Accessible enough? Legitimising half-measures of accessibility in Swedish urban environments (original) (raw)

Staircases are tangible illustrations of inaccessibility: they often lock out and exclude people with disabilities from entering an establishment independently and safely. Although staircases might be an overused and almost clichéd illustration of inaccessibility it is still a fact that many establishments are only accessible via a staired entrance. While conducting fieldwork as a part of a research project entitled 'Accessibility and its resistance' 1 I and the other researchers found staired entrances to all sorts of establishments, such as pharmacies, health care providers and service centres, shops, restaurants, pubs, art galleries and travel agencies. When interviewing accessibility officers and building permit administratorsthe professionals who are formally responsible for enforcing regulations on accessibility in the built environment-I found that they were well aware of these obstacles to independent access and participation. One of them even said: 'If you go for a walk on the pedestrian street here, I think, I can promise you, 90 per cent of all entrances have two, three steps up.' During our fieldwork we came across well-planned areas with, for example, wheelchair-accessible entrances, paving and suitable contrast markings. But we also saw and experienced the opposite: uneven cobblestone paving, tilting pavements, unmarked crossings, narrow doors and steep stairs. This inconsistency in accessibility means that people with disabilities are both included and excluded as citizens and consumers in the urban environment (Hansson, 2019). Since accessibility is unpredictable it takes planning, time, effort, creativity and help from others to deal with obstacles and hindrances in shopping malls and city centres, and many people with disabilities tend to prefer wellknown areas or settings, which they know how best to navigate (Mazurik et al.