You are here

Home » Content

EVRENSEL TASARIM VE ENGELLİLİK İLİŞKİSİNDE İNSAN, YETİ EKSİKLİĞİ VE ÇEVRESEL ETMENLER BAĞLAMINI GÖZETEN KAVRAMSAL ZORLUKLAR ENGELLİLİK KONUSU EVRENSEL TASARIM FELSEFESİ İÇİNDE NEREDE DURUR?

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?

Journal Name:

  • Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2011
DOI: 
10.4305

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
Universal Design (UD), which is grounded politically and sociologically in the long historic struggle of the anti-discrimination and disability rights movements in the United States that occurred between 1970’s and 1990’s and the market-oriented necessities of an aging society, has been defined as ‘design for all’ people to the greatest extent possible, differentiating it from earlier concepts of adaptable, specialised or accessible design. UD argues that the design of a built environment must be usable by ‘all people’, regardless of age, gender, capability, cultural origin or socioeconomic status. UD incorporates some principles to achieve ‘design for all’ solutions. Although UD is originated and developed within the discourse on disability, its emphasis on the locution ‘design for all’, along with the writings of proponents of UD, suggests a deliberate broadening but at the same time avoiding giving focus on the issue of disability. Further evidence of this interpretation of UD’s approach can be found in the design products that UD promotes. Most examples of products designed in accordance with UD principles are usable by people with diverse ‘disabilities’. Advocates’ writings reveal that the conceptual foundations of UD rely socio-politically on the ‘rights-based’ and ‘non-discriminatory’ attitudes, which have helped to consolidate the ontologically ‘non-stigmatising’ and ‘inclusionary’ status of UD. These attitudes have indirect implications for disability. This paper aims to scrutinize UD’s concern with ‘design for all’ by going beyond its promissory design-related claims and unveiling its underlying conceptual and strategic challenges in relation to disability discourse, referring to the historical developmental process of the discourse of disability and its incidence in UD’s emerging processes. Referring to the historical developmental process of disability, one could claim that the formulation of the ideals of UD 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 UD. Descriptive formulations of disability, developed within the international agencies of ICIDH and ICF in the last three decades, have consistently influenced and supported the universalising and anti- discriminatory strategy of UD. The Social Model’s distinction of ‘disability’ and ‘impairment’ substantiated UD’s concern for a non-stigmatizing, inclusionary attitude which the term ‘design for all’ suggests. This paper evaluates UD from within by drawing attention to its strong and weak sides referring to the conceptual challenges that arise directly or indirectly with reference to the historical development process of the disability discourse.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Evrensel Tasarım (ET) anlayışının temeli sosyo-politik anlamda Amerika’da 1970 ve 90’larda gelişen ‘engelli hakları’ hareketi ve yaşlanan toplum gereçlerinin artmasına dayanır. ET özünde ‘herkes için tasarım’ yaklaşımını öne çıkarırken kendisini, daha önce engellilik kavramları ile bütünleşmiş olan ‘uyarlanabilir’, ‘özelleşmiş’ ya da ‘erişilebilir’ tasarım yaklaşımlarından ayırır. ET anlayışına göre bütün yapılı çevreler insanların yaş, cinsiyet, kapasite ayrıca sosyo-kültürel ve ekonomik farklılıklarını gözetmeden herkes için kullanılabilir olmalıdır. ET tarihsel anlamda engellilik söylemi içinden türetilmiş olsa da herkes için tasarım tanım ve yaklaşmlarında engellilik temasına ve ilgili tasarımlara doğrudan referans vermekten kaçınır. Bununla birlikte ET’yi destekleyen yazılı literatürde verilen tasarım örneklerinin çoğunlukla çeşitli engellilik sorunlarını gözeten örnekler olduğu gözlenebilir. ET’nin lider savunucuları yazılarında herkes için tasarım yaklaşımının altında insan hakları ve ayırımcılık karşıtı anlayışlarına dayalı ontolojik açıdan ‘damgalayıcı olmayan’ ve ‘kapsayıcı/kaynaştırıcı’ bir misyonu olduğuna dikkat çekerken, aslında, dolaylı olarak engellilik konusu ile bağdaşlaşmış