1. Introduction
The development of the universal design approach in architectural planning began as mere principles [1], which developed into a progressive idea [2], and finally transformed into an interdisciplinary medium with the advent of global initiatives such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights for Persons with Disabilities (or UNCRPD) [3]. United Nations have affirmed that from a social standpoint, inclusiveness is an essential component in achieving sustainability. Especially after the inception of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (hereafter, UN-SDG), the need to implement equitable design is a mandate for member nations such as India. In particular, indicators 11.2.1 and 11.7.1 within targets 11.2 and 11.7 of the UN-SDG emphasise making the public spaces and transportation system accessible to all, with additional focus on the elderly and specially-abled [4,5]. This approach is particularly substantial in the 21st century due to an estimated 15% specially-abled global population [6], and an expected rise in the global elderly population to almost 16% in the year 2050, up from 6% in 1900 [7]. Thus, ensuring accessibility in the built environment is inevitable to ensure sustainability within the global context, especially when researchers have validated that ignorance towards disability is a hindrance towards sustainable development [8].
To make public spaces and transportation systems accessible to all, mobility is the foremost concern. When universal design considerations are incorporated into the mobility sector, the term ‘universal mobility’ evolves. Along similar lines, Ormerod and Newton (2011) have explained the need to go beyond the service level benchmarks in universal mobility and seek a contextual approach [9] because significant theoretical and practical gaps exist even after years of research [10]. This research seeks to explore the contextuality of universal mobility in the footpaths of urban India from the opinion of experts from India.
1.1. Background
Whipping, chaining, and starving to death were communal activities to which the specially-abled were subjected to until at least the 4th Century CE. Most of these cases in Aegean, Pagan, or other evolved religions were under the impression that any form of disability is a direct form of punishment by God to human beings. In other cases, specially-abled people were also forced to beg or were tactically used as court clowns (jesters) [11]. After this stage, from the 5th to 13th centuries CE, the torture towards specially-abled people also included death sentences by immersing in boiling water or oil [12]. Almost 8 million biological mothers of specially-abled children were labelled as witches before being ceremoniously killed during the period between the 14th to 17th centuries CE in Europe alone. Rather ironically, this period (14–17th century) was known as the Renaissance period, and was characterized by political, cultural, architectural, and social awakening [13]. The following period in history, from the 18th to 19th centuries CE, was known as the Industrial Revolution, which saw some relaxation in terms of torture towards the specially-abled. However, the needs and problems of the cognitively impaired were still largely ignored [14]. Even in modern-day USA, before the advent of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, there were discriminatory acts such as the Ugly Act, which advocated for the removal of ugly and disabled beggars from the streets; the last convicted specially-abled person in this case was as recent as 1974. The USA also had a judicial rule of two-year imprisonment for specially-abled people in case they have physical intimacy or engage in marriage [15]. Even in terms of etymology, specially-abled people are often addressed as handicapped, disabled, differently-abled, and even persons with a disability [16].
Indian society has seen specially-abled people from a different viewpoint from times immemorial. Being a society inspired by culture and mythology, stories that showed people losing their mobility or vision due to the act of sinning cultivated an ill feeling about disability amongst citizens [17,18]. Only after 1947 (independence from the torturous British empire), the implementation of Article 15 empowered the marginalized by removing any restriction whatsoever from using public (government-owned or supported) facilities based on disability [19].
1.2. Demography
Between 1891–1991, the population of India has grown by 192% (from 287,179,715 in 1881 to 838,567,936 in 1991) [20,21]. The subsequent decadal growth from 1991 to 2001 has been 22.66%, followed by 17.22% from 2001 to 2011 (referring to 1,028,610,328 in 2001 and 1,210,854,977 in 2011) [22]. However, between 1891–1991, the disabled population of India grew by 1546.75% (from 856,252 in 1881 to 14,100,344 in 1991) [23]. The subsequent decadal growth from 1991 to 2001 has been 55.36%, followed by 22.41% from 2001 to 2011 (referring to 21,906,769 in 2001 and 26,814,99 in 2011). In addition to this, between 1891–1991, the elderly population of India has grown by 737.32% (from 6,769,435 in 1881 to 56,681,640 in 1991). The subsequent decadal growth from 1991 to 2001 has been 35.18%, followed by 35.18% from 2001 to 2011 (referring to 76,622,321 in 2001 and 103,849,040 in 2011).
Even if factors such as changing the categorization of disabilities, omission of disability in certain censuses, lack of adequate surveying, and changing land boundaries are taken into consideration, it is still evident that the growth percentages in the number of disabled and elderly people has been phenomenal in comparison to the overall population growth of India.
1.3. Indian Statutory Guidelines
Thus, in the wake of the changing demographics, there have been several guidelines, policies, acts, rules, regulations, notifications, and schemes to facilitate differently-abled people and the elderly, especially in the fields of architecture, civil engineering, and planning (as mentioned in Table 1). However, these guidelines have not been able to bring about a radical change in universal mobility vis-à-vis the universal design paradigm of urban India due to multiple administrative reasons [24].
1.4. Research Methodology
These guidelines are published by government agencies, but often involve experts from the field of architecture, civil engineering, and urban planning, including experts such as academics, practitioners, and government officials. Thus, this research involves the following experts: academics (professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and Ph.D. scholar in architecture/planning), practitioners (practising architects, practising planners, and architects or planners working in private establishments), and government officials related to architecture/planning. The research questions for this research are:
Which factors of universal mobility should be prioritized during a renewal/greenfield project related to footpaths in urban India?
