Content uploaded by Mikaela Patrick
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mikaela Patrick on Nov 07, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
ISSN 2206-9658 | 93
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
The Journal of Public Space
ISSN 2206-9658
2022 | Vol. 7 n. 2
https://www.journalpublicspace.org
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces.
Learnings from Four Global Case Studies on Inclusive Cities
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
Global Disability Innovation Hub, University College London, United Kingdom
mikaela.patrick@ucl.ac.uk | i.mckinnon@ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
This paper presents some of the findings from a global research study on inclusive infrastructure
and city design (AT2030 - Inclusive Infrastructure) and will focus on inclusive public spaces.
Persons with disabilities can experience multi-dimensional exclusion from urban life, including
but not limited to physical, attitudinal, and social barriers. Public spaces, including recreational
and social spaces, are often not prioritised. Inclusive public spaces are fundamental to
participation and inclusion in society. Including persons with disabilities in the design and
planning of the built environment while applying an intersectional approach, supports equal
rights and helps identify people’s aspirations for inclusive environments.
Four city case studies will be discussed in this paper: Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia; Varanasi, India;
Surakarta, Indonesia; and Nairobi, Kenya. Research participants and objectives are organised by
three stakeholder groups:
a) People: first-hand experiences of persons with disabilities living in the city and their
aspirations for a more inclusive city
b) Policy: the awareness and understanding of inclusive design among policymakers
c) Practice: the awareness and understanding of inclusive design among practitioners including
barriers to implementation, opportunities, and the relationship with assistive technology
Methods include document reviews, interviews, photo diaries and co-design workshops with
participatory and inclusive engagement of persons with disabilities throughout. Findings on
public spaces are discussed in three ways:
1. The types of public spaces valued by participants in each of the four cities.
2. The barriers and challenges experienced by persons with disabilities in the public realm.
3. Aspirations and opportunities for more inclusive public spaces
The paper concludes by discussing how the targeted stakeholder groups of people, policy and
practice help represent three essential dimensions of inclusive city design and form a framework
for successful implementation and delivery – that supports targets set out in the UNCRPD, New
Urban Agenda and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Keywords: inclusive design, urban planning, disability, accessibility, inclusive public space,
inclusive cities
THE JOURNAL OF PUBLIC SPACE
To cite this article:
Patrick, M. and McKinnon, I. (2022) “Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces: Learnings from Four
Global Case Studies on inclusive Cities”, The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 93-116. DOI
10.32891/jps.v7i2.1500
This article has been double blind peer reviewed and accepted for publication in The Journal of Public Space.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial 4.0
International License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
94 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Introduction
This paper presents findings with a focus on inclusive public spaces from a global
research study on inclusive infrastructure and city design. The research study is
producing city case studies through participatory research with urban stakeholders on
the challenges and opportunities for inclusive environments in cities in the Global South.
Persons with disabilities can experience multi-dimensional exclusion from urban life,
including but not limited to physical, attitudinal and social barriers (The World Health
Organisation, 2011). The global population of persons with disabilities is over 1.2 billion,
which constitutes around 15% of the population (WeThe15, 2021). It is essential that
urban development initiatives are inclusive of this group. The targets set out in the UN
Sustainable Development Goals cannot be met without genuine inclusion and
participation of persons with disabilities. 80% of persons with disabilities live in lower-
and-middle-income countries (Harper, Essig and Youssefian, 2021), where urban
development can be more challenging due to limited resources and in many cases, a lack
of climate and crisis resilience. People continue to migrate towards cities, and figures
suggest that 60% of the infrastructure that will exist in 2050 is still to be constructed
(C40 Cities, 2021). There is a great opportunity to influence this development to be
inclusive for all. While definitions vary, public space is one of the fundamental mediators
of urban life and to experience inclusion in urban life, public spaces must be inclusive
and accessible to ensure persons with disabilities are not excluded.
Given the context set out above, this research project (AT2030) focused on cities in
lower-and-middle-income countries, connected to other parts of the AT2030
programme, to understand the current state of inclusion and accessibility for persons
with disabilities and what opportunities for inclusive design exist. The case studies
discussed include Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia; Varanasi, India; Surakarta (Solo), Indonesia and
Nairobi, Kenya. Each city case study is developed in partnership with local organisations
including Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs), NGOs and research
institutions and methods include interviews, photo diaries, workshops and document
reviews. While the AT2030 research study focuses on the city as a whole, this paper
will present analysis focused on the dimensions of inclusive public space only.
In this paper, public space is predominantly discussed in an urban context. Recognising
that public space is a diverse, multi-faceted, contested and evolving term, we frame
public space through Mehta and Palazzo’s discussion of how access to public space is
representative of the social, cultural and political life of a city:
“The access and availability to public spaces can show how public spaces are, or not,
an arena for public life: a place for individual and group expression; a forum for
dialogue, debate, and contestation; a space for conviviality, leisure, performance, and
display; a place for economic survival and refuge; a site for exchange of information
and ideas; and a setting for nature to exist in the city and to support the well-being of
its inhabitants.” (Mehta and Palazzo, 2020)
In this definition, access to and availability of public spaces are part of defining public
space – implicitly bringing forth concepts of inclusion and exclusion. Historically,
literature on public space has focused on cities in the Global North, particularly North
American and European cities, where Western ideologies and politics influence the
production of the built environment to reflect prevailing narratives of inclusion and
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 95
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
exclusion (Jacobs, 1992; Gehl, 2011; Mogilevich, 2020). However, a positive turn
towards recognising and embracing diversity in the built environment and a body of
literature that explores perspectives of public space from historically excluded groups is
evolving, including but not limited to: discussion of the right to the city (Harvey, 2012),
public spaces and the feminist city (Kern, 2021), public spaces in Global South
(Madanipour, 2010; Lemanski, 2019; Ye, 2019), public spaces and migration, public space
and older people (Stahl, 2019), public space and disability (Imrie, 1996; Rebernik,
Marušić and Bahillo, 2019; Pineda, 2020) and intersectional ideas of collective access
(Hamraie, 2013). This work helps create space for a more inclusive and diverse
understanding of public space.
There is often a disconnect between research and practice, with research translating to
action on the ground only in limited circumstances. Equitable research, that is co-
produced and locally-adapted, needs close participation between researchers and
people on the ground (Marrengane, Croese, 2021) – in other words, a participatory and
inclusive approach. Further, research and evidence must find its way back to local
communities and practitioners on the ground, including local governments who have a
key role in shaping the built environment (ibid). Including these stakeholders in research
activities can ensure tangible and long-term impact. Inclusive design processes have
value here, as an inclusive design approach is first and foremost a people-centred
approach to research and design, where empathy, trust and building relationships form
an essential part of knowledge production. Inclusive design is often discussed in purely
technical terms, as a set of physical standards for designing spaces, but it is much more
than that: it is a mindset, a way of thinking that champions inclusion and ensures that
everyone can experience the world around them in a fair and equal way (Global
Disability Innovation Hub, Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park and London Legacy
Development Corporation, 2019).
These case studies are also grounded in inclusive design as a theoretical approach.
Inclusive and accessible public spaces are not limited to the physical dimensions of urban
form and design but are complex entities that integrate social, political, cultural,
environmental and spatial factors. Understanding the wider contextual factors of how
people inhabit space and what their aspirations are can identify design opportunities that
will have greatest impact on people’s day-to-day lives and ensure that persons with
disabilities experience equity of rights, participation and inclusion on a par with their
non-disabled peers.
