Practical wisdom for accessible cities.
Creative tensions in Universal Design processes for Swedish urban development.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v15i1.520Abstract
This paper explores knowledge creation in Universal Design (UD) processes that aim to make cities accessible to all. It contributes insights into the practice of urban development in Sweden which, in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, shall utilize UD. Workshops and qualitative interviews were conducted in three mid-sized cities re-designing a city square, a street and the building of a new library. Drawing on Aristotle’s typology of knowledge, the analysis shows that different kinds of knowledge were in play in local collaboration. UD was akin to phronesis, i.e. practical wisdom. A number of factors contributed to tensions: organizational asymmetries, divisions between professional and experiential expertise, the perception that accessibility is a limited interest for a specific target group, as well as uncertainties about user legitimacy. To overcome these tensions, the article proposes that disability organizations should be seen as contributors rather than commentators.
References
Andersson, J. E. (2016). Improved Swedish accessibility hindered by a housing imbroglio. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 28(2), 9-32. https://arkitekturforskning.net/na/article/download/841/784.
Anderssson, J. E. (2022). Using building requirements as a means to create inclusion: Accessibility and usability at a crossroads. In H. Egard, K. Hansson, & D. Wästerfors, Accessibility Denied: Understanding Inaccessibility and Everyday Resistance to Inclusion for Persons with Disabilities (pp. 186-209). Taylor & Francis. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9781003120452-12/using-building-requirements-means-create-inclusion-jonas-andersson.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
Bertolini, L., Laws, D., & Higgins, M. (2010). Reflection-in-action, still engaging the professional? Planning Theory & Practice, 11(4), 597–619. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2010.525370.
Bonehill, J., von Benzon, N., & Shaw, J. (2020). ‘The shops were only made for people who could walk’: Impairment, barriers and autonomy in the mobility of adults with Cerebral Palsy in urban England. Mobilities, 15(3), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2020.1746057.
Bornemark, J. (. (2016). Medborgardialog – om det svåra i att mötas: Praktikers reflektioner om ett av demokratins viktigaste verktyg. Arkus. https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Ash%3Adiva-31287.
Bornemark, J. (2017). Neutrality or phronetic skills: A paradox in the praxis of citizen dialogues organized by municipal administration. Pedagogika Spoleczna, 3(65), 51–66. https://pedagogikaspoleczna.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SP3201751-66A.pdf.
Boys, J. (2014). Doing disability differently: An alternative handbook on architecture, dis/ability and designing for everyday life. London : Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315777559.
Briassoulis, H. (2023). The making of good public plans Phronesis, Phronetic Planning Research and Assemblage Thinking. Planning Theory, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952221102533.
Bruce, A. (2014). Which Entitlements and for Whom? The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Ideological Antecedents. Lund: Department of Law, Lund University. https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/11124019/Anna_Bruce.pdf.
Campbell, E G; Carayannis, D F;. (2009). ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3/4), 201., 201-234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374.
Campbell, S. D. (2013). Sustainable Development and Social Justice: Conflicting Urgencies and the Search for Common Ground in Urban and Regional Planning. Michigan Journal of Sustainability. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mjs.12333712.0001.007.
Caretta, M., & Pérez, M. (2019). When Participants Do Not Agree: Member Checking and Challenges to Epistemic Authority in Participatory Research. Field Methods, 31(4), 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X19866578.
Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366508978187.
De Blust, S., Van den Broeck, P., Devos, T., & Moulaert, F. (2022). Relational Planning as a Collective Critical Inquiry. Socio-Environmental Justice, Critical Moments and Reflective Responses in Six Years of Studio Teaching. Planning Practice & Research, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2022.2109249.
Dewey, J. (1997). How We Think. Courier Corporation. https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/howwethink00deweiala/howwethink00deweiala.pdf.
Egard, H., Hansson , K., & Wästerfors, D. (2022). Accessibility Denied: Understanding Inaccessibility and Everyday Resistance to Inclusion for Persons with Disabilities. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003120452.
Erdtman, E., Rassmus-Gröhn, K., & Hedvall, P.-O. (2021). Universal Design as Guiding, Striving and Unifying: A Qualitative Study about how Universal Design is Understood, Practised and Realised in Contemporary Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 23(1), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.770.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Phronetic planning research: theoretical and methodological reflections. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935042000250195.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.
Gunn, W., Otto, T., & Smith, R. (2013). Design Anthropology: Theory and Practice. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003085195.
Hanington, M., & Martin, B. (2019). Universal Methods of Design Expanded and Revised: 125 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions. Rockport Publishers.
Hedvall, P. O., Ståhl, A., & Iwarsson, S. (2022). Tillgänglighet, användbarhet och universell utformning. In V. D. (Eds.), Participation: vad, när, hur (pp. 151-181). Lund: Studentlitteratur. ISBN: 9789144153155. https://portal.research.lu.se/en/publications/tillg%C3%A4nglighet-anv%C3%A4ndbarhet-och-universell-utformning.
Hellquist, A., & Westin, M. (2019). Medborgardialog om konfliktfyllda samhällsfrågor: Konsensus, agonism eller mobilisering? . Uppsala: SWEDESD. https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1286917/FULLTEXT01.pdf.