Which sector of administration should focus on decision-making related to statutory administration related to footpaths in urban India?
What genre of urban development should be used in the case of implementing universal mobility in footpaths in urban India?
The survey and data collection were done digitally by explaining the intent and content of the research with the link to the questionnaire attached digitally using the following mediums:
Sending electronic mail (e-mail) to the academics (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and research scholars). The contacts of the respondents in this category were acquired from the websites of the universities that are recognized by the Council of Architecture or COA (available at
https://www.coa.gov.in/institutionStatus.php , accessed on 7 February 2023) and Institute of Town Planners, India or ITPI (available athttps://www.itpi.org.in/uploads/pdfs/2-provisional-list-of-schools-lnstitutions-and-universitites-planning-courses-approved-by-itpi.pdf , accessed on 6 February 2023).Sharing via social media platforms, which comprises a large share of Indian architects (licenced from the COA) or Indian planners (registered with ITPI); for example, ‘Conscious Urbanism’, ‘The Switch’, ‘Planning India’, etc. This approach has helped to gather responses from practising architects, practising planners, and architects or planners working in private establishments.
Contacting government officials through personal connections established by the corresponding author in India, such as the Delhi Development Authority and Public Works Department in the Government of West Bengal.
The questionnaire used in this research is available at
The research methodology for this paper is in three major parts: (a) research background, (b) primary survey, and (c) findings.
The research background consists of an understanding of topics such as the global need for universal mobility, the social model of disability, demographic studies, and statutory guidelines, all of which have been discussed in Section 1–Part a, b, and c. The primary survey involves the survey of 257 experts from 21 states and 1 union territory in India. The findings of the primary survey are elaborated on in Section 2.2.1, Section 2.2.2, Section 2.2.3, Section 2.2.4, Section 2.2.5, Section 2.2.6, Section 2.2.7, Section 2.2.8, Section 2.2.9, Section 2.2.10 and Section 2.2.11.
The findings of this research suggest answers to the primary questions mentioned in the methodology: (a) Which factors to prioritize? (b) Which sector of administration to focus on? (c) What genre of urban development to opt for? The findings are elaborated on in Section 3 and further discussed in Section 4 of this paper. The research methodology used in this paper is illustrated in Figure 1.
2. Materials and Method
2.1. Sample Description
2.1.1. The Expertise of the Respondents
In this study, 257 experts were chosen from the fields of architecture and planning. The compositions of the respondents are as follows: professors (26 nos.), associate professors (22 nos.), assistant professors (57 nos.), Ph.D. scholars in architecture/ planning (21 nos.), practicing architects (58 nos.), practicing planners (27 nos.), government officials related to architecture/planning (12 nos.), and architects or planners working in private establishments (34 nos.). Figure 2 shows the percentage share of each category of respondents.
2.1.2. Geographical Distribution
The respondents for the primary survey in this research were from 21 out of 28 states and 1 out of 8 union territories in India. The compositions of the respondents across the states (in alphabetical order) are as follows: Andhra Pradesh (11 nos.), Assam (6 nos.), Bihar (3 nos.), Chhattisgarh (2 nos.), Gujarat (2 nos.), Haryana (8 nos.), Jammu and Kashmir (1 no.), Jharkhand (2 nos.), Karnataka (8 nos.), Kerala (6 nos.), Madhya Pradesh (17 nos.), Maharashtra (17 nos.), Odisha (30 nos.), Punjab (5 nos.), Rajasthan (1 no.), Tamil Nadu (15 nos.), Telangana (9 nos.), Tripura (1 no.), Uttar Pradesh (17 nos.), Uttarakhand (1 no.), and West Bengal (68 nos.). In addition to this, 27 respondents were from the union territory of the National Capital Territory (or NCT) of Delhi. Figure 3 shows the distribution of the respondents across India.
2.2. Survey Observations
2.2.1. Universal Design in Indian Footpaths (Data Type: Ordinal Data)
The respondents were asked about the status of universal design in the footpaths of their respective cities. Only 2.72% (7 nos.) of the respondents said that the footpaths were completely universally designed and 42.80% (110 nos.) of the respondents said that the footpaths were partially universally designed; in contrast, 54.47% (140 nos.) of the respondents confirmed that the footpaths were not at all universally designed.
2.2.2. The Major Obstacle in the Implementation of Universal Design (Data Type: Ordinal Data)
A total of 135 respondents felt that the major obstacle in the implementation of universal design in their city is an urban local body. Following this, 50 respondents blamed residents, 39 respondents accused the state government, 22 respondents attributed private enterprises/ organizations, and 11 respondents thought the central government were the major obstacle in the implementation of universal design in their city. Figure 4 shows the percentage share of each category of respondents.
2.2.3. Impact of Universal Design on Urban Quality of Life (Data Type: Ordinal Data)
More than 74% of the respondents allocated a score of 7 or more when the respondents were asked to rate the impact of universal design on Indian urban quality of life on a scale of 1–10 (1 being least significant and 10 being most significant). Figure 5 shows the distribution of the respondents regarding the impact of universal design on urban quality of life.
The median score for academics (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and researchers) and practitioners (architects, planners, and private employees) is 8. However, the median score for government officials is 9.