From a policy perspective, inclusive design of public space can be guided by
international, national and local legislation. Within international frameworks and
contemporary urban development agendas, public space is commonly discussed as
demonstrated in both the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG11) and the New Urban
Agenda (NUA):
“By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public
spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with
disabilities.”
SDG11.7 (UN, 2022)
“We commit ourselves to promoting safe, inclusive, accessible, green and quality public
spaces, including streets, sidewalks and cycling lanes, squares, waterfront areas,
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
96 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
gardens and parks, that are multifunctional areas for social interaction and inclusion,
human health and well-being, economic exchange and cultural expression and dialogue
among a wide diversity of people and cultures, and that are designed and managed to
ensure human development and build peaceful, inclusive and participatory societies, as
well as to promote living together, connectivity and social inclusion.”
(‘New Urban Agenda’, 2017, p.13)
Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(UNCRPD), public space is not explicitly mentioned. However, under Article 9
(Accessibility) the UNCRPD stipulates the accessibility of all buildings, transport,
facilities, services open to the public, including environments managed by private entities
open to the public (United Nations, 2006). Furthermore, the Convention’s general
principles set out the fundamental rights to dignity, equal participation and inclusion in
society and accessibility. The Convention also recognises the diversity and
intersectionality of disability, which the inclusive design of public spaces can celebrate.
This paper will discuss findings of the AT2030 research study with a focus on public
spaces and concludes by discussing the implications of the findings and how the targeted
stakeholder groups of people, policy and practice also help represent three essential
dimensions of inclusive city design and begin to form the basis of a framework for
successful implementation and delivery, supporting inclusive global development targets.
Methodology
Four city case studies, taken from the AT2030 research programme, will be discussed in
this paper:
1. Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia – in partnership with AIFO, Universal Progress ILC,
Tegsh Niigem and Asian Development Bank;
2. Varanasi, India – in partnership with the National Institute of Urban Affairs and
Kiran Society, support by Varanasi Municipality and Smart City Mission;
3. Surakarta, Indonesia in partnership with Kota Kita;
4. Nairobi, Kenya in partnership with Kilimanjaro Blind Trust and Kounkuey Design
Initiative.
A multi-city, global approach was chosen to be able to develop shared learnings and
opportunities that can contribute to inclusive design practice internationally. The wider
study aimed to identify what works for implementing inclusive design in different
contexts. The cities were selected to represent a wide geographical region and were
cities where strong partnerships were already in place through the wider AT2030
programme, to be able to develop insights on both assistive technology and inclusive
design. In each city, local partners helped define data collection approaches and
contributed to ‘Inclusive Design Research Guidelines’. Final project outputs were
translated into local languages and presented back to communities and stakeholders.
The research methodology for each case study is consistent to support comparison.
Methods include semi-structured interviews, photo diaries, co-design workshops and
document reviews. Inclusive design research guidelines were developed to support the
research activities and these were co-developed with local partners with activities
adapted to local contexts. In interviews participants were asked about their day-to-day
experiences, their aspirations for change and their knowledge and understanding of
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 97
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
inclusive design and the policy landscape around disability inclusion. In the photo diaries,
participants with disabilities were prompted to capture images of places they spend
their time, how they move around the city, places they like to go and places they find
challenging to visit. Participants were recruited from three key stakeholder groups:
●People: persons with disabilities living in the city
●Policy: policy stakeholders working in the country/city
●Practice: industry professionals including architects, urban planners, inclusive
designers, project managers and engineers working in the city
These three groups also represent the three main objectives of the research and form
the basis of a working framework for enabling inclusive environments:
a) People – to understand the experiences of persons with disabilities living in the
city and their aspirations for a more inclusive city
b) Policy – to understand the awareness and understanding of inclusive design
among policy-makers and the opportunities for inclusive cities
c) Practice – to understand the awareness and understanding of inclusive design
among built environment practitioners including barriers to implementation,
opportunities and the relationship with assistive technology
Diagram 1. People, Policy and Practice Framework
Data collection took place between April 2020 and February 2022. Each case
study began with participatory stakeholder mapping with local partners to identify
key participants to be engaged. A total of 128 people participated in the case
studies including 71 persons with disabilities and 57 policy and practice
stakeholders, 12 of whom also identified as persons with disabilities. The following
table illustrates the participant demographics across all three stakeholder groups.
Participants were intentionally recruited from different parts of the city to help
capture varying perspectives, with particular attention to also recruit participants
living in informal settlements.
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
98 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Persons with Disabilities
City Participants Gender Disability
Age Range
Male Female Physical Visual Hearing 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+
Ulaanbaatar 15 8 7 8 1 1 4 4 1 1 0
Varanasi 21 15 6 18 3 0 8 12 1 0 0
Solo 15 10 7 6 5 4 4 9 1 1 0
Nairobi 20 12 8 9 7 4 7 8 3 2 0
Total 71 45 28 41 16 9 23 33 6 4 0
Policy and Practice Stakeholders
City Participants Gender Disability Age range
Male Female Physical Visual Hearing 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+
Ulaanbaatar 15 9 6 0 0 0 0 5 6 3 1
Varanasi 11 11 0 1 2 0 1 3 4 3 0
Solo 16 6 10 1 0 0 1 4 9 1 0
Nairobi 15 9 6 4 4 0 * * * * *
Total
57 35 22 6 6 0 2 12 19 7 1
Thematic analysis was used to generate themes relating to inclusive environments
following Braun and Clarke’s approach (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Analysis was
conducted in collaboration with local partners and findings were also presented to
participants in multi-stakeholder workshops for validation. For this paper, a secondary
analysis was conducted to examine the data with a particular view to findings specifically
related to inclusive public spaces.
Limitations for the study include:
●Challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic including remote collaboration and
essential health and safety restrictions around face-to-face activities
●Diversity of disability representation, to ensure consistency across all case
studies, participants were recruited to represent three impairment groups
(mobility, visual and hearing) which does not fully represent the rich diversity of
disability.
●Further research is needed to understand the specific experiences of
neurodiverse people including people with intellectual disabilities. Participant
recruitment was challenging at times and there is an overrepresentation of
people with mobility impairments.
●Gender diversity, participant sampling aimed to represent an equal gender
balance, but this proved to be challenging, particularly in Varanasi, India.
●A diversity of age ranges was recruited with the study focusing on adults and
not children. However, there are limited numbers of older participants (50+).
The specific experiences of children with disabilities and older people in public
spaces warrants further study.
●It was challenging to recruit stakeholder participants (i.e. local government
officials or practitioners) who also identified as a person with disabilities.
Table 1: Stakeholders participating in study research
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 99
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Case Studies Overview
Case Study 1: Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Ulaanbaatar is the capital city of Mongolia, home to around 1.4 million residents
according to official statistics (Mongolian Statistical Information Service, 2016). Mongolia
historically had a moving capital that reflected the country’s nomadic culture. The city of
Ulaanbaatar was created as a mobile monastery in 1639, with buildings primarily
consisting of yurts or ‘Gers’ (Menard, 2020). The capital city of Ulaanbaatar has been
sedentary since 1778 (Diener and Hagen, 2013) and the city is now located in a valley
on the Tuul river. Its climate is harsh with prolonged winters that reach -40°C while the
summer can be hot (25-30°C). The harsh climate means the city has a short
construction period throughout the year, with the majority of construction confined to
summer months when the ground is not frozen (Patrick, McKinnon and Austin, 2020).
