Co-design in the context of universal design: An Australian case study exploring the role of people with disabilities in the design of public buildings

References

• Alase, A. 2017. “The Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): A Guide to a Good Qualitative Research Approach.” International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies 5 (2): 9. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.9
   Google Scholar
• Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2015. 4430.0 – Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings. Australian Bureau of Statistics. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4430.0main+features202015.
   Google Scholar
• Bamzar, R. 2019. “Assessing the Quality of the Indoor Environment of Senior Housing for a Better Mobility: A Swedish Case Study.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 34 (1): 23–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-018-9623-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, E. 2016. The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability, Studies in Feminist Philosophy Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchin, M., and A. Heylighen. 2017. “Fair by Design. Addressing the Paradox of Inclusive Design Approaches.” The Design Journal 20 (Suppl 1): S3162–S3170. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352822
   Google Scholar
• Bickenbach, J. E., S. Chatterji, E. M. Badley, and T. B. Ustun. 1999. “Models of disablement, universalism and the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps.” Social Science & Medicine 48 (9): 1173–1187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00441-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigby, C., and P. Frawley. 2015. “Conceptualizing Inclusive Research – A Participatory Research Approach with People with Intellectual Disability: Paradigm or Method?” In Participatory Qualitative Research Methodologies in Health, edited by G. Higginbottom and P. Liamputtong, 136–160. London: SAGE Research Methods.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2013. Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, F. K. 2019. “Precision Ableism: A Studies in Ableism Approach to Developing Histories of Disability and Abledment.” Rethinking History 23 (2): 138–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2019.1607475
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castell, L. 2014. “Building Access for People with Intellectual Disability, Dubious Past, Uncertain Future.” Facilities 32 (11/12): 675–684. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-03-2012-0017
   Google Scholar
• Clement, F., W. Harcourt, D. Joshi, and C. Sato. 2019. “Feminist Political Ecologies of the Commons and Commoning (Editorial to the Special Feature).” International Journal of the Commons 13 (1): 1. https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, R. 1994. “The Case for Inclusive Design an Overview.” 12th Triennial Congress. International Ergonomics Association and the Human Factors Association of Canada, Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Combrinck, C., and C. J. Porter. 2021. “Co-Design in the Architectural Process.” Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research 15 (3): 738–751. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-06-2020-0105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, K. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43 (6): 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. 2013. Qualitative Research and Research Design. Choosing among Five Approaches. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Incorporated.
   Google Scholar
• Cruickshank, L., G. Coupe, and D. Hennessy. 2013. “Co-design – Fundamental Issues and Guidelines for Designers: Beyond the Castle Case Study.” Swedish Design Research Journal 10: 48–57. https://doi.org/10.3384/svid.2000-964X.13248
   Google Scholar
• Day, C., and R. Parnell. 2003. Consensus design. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Drain, A., A. Shekar, and N. Grigg. 2021. “Insights, Solutions and Empowerment: A Framework for Evaluating Participatory Design.” CoDesign 17 (1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1540641
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, C., and G. Harold. 2014. “DeafSpace and the Principles of Universal Design.” Disability and Rehabilitation 36 (16): 1350–1359. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.913710
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleck, J. 2019. Are You an Inclusive Designer? Milton, UK: RIBA Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Gaete, C., M. A. Ersoy, D. Czischke, and E. Van Bueren. 2022. “A Framework for Co-Design Processes and Visual Collaborative Methods: An Action Research Through Design in Chile.” Urban Planning 7 (3): 363–378. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i3.5349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Hidalgo, M., and C. Zografos. 2020. “Emotions, Power, and Environmental Conflict: Expanding the ‘Emotional Turn’ in Political Ecology.” Progress in Human Geography 44 (2): 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518824644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamraie, A. 2013. “Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal Design.” Disability Studies Quarterly 33 (4): 4–4. https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3871
