies.

Karekla, X., Fujiyama, T., & Tyler, N. (2011). Evaluating accessibility enhancements to public transport including indirect as well as direct benefits. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2, 92-100.

Liu, Y., Guo, X. & Feiling, H. (2014). Cost-Benefit Analysis on Green Building Energy Efficiency Technology Application: A Case in China. Energy and Buildings, 82(2014), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.008.

Loosemore, M., & Lim, B.T.H. (2017). Linking Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Performance in the Construction Industry. Construction Management and Economics, 35(3), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1242762.

Lyche, L., & Hervik, A. (2002). A cost efficiency approach to universal access for public transport for disabled people. In Hensher, D.A., and Hauge, O. (Eds.) Competition and ownership in land passenger transport: The 7th International Conference. Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary Journal, 22(3), 335-370.

MacLachlan, M., Cho, H. Y., Clarke, M., Mannan, H., Kayabu, B., Ludolph, R., & McAuliffe, E. (2018). Report of the systematic review on potential benefits of accessible home environments for people with functional impairments. In: WHO Housing and Health Guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535292/

Maynard, A. (2009). Can measuring the benefits of accessible transport enable a seamless journey. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 2(2), 21-30.

Maynard. A. (2007). Monetising the benefits of disabled access in transport appraisal. In TRANSED 2007, Montreal. http://www.transedconferences.com/Transed2007/pages/1218.htm.

Odeck, J., Hagen, T., & Fearnley, N. (2010). Economic appraisal of Universal Design in transport: Experiences from Norway. Research in Transportation Economics, 29(2010), 304–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2010.07.038.

Pavkovic, I., Lawrie, A., Farrell, G. Huuskes, L., & Ryan, R. (2017). Inclusive Tourism: Economic Opportunities. University of Technology Sydney Institute for Public Policy and Governance, Sydney, NSW.

Pena Cepeda, E., Galilea, P., & Raven, S. (2018). How much do we value improvements on the accessibility to public transport for people with reduced mobility or disability? Research in Transportation Economics 69, 445-452.

Pirsch, J., Shruti G., & S. Grau. (2007). A Framework for Understanding Corporate Social Responsibility Programs as a Continuum: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9100-y.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism-and Unleash a Wave of Innovation and Growth. Harvard Business Review, 63–77. https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/09600039410055963.

Raviselvam, S., Wood, K.L., Hölttä-Otto, K., Tam, V., & Nagarajan, K. (2016). A Lead User Approach to Universal Design—Involving Older Adults in the Design Process. In Universal Design 2016: Learning from the past, designing for the future, edited by Helen Petrie, Jenny Darzentas, Tanja Walsh, David Swallow, Leonardo Sandoval, Andrew Lewis, & Christopher Power, 101–110. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press BV. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-684-2-101.

Rebstock, M. (2017). Economic benefits of improved accessibility to transport systems and the role of transport in fostering tourism for all. International Transport Forum Discussion Papers 2017/04 OECD Publishing.

Rick Hansen Foundation. (2017). Rick Hansen Foundation Accessibility Certification (RHFAC) Ratings Reference Guide. Richmond, British Columbia.

Siperstein, G.N. (2006). A national survey of consumer attitudes towards companies that hire people with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 24, 3-9.

Steinfeld, E., & Smith, R. O. (2012). Universal Design for Quality of Life Technologies. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(8), 2539–2554. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2200562.

Story, M. F., Mueller, J.L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities. Design Research and Methods Journal, 1(5), 165. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.12.6854.

United Nations. (2016). United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-ofpersons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities2.html.

Uğur, L.O., and Leblebici, N. (2018). An examination of the LEED green building certification system in terms of construction costs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81(1), 1476-1483.

US Department of Transportation. (2014, July 9). The Value of Travel Time Savings: Departmental Guidance for Conducting Economic Evaluations, Revision 2 (2014 Update). https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/USDOT%20VOT%20Guidance%202014.pdf

Wagner, L. (2019). Disabled people in the world in 2019: facts and figures. Inclusive City Maker. https://www.inclusivecitymaker.com/disabled-people-in-the-world-in-2019-facts-and-figures/

Winance M. (2014). Universal design and the challenge of diversity: reflections on the principles of UD, based on empirical research of people’s mobility. Disability and Rehabilitation, 26(16), 1334-1343.

World Health Organization. (2011). WORLD REPORT ON DISABILITY. Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/about/.

Cover

Downloads

Published

2021-11-30

How to Cite

Terashima, M., & Clark, K. . (2021). Measuring economic benefits of accessible spaces to achieve ’meaningful’ access in the built environment: A review of recent literature. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 11(2), 195-231. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v11i2.274