This is reflected in the city’s infrastructure where much of the built environment is built
above ground. Substations and infrastructure often occupy the ground level with many
buildings having raised main entrances creating immense accessibility challenges. Around
60-70% of the city’s residents reside in unplanned settlements called the ‘Ger Areas’.
These areas are largely made up of Ger huts (yurts), the traditional dwellings of
Mongolia’s nomadic population. Some do not consider the Ger areas informal
settlements as they have existed for a long time and are formed of a traditional
vernacular architecture. However, these areas often lack access to basic infrastructure
such as paved roads, running water and electricity.
With regard to disability inclusion, according to official statistics, there are 35,600
persons with disabilities living in Ulaanbaatar: 19,700 male and 15,900 female
(Government of Mongolia and JICA, 2017). Mongolia ratified the UNCRPD in 2008 and
developed its first accessibility standard MNS6055 in 2009. However, the accessibility
standards are not mandatory and therefore building control enforcement is minimal.
Mongolia’s law to protect the rights of persons with disabilities was renewed in 2016
and the country is in the process of developing an accessibility law and reviewing its
accessibility standards. OPDs are very active in Mongolia.
Case Study 2: Varanasi, India
Varanasi is a city in Uttar Pradesh, India, with a population of circa 1.2 million people.
However, the last census took place in 2011 and the actual population is estimated to
be much higher. The city has great significance in Indian culture and is a site of
pilgrimage and tourism for people from all over India and the world, with an estimated
5-6 million visitors per year (Patrick et al, 2021). The city is widely regarded as one of
the oldest cities in the world (Singh and Rana, 2017) and its renowned heritage sites
such as the riverfront Ghats present numerous accessibility challenges. There are many
infrastructure challenges in Varanasi and it is estimated that 34% of its population live in
informal settlements (Jha, Harshwardhan and Tripathi, 2016). Many residents lack access
to basic infrastructure such as clean drinking water and rely on public sanitation
facilities. Additionally, the old city suffers from extreme congestion with pedestrians and
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
100 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
motorised transport options often conflicting, particularly in the constrained and
densely populated areas surrounding heritage sites in the old part of city.
In terms of disability inclusion, there are 96,924 citizens with disabilities registered in
Varanasi, 54,297 male and 42,627 female (District Wise Population of Disabilities,
Official Website of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Department,
Government of Uttar Pradesh, India). India ratified the UNCRPD in 2007 and has
national disability laws such as The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016). New
guidelines for national accessibility standards have recently been published: ‘Harmonised
Guidelines for Universal Accessibility in India 2021’.
Case Study 3: Surakarta (Solo), Indonesia
Surakarta, Indonesia, known as Solo to local residents, is a city in Java, Indonesia. The
population of Solo is 557,606 and the city is widely regarded as a friendly place for
persons with disabilities to live. Solo became home to numerous rehabilitation centres
following the civil war (1946-1950) and is still a place people go to seek rehabilitation
services (UNESCO and Kota Kita, 2018). This has created an urban environment where
disability is more visible, and residents report lower feelings of stigma and better social
inclusion in comparison to other Indonesian cities. On the policy level, the city is also
considered progressive with strong city level regulations around accessibility. In terms
of liveability and city infrastructure, many residents live in informal settlements, but
there is a high level of planning and organisation at different scales in the city, with block
and neighbourhood scale community representatives that feed into city planning. While
disability is still not greatly represented at this level (Patrick et al, 2022), other aspects
of social exclusion such as gender are addressed quite comprehensively through
grassroots action.
In terms of disability inclusion, a survey conducted by AT2030 partner Kota Kita in
2018 determined there are 1,167 persons with disabilities in Solo, but it is likely the
figure is higher. Indonesia ratified the UNCRPD in 2011 and has national disability laws:
Law on Disabilities (No. 8/2016). City-level legislation pre-dates the ratification of the
UNCRPD: ‘Local Law No. 2/2008 on Disability Rights’ and Surakarta City Regulation
No 9/2020 concerning Protection and Fulfilment of the rights of persons with disabilities
(2020). Since 2002 construction laws have stipulated the need for accessibility such as:
Law No.28/2002 on the Construction of Buildings (ILO, no date). The most recent
national regulations regarding accessibility are: Regulation of the Ministry of Public
Works and Housing No. 14/PRT/M/2017 on Access Requirements for Building Facilities
(2017). There are also very high numbers of rehabilitation centres and OPDs operating
in the city relative to its size, which is one of the reasons given why residents feel it is
an inclusive city.
Case Study 4: Nairobi, Kenya
Nairobi, the capital city of Kenya was founded in 1899 and is now home to circa 4.4
million residents. The city has a challenging history of exclusionary development and is
known for its numerous informal settlements that represent around 60% of its
population. The city has grown rapidly and extremely high densities can be found in the
city’s informal settlements. Informal labour is common in the informal settlements in
Nairobi and it is likely that figures on poverty are underestimated due to a lack of
recognition of informal settlements and labour (Sverdlik, 2021). Temperatures are rising
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 101
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
in the city and informal settlements are particularly at risk due to the high density and
lack of vegetation (Scott et al., 2017). Infrastructure coverage varies but a study from
2019 found that Nairobi’s sewerage reach was 51% and water supply reached 77% of
households (Sverdlik, 2021). The city has a thriving technology sector, particularly
within mobile technologies and is home to Africa’s first Assistive Technology
accelerator (Innovate Now - Africa’s 1st Assistive Technology Venture Accelerator,
2019-present). Civil society is very active in the city and social media is popular for
advocacy purposes.
In terms of disability inclusion, according to the most recent census, there are 42,703
persons with disabilities living in Nairobi, 19,374 male and 23,322 female (Kenya
National Bureau of Statistics, 2020). Kenya ratified the UNCRPD in 2008 and has
national disability laws including: the Persons with Disabilities Act (2003, revised 2010).
Kenyan Building Code (2009) includes sections on accessibility and inclusivity and is
currently under revision. As the capital city, Nairobi is the centre of policy-making and
therefore also home to numerous OPDs that operate at a national level.
Findings
In this section, findings from the case studies will be discussed across three categories:
1. The types of public spaces valued by participants in each of the four cities.
2. The barriers and challenges experienced by persons with disabilities in the public
realm in cities.
3. Aspirations and opportunities for more inclusive public spaces, providing
recommendations for policy-makers and practitioners.
