RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Title:

Universal Design Approach for an Accessible Built Environment through Legislation

for Effective Implementation in Malaysia

PhD Candidate:

Nur Amirah Abd. Samad

(PBE163003)

Supervisor:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ismail Said

Faculty of Built Environment

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

81310 Skudai, Johor

MAY 2017

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction 3

2.0 Issues and Problem Statement 5

3.0 Research Gap 8

4.0 Research Aim and Objectives 11

5.0 Research Questions 11

6.0 Literature Review 12

7.0 Scope and Parameters of Research 16

8.0 Theoretical Framework 17

9.0 Research Methodology 18

10.0 Significance of Research 21

11.0 Research Milestone 21

References 22

3

1. Introduction

This research will explore and sets out its focus on the current situation of accessibility in

Malaysian built environment and further investigate alternatives and recommendations for an

effective implementation to intensify accessibility in the built environment, as to what is

prevalent, shows that there is a lack of seamlessness in the access. Accessibility in the built

environment is often associated with Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) as it distinguishes the

rights of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) towards gaining access to the physical

environment and their discrimination of equal participation in the society.

The significant global scene was identified when the Americans with Disabilities Act was

being conferred in United States in 1990 by establishing a comprehensive legal framework in

protecting Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) from discrimination in employment and access to

services and facilities for equal opportunities as a civil rights issue (Kose, 2010; Manley,

1996). Despite United Nations (UN) initiation of United Nation International Year of

Disabled Persons in 1982 followed by the International Decade of Disabled Person from

1983 to 1992 (Kose, 2010; Parker, 2001b) where it has effected advocacy issues in Asian

countries in the Asia Pacific region under the United Nation Economic and Social

Commission of Asia Pacific (UNESCAP). The movement also started the incorporation of

the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as a rights based legislative measure in achieving

social inclusion for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in the United Kingdom. Further noting

the United Nations member states signed the UN’s “Standard Rules on the Equalisation of

Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities” in 1993 that accessibility and political action

plans really made it into the agenda in the Scandinavian countries. In addition to the UN

Standard Rules, Scandinavian countries been influenced by EU legislation, recommendations

and resolutions also signed and adopted the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with

Disabilities (UNCRPD) in 2006 (Norway Universally Designed by 2025, 2009) which

impacted the Design for All, not only in Denmark and the other Scandinavian countries, but

throughout the world (Bendixen, 2010; Strand, 2014).

Malaysia in particular has signed the Proclamation of the Asian and Pacific Decade of

Disabled Persons 1993-2002 for its 1st decade with its further continuation of the Asian and

Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons 2003 – 2012 for its 2nd decade, which is embraced in the

United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and its

4

Optional Protocal when it is developed in 2006, as argued by Kanter (2015) and coined by

Series (2015) that UNCRPD was a response in concerning that previous existing human

rights instruments have not given significant impact on improving the quality of live for

PwDs, making UNCRPD a remarkable legal instrument by representing the culmination of

many different strands of disability activism over the last few decades. Malaysia has also

shown the commitment to promote and protect the rights of people with disabilities and this

is manifested by enacting new laws, formulating new policies and taking appropriate

measures to comply with international law and resolve preliminary issues surrounding the

ratification of the treaty into the domestic legal framework (Tah & Mokhtar, 2016).

The UNCRPD covers mainly the personal aspects and equal interaction within society and its

principles established under Article 3, include respect for inherent dignity; individual

autonomy including the freedom to make one’s own choices, and independence of persons;

non-discrimination; full and effective participation and inclusion in society; respect for

difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of human diversity and

humanity; equality of opportunity; accessibility; equality between man and women; respect

for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities and respect for the right of children

with disabilities and preserve their identities (UNCRPD, 2006). The UNCRPD has shifted the

charity paradigm towards people with disabilities to the human rights-based approach. The

rights proclaimed in the treaty include not just civil and political rights but also socio-

economic and cultural rights as well as the effort of empowering persons with disabilities

must be included in national agenda, and anything which leads to exclusion and

discrimination against them must be stopped. Therefore, the implementation of rights must

include the development of proper and systematic monitoring mechanisms. (Kanter, 2011;

Stein & Lord, 2010; Tah & Mokhtar, 2016). Building design must integrate all of the

requirements especially in terms of function, user, performance and statutory requirements in

order to achieve the accessible design goals. Where legislation, statutory and guidelines are

readily available to be referred to, legislative clarity is necessary but not a sufficient factor

without enforcement and absence of good technical codes. (Kamarudin, Hashim, Mahmood,

Ariff, & Ismail, 2012; Roulstone & Prideaux, 2009).

5

2. Issues and Problem Statement

Global concerns on Persons with Disabilities (PwDs), Universal Design and Accessibility

The global movement launched from the perspective of disability studies where scholars have

argued that what is called physical or mental `disability' is not simply an attribute of a person

but a complex collection of conditions, activities and relationships, many of which are

created by the social environment. This is sometimes called the `social' or `social-political

perspective' in which disability is seen as a `social construct', or more pointedly, as a

`sophisticated form of social oppression' (Bickenbach, Chatterji, Badley, & Üstün, 1999).

Thus, PwDs being social minorities who have been systematically discriminated against in all

areas of life also face limitations in education, employment, housing and transportation are

not the products of their medical condition, but of social attitudes of neglect and stereotypical

images about their capacities and needs.

Attitudes to people with disabilities have improved in recent years, but there is still some

reluctance among architects and building owners to invest in facilities to make the buildings

more user friendly, either for reasons of cost or in the mistaken belief that this will hamper

the aesthetic quality of the end product. In all European countries, including in the United

Kingdom and Republic of Ireland, comprehensive and enforceable access legislation is in

place to promote and enable independent living, along with safety and accessibility.