2.2.4. Need for the Involvement of Private Establishments or PPP Models in the Field of Universal Design (Data Type: Nominal Data)
A total of 91.44% of respondents (235 respondents) confirmed that there is a need for the involvement of PPP models in the field of universal design in urban India.
2.2.5. Adequacy of Accessibility Audit Checklists in India (Data Type: Nominal Data)
A total of 80.93% of respondents (208 respondents) stated that the accessibility audit checklists presently available in India are not completely adequate for assessing accessibility in urban India.
2.2.6. Separate Universal Design Guidelines for Old Cities and New Cities (Data Type: Nominal Data)
A total of 94.55% of respondents (243 respondents) are of the opinion that there is a need for separate universal design guidelines for old cities and new cities in India.
2.2.7. Importance of Universal Mobility in Realizing Universal Design in Urban India (Data Type: Ordinal Data)
More than 91% of the respondents apportioned a score of 7 or more when the respondents were asked to rate the importance of universal mobility in realizing universal design in urban India on a scale of 1–10 (1 being least significant and 10 being most significant). Figure 6 shows the distribution of the respondents regarding the impact of universal design on urban quality of life.
The median score for academics (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and researchers) and practitioners (architects, planners, and private employees) is 9. However, the median score for government officials is 10.
2.2.8. Authentication of a Theoretical Model Is Important for Ensuring the Universal Mobility Scenario (Data Type: Nominal Data)
A total of 87.16% of respondents (224 respondents) confirmed that authentication of a theoretical model is important for ensuring the universal mobility scenario in urban India.
2.2.9. Prioritizing Stretches in Old Indian Cities (Pilot Project) Is Important for Ensuring Better Implementation of Universal Mobility (Data Type: Nominal Data)
A total of 96.50% of respondents (248 respondents) established that prioritizing stretches in old Indian cities (such as a pilot project) is important for ensuring better implementation of universal mobility.
2.2.10. Importance of Cognitive Elements (Temperature, Sound, Texture, Landmarks, etc.) in Ensuring Universal Mobility (Data Type: Ordinal Data)
Nearly 86% of the respondents allocated a score of 7 or more when the respondents were asked to rate the importance of cognitive elements (temperature, sound, texture, landmarks, etc.) in ensuring universal mobility on a scale of 1–10 (1 being least significant and 10 being most significant). Figure 7 shows the distribution of the respondents regarding the importance of cognitive elements (temperature, sound, texture, landmarks, etc.) in ensuring universal mobility.
The median score for academics (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and researchers) and government officials is 8. However, the median score for practitioners (architects, planners, and private employees) is 9.
2.2.11. Factors of Universal Mobility (Cognitive. Prioritization, etc.)
The respondents were asked to mark any 5 (only five) of the most important of the factors while assessing universal mobility for pedestrians in old cities in India. The respondents were given a choice from eighteen factors, as mentioned in Appendix A (Question Number 5a).
A total of 50.58% (130 nos.) of the respondents ranked the ‘dimension of the footpath (Clear width and height)’ as the most important question of the factors while assessing universal mobility for pedestrians in old cities in India, while 35.41% (91 nos.) of the respondents ranked adjacent building typology (mixed-use and historic buildings). Other respondents preferred: temporary encroachment (informal vendors, beggars, homeless and child labours), 5.06% (13 nos.); transport stops (bus stop, metro rail twist entrance, etc.), 3.50% (9 nos.); railings (pedestrian guard rails), 2.72% (7 nos.); permanent encroachment (places of religious interest, business establishments and open baths), 1.56% (4 nos.); storm water drains, 0.78% (2 nos.) and public toilets, 0.39% (1 no.). Figure 8 shows the distribution of respondents in choosing the first and most important of the factors. None of the respondents opted for trash bins (garbage bin), street lights, flooring (surface finish), manholes (drain-type and grating-type), kerb, pedestrian crossing (signalised crossing and audio assistance), street furniture, safety and security (fire hydrant and security camera), additional inclusive features, signage, bicycle track, public drinking water facilities, street art, and contextual factors (such as Topography, etc.).
2.3. Data Validation
Although there are differences in the opinion between different categories of respondents, there is a need to validate the internal consistency of the data collected so that this research can validate the opinions of the experts to be used in policymaking. Thus, Cronbach’s Alpha was used for this purpose. Because the respondents are already categorized into (1) academics (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and researchers), (2) practitioners (architects, planners, and private employees), and (3) government officials, the next steps are explained hereafter. Because there are 3 types of questions in the survey format, the first step was to categorise them into Multiple Choice (Section 2.2.1 and Section 2.2.2), Likert Scale (Section 2.2.3, Section 2.2.7, Section 2.2.10 and Section 2.2.11) and Dichotomous (Section 2.2.4, Section 2.2.5, Section 2.2.6, Section 2.2.8 and Section 2.2.9).
To analyse the distribution of respondents: (1) the first choice of the respondents was the factor used for the multiple-choice type questions; (2) the majority choice of the responses was the factor used for the dichotomous type questions; (3) respondents who selected the score of 7 and above were the factor used for Likert Scale-type questions. As an example, for Section 2.2.1, among the 140 respondents who selected that the footpaths in their city are not at all universally designed, (1) 54.35% (69 nos.) were academics, (2) 55.46 (66 nos.) were practitioners, and (3) 41.67 (5 nos.) were government officials. Table 3 shows the type, followed by their point of analysis, and the distribution of respondents for all questions.