   Google Scholar
• Hamraie, A. 2016. “Universal Design and the Problem of "Post-Disability" Ideology.” Design and Culture 8 (3): 285–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2016.1218714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamraie, A. 2017. Building Access: Universal Design and the Politics of Disability. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, N., K. Slegers, and P. Duysburgh. 2015. “Codesign with People Living with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments: A Case for Method Stories and Uniqueness.” CoDesign 11 (1): 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1020316
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heylighen, A., J. Schijlen, V. Van der Linden, D. Meulenijzer, and P. W. Vermeersch. 2016. “Socially Innovating Architectural Design Practice by Mobilising Disability Experience. An Exploratory Study.” Architectural Engineering and Design Management 12 (4): 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2016.1172197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heylighen, A., V. Van der Linden, and I. Van Steenwinkel. 2017. “Ten Questions Concerning Inclusive Design of the Built Environment.” Building and Environment 114: 507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbottom, G. 2015. Participatory Qualitative Research Methodologies in Health. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Hitch, D., H. Larkin, V. Watchorn, and S. Ang. 2012. “Community Mobility in the Context of Universal Design: Inter-Professional Collaboration and Education.” Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 59 (5): 375–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1630.2011.00965.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imrie, R., and R. Luck. 2014. “Designing Inclusive Environments: Rehabilitating the Body and the Relevance of Universal Design.” Disability and Rehabilitation 36 (16): 1315–1319. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.936191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins, G. 2011. “The Challenges of Characterizing People with Disabilities in the Built Environment.” OT Practice 16 (9): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, P. 2009. “Concepts of Social Participation in Architecture.” In Architecture, Participation and Society, edited by P. Jenkins and L. Forsyth, 9–22. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, P. 2014. “Situating Universal Design Architecture: Designing with Whom?” Disability and Rehabilitation 36 (16): 1369–1374. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.944274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. 2019. “Towards Ethical Principles for Participatory Design Practice.” CoDesign 15 (4): 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1502324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larkin, H., D. Hitch, V. Watchorn, and S. Ang. 2015. “Working with Policy and Regulatory Factors to Implement Universal Design in the Built Environment: The Australian Experience.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 12 (7): 8157–8171. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120708157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, M., B. A. Cooper, S. Strong, D. Stewart, P. Rigby, and L. Letts. 1996. “The Person-Environment-Occupational Model: A transactive Approach to Occupational Performance.” Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 63 (1): 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/000841749606300103
   Google Scholar
• Liamputtong, P. 2020. Qualitative Research Methods. Melbourne: Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Mace, R. 1985. “Universal Design. Barrier-Free Environments for Everyone.” Designers West 33 (1): 147–152.
   Google Scholar
• Malterud, K., V. D. Siersma, and A. D. Guassora. 2016. “Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies.” Qualitative Health Research 26 (13): 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molnar, S., and K. Palmås. 2022. “Dissonance and Diplomacy: Coordination of Conflicting Values in Urban Co-Design.” CoDesign 18 (4): 416–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2021.1968441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Disability Services (NDS). 2020. NDS Workforce Census Key Findings. National Disability Services. https://www.nds.org.au/images/news/NDS-Workforce-Census-Key-Findings-Dec-2020.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 1990. The Politics of Disablement: A Sociological Approach. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostroff, E. 1997. “The User as Expert: Mining Our Natural Resources.” Innovation, the Quarterly Journal of the Industrial Designers Society of America 16 (1): 33.
   Google Scholar
• Patrício, L., and R. Fisk. 2013. “Creating New Services.” In Serving Customers: Global Services Marketing Perspectives, edited by R Russell-Bennett, R. P. Fisk, and L. Harris, 185–207. Melbourne: Tilde University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. 2015. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Incorporated.