Legislation to require accessibility is not the same thing as universal design but is an

important support. The Disability Discrimination Act in the UK, and similar anti-

discrimination legislation in other countries, follows another route to enforce alternative ways

towards creating a more inclusive environment. This also has the benefit of applying to

existing buildings, not just new-build or refurbishment, as with building codes. But, by

definition, anti-discrimination legislation will only make sense in countries where other

forms of equality are pervasive. Discrimination tends to surface in terms of perception where

local authority officers tend to conceive of disability as a medical rather than an

environmental issue (J. Harrison & Dalton, 2015; Imrie, 2000; Imrie & Kumar, 1998). As

reported by Imrie and Kumar (1998) they indicates, most local authorities in the UK have no

definition of disability or tend to use medical terms like `disability is a congenital condition’

making it problematical as they conceive of disability as a disease that requires treatment. In

6

this sense, the impairment is seen as the problem to be overcome rather than the social or

environmental barriers. Although the imperative for buildings to become more ‘user-

friendly’ may be becoming increasingly accepted by the design professions, there are still

areas of ignorance or grudging acceptance just to satisfy the basic requirements of the Part M

technical document. Attitudes towards disability may continue to improve, but there is no

place for complacency (J. Harrison & Dalton, 2015). Eventhough western countries has been

designed as an accessible built environment they still have to have a thorough commitment in

ensuring the social sustainability of PwDs in social inclusion and participation.

Regional Issues and concerns regarding Accessibility in the Built Environment

As emphasized by Ostroff (2001) that everyone is likely to experience the misfit between

themselves and the environment at some time in their life. People worldwide are living longer

and having longer life span within further 20 years as predicted through census reported in

the United States (Ostroff, 2001), in London, the prevalence of disability rises with age.

There was an 80% increase over six decades from in 1951 and over the last 60 years there has

been a substantial change in the age composition of older people. In 1951, those aged 65-74

represented 67%, and those aged 85 and over made up just 4%, of the 65 and over

population. Today, the two age groups represent 51% and 14% respectively (Asiah Abdul

Rahim, Zen, Samad, Rahim, & Badhrulhisham, 2014).

In ASEAN countries, the statistics of population for the disabled people and elderly in Asia

and the Pacific region are reported to be increasingly rapid with an estimation of 40% of total

world population (Asiah Abdul Rahim, Samad, & Rahim, 2015; "Quick Facts and

Perspectives: Asia-Pacific Development Center on Disability," 2015) and with the addition of

the population of 65 years and above is showing a high percentage by 2030 as the result of

the baby boomers generation is aging and having longer life span as aging increases the

potential of vulnerability in the environment. Supporting this fact, Kose (2010) once charts

that Japan has the fastest growing aging population and predicted an increase of more that

25% of the country population over 65 years and above in 2015, and the pressure of

demographic and changing of cultural patterns leads older people in Singapore to be living

apart from their families independently (J. D. Harrison, 2001).

7

As derived by Kose (2010), many provision of accessibility activities took place around the

world including in Japan after the United Nation International Year of Disabled Persons in

1982 followed by the International Decade of Disabled Person 1983 to 1992, but there was

no comprehensive accomplishment to the accessibiity in the built environment in Japan in

1992. Noting that the most remarkable move and great milestone at the international scene is

when United States releases the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in

July 1990 where the rights of persons with disabilities were recognize as equal to others.

Discrimination act affects civil rights of social participation and equal opportunity. As in

Asia and the Pacific Countries where ethnicity and race are the most diverse, there are no

discrimination act but they developed Disability act or similar in order to achieve equal

opportunity for Persons with Disabilities.

Local Issues on Universal Design and Accessibility in the Built Environment in Malaysia

Accessibility of built environment in Malaysia has been an ongoing issue as legislation

implementation and enforcement for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) accessibility are not

well integrated and implemented by Local Government in Government buildings, Public

buildings and public spaces. Accessibility in the built environment is in line with Universal

Design principles to determine the minimum design requirements for PwDs. Introduction of

Malaysian Standard started in 1990 but it was not acknowledged until the establishment of

Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) Act in 2008 and this impacted the slow pace of accessibility

awareness and also design implementation in development despite of the massive urban

development happening in Major cities in Malaysia currently.

According to Hussein and Yaacob (2012), the introduction of the Law of Malaysia, Act 658,

Persons with Disabilities Act in 2008 indicates a move forward in the right direction to

empower Persons with Disabilities (PWD). Interpretations were made of concepts such as

Universal Design reflecting a more global perspective and commitment of issues relating to

PWD n on the Rights of PWD that was ratified on 19 July 2010. The notion of the Social

Model of Disability was also suggested throughout the Act, where disability is defined as an

evolving concept, whereas prior to the 2008 Act, it is very much perceived as charity and

welfare, based on the Medical Model focusing on impairments and negative perceptions.

8

Malaysia has also shown some developments in catering the need of persons with disabilities

(PWD) yet, there are the need to efficiently implement universal design in Malaysia, the need

for more professionals or researchers in this area, and the need to revisit the current standards

codes. Many have increasingly questioned the effectiveness of these legislation and standards

with disabilities in Malaysia as being unsatisfactory or ineffectual in their implementation

and the design outcomes achieved (Kadir & Jamaludin, 2012). Previous research (Kamarudin

et al., 2012; Maidin, 2012; Soltani, Sham, Awang, & Yaman, 2012; L. M. Yusof & Jones,

2016) highlight similar issues about the indication that there is a potential gap between

having legislation and standards and ensuring their implementation pointing to questions

about perceptions, knowledge and the understanding of professionals in the construction

industry on these legislation and standards and the role these legislation and standards have in

influencing these professionals to incorporate Universal Design in their design. There are also

problems of detection of discrepancies of the minimum design requirements in between

available existing Standards, Design Guidelines, and Local Government’s / Local Authority’s

design requirements checklists that complicates more on the conveyance of accessibility

knowledge.