Hereafter, the percentage distribution of respondents against the selected point of reference was used for the Cronbach’s Alpha analysis of internal consistency using IBM® SPSS® Statistics 26.0 version. The Cronbach’s Alpha for the dataset is 0.981, reflecting the highest order of internal consistency. Furthermore, it can be commented that the inference of this research (i.e., cumulative opinion of the experts including academics, practitioners, and government officials) can be used as a component in the policymaking of urban guidelines related to universal mobility.
3. Discussion
Rhoads et al. (2023) have debated the adaptability of footpaths concerning diverse mobility conditions, which is close to the concept of universal mobility that this research primarily focuses upon [28]. In continuation to this, this section primarily focuses on comparing this research with relevant, earlier published research. This section further critically examines the possibility of implementing universal mobility in urban India.
Solanki and Khare (2018) have concluded the status of building-standard-oriented accessibility guidelines in the India [29]. In addition to this, Table 1 in this paper mentions the different guidelines. However, due to socio-political reasons, the implementation of Universal Design guidelines in urban India has not been a reality. Due to the decentralised politics of India, the schemes and programmes at the central government level often get ignored at the state government level, especially if the ruling political party is not the same at both levels [30]. This research identifies the urban local body as the major obstacle in the implementation of universal design guidelines, which is understandable because the local municipal corporation or municipality is responsible for checking, authorising, legitimizing, and supervising any construction in the city limits. This research raises questions on the challenging yet essential component of urban quality of life, which is especially significant in the wake of the growing urban population [31]. Lee and Park (2023) have maintained that urban guidelines are significant in maintaining walkability standards. Sustainable urban development in the 21st century is often unimaginable without the involvement of private enterprises with public entities, thus creating Public Private Partnerships or PPP [32,33,34]. Along similar lines, there is a need for the involvement of PPP models in the field of universal design in urban India. The only government-recognized comprehensive accessibility audit checklist available in India was made available in 2015 vis-à-vis the Accessible India Campaign [35]. However, the checklist is a mere holistic one [36] and depending on the criticality of urban India, this research confirms that accessibility audit checklists presently available in India are not completely adequate for assessing accessibility in urban India. Duman and Asilsoy (2022) have maintained the evidence-based approach [37], and Lid (2013) has preferred a literature-based approach towards establishing universal mobility [38]. This research argues that an expert opinion-based approach is apt for the Indian context. Decision makers around the world have preferred to implement pilot projects in the case of urban-level universal design programmes [39,40]. Respondents in this research have also confirmed this fact in the urban Indian context, as elaborated in Section 2.2.9 of this paper. The cognitive component of this research confirms the impact of cognition at the pedestrian level for universal mobility [41,42]. Indian cities are unique due to their historic temporal developments [43], and researchers have published a set of contextual factors for assessing/observing the footpaths [44]. This research further investigates the various factors of assessing the footpaths in the Indian context and establishes that besides finding the factors for assessment, prioritizing them is equally important to make decisions at urban levels.
Aligned with the findings for this research, other research on universal mobility done by the author for the past decade also reflects the critical condition of footpaths in urban India, especially in old cities [30,31,41,43,44]. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show some footpath conditions in various cities in India.
These pictures are evidence that basic mobility is a challenge in urban India, let alone universal mobility. Thus, India needs to undertake a complete overhaul in its developmental approach towards universal mobility if it aims to come close to the deadline of SDG 11 to provide an inclusive urban environment for all users regardless of their physical and cognitive abilities by 2030.
One important point that this research highlight is the role of urban local bodies in ensuring the implementation of universal design in pedestrian areas (mentioned in Section 2.2.2). Furthermore, land is a state subject in India and owing to the decentralised political system in India, the state administration works independently from the central administration. In addition to this, India is a country with numerous urban contexts depending on the climate, language, topography, social, and political issues. Taking a cue from this, future research can focus on the location-specific analysis of universal mobility issues, where the respondents should ideally be from the same urban local body where the research is being conducted. Another possible and essential scope of future research is the addition of environmental factors along with cognitive and infrastructural factors in the fieldwork survey; open-ended questions can be added in future research.
4. Conclusions
Based on the survey mentioned in Section 2, the findings from the viewpoint of experts are elaborated hereafter. Despite the significant impact on the urban quality of life, the footpaths in urban India have no/minimal universal design considerations and urban local bodies are primarily responsible for the lack of implementation of universal design in their respective jurisdictions (derived from Section 2.2.1, Section 2.2.2 and Section 2.2.3). Thus, the involvement of private establishments or PPP models can positively influence universal design in urban India (derived from Section 2.2.4). Subsequently, the accessibility audit checklists presently available in India are not completely adequate for assessing accessibility in urban India (derived from Section 2.2.5). Therefore, there is a need for separate universal design guidelines for old and new cities in India (derived from Section 2.2.6). Along similar lines, universal mobility is essential in realising universal design in urban India (derived from Section 2.2.7). However, authentication of a theoretical model is important for ensuring the universal mobility scenario in urban India (derived from Section 2.2.8). Moreover, prioritizing stretches in old Indian cities (such as a pilot project) is important for ensuring better implementation of universal mobility (derived from Section 2.2.9). Additionally, cognitive elements (temperature, sound, texture, landmarks, etc.) are significant in ensuring universal mobility (derived from Section 2.2.10). Finally, the most important factors while assessing universal mobility for pedestrians in old cities of India are (1) the dimension of the footpath (clear width and height) and (2) adjacent building typology (mixed-use and historic buildings) (derived from Section 2.2.11). In addition, academics and private practitioners tend to agree more with each other in comparison to government officials. The next section answers the three research questions for this paper.