konuları dile getirir. Bu makale, herkes için tasarım anlayışının tasarım vurgusunun yanısıra sahip olduğu kavramsal derinliğini ve engellilik konusu ile olan ilişkisini engellilik kavramının tarihsel gelişim süreci içerisinden bakarak irdelemeyi ve bu sürecin ET ın ortaya çıkışındaki etkilerini anlamayı hedefler. Engellilik kavramının tarihsel gelişim süreci içerisinden bakıldığında ET’nin engellilik kavramının ‘medikal bakış açısından kopma’ ve ‘evrenselleştirme’ süreçlerinden etkilenen bir yaklaşım belirlediği görülür. Benzer şekilde sosyal çatkıcı bakış açısına dayanan ve engelliliği yaratan faktörlerin bireyin yetieksikliğinden çok çevresel faktörler olduğunu savunan ‘sosyal model’ ve ‘azınlık grupları modeli’ anlayışlarınının da ET ın kavramsal oluşumunu etkilediğini söylemek mümkündür. Dünya Sağlık Örgütü bünyesinde ICIDH ve ICF tarafından son 30 yılda geliştirilen engellilik tanımları ET ın ayırımcılık karşıtı ve evrenselleştirici tutumunun netleşmesine yardım etmiştir. Engellilik yaklaşımlarından olan sosyal model yaklaşımının ‘engellilik’ (sosyal çevreye ait) ve ‘yetieksikliği’(bireye ait) kavramlarını birbirinden koparması ET’nin kaynaştırıcı ve damgalama karşıtı anlayışlarını vurgulayan ve herkes için tasarım yaklaşımını destekleyen izler görülür. Makale, ET’ye bu söylemin içerisinden ve engellilik söylemi ve onun tarihsel gelisim süreci ile ilişkisini gözönüne alarak bakmaya çalışırken bu söylemin güçlü ve zayıf yanlarına dikkat çekmeye çalışmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_290_28_pp_181-203.pdf
  • 2
181-203
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Universal Design (UD), which is grounded politically and sociologically
in the long historic struggle of the anti-discrimination and disability rights
movements in the United States that occurred between 1970’s and 1990’s
and the market-oriented necessities of an aging society, has been defined
as ‘design for all’ people to the greatest extent possible, differentiating
it from earlier concepts of adaptable, specialised or accessible design.
UD argues that the design of a built environment must be usable by ‘all
people’, regardless of age, gender, capability, cultural origin or socioeconomic
status. UD incorporates some principles to achieve ‘design for all’
solutions.
Although UD is originated and developed within the discourse on
disability, its emphasis on the locution ‘design for all’, along with the
writings of proponents of UD, suggests a deliberate broadening but at the
same time avoiding giving focus on the issue of disability. Further evidence
of this interpretation of UD’s approach can be found in the design products
that UD promotes. Most examples of products designed in accordance with
UD principles are usable by people with diverse ‘disabilities’. Advocates’
writings reveal that the conceptual foundations of UD rely socio-politically
on the ‘rights-based’ and ‘non-discriminatory’ attitudes, which have helped
to consolidate the ontologically ‘non-stigmatising’ and ‘inclusionary’ status
of UD. These attitudes have indirect implications for disability.
This paper aims to scrutinize UD’s concern with ‘design for all’ by going
beyond its promissory design-related claims and unveiling its underlying
conceptual and strategic challenges in relation to disability discourse,
referring to the historical developmental process of the discourse of
disability and its incidence in UD’s emerging processes.
Referring to the historical developmental process of disability, one could
claim that the formulation of the ideals of UD 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 UD. Descriptive formulations
of disability, developed within the international agencies of ICIDH and ICF
in the last three decades, have consistently influenced and supported the
universalising and anti- discriminatory strategy of UD. The Social Model’s
distinction of ‘disability’ and ‘impairment’ substantiated UD’s concern for
a non-stigmatizing, inclusionary attitude which the term ‘design for all’
suggests.
This paper evaluates UD from within by drawing attention to its strong
and weak sides referring to the conceptual challenges that arise directly
or indirectly with reference to the historical development process of the
disability discourse.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com