3. Research Gap

Accessibility in the physical built environment in developed countries is more evolved and

accepted by society as compared to developing countries. Accessibility can be achieved by

strict implementation at Local Government, but how it should be implemented and enforced,

has been debated on its practicality between academia and professional practices (Manley,

1996) whereas in Asia, raising public awareness and destigmatizing disability issues must be

accompanied by two key features of cooperation and commitment among all government,

public, private agencies and the mass media (Parker, 2001a) and ensuring accessibility for all

is indispensable for everybody to participate in social and communal life as the key factor to

ensure social sustainability (Evcil, 2012). As coined by (Kose, 2015) that emphasize by

providing to the needs of PwDs will compliment all other users regardless of age and ability

through the concept of Universal Design. It is particularly important to take into

consideration that almost all abilities deteriorate at the same time as people growing older.

Coping specific strategies that will only work for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) might not

be effective in achieving access for all but to clearly emphasize that Universal Design are

intended to benefit a wider range of users.

9

Accessibility and Universal Design has been integrated in current developments but restricted

to individual buildings’ context only. Connectivity between, going to and from buildings is a

crucial factor in determining a holistic seamless accessible journey. This ‘Connectivity’ often

disappears while integrations of the old and new development are not monitored as a result of

land jurisdiction issues and building ownership. Barriers and obstructions were caused by

indiscipline habits and ignorance of rules as well as regulations. This presents that socio-

political culture and attitude, as well as practices of the local authorized actors are vital

factors obstructing the implementation of accessible facilities in public area (Imrie, 2012).

For Architects, Planners and Designers, by understanding these limitations, especially in

respect of legislation, it is an important step towards better and more integrated design;

furthermore by understanding something about the ways in which we design, can actually

help us extend our skills and design more creatively. Universal Design and Inclusive Design

have now gained wide acceptance as similar concepts, even where there may be limited

evidence of it being put into practice in the built environment. Although building codes

require significant elements of construction to be made barrier-free, it is much more difficult

to legislate to make a more comprehensive and ‘joined-up’ environment overall (J. Harrison

& Dalton, 2015; Swanton, 2013).

It could be assumed that there are possible factors that create inaccessibility within the

physical built environment; it is identified that there is a lack of awareness and accessibility

design knowledge among Architects, Planners and Designers as it is considered as a design

concept for a minority group of people where in Malaysia, noted by N. L. M. Yusof and Jones

(2014) misconception about Universal Design terminology that it is perceived as a design

template for PwDs and the misconception contributes to the slow pace of acceptance and

implementation in Malaysian practices as a result of lack of awareness. The other assumption

is that Architects and officer implementer at Local Authority does not fully understanding the

design specifications and design requirements for PwDs, treating the design as additional

criteria in terms of unnecessarily needed or costly addition. As awareness can still be instilled

further among practitioners (Saito, 2006), it is already been gazette for building requirements

for disabled people in 12 states UBBL (amendment) 1991 By-Laws 34A under the Street,

Drainage and Building Act 1974, implementation stature for Local Authority officers but it is

not fully enforced as it has no regulatory authority to ensure its enforcement but rely fully on

the design interpretation by Architects and building plan approval by officers. Local and

10

regional authorities, decision makers, urban planners and architects should engage in

developing these accessible and supportive built environments for active and healthy ageing,

i.e. environments that enhance opportunities for independent living of people, and that support

an accessible society for all ages (Froyen, 2015).

Apart from awareness, the greater setback of the lack inclusivity in the society and the

community is the mentality of the local society of PwDs having to receive welfare and

sympathy. The society mentality and attitudes should already moved to the human rights

social model of treating PwDs as equally and inclusively. Statements made by (Erkilic, 2011;

Froyen, 2015) that refers to historical process of disability that one could claim that the

formulation of the ideals of Universal Design was influenced by the long path of

demedicalisation and universalisation of the status of disability. The social constructionist

approach of the Social Model and the Minority Group Model of disability that signify the

environmental conditions as the primary source for enabling/disabling of the people with

diverse disabilities throughout the demedicalisation process of disability inspired the

conceptual strategies and authenticity of Universal Design. In the perspectives of disability

studies, universal design and accessible / barrier-free design is conceptually called ‘the social

construction model of disability’, unlike the medical model, this model defines disability as a

product of social interaction, thought, belief, and language used in a certain culture, and sees

social interventions to increase the mutual understanding of people as the key to inclusion and

participation of PwDs in community activities and are the key approach to lower

environmental barriers to social participation (Froyen, 2015; Saito, 2006).