Findings 1: The types of public spaces valued by participants
Analysis of the case study data resulted in the following types of public spaces, as
identified by participants:
●Social and familiar environments
●Communal spaces around housing, visiting a neighbour, community life
●Green spaces
●Healthy and hygienic environments
●Religious and cultural spaces, including festivals
●Markets and street vendors
●Places to eat and drink (restaurants, coffee shops)
●Recreational and commercial spaces – shopping malls, cinemas, food courts,
nightclubs, karaoke bars
●Sports, recreational and leisure spaces and activities, including spaces to play
●Community spaces such as local Disabled Persons’ Organisations or
Neighbourhood Associations
●Safe spaces
●Tourist attractions
●Digital spaces, online fora and social media
●Temporary spaces such as ‘happy streets’ and festivals
The following table summarises these types of public spaces and includes examples of
participant insights, including key accessibility features to consider in their design:
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
102 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Table 2. Public space categories and key insights
Types of public
spaces
mentioned
Cities
mentioned
Stakeholder
groups
mentioned
Examples
Examples of
accessibility provisions
suggested
Social, familiar,
environments
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo
Persons with
disabilities,
communities,
friends, family
“Basically, as humans, we are social
beings, right?” Participant in Indonesia
“Everyone knows me, likes me, here
they never show any kind of
discrimination towards me, I get to
equal participate in all activities like
everyone else.” Participant in India
“Whether it be a stranger taking pity on
me and offering me money, a passer-by
asking God to perform a miracle and
cure me, a gang harassing me on the
street and trying to push me around for
a laugh: people’s attitudes are the
source of many issues for me”
Participant in Kenya
Socially inclusive
environments, awareness,
inclusive and accessible
housing
Communal spaces
around housing,
visiting a neighbour,
community life
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo
Persons with
disabilities,
communities, a
neighbour with an
illness, community
leaders
“I live in (through) a fence. The fence is
not mine so I cannot tell them that it is
difficult to go in and out” Participant in
Mongolia
“It has a flat surface so it’s easy for me
to stay here and do my work. I have
proper light here and I can also stay in
touch with other people so I don’t feel
alone” Participant in India
“She had been stuck in her third-floor
apartment building for four months
because the building’s entryway was
accessible only by stairs, and the
elevator only worked sporadically.”
Participant in Kenya
Individual interventions,
good light, proximity to
others, flat surfaces, places
to sit
Green spaces Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, children,
families,
sustainability
stakeholders
“And large trees in the middle of the
sidewalk with the excuse of a green
campus and so on but it’s difficult”
Participant in Indonesia
“Mostly, I like to visit to national park,
game centres and other public places
with my girlfriend. Only difficulties are
on the way to there and to home. It
happens to go through broken road,
sidewalk less streets and some stairs.”
Participant in Mongolia
“I like nature so much. I like mountains,
rivers, garden, forest, whenever I get
free time, I go to such places with my
family. Challenges are everywhere but
with the support of family we can
overcome any challenges.” Participant in
India
Step free access and paved
pathways, toilets, accessible
and inclusive design of
‘green interventions’,
accessible and affordable
transport links
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 103
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Healthy and
hygienic
environments
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, people
living in informal
settlements, people
with health
conditions, older
people
“The city should not be as noisy as it is.
If we look for perspective over visually
impaired person this sound is a very
important part. I have seen many cities
and Varanasi is one of the noisiest
cities” Participant in India
“During lockdown I stayed in my room
for three months, never went out once,
if they didn’t deliver food at home I
could have died there”
Participant in India
Good air quality, minimal
noise pollution, open
spaces, pandemic safety
measures in place
Religious and
cultural spaces
including festivals
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, older
people, pilgrims
“From a long time ago, I wanted to do
advocacy in religion issues, because the
religion sector is currently still difficult
to access.” Participant in Indonesia
“The culture of the people, now this is
Javanese culture, like caring for one
another and also kinship.” Participant in
Indonesia
“There is a temple inside the village, I
spend time there. Whenever I feel sad, I
go there, spend some time there as it's
very peaceful. That place is accessible
for me I can go easily inside the
premises on my tricycle.” Participant in
India
Level access, advocacy
opportunities, accessible
museum exhibitions with
equitable user experiences,
event accessibility, access
to areas of religious
importance
Markets and street
vendors
Varanasi,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities,
shopkeepers and
informal workers
“The Gede Market already has
accessibility, but there is no socialization
to us. Continue to terminals, public
places. The terminal has a road for the
blind's accessibility, there are guiding
blocks. It's just that, it's the lack of
socialization.” Participant in Indonesia
“[streets are] Very shabby and broken
and occupied by vendors” Participant in
India
“People opposed it, they said if we build
a footpath in front of their shops their
businesses will get interrupted this is the
thinking of the Varanasi public.”
Participant in India
Good lighting levels, shelter
from rain, accessible
communication including
sign language, good
maintenance and regulation
of space to remove
hazards, negotiation with
shopkeepers
Places to eat and
drink (restaurants,
coffee shops)
Ulaanbaatar,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, business
owners
“We should reserve the table before we
go to restaurant, we cannot reserve by
online or phone. The people in
restaurant don’t know sign language. So,
we meet at someone’s home.”
Participant in Mongolia
“But we gather at my house more often,
because there is a Wedangan (in English
Traditional Drink Stall) in my house.
They also sell fried rice too. So, my
friends usually like to buy drinks or food
there.”
Participant in Indonesia
Comfortable seating,
proximity to home, step-
free access, social inclusion,
good lighting, noise levels,
information on accessibility
available, disability aware
staff members, accessible
booking systems, inclusive
hiring programmes and
training opportunities, pro-
active service providers
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
104 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
“[giving feedback to a restaurant owner]
'Wow, this is a great place, it would’ve
been better if you provide access for
those who are in wheelchairs.' Then he
went straight to build this access. A
week later I was there and there is
access for wheelchair users. So he really
cares for his friends with disabilities.”
Participant in Indonesia
Recreational and
commercial spaces
–shopping malls,
cinemas, food
courts, nightclubs,
karaoke bars
Ulaanbaatar,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, business
owners, staff
“The malls here provide elevators, but I
am surprised that when I go to the Mall,
sometimes people don't want to
prioritize people with disabilities.”
Participant in Indonesia
“Yes, in the mall, usually, at the food
court, it's like you can choose what to
eat, right there, it's complete, not
confused. Then after eating, for
example, if I want to buy basic
necessities, I go to Hypermart, right,
there are also those, if I want to watch
movies there is also a cinema too.”
Participant in Indonesia
“They said there was no more space in
the concert hall for wheelchair users, as
they had exceeded their quota and
there were two of us already.”
Participant in Kenya
Variety of services/facilities
available, physical
accessibility is usually good,
often built to international
accessibility standards,
accessible equipment
(karaoke), Management of
the space (i.e. priority use)
Sports, recreational
and leisure spaces
and activities,
including spaces to
play
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo
Persons with
disabilities, children,
tourists
Involvement and participation in sports
can be motivating. In Mongolia in
particular, sport is highly valued
culturally so to be able to participant is
important.
“My kids have no place to play in the ger
district” Participant in Mongolia
“I always wanted to learn swimming but
till now I don’t know any accessible
place here in Varanasi where I can learn
swimming. There’s no swimming club
here where people with disabilities can
join too.” Participant in India
Accessible sports
infrastructure, inclusive
culture, accessible boats
Community spaces
such as local
Organisations of
Persons with
Disabilities or
Neighbourhood
Associations
Ulaanbaatar,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities,
community leaders,
other marginalised
groups such as
women’s
associations
“I like to visit Universal Progress ILC.
When I go to other places people don’t
understand my speech. I have many
friends here and I can freely talk with
them. They can understand me.”
