让我们超越文字斗争和分离主义:瑞典关于通用设计的战略和关切

Emil Erdtman, K. Rassmus-Gröhn, P. Hedvall
{"title":"让我们超越文字斗争和分离主义:瑞典关于通用设计的战略和关切","authors":"Emil Erdtman, K. Rassmus-Gröhn, P. Hedvall","doi":"10.1108/edi-04-2021-0108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeUniversal design (UD) is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and adopted in Sweden as a guiding principle for the design of new products, facilities, services, etc. This study aims to contribute to knowledge about UD in practice – how it is conceived, experienced and discussed in Sweden, especially regarding education, working life and housing.Design/methodology/approachA group interview and a workshop (immersion into personas and scenarios) with 14 practitioners of inclusion and accessibility from academia, civil society, business and the public sector were analyzed with qualitative content analysis.FindingsThe participating practitioners related UD to a cluster of terms for inclusion and wanted to communicate the reason for UD rather than battling about words. Flexibility was considered openness to the diversity of human conditions and situations combined with individualization capacity including assistance. Short-term demands for access and compliance to minimum standards must be balanced with long-term learning processes. Evaluation, relation-building and dialogs must update and contextualize UD, for example, in relation to categorization.Originality/valueThis study yields an in-depth picture of how the practice of UD is conceived, experienced and discussed among Swedish practitioners of inclusion and accessibility. It elucidates dissonances between experiences and ideals, standardized and flexible design, and the interests of users and institutions. It enhances knowledge of the dilemmas in inclusive and diversity-based practices, as well as the implementation and promotion of UD.","PeriodicalId":72949,"journal":{"name":"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Let us move beyond word battles and separatism: strategies and concerns regarding universal design in Sweden\",\"authors\":\"Emil Erdtman, K. Rassmus-Gröhn, P. Hedvall\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/edi-04-2021-0108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeUniversal design (UD) is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and adopted in Sweden as a guiding principle for the design of new products, facilities, services, etc. This study aims to contribute to knowledge about UD in practice – how it is conceived, experienced and discussed in Sweden, especially regarding education, working life and housing.Design/methodology/approachA group interview and a workshop (immersion into personas and scenarios) with 14 practitioners of inclusion and accessibility from academia, civil society, business and the public sector were analyzed with qualitative content analysis.FindingsThe participating practitioners related UD to a cluster of terms for inclusion and wanted to communicate the reason for UD rather than battling about words. Flexibility was considered openness to the diversity of human conditions and situations combined with individualization capacity including assistance. Short-term demands for access and compliance to minimum standards must be balanced with long-term learning processes. Evaluation, relation-building and dialogs must update and contextualize UD, for example, in relation to categorization.Originality/valueThis study yields an in-depth picture of how the practice of UD is conceived, experienced and discussed among Swedish practitioners of inclusion and accessibility. It elucidates dissonances between experiences and ideals, standardized and flexible design, and the interests of users and institutions. It enhances knowledge of the dilemmas in inclusive and diversity-based practices, as well as the implementation and promotion of UD.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72949,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-04-2021-0108\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Equality, diversity and inclusion : an international journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-04-2021-0108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的通用设计(universal design, UD)是《联合国残疾人权利公约》(UNCRPD)中定义的,瑞典将其作为设计新产品、设施、服务等的指导原则。这项研究的目的是在实践中促进对UD的了解-瑞典是如何构思,经验和讨论的,特别是在教育,工作生活和住房方面。设计/方法/方法采用定性内容分析,对来自学术界、民间社会、商业和公共部门的14名包容性和无障碍实践者进行了小组访谈和研讨会(沉浸在人物角色和场景中)。研究结果参与的从业者将UD与一组包含的术语联系起来,并希望传达UD的原因,而不是争论词语。灵活性被认为是对人的条件和情况的多样性的开放性,与包括援助在内的个性化能力相结合。对获取和遵守最低标准的短期需求必须与长期学习过程相平衡。例如,评价、建立关系和对话必须在分类方面更新和纳入可持续发展方案。原创性/价值本研究对瑞典包容性和可及性的实践者如何构思、经验和讨论UD的实践产生了深入的了解。它阐明了经验和理想、标准化和灵活的设计以及用户和机构的利益之间的不协调。它提高了对包容性和基于多样性的实践的困境的认识,以及实施和促进发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Let us move beyond word battles and separatism: strategies and concerns regarding universal design in Sweden
PurposeUniversal design (UD) is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and adopted in Sweden as a guiding principle for the design of new products, facilities, services, etc. This study aims to contribute to knowledge about UD in practice – how it is conceived, experienced and discussed in Sweden, especially regarding education, working life and housing.Design/methodology/approachA group interview and a workshop (immersion into personas and scenarios) with 14 practitioners of inclusion and accessibility from academia, civil society, business and the public sector were analyzed with qualitative content analysis.FindingsThe participating practitioners related UD to a cluster of terms for inclusion and wanted to communicate the reason for UD rather than battling about words. Flexibility was considered openness to the diversity of human conditions and situations combined with individualization capacity including assistance. Short-term demands for access and compliance to minimum standards must be balanced with long-term learning processes. Evaluation, relation-building and dialogs must update and contextualize UD, for example, in relation to categorization.Originality/valueThis study yields an in-depth picture of how the practice of UD is conceived, experienced and discussed among Swedish practitioners of inclusion and accessibility. It elucidates dissonances between experiences and ideals, standardized and flexible design, and the interests of users and institutions. It enhances knowledge of the dilemmas in inclusive and diversity-based practices, as well as the implementation and promotion of UD.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信