The further research gap that has been identified is the facts that the journey, route and

connectivity of the access not being seamless, creates loopholes in the integration of planning

and design aspect, as well as implementation and jurisdiction aspect. In the case of senior

citizen and elderly, the physical environment is unfortunately, designed and built to best meet

healthy robust people, typically between 15 and 55, who are assumed to be able to commute

in a congested train in the morning. It is quite often in Japan, one is offered to avoid

congested commuting hours. It is in a sense a good solution, but unless the environment is

changed to meet one’s deteriorating capabilities (for example introduction of elevators), a

person will still suffer (Kose, 2015). Another scenario describe by J. Harrison and Dalton

(2015), a clinic for instance, may have different standards to the dwelling place; public

buildings may be accessible and usable by people with a range of disabilities, whereas the

11

road system is the responsibility of another authority, with its own standards, and then the bus

service operates in a completely different way. Thus, to conclude a narrative of a person

going to a clinic will be subject to standards and constraints that vary quite widely. The roads

or footpaths that they walk or drive on are relatively permanent, subject to some degree of

maintenance, whereas the public transportation system changes all the time; vehicles have

different specifications and the personnel who operate them need to be properly trained to

sustain a vital degree of user-friendly service. It can be discussed that the scenario and

situation to create accessibility goes beyond only the design aspect and implementation

requires a more elaborate strategy to cope with existing legislation for effectiveness.

4. Research Aim and Objectives

This research attempts to formulate an implementation strategy framework of accessibility

and seamless connectivity through the application of Universal Design in Malaysian built

environment. In the effort of achieving the research aim, the following research objectives

has been further detailed:

1. To identify and distinguish the legislations related to Persons with Disabilities

(PwDs) and accessibility in the built environment in Malaysia.

2. To investigate implementation strategies and initiatives of other developed and

developing countries that has regulated their legislation, policies, and standards

and how they overcome problems for enforcements.

3. To formulate a recommended implementation framework on strategy measures

linking available legislative documents and standards to ensure enforcement for

accessibility in the built environment.

5. Research Questions

To achieve the research objectives that have been detailed above, the following research

questions are formulated:

12

Objective 1: To identify and distinguish the legislations related to Persons with Disabilities

(PwDs) and accessibility in the built environment in Malaysia.

RQ1. What are the legislations related to Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) regarding

provision of accessibility in the built environment in Malaysia?

Objective 2: To investigate implementation strategies and initiatives of other developed and

developing countries that has regulated their legislation, policies, and

standards and how they overcome problems for enforcements.

RQ2a. How implementation strategies and initiatives of other countries that have

regulated their legislation, policies, and standards could be adopted in

Malaysia?

RQ3b. How developed countries overcome issues, problems and enforce

implementation in achieving their accessible physical built environment?

Objective 3: To formulate a recommended implementation framework on strategy measures

linking available legislative documents and standards to ensure enforcement

for accessibility in the built environment.

RQ3a. Is there any available local framework of accessibility implementation model

that has been implemented and enforced?

RQ3b. Does perception, awareness, and understanding of Universal Design reflects in

the building design and is well interpreted by architects, planners, designers

and authority officers?

6. Literature Review

Universal Design concept goes way back in 1985 when it was first introduce by Ronald

Mace, an architect who had a disability himself, defines Universal Design as a ‘design of

13

products and environments usable by all people to the greatest extent possible, without the

need for adaptation or specialized design’ where it applies to all ages, personal abilities and

sizes, with an inclusive capability that transcends barrier-free and accessible design. This

concept has been accepted in a variety of design fields, such as architecture, engineering,

product design, and landscape design (Erkilic, 2011; Ostroff, 2001). Noted by J. Harrison and

Dalton (2015) Universal Design intent is it encompassing nature, to enable a wider cohort of

people than before to benefit from accessibility, safety and usability without discriminating

against anyone. However in designing the built environment, there are inevitable limits,

where Ronald Mace stated that facilities should be designed to be usable ‘to the greatest

possible extent’, rather than ‘by all’, recognizing that there are limits to providing this

inclusion to everyone in all situations (Preiser & Ostroff, 2001).

Among European experts involved in the European concept for Accessibility, the term

accessibility has a different meaning for them that note accessibility is the umbrella issue for

all parameters that influence human functioning in the environments and defines it as an

environmental quantity. Across Europe, they claim that human diversify in age, culture and

ability greater than ever and to base their designs on the principle of inclusion. European

approach is ‘Design for All’ that is defined as ‘the design for human diversity, social

inclusion and equality.’ This holistic and innovative approach constitutes a creative and

ethical challenge for all planners, designers, entrepreneurs, administrators and political

leaders. Design for All aims to enable all people to have equal opportunities to participate in

every aspect of society. Thus everything that is designed and made by people to be used by

people must be accessible, convenient for everyone in society to use and responsive to

evolving human diversity. The practice of Design for All makes conscious use of the analysis

of human needs and aspirations and requires the involvement of end users at every stage in

the design process ("The EIDD Stockholm Declaration," 2004). Design for All must been

seen as a whole concept has plays an important role in relation to demographic change, which

will bring a drop in the number of hands available to work in the public sector and a rise in

the use of welfare technology; other factors at work are the increase in numbers of seriously

overweight people (Bendixen, 2010).

In the US, accessible design became more widely used in the 1970s as a more positive term

that barrier-free design, but it was and still very much linked to legislated requirements

(Ostroff, 2001). The Universal Design concept advances in a more comprehensive way as it

14

has the formulation of the Seven Principles of Universal Design (Table 1) those

characteristics of more usable design solutions, products and environments making this

concept is more likely to be adopted and embraced internationally noted by researchers from

all parts of the world (Gray, Zimmerman, & Rimmer, 2012; Guimarães, 2016; Kadir &

Jamaludin, 2013; I. M. Lid & Solvang, 2016; N. L. M. Yusof & Jones, 2014).

Table 1:Seven Principles of Universal Design

Principle 1: Equitable Use

The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities.

Principle 2: Flexibility in Use

The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities.

Principle 3: Simple and Intuitive Use

Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.

Principle 4: Perceptible Information

The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user’s sensory abilities.