First, based on the expert opinions elaborated in Section 2.2.10 and Section 2.2.11, in the case of approaching an urban area to incorporate universal mobility, the dimension of the footpath and adjacent building typology should be prioritized. In relation to this, the Indian Road Congress (2012) has mentioned 1800 mm as the clear width and 2200 mm as the clear height for an ideal walking zone in the streetscape. In addition to this, the required width of the footpath as per adjacent land use is also specified. For example, a minimum of 2500 mm clear width for footpaths is mandatory in areas with commercial/mixed-use adjacent building typology [45]. Many other guidelines, as mentioned in Table 1, also focus on the quantitative guidelines for footpaths. However, these guidelines lack the acknowledgement of cognitive factors such as sound and temperature, as well as contextual factors such as temporary encroachment, permanent encroachments, and transport stops. Thus, the authors argue that a qualitative study of footpaths in urban India is necessary, as well as a quantitative assessment during any development plans.
The second step was to identify which sector of administration to focus on. The land-related policies in India fall under the jurisdiction of state administration as per the directions of the Seventh Schedule (Article 246) [46]. If the state and central administration do not have the same political party, the guidelines (as mentioned in Table 1) are often not implemented due to political bottlenecks [47]. Thus, based on the expert opinions elaborated in Section 2.2.2, Section 2.2.3 and Section 2.2.4, reforms in the statutory functioning of the urban local body (under state government) will be beneficial for the footpaths to bear universal mobility. In addition to this, PPP models shall be beneficial where local businesses consult Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or any other suitable models such as Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT).
The third step was to determine what urban development genre to choose. Based on the expert opinions elaborated in Section 2.2.5, Section 2.2.6, Section 2.2.7, Section 2.2.8 and Section 2.2.9, the ideal development model is to create a new research-based accessibility audit checklist suitable for urban India, then verify the same on a case area, and finally prioritize stretches (such as a pilot project).
Thus, this research adds value/contributes to these major fronts:
The researchers/academics can use the findings and even refer to the methodology used in this research to conduct more investigations for improving the research domain in universal design/mobility in Indian cities.
The government officials can interpret how to distribute funding and resources based on the prioritization of universal mobility issues.
Furthermore, the policymakers can now understand the viewpoint of the experts in the field of universal design and include them more in the process of framing guidelines (as explained in Section 2.3).
In addition, it is ethically imperative for an architect/planner to think rationally before approaching any design solution at an urban level to ensure that the proposed design solution should be both creative and inclusive to ensure sustainability in the domain of the built environment.
Conceptualization, S.M. and G.D.M.; Methodology, G.D.M.; Software, G.D.M.; Validation, S.M. and R.N.; Formal analysis, G.D.M.; Investigation, G.D.M.; Resources, S.M., R.N. and G.D.M.; Data curation, G.D.M.; Writing—original draft preparation, G.D.M.; Writing—review and editing, S.M. and R.N.; Visualization, G.D.M.; Supervision, S.M. and R.N.; Project administration, S.M. and R.N.; Funding acquisition, S.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Ethical review and approval were waived for this study because no data and information related to the ethical guidelines were at the discretion of the committee at Hokkaido University.
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the help of Architect Disha Maity, Planner Soumyasree Chakraborty, Akash Das, Architect Sagnik Das, Architect B Surya Prakash, and Planner V Siddhartha for their help in conducting the surveys in India.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Distribution of the respondents across India. The numbers in each state mention the share of respondents from each state (Source: Author).
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. Percentage of the respondents regarding major obstacles in the implementation of Universal Design (Source: Author).
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Distribution of the respondents regarding the impact of universal design on urban quality of life. The green shades emphasize the respondents who have scored 7 and above (Source: Author).
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. Distribution of the respondents regarding the importance of universal mobility in realizing universal design in urban India. The green shades emphasize the respondents who have scored 7 and above (Source: Author).
Enlarge this image.Figure 7. Distribution of the respondents regarding the importance of cognitive elements (temperature, sound, texture, landmarks, etc.) in ensuring universal mobility. The green shades emphasize the respondents who have scored 7 and above (Source: Author).
Enlarge this image.Figure 8. Distribution of the respondents regarding the most important of factors while assessing universal mobility for pedestrians in old cities of India (Source: Author).
