How laws of universal design discriminate between different types of disabilities - Lessons learned from Norway

Abstract

Introduction

Different diseases and disabilities have varying levels of prestige in the society. Is this variance also visible in the legal documents about universal design in the transport sector?

Methods

Based on a document analysis of 42 legal documents and guidelines in Norway, we have examined (1) how the laws define universal design and (2) what groups they include when talking about disabilities. Both a qualitative and a quantitative analyses are conducted to answer the research question: do the legal documents discriminate between different types of disabilities – and if this is the case, is this due to difference in prestige or visibility?

Results

Findings suggest that there is a biased focus on physical environment in the definitions of universal design and that visible disabilities, especially mobility impairments and visual impairments, are prioritized over other types of disabilities.

Conclusion

Disease prestige does not seem to explain the difference in terms of inclusion in legal documents to the extent that visibility does.