Principle 5: Tolerance for Error

The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions.

Principle 6: Low Physical Effort

The design can be used efficiently and comfortably and with a minimum of fatigue.

Principle 7: Size and Space for Approach and Use

Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use regardless of user’s body size, posture, or mobility.

The concept also has other similar terminology, that are Accessible Design and Barrier-Free

Design, which are often considered inappropriately similar to universal design, that have

been broadly recognized in the field of architecture, mainly through architectural regulations.

Accessibility is defined as a quality of a built environment to be accessed by people with

15

physical disabilities and/or older people. Barrier-free design is defined as a design concept to

make a built environment accessible to people with physical disabilities and/or older people

by removing the architectural barriers present in existing buildings (Ostroff, 2001; Saito,

2006). These two concepts can be used as virtually synonymous terms.

Another Accessibility term is increasingly recognized as a key element of a high quality,

efficient and sustainable transport system under Urban Transportation and Urban Design

field, indeed us as users of the transport system benefit from easier access to buses, trams,

trains, planes and ships (Soltani et al., 2012). As accessibility impacts Persons with

Disabilities and those people who has a consequence of physical disability or impairment are

in relation to the physical environment, the category of PwDs can expand and not limited to

Elderly person, Ambulant disable, Wheelchair-bound, Sensory disabled and Temporary

disabled. Some related term is Accessible Design that defines ‘the design process in which

the needs of people with disabilities are specifically considered’ and as such, Accessibility

sometimes refers to the characteristic that product, services, and people with various

disabilities can independently use facilities. Accessibility as a design concern has a long

history, but public awareness about accessibility increased with the passage of legislation

such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which mandated that public facilities and

services be fully accessible to people with disabilities. Both accessible and universal design

are concerned with addressing the needs of users beyond those considered to be "average" or

"typical (Fletcher, 2016).

As deliberated by Bickenbach et al. (1999), the proposal by UPIAS, Disability Union of the

Physically Impaired Against Segregation in 1976, offered a two-element model which

originally used the terms `disability' and `handicap', although later these terms were replaced

by `impairment' and `disability' where ‘Impairment’ is defined as ‘the functional limitation

within the individual caused by physical, mental or sensory impairment’ and ‘Disability’ is

‘the loss or limitation of opportunities to take part in the normal life of the community on an

equal level with others due to physical and social barriers’. Though the first definition is

circular, taken together the definition have the virtue of making explicit effect of the social

environment. Disabled people are those with impairments who experience disability as a

collection of socially created restrictions, which are discriminatory because they limit

opportunity for full and equal participation emphasizing disabled people are therefore an

oppressed group in society.

16

Disability define by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

in Article 1 as:

“Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental,

intellectual or sensory impairments, which in interaction with various barriers may

hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”

Malaysia on the other hand although adopting the definition, as deliberated and coined by

Abdullah, Hanafi, and Hamdi (2017) Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 has omitted the

phrase ‘on an equal basis with others’ and provide definition as follows:

“Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual

or sensory impairments, which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full

and effective participation in society.”

The omission could be in relation to the discrepancies between movement of disabled person

human rights and anti-discrimination in its nature, by further explanation that The Persons

with Disabilities Act 2008 seeks to enhance the life of persons with disabilities by promoting

civil rights and equality. Thus, it is only appropriate that it is non-discriminatory in nature. In

order for it to function as a tool for enhancement, it is essential that the statute should have

remedial measures. This is due to the fact that one of the important measures including the

existence of remedial provision to address any issues of breach might possibly occur in the

future (Abdullah et al., 2017; Maidin, 2012; Tah, 2013).

7. Scope and Parameters of Research

The scope of this research is not limited to but will be focusing the subject only on legislative

documents and experts views that are related to Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) and the

accessibility in the built environment. By definition, Universal Design relates to products and

environments, so the focus will be the design aspect of environment in relation to the

physical built environment.

From all seven (7) categories breakdown stipulated by the Ministry of Women, Family and

Community Development as coined by Abdullah et al. (2017), that are including hearing;

vision; speech; physical; learning difficulties; mental and various or multiple disabilities but

the parameters covers the category of PwDs for only Physical Disabilities / Multiple

Disabilities with mobility issues and Vision impaired / Blind are the main subjects as they are

17

mostly effected by the barriers existed in the physical environment. The other parameter

identified is the building typology that will be discussed and looked into are inclusive of all

building typology in accordance to the list stated in Uniform Building By-Laws (UBBL) but

will set aside transportation facilities and heritage buildings as these typology has their own

set of regulation issues in terms of economic and heritage consideration. These parameters

will cover only the stated limitation but in any cross reference in the documentation analysis

and interpretation will eventually touching issues on other types of disabilities and

transportation facilities as well as heritage areas where at some events they will interweave

with each other.

8. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical elements in this research are divided into disciplines of study and themed

keywords according to authors and documents available.

Discipline of Study Themed keyword Author / Authors

Disability Studies The Medical model of disability

The social construction model

of disability

(Bickenbach et al., 1999;

Erkilic, 2011; Froyen, 2015)

International Laws on

Disability Human Rights

• United Nation International

Year of Disabled Persons

1982

• International Decade of

Disabled Person 1983-1992

• UNESCAP

• UNCRPD 2006

• ‘Incheon Strategy’ 2012-

2022

(Bendixen, 2010; Manley,

1996)

(Kamarudin et al., 2012; Stein

& Lord, 2010; Strand, 2014;

Tah & Mokhtar, 2016)

Disability Concepts and

Terminology in relation to

Built Environment

• Accessibility

• Universal Design

• Design for All

• Inclusive Design

• Accessible Design

(Bendixen, 2010; "The Center

for Universal Design (CUD),

NCSU," 2008; "The EIDD

Stockholm Declaration," 2004;

Evcil, 2012; Fletcher, 2016; J.