Indian guidelines related to inclusiveness (Source: Author).
| S. No. | Year | Indian Guidelines | Implementing Agency (Within Government of India) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1950 | Constitution of India, Article 15 | Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India |
| 2 | 1968 | IS 4963; Recommendations for Buildings and Facilities for the Physically Handicapped. Bureau of Indian Standards: New Delhi, India, 1968 [ |
Bureau of Indian Standards (Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs) |
| 3 | 1970 | National Building Code of India |
Bureau of Indian Standards |
| 4 | 1983 | IS 7419; Requirements for stairs for physical rehabilitation. Bureau of Indian Standards: New Delhi, India, 1983 [ |
Bureau of Indian Standards |
| 5 | 1987 | The Mental Health Act | Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice |
| 6 | 1991 | IS 8086; Rehabilitation Equipment-Wheelchairs, folding, junior size-Specification. Bureau of Indian Standards: New Delhi, India, 1991 [ |
Bureau of Indian Standards |
| 7 | 1992 | Rehabilitation Council of India Act |
Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs |
| 8 | 1995 | Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act (Replaced in 2017 after RPwD Act) | Department of Empowerment of Persons with disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 9 | 1997 | Rehabilitation Council of India (Standards of Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics for Rehabilitation Professionals) Regulations |
Department of Empowerment of Persons with disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 10 | 1998 | Guidelines and Space standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for Disabled and Elderly persons | Central Public Works Department, Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment, |
| 11 | 1999 | The National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disability Act | Legislative Department, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs |
| 12 | 2000 | The National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disability Rules |
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 13 | 2001 | The National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disability Regulations | Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 14 | 2001 | Board of Trust Regulations |
Department of Empowerment of Persons with disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 15 | 2001 | Planning a Barrier Free Environment | Office of the Chief Commissioner, People with Disability |
| 16 | 2006 | National Policy for Persons with Disabilities | Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 17 | 2009 | National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights | Ministry of Corporate Affairs |
| 18 | 2012 | Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities (IRC: 103–2012) | Indian Roads Congress |
| 19 | 2012 | Manual on Disability Statistics | Central Statistics Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation |
| 20 | 2014 | Handbook of Barrier Free and Accessibility | Central Public Works Department |
| 21 | 2014 | The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill | Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice |
| 22 | 2015 | Accessible India Campaign | Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 23 | 2015 | First Country Report on the Status of Disability in India |
Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 24 | 2016 | Harmonized guidelines and space standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for People with Disability and Elderly Persons | Ministry of Urban Development |
| 25 | 2016 | The Rights to Persons with Disability (RPwD) Act (enacted on 28.12.2016, came into force from 19.04.2017) | Ministry of Law and Justice |
| 26 | 2016 | Elderly in India | Social Statistics Division, Central Statistics Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation |
| 27 | 2016 | Disabled persons in India-A Statistical Profile | Social Statistics Division, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation |
| 28 | 2017 | Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules |
Department of Empowerment of Persons with disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment |
| 29 | 2017 | Parallel Report of India on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) | National Disability Network (NDN) and National Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (NCRPD) |
| 30 | 2019 | CPWD Works Manual 2019 (including Standard Operating Procedures) | Central Public Works Department |
| 31 | 2020 | Building Accessible, Safe, and Inclusive Indian Cities (BASIIC) | National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA) in collaboration with Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) |
| 32 | 2021 | Harmonised Guidelines and Standards for Universal Accessibility in India 2021 (Revised in 2022) | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs |
Questionnaire used in this research (Source: author).
| S. No | Category | Question | Options |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Respondent details | Name | N/A |
| 2 | Affiliated Institute (Presently Engaged/ Last Academic Institute/ Own Company) | N/A | |
| 3 | Designation |
|
|
| 4 | Name one Indian City (where you are born/ working/ educated) | N/A | |
| 5 | The above-mentioned City falls in which State/ Union Territory of India? | N/A | |
| 6 | Universal Design | Are the footpaths in your above-mentioned city Universally Designed? |
|
| 7 | Which is the major obstacle in the implementation of Universal Design in the pedestrian areas of your city? |
|
|
| 8 | How much would you rate the impact of Universal Design on Indian Urban Quality of Life? | Likert Scale (On a scale of 1–10; 1 being least significant and 10 being most significant) | |
| 9 | Is there a need for the involvement of Private establishments or PPP models in the field of Universal Design in Urban India? |
|
|
| 10 | Accessibility Audit | Do you think that the Accessibility Audit checklists presently available in India are completely adequate for assessing accessibility in Urban India? |
|
| 11 | Do we need separate Universal Design guidelines for Old Cities and New Cities in India |
|
|
| 12 | Universal Mobility | On a scale of 1–10, how important is universal mobility in realizing Universal Design in Urban India? | Likert Scale (On a scale of 1–10; 1 being least significant and 10 being most significant) |
| 13 | Is the authentication of a theoretical model important for ensuring the universal mobility scenario in Urban India? |
|
|
| 14 | Is prioritizing stretches in Old Indian cities (like a pilot project) important for ensuring better implementation of universal mobility? |
|
|
| 15 | On a scale of 1–10, what is the importance of Cognitive Elements (like Temperature, Sound, Texture, Landmarks, etc.) in ensuring universal mobility? | Likert Scale (On a scale of 1–10; 1 being least significant and 10 being most significant) | |
| 16 | Mark any 05 (ONLY FIVE) of the MOST IMPORTANT of the factors while assessing universal mobility for pedestrians in Old Cities of India | Adjacent Building Typology (Mixed Use and Historic Buildings); Dimension of the Footpath (Clear width and height); Temporary Encroachment (Informal Vendors, Beggars, Homeless and Child Labours); Permanent Encroachment (Places of Religious Interest, Business Establishments and Open Bath); Transport Stops (Bus Stop, Metro Rail Entrance, etc.); Railings (Pedestrian Guard Rails); Storm Water Drains; Public Toilets; Trash Bins (Garbage Bin); Streetlights; Flooring (Surface Finish); Manholes (Drain-Type and Grating-Type); Kerb; Pedestrian Crossing (Signalized Crossing and Audio-assistance); Street Furniture; Safety and Security (Fire Hydrant and Security Camera); Additional Inclusive Features (Signage, Bicycle Track, Public Drinking Water Facility, and Street Art); Contextual Factors (like Topography, etc.) |
Framework for assessment of internal consistency (Source: Author).