   Google Scholar
• Persson, H., H. Åhman, A. A. Yngling, and J. Gulliksen. 2015. “Universal Design, Inclusive Design, Accessible Design, Design for All: Different Concepts—One Goal? On the Concept of Accessibility—Historical, Methodological and Philosophical Aspects.” Universal Access in the Information Society 14 (4): 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0358-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pressman, A. 2012. Designing Architecture: The Elements of Process. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pritchard, E. 2014. “Body Size and the Built Environment: Creating an Inclusive Built Environment Using Universal Design.” Geography Compass 8 (1): 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12108
   Google Scholar
• Rajapakse, R., M. Brereton, and L. Sitbon. 2021. “A Respectful Design Approach to Facilitate Codesign with People with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments and Makers.” CoDesign 17 (2): 159–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2019.1612442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raman, S., and T. French. 2022. “Enabling Genuine Participation in Co-Design with Young People with Learning Disabilities.” CoDesign 18 (4): 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2021.1877728
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieger, J., J. Herssens, and M. Strickfaden. 2020. “Spatialising Differently Through Ability and Techné.” CoDesign 16 (2): 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1531134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringaert, L. 2001. “User/Expert Involvement in Universal Design.” In Universal Design Handbook, edited by Wolfgang F. E. Preiser and E Ostroff, 6.1–6.14. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). 2022. “Inclusive Design the Standard to Reach.” https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/knowledge-landing-page/inclusive-design-the-standard-to-reach.
   Google Scholar
• Sánchez De La Guía, L., M. Puyuelo Cazorla, and B. De-Miguel-Molina. 2017. “Terms and Meanings of “Participation” in Product Design: From “User Involvement” to “Co-Design.” The Design Journal 20 (Suppl 1): S4539–S4551. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352951
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, E. B. N., and P. J. Stappers. 2008. “Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design.” CoDesign 4 (1): 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
   Google Scholar
• Sarmiento-Pelayo, M. P. 2015. “Co-Design: A Central Approach to the Inclusion of People with Disabilities.” Journal of the Faculty of Medicine of the National University of Colombia 63: 149–154.
   Google Scholar
• Shouman, B., A. A. E. Othman, and M. Marzouk. 2022. “Enhancing Users Involvement in Architectural Design using Mobile Augmented Reality.” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 29 (6): 2514–2534. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2021-0124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, J. A., and V. Eatough. 2007. “Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.” In Analysing Qualitative Data in Psychology edited by E. Lyons and A. Coyle, 35–50. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, R., and C. Ryhl. 2018. “Responding to Diversity Including Disability.” Design as a catalyst for change: Proceedings of DRS 2018 International Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Steen, M. 2013. “Co-Design as a Process of Joint Inquiry and Imagination.” Design Issues 29 (2): 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todres, L., and I. Holloway. 2004. “Descriptive Phenomenology. Life World as Evidence.” In New Qualitative Methodologies in Health and Social Care Research, edited by F. Rapport, 79–98. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Trischler, J., T. Dietrich, and S. Rundle-Thiele. 2019. “Co-Design: From Expert- to User-Driven Ideas in Public Service Design.” Public Management Review 21 (11): 1595–1619. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619810
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker, R., D. Kelly, L. Johnson, U. De Jong, and V. Watchorn. 2022. “Housing at the fulcrum: A systems approach to uncovering built environment obstacles to city scale accessibility and inclusion.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 37: 1179–1197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-021-09881-6.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2007. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). New York: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Vermeersch, P. W., and A. Heylighen. 2021. “Involving Blind User/Experts in Architectural Design: Conception and Use of More-Than-Visual Design Artefacts.” CoDesign 17 (1): 50–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1557696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watchorn, V., D. Hitch, C. Grant, R. Tucker, K. Aedy, S. Ang, and P. Frawley. 2021. “An integrated literature review of the current discourse around universal design in the built environment - is occupation the missing link?” Disability and Rehabilitation 43 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1612471.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (WHO). 2002. Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health ICF. Geneva: WHO.
   Google Scholar