Harrison & Dalton, 2015; Imrie,

18

• Barrier-free Design

• Disability

• Impairment

• Persons with Disabilities

(PwDs)

2012; Iwarsson & StÅHl, 2003;

Kose, 2010, 2015; Inger Marie

Lid, 2014; Ostroff, 2001;

Preiser & Ostroff, 2001; Saito,

2006; Swanton, 2013;

Takahashi, 2001; N. L. M.

Yusof & Jones, 2014)

Legislation, Acts,

Implementation

Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) Act in 2008 Local Authority

(Abdullah et al., 2017; Imrie,

2000; Imrie & Kumar, 1998;

Kamarudin et al., 2012; Kose,

2010; Maidin, 2012; Norway

universally designed

by 2025: The Norwegian

government’s action plan for

universal design and increased

accessibility 2009-2013, 2009;

Setthakorn, 2015; N. L. M.

Yusof & Jones, 2014)

Urban Design,

Urban Transportation

Accessibility (Asiah Abdul Rahim et al.,

2014; Soltani et al., 2012)

Social Sustainability Inclusive,

Social inclusion,

Social participation,

(Bickenbach et al., 1999; Evcil,

2012; Kadir & Jamaludin, 2013;

I. M. Lid & Solvang, 2016)

Design and Practice Architect perception,

Awareness

(Evcil, 2012; Saito, 2006; N. L.

M. Yusof & Jones, 2014)

9. Research Methodology

The research methodology will be Qualitative Method that will be participatory worldview,

narrative design and open ended interview (Creswell, 2009) and the qualitative research

design selected for this research is Content Analysis in focus of adhering objective 1, 2 and 3

with the effort of solving all research questions formulated.

For objective 2, Content Analysis is still the main research design with a Case Studies

approach for the multiple countries research of the developed and developing countries

19

identified (Groat & Wang, 2002). Selection of the case studies focuses on two aspects that is

the aspect of developed countries in compare to developing countries in terms of effective

implementation of accessible environment and second is the consideration of western and

eastern concept of Universal Design, its ideology and interpretation within their local context.

The research detailed approached here will be qualitative exploratory, explanatory and

descriptive on the research instruments, samples size and data analysis. In objective 3; one of

the identified Local Authority that has an a secretariat committee for PWDs with officers is

Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) where the selection is based on the criteria that

DBKL is the local authority, which administrates Kuala Lumpur city centre and other areas in

the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. Having a vision towards a world class city with the

mission to plan, develop, administrate and manage Kuala Lumpur. Some of DBKL functions

are to manage the city beautification together with planning and developing the city as well

as being responsible to manage and maintain the public facilities such as stadium, sports

complex, market place, public toilet, bus station etc (Kamarudin et al., 2012).

Research Objectives

Research Questions Instruments Sample Data Analysis

To identify and distinguish the legislations related to Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) and accessibility in the built environment in Malaysia.

1. What are the legislations related to Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) regarding provision of accessibility in the built environment in Malaysia?

Document review -Acts and policy -Master plan and Action plan -Standards and code of practice -Government reports -Design guidelines Journal and proceeding publication Video and audio presentation recording of expert / government representative officer Mass Media of current issues / news paper cuttings

Document data analysis & cross referencing Text and image analysis Audio and visual data

Qualitative Content Analysis – Thematic, Patterns interpretation & Descriptive

To investigate implementation

2. How implementation framework of other

Document review of selected

Identify keywords and

Qualitative Case study -

20

framework of other developed and developing countries that has regulated their legislation, policies, and standards and how they overcome problems and enforcements.

countries that has regulated their legislation, policies, and standards could be adopted in Malaysia?

3. How developed

countries overcome problems and enforce implementation in achieving their accessible physical built environment?

countries -Acts and policy -Master plan and Action plan -Standards and code of practice -government reports -design guidelines Journal and proceeding publication Video and audio presentation recording of expert / government representative officer

parameters 4 country in Asia and the Pacific including Malaysia 4 western and developed country

Thematic, Patterns interpretation & Descriptive

To formulate a recommended framework on implementation measures focusing on accessibility and connectivity in the built environment.

4. Is there any available local framework of accessibility implementation model that has been implemented and enforced?

5. Does awareness, understanding and knowledge of Universal Design affects design and implementation measures on accessibility and connectivity in the built environment by architects and

Document Analysis -Document data, text and image analysis - Map, Local Plan / Master Plan Focus Group Discussion Semi-structures in-depth interview of experts & officer in charge at Ministry / Local Authorities Video and audio recording Survey Observation

1-3 officers in charge at checking & approving Accessibility Building Plan under Building Department at each identified Local Authorities (estimate 4 Local Authority – Identified Local Authority are DBKL, PJC, MBPJ & MBPP) Non-Probability & Purposive - Stratafied sampling; All officers in at Building Department at all Local Authority.

Qualitative Content Analysis – Thematic, Patterns interpretation & Descriptive Descriptive Statistic - SPSS

21

implementers in authorities?

10. Significance of Research

The significant of this research, firstly it will be a continuous effort of instilling and changing

the society’s mentality of the disability medical model of receiving welfare to the social

construction model of disability as the ideals of Universal Design is to demedicalisation

perceptions and create a new perspectives of universalisation of disability status ensuring

social and community inclusion and equality for PwDs by providing accessibility.

