残疾人与城镇街道:从共享空间到包容空间?

{"title":"残疾人与城镇街道:从共享空间到包容空间?","authors":"","doi":"10.32891/jps.v7i2.1603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article highlights the importance of ensuring that accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities, as required by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,  is fully embedded in efforts to reduce the dominance of cars in city streets and promote more active modes of travel (including walking, wheeling and cycling) in line with global agendas. Drawing on emerging findings from the Inclusive Public Space research project, we present and critically reflect on types of difficulty associated with streets in which what is commonly known as a ‘shared space’ design operates, and those in which all or part of the available space is designated as primarily for pedestrian use. The data on which this analysis is based is qualitative, deriving from 83 semi-structured interviews about the experiences of our participants (a substantial majority of whom identified as having a disability) in two large UK cities and their wider metropolitan areas. The types of exclusionary experience described by our participants are organised into two broad overlapping categories –  first, difficulties associated with navigating environments in which kerbs have been removed; and second, difficulties associated with interacting with vehicles (including bicycles) within and at the boundaries of shared or pedestrian spaces. Our findings are in line with those of previous projects that challenge and complicate claims that ‘shared space’ design, with its removal of kerbs and controlled crossings, enhances safety and mobility for all. Further, they demonstrate that many of the concerns associated with ‘shared space’ environments are also applicable to other types of street environment intended primarily for pedestrians. As well as highlighting and raising awareness of potential types of exclusion against which action should be taken, we draw attention to measures that could reduce the risk of such exclusionary barriers arising and persisting. \n  \nRead the full article in accessible html-format here.","PeriodicalId":407771,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Public Space","volume":" 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pedestrians with Disabilities and Town and City Streets: From Shared to Inclusive Space?\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.32891/jps.v7i2.1603\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article highlights the importance of ensuring that accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities, as required by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,  is fully embedded in efforts to reduce the dominance of cars in city streets and promote more active modes of travel (including walking, wheeling and cycling) in line with global agendas. Drawing on emerging findings from the Inclusive Public Space research project, we present and critically reflect on types of difficulty associated with streets in which what is commonly known as a ‘shared space’ design operates, and those in which all or part of the available space is designated as primarily for pedestrian use. The data on which this analysis is based is qualitative, deriving from 83 semi-structured interviews about the experiences of our participants (a substantial majority of whom identified as having a disability) in two large UK cities and their wider metropolitan areas. The types of exclusionary experience described by our participants are organised into two broad overlapping categories –  first, difficulties associated with navigating environments in which kerbs have been removed; and second, difficulties associated with interacting with vehicles (including bicycles) within and at the boundaries of shared or pedestrian spaces. Our findings are in line with those of previous projects that challenge and complicate claims that ‘shared space’ design, with its removal of kerbs and controlled crossings, enhances safety and mobility for all. Further, they demonstrate that many of the concerns associated with ‘shared space’ environments are also applicable to other types of street environment intended primarily for pedestrians. As well as highlighting and raising awareness of potential types of exclusion against which action should be taken, we draw attention to measures that could reduce the risk of such exclusionary barriers arising and persisting. \\n  \\nRead the full article in accessible html-format here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":407771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Public Space\",\"volume\":\" 7\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Public Space\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1603\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Public Space","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1603","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文强调,根据《联合国残疾人权利公约》的要求,在减少汽车在城市街道上的主导地位和促进更积极的出行方式(包括步行、骑自行车和骑自行车)的努力中,确保残疾人的无障碍和包容的重要性,符合全球议程。根据包容性公共空间研究项目的新发现,我们提出并批判性地反思了与通常被称为“共享空间”设计运作的街道相关的各种困难,以及所有或部分可用空间被指定为主要供行人使用的街道。本分析所依据的数据是定性的,来自83个半结构化访谈,这些访谈是关于我们的参与者(其中绝大多数被确定为残疾)在英国两个大城市及其更广泛的大都市区的经历。我们的参与者描述的排他性体验的类型被分为两大类重叠的类别-首先,与移除路边石的导航环境相关的困难;其次,在共享空间或步行空间内或边界与车辆(包括自行车)互动的困难。我们的发现与之前的项目一致,这些项目挑战并复杂化了“共享空间”设计的主张,通过移除路边石和受控制的交叉路口,提高了所有人的安全性和机动性。此外,它们还表明,与“共享空间”环境相关的许多问题也适用于主要供行人使用的其他类型的街道环境。除了强调和提高对应采取行动的潜在排斥类型的认识外,我们还提请注意可减少这种排斥性障碍产生和持续存在的风险的措施。在这里以可访问的html格式阅读全文。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pedestrians with Disabilities and Town and City Streets: From Shared to Inclusive Space?
This article highlights the importance of ensuring that accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities, as required by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,  is fully embedded in efforts to reduce the dominance of cars in city streets and promote more active modes of travel (including walking, wheeling and cycling) in line with global agendas. Drawing on emerging findings from the Inclusive Public Space research project, we present and critically reflect on types of difficulty associated with streets in which what is commonly known as a ‘shared space’ design operates, and those in which all or part of the available space is designated as primarily for pedestrian use. The data on which this analysis is based is qualitative, deriving from 83 semi-structured interviews about the experiences of our participants (a substantial majority of whom identified as having a disability) in two large UK cities and their wider metropolitan areas. The types of exclusionary experience described by our participants are organised into two broad overlapping categories –  first, difficulties associated with navigating environments in which kerbs have been removed; and second, difficulties associated with interacting with vehicles (including bicycles) within and at the boundaries of shared or pedestrian spaces. Our findings are in line with those of previous projects that challenge and complicate claims that ‘shared space’ design, with its removal of kerbs and controlled crossings, enhances safety and mobility for all. Further, they demonstrate that many of the concerns associated with ‘shared space’ environments are also applicable to other types of street environment intended primarily for pedestrians. As well as highlighting and raising awareness of potential types of exclusion against which action should be taken, we draw attention to measures that could reduce the risk of such exclusionary barriers arising and persisting.   Read the full article in accessible html-format here.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信