Participant in Mongolia
Disability equality and
awareness training,
accessible community
meetings, accessible
communication and
information
Safe spaces
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo,
Nairobi,
Persons with
disabilities, women
with disabilities,
older people,
people living in
climate-vulnerable
contexts
“I am afraid of going alone when it is
dark and taking a taxi, sometimes the
drivers are violent, saying things like give
me your phone number or I will not
drop you off” Participant in Mongolia
Hazard-free good inclusive
design, good lighting, access
to emergency help, overall
awareness from general
public, accessible and safe
public transport, passive
surveillance when
appropriate
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 105
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Tourist attractions
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo
Persons with
disabilities, tourists,
pilgrims, older
people, people
travelling with
luggage
“Well, I'm a bit afraid to go to Malang by
myself. Because if there is information
such as at the terminal or at the station,
we must continue to test for COVID
rapid test and so on, like that. Looks like
it will be difficult.” Participant in Indonesia
“Not to mention if we travel with
people who are not our family
members, this becomes a problem, its
privacy, right? The more disability a
person has, the more discrimination and
more losing of their privacy. And this
becomes a potential of harassment if we
depend on others too much.” Participant
in Indonesia
“Getting the places worth visiting which
you as a citizen would want to visit,
want to see for yourself, those places
need to be made accessible.” Participant
in India
Step-free access, accessible
toilets, clear information
accessibility (both online
and on-site), targeted
support for persons with
disabilities to support
independence, fee
concessions (including free
personal assistant access)
Digital spaces,
online forums and
social media
Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi,
Solo, Nairobi
Persons with
disabilities, business
owners,
government
stakeholders
“We, blind people, have an association,
if there is a complaint, it will be
submitted via YouTube. So that it is
known by the general public, it also can
be conveyed via Twitter or something,
so that shopper will know that this one
lacks access.”
Participant in Indonesia
Advocacy, social media,
campaigning, digital
accessibility, affordability
Temporary spaces
such as ‘happy
streets’ and festivals
Varanasi
Persons with
disabilities, women,
older people,
children, pilgrims
“I always want to go down there at
riverbank and watch ganga arti too but
there are so many stairs I cannot go
there on my own. I need someone else
help to carry me there.” Participant in
India
Accessible events, access
audits, inclusive activities
Findings 2: The barriers and challenges experienced by persons with disabilities.
“These public places are not accessible, we can manage but things need to change.”
Participant in India
Persons with disabilities experience social, physical, economic and political exclusion.
The following 11 categories of barriers to inclusive public spaces were identified
through the case studies:
Social and attitudinal:
●Stigma and trauma: “I think inaccessibility is sort of stigma itself” Participant in
Mongolia
●Awareness: a lack of education and training around disability including good
disability equality and awareness training
●Reliance on support: “There's no traffic light, so I have to rely on other people
to cross the street. If other people are not there, I can't cross or I take a risk.”
Participant in Kenya
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
106 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
●Accountability: “it is better to provide a building that is accessible for disabilities,
be it private or government owned. I have always wanted to convey that.
Sometimes I upload on social media, then I tag the associated manager. "Please
give access to friends with disabilities," He doesn't know, maybe at any time, we
(people with disabilities) will access that place.” Participant in Indonesia.
Knowledge and conceptual:
●Accessibility is generalised or limited to certain impairments: “When they
look at accessibility, they look at people who are on wheelchairs...a person
on a wheelchair is not the only person who is not able to access the building.
We have people on crutches who can’t use the ramp you’ve constructed.”
Participant in Kenya
●Even within spaces labelled as accessible, there is a need for targeted
research on specific needs to support genuine inclusion: “In terms of the
building, to be honest, it is still not accessible. Because sometimes, their
perspectives are different, with us, even those with disabilities themselves
are different.” Participant in Indonesia
●Buildings in formal/planned settlements are not necessarily accessible and
buildings in informal settlements are not necessarily inaccessible, inclusive
design should be evaluated separate to these criteria
●Understanding of inclusive design is limited beyond common accessibility
provisions
Physical and infrastructural:
●Poor drainage infrastructure can impede movement and independence, and
reduce the quality of the environment
●Accessible design elements are present in some buildings but are not functional
or practical in use due to technical specifications.
●A lack of end-to-end journey thinking impedes access as individual building
accessibility is not sufficient for an inclusive experience
●Quality of materials and adherence to standards: “For example in rest area or
gas stations, they provide toilet but not the toilet for disability. And even there’s
a mistake, the toilet door has a logo of a wheelchair, which says it is a toilet for
disability, but it turns out to be a seated toilet to indicate it is not a squat toilet,
and it is not accessible.” Participant in Indonesia
●Poor maintenance and misuse of space: “We live in a city where there are no
rules, in the middle of the road you may find a barrier, you may find it
anywhere.” Participant in India
●Problems of space: “Land tenure is not systematic, so it is difficult to free up land
to build public facilities, which means things like roads missing sidewalks because
they don’t have enough space” Participant in Mongolia.
Environmental:
●Sensory factors including noise, smells, light levels: participants in Varanasi and
Nairobi talked about the impact of noise on sense-making and navigation, and
that noise pollution can increase a sense of anxiety in public spaces.
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 107
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
●Climate and environmental conditions including mud, rain, ice, wind, heat, cold:
“In public places, I can't go inside, just stay outside, but people usually help.
During rainy season it gets worse.” Participant in India.
Temporal:
●Spaces are used in different ways throughout the day, week, season which may
alter their accessibility
●Festival and events or busy tourist periods can impact how inclusive a public
space will be
●Changing weather conditions will temporarily alter accessibility, and in the case
of extreme weather events or crises may have longer-lasting impacts and
damage
●Urban development can progress at pace and changing infrastructures will alter
accessibility and sometimes information services cannot keep up.
Mobility:
●Mobility: public transport can be inaccessible and chaotic, private transport can
be a financial barrier: “The place that I would like to go is quite difficult, so I try
not to go.” Participant in Mongolia
●Private transport can be expensive
●Lack of dedicated spaces for different transport modes, including pavements and
cycle lanes
●Traffic congestion is an issue in all case study cities
Financial:
●Private transport, which is often the most physically accessible, can be expensive
●Government-provided assistive technology can be limited and poor quality,
private solutions for quality AT that is fit for purpose can be expensive
●Informal labour opportunities often take place in public spaces, which if
inaccessible is a barrier for persons with disabilities to access opportunities
●Some spaces that are treated as public spaces are privately-owned, such as
shopping malls, where there can be expectations to buy things
Political:
●Lack of implementation of existing laws and regulation
●Siloed or fragmented national and local government departments
●Lack of dedicated funding/budget allocations for inclusive design
●Lack of local leadership on inclusive design
●Participation in civic life within communities and cities often dictates ability to
vote, access to justice and participation in urban planning processes
Professional and practice:
●Lack of education on inclusive design
●No time provided for consultation within construction timelines
●Lack of in-country technical experts
●Need for clients to have knowledge of and advocate for inclusive design
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
108 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
●Privately-owned ‘public’ spaces such as restaurants or recreational spaces have a
responsibility to ensure inclusion, this requires awareness and training among
business owners
●Accountability, monitoring and evaluation to ensure consistency, good practice
and innovation.
Information:
●Accessing information and services: “Where there is good design, the service
and staff need to match it” Participant in Mongolia
●Communication: “When you need to speak with an official in a government
building, the receptionist gives you a list of numbers to call. But if you can't use
the phone, then you can't talk to anyone. So, you have to ask a guard to call for
you, and they won't always do that. Or you just have to go to important places
with your own sign language translator.” Participant in Kenya.