Heylighen, A., & Herssens, J. (2014). Designerly Ways of Not Knowing: What Designers Can Learn about Space from People Who are Blind. Journal of Urban Design, 19(3), 317-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2014.890042.
Hugemark, A., & Roman, C. (2007). Diversity and Divisions in the Swedish Disability Movement: Disability, Gender, and Social Justice. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 9(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410600979553.
Imrie, R., & Hall, P. (2001). An Exploration of Disability and the Development Process. Urban Studies, 38(2), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980124545.
Kitchin, R. (1998). ‘Out of Place’, ‘Knowing One’s Place’: Space, power and the exclusion of disabled people. Disability & Society, 13(3), 343–356. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/09687599826678.
Koch, D. (2022). Jämlik livsmiljö universell utformning och tillgänglighet som stadsbyggnadsutmaning. . Stockholm: KTH Arkitektur. https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Akth%3Adiva-312408.
Larsson, G. (2010). Land Management as Public Policy. University Press of America. ISBN : 1-282-82026-5. https://www.google.es/books/edition/Land_Management_as_Public_Policy/_cvVaLNwjcsC?hl=es&gbpv=1&dq=inauthor:%22Gerhard+Larsson%22&printsec=frontcover.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1017/CBO9780511815355.
Lawson, A., Eskytė, I., Orchard, M., Houtzager, D., & Vos, E. L. D. . (2022). Pedestrians with Disabilities and Town and City Streets: From Shared to Inclusive Space? . The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 41-62. ISSN 2206-9658. https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1603
Lid, I. M. (2012). Likeverdig tilgjengelighet? En drøfting av menneskesyn og funksjonshemming med vekt på etiske problemstillinger knyttet til universell utforming, mangfold og deltakelse. . Oslo: Det teologiske fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo. https://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2021071948583
Lid, I. M. (2013). Developing the theoretical content in Universal Design. . Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 15(3), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2012.724445.
Motulsky, S. L. (2021). Is member checking the gold standard of quality in qualitative research? Qualitative Psychology, 8(3), 389–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000215.
Müller, L., Ericsson, S., & Hedvall, P.-O. (2022). Visions of a City for All: Resources, Choices and Factors Supporting and Impeding Universal Design in the Urban Development Process. The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 63-78. https://www.journalpublicspace.org/index.php/jps/article/view/1486/860
Ostroff, E. (1997). Mining our Natural Resources: The User as Expert. INNOVATION, the Quarterly Journal of the Industrial Designers Society of America, 16(1). http://berkeleyprize.org/downloads/files/global/OSTROFF%20-%20Mining%20our%20Natural%20Resources.doc.
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068.
Sandin, G. (2022). Dialogens roll i planeringen av staden och dess arkitektur. In V. Denvall, & S. Iwarsson (Eds.), Participation: vad, när och hur Studentlitteratur AB.. https://portal.research.lu.se/en/publications/dialogens-roll-i-planeringen-av-staden-och-dess-arkitektur.
Scully, J. L. (2018). From “She Would Say That, Wouldn't She?” to “Does She Take Sugar?” Epistemic Injustice and Disability. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.11.1.106.
Steinfeld, E., & Maisel, J. (2012). Universal Design: Creating Inclusive Environments. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN: 978-0-470-39913-2. https://books.google.es/books?id=II6VV5iAW9cC&printsec=frontcover&hl=es&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Storvang, P., Clarke, A. H., & Mortensen, B. (2014). Using workshops in design research. Proceedings of the 19th DMI: Academic Design Management Conference (pp. 2917–2938). London: Design Management Institute. https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/publications/using-workshops-in-design-research.
Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities. Revised Edition. Raleigh: Center for Universal Design, NC State University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED460554
Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. (2023). Delaktighetstrappan: Och Liknande Modeller. Stockholm: Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. https://skr.se/download/18.3a0a1c2218723106f7691f6/1680012199306/Delaktighetstrappan.pdf
Tunström, M., & Löfving, L. (2020). The right to access the city: Nordic urban planning from a disability perspective. Nordic Council of Ministers, Nordregio. https://doi.org/10.6027/R2020:11.1403-2503
UN. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from Department of Economic and Social Affairs: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html
UN. (2018). General comment No. 7 on the participation of persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, through their representative organizations, in the implementation and monitoring of the Convention. Geneve: United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3899396?v=pdf
Welch, P. (1995). Strategies for Teaching Universal Design. Berkeley, California: Mig Communications. https://ia801605.us.archive.org/7/items/strategiesfortea00welc/strategiesfortea00welc.pdf
Westerlund, B. (2009). Design space exploration: Co-operative creation of proposals for desired interactions with future artefacts. Stockholm: Skolan för datavetenskap och kommunikation, Kungliga Tekniska högskolan. https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Akth%3Adiva-11210
Yanow, D. (2009). Ways of Knowing: Passionate Humility and Reflective Practice in Research and Management. The American Review of Public Administration, 39(6), 579–601. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1177/0275074009340049
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Emil Erdtman, Lilian Müller, Per-Olof Hedvall
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share or adapt the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Use of the work for commercial purposes are not allowed.
- Authors are able to publish the journal's published version of the work in other media (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as far as they inform the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All of that fact. When publishing their work in other sources, authors must mention the name of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, its ISSN, the number and issue in which the article was published and a link to the main page of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All. Optionally, they can also include a link to the article published in the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