Universal Design is the most relevant concept and the current trending concept besides the

terminology has been familiarize within all Malaysian Ministry and Government Agencies.

Universal Design provides the design needs for the PwDs and will eventually compliment all

other users regardless of age and ability and can benefit all users. To further the Universal

Design concept of Inclusion to Innovation and instead of stifling creativity for architects,

planners and designers and pushes them to be inventive.

Significantly this research will formulate an Accessibility Implementation Framework for use

under ministry and government agencies in innovating possibilities of expanding the existing

policies for empowering accessibility for all in our physical built environment, for effective

implementation for our public building, public amenities and public spaces by conforming

the government’s plan of action that is the PwDs Policies and Action Plan for Persons with

Disabilities 2016 – 2022 in line with RMK-11.

11. Research Milestone and Gantt Chart

Gantt chart Activities Semester / Year 1/2016 2/2017 3/2017 4/2018 5/2018 6/2019 Research Conceptualization

• Introduction and research background. • Research objectives and research

questions developed. • Research gaps identified. • Develop theoretical framework. • Distinguish research theoretical

underpinnings.

22

• Proposal Defense. Literature Review

• Comparisons of Universal Design strategies and implementations in other developed and developing countries.

• Definition of terms. • Chronology development of Universal

Design and Accessibility. Writing

• Writing for Journal publications. • Attending and presenting at international

conferences. • Writing papers for conferences and

seminars.

Data Collection • Interviews of experts at the Ministry,

Local Government, NGOs. • Collection of related master plans,

structure plans, action plans documents and policies.

• Supporting documents in assisting design implementations such as guidelines and standards.

• Writing for Journal publications.

Data Analysis • Discussion on data collected. • Interpretation of data analysis. • Journal publications.

Thesis writing • Discussion and conclusion.

Submission of thesis • Viva-voce examination and presentation. • Correction after viva.

References

Abdullah, N., Hanafi, H., & Hamdi, N. I. M. (2017). The Rights of Persons With Disabilities in Malaysia: The Underlying Reasons for Ineffectiveness of Persons with Disabilities Act 2008. International Journal for Studies on Children, Women, Elderly And Disabled, Vol. 1 (January).

Asiah Abdul Rahim, Samad, N. A. A., & Rahim, C. R. C. (2015). Overview of Universal Design Application and Accessibility in Major Cities of ASEAN Countries. . Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on ASEAN Community 2015, Kuala Lumpur.

Asiah Abdul Rahim, Zen, I., Samad, N. A. A., Rahim, C. R. C., & Badhrulhisham, A. (2014, 11th - 13th November 2014). Investigation on the Accessibility in Transportation Hubs: Upgrades in London. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference for Universal Design in Fukushima & Tokyo 2014 Tokyo.

Bendixen, K. (2010, 2nd November 2014). Perspective from Denmark: Design for All – Point of no Return! Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference for Universal Design in Hamamatsu, Japan 2010, Hamamatsu.

Bickenbach, J. E., Chatterji, S., Badley, E. M., & Üstün, T. B. (1999). Models of

23

disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Social Science & Medicine, 48(9), 1173-1187. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00441-9

The Center for Universal Design (CUD), NCSU. (2008). Retrieved from https://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udhistory.htm

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd Edition ed.). USA: SAGE Publications.

The EIDD Stockholm Declaration. (2004). Erkilic, M. (2011). CONCEPTUAL CHALLENGES BETWEEN UNIVERSAL DESIGN

AND DISABILITY IN RELATION TO THE BODY, IMPAIRMENT, AND THE ENVIRONMENT: WHERE DOES THE ISSUE OF DISABILITY STAND IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF UD? Universal Design and Disability, 2(METU JFA ). doi:DOI: 10.4305/METU.JFA.2011.2.9

Evcil, A. N. (2012). Raising Awareness about Accessibility. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 490-494. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.686

Fletcher, V. (2016). Inclusive/universal design: People at the center of the design process The Routledge Companion for Architecture Design and Practice: Established and Emerging Trends (pp. 251-268): Taylor and Francis.

Froyen, H. (2015). Universal Design for The Human-Made Environment We Share. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Universal Design in the Built Environment 2015 Sharing the World (ICUDBE2015), Perbadanan Putrajaya

Gray, J. A., Zimmerman, J. L., & Rimmer, J. H. (2012). Built environment instruments for walkability, bikeability, and recreation: Disability and universal design relevant? Disability and Health Journal, 5(2), 87-101. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2011.12.002

Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2002). Architectural Research Methods. USA: John Wiley & Sons. Guimarães, M. P. (2016) Universal design criteriain standardsand codes about accessibility of

built environmentsin Brazil. Vol. 229. 3rd International Conference on Universal Design, UD 2016 (pp. 121-130): IOS Press.

Harrison, J., & Dalton, C. (2015). THE FAMILIAR AND THE STRANGE: THE LIMITS OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT. JOURNAL OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 1(1), 49-67.

Harrison, J. D. (2001). Housing for Older Persons in Southeast Asia: Evolving Policy and Design. In W. F. E. Preiser & E. Ostroff (Eds.), Universal Design Handbook: McGraw-Hill Education.

Hussein, H., & Yaacob, N. M. (2012). Development of Accessible Design in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 121-133. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.212

Imrie, R. (2000). Disabling environments and the geography of access policies and practices. Disability & Society, 15(1), 5-24.