Safety:
●Harassment and violence, particularly for women with disabilities
●Theft
●Fear of stampedes and safe navigation in crowds
●Assistive technology is not enough to feel safe, for example in Nairobi white
cane users report still feeling they need a guide most of the time to feel safe.
These categories reflect the over-arching themes of physical, attitudinal, and social
barriers that are commonly used to describe the types of exclusion persons with
disabilities experience. However, they also capture a sense of the complexity of what
constitutes an inclusive environment, including consideration of socio-economic factors.
As poverty and disability are often linked, it is vital to consider affordability in the public
realm. People’s experience of a space is not only determined by its physical design but
there are social, sensory and environmental factors that influence the feel of a space, as
well organisational or institutional aspects such as the quality-of-service delivery.
Conceptual and professional/practice barriers provide particular insights for
practitioners and policymakers, that are often missed in physical audits of the built
environment. Time constraints, use patterns or temporary barriers including changing
weather conditions also affect accessibility and inclusion, as does urban development
progression. Lastly, there is a clear need for an intersectional approach to designing
inclusive public spaces as there is great diversity in people’s access needs with many
people experiencing multiple forms of discrimination, for example women with
disabilities, who are more likely to experience exclusion, harassment or violence.
Comparing the different cities shows that climate influences public spaces. In Ulaanbaatar
there was less discussion of communal public spaces as considering the city’s climate,
these external gathering spaces would not be usable for much of the year. However,
design and innovation can support creating more inclusive public spaces in this context.
For example, ‘GerHub’ has designed a new community space, the Ger Innovation Hub,
that provides different layers of interior space to try and address the lack of access to
outdoor public spaces in colder climates (GERHub, 2022). In Varanasi and Solo, where
climates are warmer, informal public spaces are often formed at the boundaries between
public and private space around homes. Culture is also an important factor and in
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 109
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Ulaanbaatar and Solo there is a particularly active community of OPDs that create spaces
of social interaction and gathering. Local cultures and faiths influence the types of public
spaces that people value and in all the cities there were participants who identified
religious and cultural spaces as a key collective or public space.
The role of local government and planning is influential. In Solo, even within informal
settlements there is a strong structure to planning and political processes through the
city scales down the RTs (Rukan Tetangga – the smallest administrative division in city
planning in Indonesia) that supports the creation of public space. The role of local
governments is important and there was a clear distinction in the connection between
national and local policies in the cities that are not capital cities (Solo and Varanasi),
where there is arguably a need to operate somewhat autonomously.
Findings 3: Aspirations for more inclusive public spaces and opportunities for inclusive
design
Among all three stakeholder groups there is an aspiration for more inclusive city design.
Participatory activities such as workshops were used to take a solutions-focused
approach to discussing inclusive environments. Participants were asked to identify
priority areas for intervention based on identified themes. In workshops, some policy
stakeholder participants, reflected that the photo diary activities illustrated a more
negative view of the state of inclusion in the city, and did not capture spaces that have
made more progress on inclusion such as government buildings and commercial spaces
in city centres, like malls and international hotels. This is significant as the photo diary
task captured spaces where people currently spend and would like to spend their time.
If these are not currently inclusive, then the day-to-day experiences of persons with
disabilities will overwhelming be of inaccessible environments. It also alludes to the fact
that in many cases housing, informal public spaces and areas of informal settlements are
not currently prioritised in inclusive city design. In some cases, these spaces are
privately-owned which creates greater complexity for ensuring standards are met.
Aspirations and recommendations for more inclusive public spaces included the views
that integrated, holistic approaches are necessary. This includes contextualising
inclusive environments with other global challenges such as climate and crisis resilience
to ensure inclusive design solutions are sustainable and resilient well into the future.
The role of policy is also important as it can provide the basis for multi-sectoral action.
Effective implementation of those policies is necessary to achieve desired aims, which
requires the commitment of all stakeholder groups.
Engaging diverse stakeholders is important, including representation of all disabilities,
ages and genders. Among policy and practice stakeholders, all government sectors
should be engaged in supporting inclusive public spaces, such as a suggestion in Kenya to
engage the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) with regards to noise
control and regulation to support independent mobility for visually impaired persons.
Participation and inclusive processes must be embedded in urban development
interventions, from conception to completion to monitoring and evaluation to embody
the aim of, ‘nothing about us without us’. Participatory mapping could also be developed
to provide live data on the state of inclusion and accessibility, a system to support
ongoing participatory processes which would contribute to a sense of participating in
public life and citizenship for persons with disabilities.
There must be continuous efforts to generate data and evidence to support inclusive
city design and in particular to advocate for the inclusive public spaces that people want.
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
110 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Accountability is an essential component to ensure the maintenance of existing inclusive
public spaces and continued progress towards more inclusive environments.
Accountability can take many forms including: accountability in implementation
processes across infrastructure, urban design, and architecture; access to complaints
systems to report problems; access to justice systems to address grievances and report
violence, harassment or human rights infringements. Social media and other digital
spaces can also create accountability, improve awareness, and contribute to data and
evidence that can be used by local governments.
All stakeholder groups can contribute towards the creation of a more inclusive urban
life. For example, collective action from the disability community, with OPDs working
together to agree priorities could amplify impact. Inclusive public spaces should also
consider the wider benefits inclusive design brings by supporting other under-
represented groups including women, children, older people and indigenous people.
Community leaders have a role to play engaging all citizens and mediating conflicting
needs and aspirations as they arise.
Inclusive public spaces can have far reaching benefits within and beyond the local
community, from improving general well-being to generating employment opportunities
and facilitating more positive social interactions. This will be of particular relevance in the
ongoing recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Recreational spaces are as much a part
of public life as any other space. To create genuinely inclusive cities, everyone should be
able to experience the environment around them in a fair and equal way – creating
accessible and welcoming spaces people can enjoy and want to spend their time.
Awareness and education at different scales, from primary to tertiary education, will
help support a culture of inclusion. Practitioners must be equipped with inclusive design
skills to design for all and all citizens should be able to participate, to create a culture of
inclusion.
Continued innovation and best practice in inclusive design will support long-term
sustained urban transformation. Aspects of best practice include a continuous desire to
innovate and a reflective approach to project delivery processes and best practice
guidance. Grassroots innovation and informal public spaces should be embraced.
Consistency can be achieved through robust inclusive design standards and delivery
processes and would benefit from the development of a standardised evaluation system
to better assess outcomes and support future progress.
Assistive technology can be an enabler. However, inclusive public spaces need to
enable AT users. Targeted interventions or support can sometimes be necessary to
ensure everyone has equal rights to access and experience the public realm. Such
interventions must be developed in a way that does not increase stigma for persons
with disabilities. This can be achieved through awareness raising, educating people
about the potential of AT to transform people’s lives.
Attention to inclusive mobility is urgently needed to make public spaces more inclusive.
Creating spaces for active modes of transport in the city such as walking and cycling,
will generate more opportunities for people to participate in public life. Good city
planning is needed to implement inclusive transport infrastructure and ensuring urban
planners have good inclusive design training will support this.
These findings illustrate that the aspirations around inclusive public spaces are varied, as
are the typologies of public spaces identified. The barriers people experience are
complex and it can be challenging for stakeholders to know where to start. A focus on
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 111
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
actions and processes is valuable as it can be adapted to specific local contexts and
collect relevant local data when necessary, avoiding solutions that are not fit for
purpose or desirable.