| S. No | Question No. | Type of Question | Point of Analysis | Percentage Category of Respondents | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Academics | Practitioners | Government Officials | ||||
| 1 | 2.2.1 | Multiple Choice | The first choice amongst the options (i.e., No, not at all Universally Designed) | 54.76 | 55.46 | 41.67 |
| 2 | 2.2.2 | Multiple Choice | The first choice amongst the options (i.e., Urban Local Body) | 56.35 | 49.58 | 41.67 |
| 3 | 2.2.3 | Likert Scale | Respondents who selected score of 7 and above | 76.19 | 73.11 | 66.67 |
| 4 | 2.2.4 | Dichotomous | Majority of response (i.e., Yes) | 91.27 | 92.44 | 83.33 |
| 5 | 2.2.5 | Dichotomous | Majority of response (i.e., No) | 79.37 | 82.35 | 83.33 |
| 6 | 2.2.6 | Dichotomous | Majority of response (i.e., Yes) | 93.65 | 94.96 | 100.00 |
| 7 | 2.2.7 | Likert Scale | Respondents who selected score of 7 and above | 93.65 | 89.92 | 83.33 |
| 8 | 2.2.8 | Dichotomous | Majority of response (i.e., Yes) | 84.92 | 89.92 | 83.33 |
| 9 | 2.2.9 | Dichotomous | Majority of response (i.e., Yes) | 97.62 | 95.80 | 91.67 |
| 10 | 2.2.10 | Likert Scale | Respondents who selected score of 7 and above | 88.10 | 83.19 | 91.67 |
| 11 | 2.2.11 | Likert Scale | Respondents who selected score of 7 and above | 55.56 | 46.22 | 41.67 |
Appendix A
A filled Google form questionnaire used for this survey is shown. The respondents’ and affiliated institutes’ names are not mentioned for privacy reasons.
References
1. Story, M.F. Maximizing Usability: The Principles of Universal Design. Assist. Technol.; 1998; 10, pp. 4-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1998.10131955]
2. Hamraie, A. Universal Design and the Problem of “Post-Disability” Ideology. Des. Cult.; 2016; 8, pp. 285-309. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2016.1218714]
3. Lid, M. Universal Design and disability: An interdisciplinary perspective. Disabil. Rehabil.; 2014; 36, pp. 1344-1349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.931472]
4. Make Cities and Human Settlements Inclusive, Safe, Resilient and Sustainable. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal11 (accessed on 2 January 2023).
5. Al-Zu’bi, M.; Radovic, V. SDG—11 Sustainable Cities and Communities: Towards Safe and Resilient Settlements; Emerald Publishing: Bingley, UK, 2019; ISBN 978-1-78756-924-9
6. World Health Organization. World Report on Disability; WHO Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011; ISBN 978 92 4 068521 5
7. United Nations. Population Ageing 2019 Highlights; ST/ESA/SER.A/430 Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: New York, NY, USA, 2019.
8. “Leave No One Behind”: How to Ensure That Development Efforts Include 1 Billion People with Disabilities. Available online: https://ideas4development.org/en/leave-no-one-behind-how-to-ensure-that-development-efforts-include-1-billion-disabled-people/ (accessed on 6 February 2023).
9. Ormerod, M.G.; Newton, R.A. Moving Beyond Accessibility: The Principles of Universal (inclusive) Design as a Dimension in nD Modelling of the Built Environment. Archit. Eng. Des. Manag.; 2011; 1, pp. 103-110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2005.9684587]
10. Imrie, R. Universalism, universal design and equitable access to the built environment. Disabil. Rehabil.; 2012; 34, pp. 873-882. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.624250] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22054109]
11. Marini, I. The History of Treatment toward People with Disabilities. Psychosocial Aspects of Disability; Marini, I.; Graf, N.; Millington, M.J. Springer Publishing Company: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 3-32.
12. McNabb, C.H. Medieval Disability Sourcebook: Western Europe. Medieval Disability Sourcebook: Western Europe; McNabb, C.H. Punctum Books: Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 2020; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11hptcd]
13. Hobgood, P.; Wood, D.H. Recovering Disability in Early Modern England; 1st ed. The Ohio State University Press: Columbus, OH, USA, 2013.
14. Turner, D.M.; Blackie, D. Disability in the Industrial Revolution Physical impairment in British Coalmining, 1780–1880; 1st ed. Manchester University Press: Manchester, UK, 2018.
15. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Protects People with Disabilities from Discrimination. Available online: https://www.ada.gov (accessed on 11 January 2023).
16. Albrecht, G.L. Encyclopedia of Disability; SAGE Publications: Chicago, IL, USA, 2006.
17. Gupta, S.; de Witte, L.P.; Meershoek, A. Dimensions of invisibility: Insights into the daily realities of persons with disabilities living in rural communities in India. Disabil. Soc.; 2020; 36, pp. 1285-1307. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1788509]
18. Kumari, N. Karmic Philosophy and the Model of Disability in Ancient India. Int. J. Arts Sci. Humanit.; 2019; 7, pp. 39-43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.34293/sijash.v7i1.531]
19. Prabhakaran, S. Article 15 of the Indian Constitution—No Discrimination. Int. J. Law Manag. Humanit.; 2021; 4, pp. 1058-1072.