Imrie, R. (2012). Universalism, universal design and equitable access to the built environment. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(10), 873-882. doi:10.3109/09638288.2011.624250

Imrie, R., & Kumar, M. (1998). Focusing on Disability and Access in the Built Environment. Disability & Society, 13(3), 357-374. doi:10.1080/09687599826687

Iwarsson, S., & StÅHl, A. (2003). Accessibility, usability and universal design—positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(2), 57-66. doi:10.1080/dre.25.2.57.66

Kadir, S. A., & Jamaludin, M. (2012). Applicability of Malaysian Standards and Universal Design in Public Buildings in Putrajaya. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,

24

36, 659-669. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.072 Kadir, S. A., & Jamaludin, M. (2013). Universal Design as a Significant Component for

Sustainable Life and Social Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 85, 179-190. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.349

Kamarudin, H., Hashim, A. E., Mahmood, M., Ariff, N. R. M., & Ismail, W. Z. W. (2012). The Implementation of the Malaysian Standard Code of Practice on Access for Disabled Persons by Local Authority. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 442-451. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.048

Kanter, A. S. (2011). The Law: What's Disability Studies Got To Do With it or An Introduction to Disability Legal Studies. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 42(2), 403.

Kanter, A. S. (2015). The development of disability rights under international law: from charity to human rights. Abingdon: Routledge.

Kose, S. (2010). The impact of Aging on Japanese Accessibility Design Standards. In W. F. E. Preiser & K. H. Smith (Eds.), Universal Design Handbook, 2E: McGraw-Hill Education.

Kose, S. (2015). TOURISM FOR ALL: HOW CAN UNIVERSAL/INCLUSIVE DESIGN ACCOMMODATE SENIOR TRAVELERS? JOURNAL OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 1(1), 33-47.

Lid, I. M. (2014). Universal Design and disability: an interdisciplinary perspective. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(16), 1344-1349. doi:10.3109/09638288.2014.931472

Lid, I. M., & Solvang, P. K. (2016). (Dis)ability and the experience of accessibility in the urban environment. Alter, 10(2), 181-194. doi:10.1016/j.alter.2015.11.003

Maidin, A. J. (2012). Legal Framework Regulating for Improving Accessibility to Built Environment for Disabled Persons in Malaysia.

Manley, S. (1996). Walls of exclusion: The role of local authorities in creating barries-free streets. Landscape and Urban Planning, 35, 137-152.

Norway universally designed by 2025: The Norwegian government’s action plan for universal design and increased

accessibility 2009-2013. (2009). Norwegian Ministry of Children and Equality. Ostroff, E. (2001). Universal Design: The New Paradigm. In W. F. E. Preiser & E. Ostroff

(Eds.), Universal Design Handbook: McGraw-Hill Education. Parker, K. J. (2001a). Changing Attitudes Towards Persons with Disabilities in Asia.

Disability Studies Quarterly, Volume 21(No. 4), Page 105-113. Parker, K. J. (2001b). Changing Attitudes Towards Persons with Disabilities in Malaysia.

Disability Studies Quarterly, 21(4), 105 - 113. Preiser, W. F. E., & Ostroff, E. (2001). Universal Design Handbook: McGraw-Hill

Education. Quick Facts and Perspectives: Asia-Pacific Development Center on Disability. (2015).

Bangkok: Asia-Pacific Development Center on Disability. Roulstone, A., & Prideaux, S. (2009). Constructing Reasonables: Environmental Access

Policy for Disabled Wheelchair Users in Four European Union Countries. European Journal of Disability Research, 3, 360-377.

Saito, Y. (2006). Awareness of universal design among facility managers in Japan and the United States. Automation in Construction, 15(4), 462-478. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2005.06.013

Series, L. (2015). The development of disability rights under international law: from charity to human rights. Disability & Society, 30(10), 1590-1593. doi:10.1080/09687599.2015.1066975

Setthakorn, N. (2015). Activity report of Department of Empowerment of Persons with

25

Disabilities (DEP), Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. Retrieved from Tokyo:

Soltani, S. H. K., Sham, M., Awang, M., & Yaman, R. (2012). Accessibility for Disabled in Public Transportation Terminal. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 89-96. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.066

Stein, M., & Lord, J. E. (2010). Monitoring the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: innovations, lost opportunities, and future potential. . uman Rights Quarterly, 32(3), 689-728.

Strand, V. B. (2014). Norway's Ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Highlighting Current Discourses in the Field of Human Rights in Norway. Nordic Journal of Human Rights, 32(1), 75-83. doi:10.1080/18918131.2013.878894

Swanton, D. (2013). An In-depth Study of Access in the Built Environment with regards to Universal Design. Student Dissertation. Cork Institute of Technology, reproduced In Design For All. Retrieved from http://www.designforall.in

Tah, I. H. M. (2013, December 2 - 3, 2013). A Need for Remedial Provision to Protect Persons with Disabilities in Malaysia. Paper presented at the Proceeding - Kuala Lumpur International Business, Economics and Law Conference.

Hotel Putra, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tah, I. H. M., & Mokhtar, K. A. (2016). Malaysia’s Ratification of the UN Convention on the

Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD). International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, Vol 11(Issue 4 (Dec)).

Takahashi, G. (2001). From Accessibility for Disabled people to Universal design: Challengers in Japan. In W. F. E. Preiser & E. Ostroff (Eds.), Universal Design Handbook: McGraw-Hill Education.

Yusof, L. M., & Jones, D. (2016). THE APPLICATION OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS IN MALAYSIA AND AUSTRALIA. JOURNAL OF UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 2(1), 17-35.

Yusof, N. L. M., & Jones, D. (2014). Universal Design Practice in Malaysia: Architect’s Perceptions of its Terminology. Paper presented at the Universal Design 2014: Three Days of Creativity and Diversity.