Conclusion
The analysis of inclusive public spaces through case studies on the cities of Ulaanbaatar,
Varanasi, Solo and Nairobi identified a diverse type of public spaces for consideration.
Mehta and Palazzo’s description of public spaces as ‘a place for individual and group
expression; a forum for dialogue, debate, and contestation; a space for conviviality, leisure,
performance, and display; a place for economic survival and refuge; a site for exchange of
information and ideas; and a setting for nature to exist in the city and to support the well-being
of its inhabitants’ is reflected in the public spaces discussed, with perhaps the addition of
sites for exploration (tourist attractions), a setting for livelihood activities (eating,
studying), a setting for social relations (familial and neighbourhood interactions) and a
setting for solidarity and empowerment (OPDs and community organising).
The physical design of a public space, its physical attributes, can enable or disable
activities such as:
●facilitating social interaction
●access to outdoors, time in nature, feeling of wellbeing
●access to culture and religion
●access to recreation, enjoyment
●access to food, sustenance, and enjoyment
●access to civic and community engagement
Inclusive and accessible public spaces allow independence, respect and dignity, safety,
enjoyability, and good use of time for all, ensuring people’s human rights are upheld in
the public realm. While the geographic and cultural contexts of each of the cities
studied are diverse, there are common threads and shared aspirations for inclusive
environments, demonstrating that global guidance that can be locally adapted will have
value.
Tangible design elements were suggested by participants that demonstrate how the
factors to create an inclusive environment must go beyond basic physical design
elements. They must consider the sensory environment, how the space functions, what
services are provided within, how people get there and how they can access
information about the space both in advance and during their visit.
This study demonstrates the value of co-design and participatory processes to research,
illustrating how the genuine participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities in
research, facilitates in depth insights that can help prioritise actions towards more
inclusive environments. The barriers and challenges described by participants illustrate
the complexity of access challenges and exclusionary factors people encounter in the
built environment. As human beings are diverse and individual, there is rarely one ideal
design solution, and considering the pace at which cities evolve, ongoing processes that
commit to the sustained inclusive design of the built environment will be fundamental,
particularly as cities continue to be impacted by climate change. Therefore, we must
embed inclusive design approaches in how we shape the public realm to ensure robust,
inclusive, participatory processes for urban development that include persons with
disabilities and other disadvantaged groups.
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
112 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Standards, regulations and policy frameworks also have a responsibility to commit to
inclusion. Having good standards that are legally mandated supports the creation of
inclusive environments. However, attention must also be given to the implementation
processes that ensure delivery while also ensuring that national standards translate at
the regional level. .. Many public spaces are not regulated by conventional building
standards, especially when constructed or formed within informal settlements or within
privately-owned spaces. This requires broader advocacy and education to ensure clients
and built environment practitioners uphold inclusive design standards in their work.
Diagram 2. People, policy and practice framework: focal areas
We propose that the framework of ‘people, policy and practice’ is useful for navigating
the complex dimensions of inclusive public spaces and inclusive environments. First, we
start with people: persons with disabilities must be involved in the process, from the
start and throughout. This is the best way to actively create an inclusive space and
requires consultation processes to be inclusive and accessible. Even better, employing
persons with disabilities across government and built environment sectors will ensure
both diversity in our workforce and result in more inclusive project delivery and reduce
stigma. Secondly, we must uphold legislation and standards, including international,
national and local ones, and strive to go beyond minimum standards to innovate and
champion best practice. Policy stakeholders must be committed to shaping inclusive
environments as they lead decision-making, have influence or control over funding and
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 113
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
lead overall urban development and planning. Lastly, we must commit to inclusive
practices, and this applies to all stakeholders, but specifically built environment
practitioners. They must have training and a good awareness and understanding of the
benefits of inclusive design and a people-centred approach. Professional training and
education through colleges/universities should ensure diversity and inclusion are
fundamental aspects of educational programmes for the built environment.
By taking this three-fold approach of first including people, secondly being aware of what
policies, frameworks and power structures guide us and thirdly ensuring good inclusive
design practice and implementation we can embed inclusive design into the core of city
planning and design, ultimately creating public spaces that work better for all.
Implications
A framework like this would have most impact at the local government level, where it
can be embedded in city planning and design, supporting any existing legislation and
standards in place and help set local targets to address the SDGs and NUA. The
framework should be complemented with inclusive design training and a monitoring
system that evaluates progress and reflects on the practices being employed at regular
intervals.
Practitioners can engage with such a framework in their work as it provides a starting
point for embedding inclusive design in their practice. There is also a role for advocating
for more inclusive public spaces and inclusive environments more broadly, as it is an
ongoing process with significant effort required to meet the SDG targets by 2030.
There remains a critical role for research, with data needed at the local government
level to prioritise interventions. Stakeholders often prefer quantitative data to provide
measurable data, but qualitative data has a significant role in good inclusive design
practice as it is grounded in people’s experiences and aspirations. Furthermore, as the
limitations in this study have identified, there are many facets of the experience of
persons with disabilities in the built environment. Research with an intersectional
approach and research across a wider spectrum of persons with disabilities is needed.
Lastly, there are implications to consider regarding other global challenges such as the
increasing impacts of climate change and the ongoing recovery from the COVID-19
pandemic. Inclusion and resilience are increasingly linked as persons with disabilities are
often more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (Kett and Cole, 2018) and
efforts to create inclusive infrastructure must consider long-term resilience and
sustainability. Good health and wellbeing is critical to people’s lives and the impacts of
COVID-19 have shown that healthy and safe environments are critical for public spaces
in the future, to allow persons with disabilities to participate in society on an equal basis
and in order to safeguard against future pandemics.
Funding
This research was funded by the UK Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office
(FCDO).
Ethics
This study has ethics approval from University College London’s Ethics Committee,
project reference 18511/001 and local ethical approval in each of the case study cities.
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
114 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Acknowledgements
We’d like to thank all our partners on the AT2030 Inclusive Infrastructure sub-
programme who have supported data collection and analysis in the case study cities.
This includes: Tulgamaa Damdinsuren (AIFO), Enhbuyant Lhagvajav (Tegsh Niigem),
Tamirkhuu Narangerel, Nyam-Ochir Byambdorj, Undrukhbayar Chuluundavaa and
Avirmed Yamkhin (Universal Progress ILC), Satish Mishra (Kiran Society), Utsav
Choudhury and Prabha Roy (NIUA), Kavita Murugkar, Gaurav Raheja (IIT Roorkee),
Kirana Prastika Putri, Fuad Jamil and Nina Asterina (Kota Kita), Eugene Muchai, Alex
Kaluyu and Suparna Biswas (Kilimanjaro Blind Trust), Gloria Tanui, Allan Ouko, Amos
Wandera, Jack Campbell Clause and Vera Bukachi (Kounkuey Design Initiative).
References
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), pp. 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
C40 Cities (2021) C40 Cities: Energy & Buildings, C40 Cities. Available at:
https://www.c40.org/what-we-do/scaling-up-climate-action/energy-and-buildings/ (Accessed:
7 February 2022).
Diener, A.C. and Hagen, J. (2013) ‘City of felt and concrete: Negotiating cultural hybridity in
Mongolia’s capital of Ulaanbaatar’, Nationalities Papers, 41(4), pp. 622–650.
doi:10.1080/00905992.2012.743513.