20. Baines, J.A. East Indies Census—General Report on the Census of India, 1891; Eyee and Spottiswoode: London, UK, 1893.
21. Census Year 1991. Available online: http://lsi.gov.in:8081/jspui/handle/123456789/29 (accessed on 9 January 2023).
22. Census Tables. Available online: https://censusindia.gov.in/census.website/data/census-tables (accessed on 7 January 2023).
23. Paul, K.; Paul, S. Burden of Disability in India (1881–2011). J. Multidiscip. Res. Healthc.; 2015; 2, pp. 31-54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15415/jmrh.2015.21003]
24. Gupta, S. White Paper on Achieving Infrastructural Accessibility in India & 5-Year Action Plan; Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2018.
25.
26.
27.
28. Rhoads, D.; Solé-Ribalta, A.; Borge-Holthoefer, J. The inclusive 15-minute city: Walkability analysis with sidewalk networks. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst.; 2023; 100, 101936. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2022.101936]
29. Solanki, S.K.; Khare, R. Universal Design Building Standard for INDIA: A Critical Inquiry. Transforming Our World through Design, Diversity and Education; Craddock, G.; Doran, C.; McNutt, L.; Rice, D. IOS Press: Dublin, Ireland, 2018; pp. 669-678. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-923-2-669]
30. Das Mahapatra, G.; Devanath, J.; Chakraborty, S. Inclusivity in Spatial Standards: A Changing Paradigm in Accessibility Scenario in India. Proceedings of the International Conference Proceedings on Resilient & Liveable City Planning (RLCP 2020) Transforming Urban Systems; Vijayawada, India, 20–21 January 2021; ISBN 978-93-90211-61-6
31. Das Mahapatra, G. Neighbourhood Planning: Approach in Improving Livability and Quality of the Life in the Cities. Springer Transactions in Civil and Environmental Engineering; Seta, F.; Biswas, A.; Khare, A.; Sen, J. Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 47-53. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2138-1_5]
32. Kościelniak, H.; Górka, A. Green Cities PPP as a Method of Financing Sustainable Urban Development. Transp. Res. Procedia; 2016; 16, pp. 227-235. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.022]
33. Bennett, E.; Grohmann, P.; Gentry, B. Public-Private Partnerships for the Urban Environment (PPPUE Working Paper Series Volume I); UNDP and Yale University: New York, NY, USA, 1999.
34. He, N.; Li, Y.; Li, H.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, C. Critical Factors to Achieve Sustainability of Public-Private Partnership Projects in the Water Sector: A Stakeholder-Oriented Network Perspective. Complexity; 2020; 2020, 8895980. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/8895980]
35. Accessible India Campaign. Available online: https://disabilityaffairs.gov.in/content/page/accessible-india-campaign.php (accessed on 12 January 2023).
36. Bhalerao, S.; Moger, A. A Survey Study on Awareness and Impact of Accessible India Campaign: Challenges and Opportunities. Aarhat Multidiscip. Int. Educ. Res. J. (AMIERJ); 2019; 8, pp. 210-215.
37. Duman, Ü.; Asilsoy, B. Developing an Evidence-Based Framework of Universal Design in the Context of Sustainable Urban Planning in Northern Nicosia. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 13377. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su142013377]
38. Lid, M. Developing the theoretical content in Universal Design. Scand. J. Disabil. Res.; 2013; 15, pp. 203-215. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2012.724445]
39. Sholihah, A.B. Mobility for all—Towards Barrier-Free Environment in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. IATSS Res.; 2001; 25, pp. 23-32. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0386-1112(14)60003-0]
40. Evaluating Two Universal Basic Mobility Pilot Projects in California. Available online: https://www.ucits.org/research-project/2022-20/ (accessed on 4 January 2023).
41. Das Mahapatra, G.; Mori, S.; Nomura, R. Role of Cognition in Pedestrian-Level Universal Mobility: Case of Central Kolkata, India. Athens J. Archit.; 2023; 9, pp. 107-128. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30958/aja.9-1-5]
42. Chopra, R.; Das Mahapatra, G. Cognitive Mapping in spaces for public use. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol.; 2018; 7, pp. 138-142. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15623/ijret.2018.0709020]
43. Das Mahapatra, G.; Puntambekar, K. Re-Interpreting Urban Fabric in Cities with Living Heritage: The Case of Central Kolkata; Copal Publishing Group: New Delhi, India, 2020; ISBN 978-9383419883
44. Das Mahapatra, G.; Mori, S.; Nomura, R. Universal Mobility in Old Core Cities of India: People’s Perception. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 4391. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13084391]
45. Indian Roads Congress. Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities IRC: 103-2012, 1st Revision; Indian Roads Congress: New Delhi, India, 2012.
46. Raju, G.N. The Constitution of India; Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice: New Delhi, India, 2018.
47. Ayog, N. Reforms in Urban Planning Capacity in India; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2021.
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Mori, Suguru 2 ; Nomura, Rie 2 1 Laboratory of Architectural Planning (N216, Engineering Faculty), Division of Architectural and Structural Design, Hokkaido University, Kita 13-Jo, Nishi 8-Chome, Sapporo 060-8628, Hokkaido, Japan
2 Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8628, Hokkaido, Japan