District Wise Population of Disabilities | Official Website of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities
Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, India. (no date). Available at:
http://uphwd.gov.in/page/en/district-wise-population-of-disabilities (Accessed: 13 April
2021).
Gehl, J. (2011) Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Translated by Jo Koch. 6th Edition. Island
Press.
GERHub (2022) GerHub: Ger Innovation Hub. Available at: https://gerhub.org/ger-innovation-hub
(Accessed: 7 February 2022).
Global Disability Innovation Hub, Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park and London Legacy
Development Corporation (2019) ‘Inclusive Design Standards’. Available at:
https://www.disabilityinnovation.com/news/inclusive-design-standards-updated-for-2019
Government of Mongolia and JICA (2017) ‘Disability in Mongolia 2017: Facts and figures’.
Government of Mongolia: Ministry of Labour and Social Protection.
Hamraie, A. (2013) ‘Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal
Design’, Disability Studies Quarterly, 33(4). DOI:10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3871.
Harper, A., Essig, B. and Youssefian, E. (2021) Disability, Displacement and Climate Change.
UNHCR, IDMC and IDA, p. 2. Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/60896a274.pdf
(Accessed: 1 February 2022).
Harvey, D. (2012) Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. Verso Books.
ILO (no date) Inclusion of People with Disabilities in Indonesia. International Labour Organisation.
Available at: http://www.oit.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-
jakarta/documents/publication/wcms_233427.pdf (Accessed: 9 February 2022).
Imrie, R. (1996). Disability and the City: International perspectives. Paul Chapman Publishing.
Innovate Now - Africa’s 1st Assistive Technology Venture Accelerator (2021) Innovate Now. Available
at: https://atinnovatenow.com/ (Accessed: 8 February 2022).
Jacobs, J. (1992) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books.
Jha, D.K., Harshwardhan, R. and Tripathi, V.K. (2016) ‘Determining Poverty and Quality of Life
in Slums of Varanasi City’, National Geographical Journal of India, 62(4), pp. 377–388.
Mikaela Patrick, Iain McKinnon
The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658 | 115
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2020) 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census Volume IV:
Distribution of Population by Socio-Economic Characteristics, Kenya National Bureau of Statistics.
Available at: https://www.knbs.or.ke/download/2019-kenya-population-and-housing-census-
volume-iv-distribution-of-population-by-socio-economic-characteristics/ (Accessed: 8
February 2022).
Kern, L. (2021) Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-made World. Verso Books, p. 224.
Kett, M. and Cole, E. (2018) Research Report: Disability and Climate Resilience Research Project.
UCL and Leonard Cheshire. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5af94ae4e5274a25e78bbe03/FINAL_Climate_
research_report_100518.pdf (Accessed: 8 February 2022).
Lemanski, C. (2019) Citizenship and Infrastructure: Practices and Identities of Citizens and the State.
New York: Routledge.
Madanipour, A. (2010) Whose Public Space?: International Case Studies in Urban Design and
Development. New York: Routledge.
Marrengane, N. and Croese, S. (2021) There’s a disconnect between research and urban planning in
Africa: how to fix it, The Conversation. Available at: http://theconversation.com/theres-a-
disconnect-between-research-and-urban-planning-in-africa-how-to-fix-it-157113 (Accessed:
11 August 2021).
Mehta, V. and Palazzo, D. (2020) ‘Introduction’, in Mehta, V. and Palazzo, D. (eds) Companion to
Public Space. 1st edn. New York : Routledge, pp. 1–3. doi:10.4324/9781351002189.
Menard, A. (2020) Young Mongols: Forging Democracy in the Wild, Wild East. Penguin Random
House SEA.
Mogilevich, M. (2020) The Invention of Public Space: Designing for Inclusion in Lindsay’s New York.
University of Minnesota Press.
Mongolian Statistical Information Service (2016) 2015 Population and Housing, Census of Mongolia.
Available at: www.1212.mn (Accessed: 28 May 2020).
United Nations (2016), New Urban Agenda. Retrieved at: https://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-
agenda/
Patrick, M., McKinnon, I. and Austin, V. (2020) Inclusive Design and Accessibility in Ulaanbaatar,
Mongolia. AT2030 Inclusive Infrastructure Case Studies. Prepared by the Global Disability
Innovation Hub and partners for the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26922.44485
Patrick, M., McKinnon, I., Mishra, S., Gupta, S., Roy, P, Choudhury, U., Murugkar, K., and Raheja,
G. (2021) Inclusive Design and Accessibility in Varanasi, India. AT2030 Inclusive
Infrastructure Case Studies. Prepared by the Global Disability Innovation Hub and partners
for the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.2.21808.69129
Patrick, M., Putri Prastika, K., Jamil, F., Asterina, N. and McKinnon, I. (2022) Inclusive Deisgn and
Accessibility in Solo, Indonesia. Prepared by the Global Disability Innovation Hub and
partners for the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Available at
www.at2030.org/inclusive-infrastructure.
Pineda, V.S. (2020) Building the Inclusive City: Governance, Access, and the Urban Transformation of
Dubai. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-32988-4.
Rebernik, N., Marušić, B. and Bahillo, A. (2019) Understanding the complexity of inclusive public
spaces design – Reflections on the case study of Slovenia. In: Merluci Menezes, Carlos
Smaniotto (Eds.). Neighbourhood & City - Between digital and analogue perspectives, p.
415.
Scott, A.A. et al. (2017) ‘Temperature and heat in informal settlements in Nairobi’, PLOS ONE,
12(11), p. e0187300. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187300.
Singh, R.P.B. and Rana, P.S. (2017) ‘Varanasi: Sustainable Development Goals, Smart City Vision
and Inclusive Heritage Development’, p. 19.
Co-creating Inclusive Public Spaces
116 | The Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 2022 | ISSN 2206-9658
City Space Architecture / UN-Habitat
Stahl, A. (2019) Age-inclusive Public Space Learning in Practice. Hatje Cantz.
Sverdlik, A. (2021) Nairobi: City Scoping Case Study. African Cities Research Consortium, p. 12.
Available at: https://www.african-cities.org/publications/.
The World Health Organisation (2011) World Report on Disability. The World Health
Organisation, p. 350.
UN (2022) Goal 11 | Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, UN
Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal11 (Accessed: 7
February 2022).
UNESCO and Kota Kita (2018) Solo City: A Disability-Inclusive City Profile | UNESCO Inclusive Policy
Lab. UNESCO & Kota Kita. Available at: https://en.unesco.org/inclusivepolicylab/e-
teams/inclusive-policy-persons-disabilities-indonesia/documents/solo-city-disability-inclusive
(Accessed: 15 April 2021).
United Nations (2006) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) | United Nations
Enable. Available at: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-
rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html (Accessed: 6 February 2022).
WeThe15 (2021) WeThe15: A global human rights movement for the 1.2 billion persons with
disabilities, WeThe15. Available at: https://www.wethe15.org/news/wethe15-a-global-human-
rights-movement-for-the-12-billion-persons-with-disabilities (Accessed: 7 February 2022).
Ye, J. (2019) ‘Re-orienting geographies of urban diversity and coexistence: Analyzing inclusion
and difference in public space’, Progress in Human Geography, 43(3), pp. 478–495.
doi:10.1177/0309132518768405.
