UK Disability History Month

This year, Markides Associates are participating in UKDHM, which takes place from Wednesday 16th November until Friday 16th December. In this article, Markides Associates’ Transport Planner Matt Loadwick reflects on the ‘social model’ of disability and the impacts this can have in achieving an equitable transport network, highlights the unequal position of disabled people in society, and looks at examples of advocacy for disability equality.

Introduction to UK Disability History Month

In response to growing calls by disabled-led organisations to have a specific time in the year to focus on the history of the struggle for equality and human rights for disabled people in the UK, the first UK Disability History Month (UKDHM) was held in 2010.

The UKDHM founding document outlines the key purposes of the month, which are;

“To raise awareness of the unequal position of disabled people in society and to advocate disability equality; to develop an understanding of the historical roots of this inequality; to highlight the significance of disabled people’s struggles for equality and inclusion and the ‘social model’ of disability; to publicise and argue for the implementation of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities and the Equalities Act (2010).”

The social model of disability

There are two main ways of thinking about disability: the medical model of disability, and the social model of disability. The medical model of disability says that people are disabled by their impairments or differences, which should be ‘fixed’ through a medical approach. The social model of disability is the understanding that people are disabled by barriers in the way that society is organised, which in turn is solved as we change the way that society is organised to encourage inclusivity.

When thinking about transport, these barriers are often physical: such as a lack of step-free access or a lack of tactile paving on a key desire line. However, these barriers can also be social: through people’s attitudes to difference, or a lack of understanding of people’s needs.

As transport planners, the social model encourages us to think about the needs of others, targeting barriers which can make things difficult for disabled people, and subsequently designing infrastructure to be more inclusive. As these barriers are removed, we can create equality and offer people more independence.

An example of the social model in action could be as follows: you are a disabled person with a mobility issue who needs to get onto a rail station platform that is only accessible by stairs. The social model recognises that this is a problem with the rail station access, not the person, and would suggest providing a lift / step-free access.

Clearly, the social model is already being used by transport planners, as the accessibility improvements in transport infrastructure over the past two decades would indicate. Through continued focus on the social model in transport planning, we can identify barriers for those with all kinds of sensitivities, and plan infrastructure so that it is more equitable for all.

Raising awareness of the unequal position of disabled people using transport

As a non-disabled person, my experiences of transportation tend to present few challenges which inhibit my ability to get from A to B. Thinking about how I will get to work on any given day tends to be a brief internal dialogue during which I’ll consider typical factors including cost, speed/time, and increasingly as we edge deeper into to the winter months, the weather. Each day, I’ll choose an optimum mode of transport for my commute depending on how those factors align and make my way to work without much further thought.

Using the social model helps us to identify how, for many disabled people, transport networks in the UK can present challenges that affect their travel experience, and sometimes their ability to travel at all. This can occur across all modes, for example: for people who depend on the rail or bus network, access could be inhibited physically by a lack of step-free access, or by wide gaps between the train and platform edge / bus and kerb side. For visually impaired pedestrians, access could be inhibited by a lack of tactile paving on a key desire line, or by unsuitable passenger information systems. For disabled cyclists there may be barriers, such as the unpredictability of pavements / kerbs, or inaccessible cycling infrastructure for users of longer / wider cycles.

There could also be barriers for those with learning disabilities, where transport staff may not have an appropriate understanding of the needs of disabled passengers. In some instances, passengers could be subjected to discrimination, which could have a significant negative impact on their experience of using the transport network.

There are a wide variety of scenarios that present barriers for disabled people on transport, which do not exist for non-disabled people, and where further progress must be made in the coming years to reduce transport inequality in the UK.

Disabled Travel

The 2021 National Travel Survey (NTS) presents data regarding the travel patterns of disabled people in England which sheds some light on transport inequality in the UK. It should be noted that while the response rates to the 2021 NTS were 60% higher than those from 2020, they were 31% lower compared to 2019 (the last year pre-covid). As such, some caution is necessary when interpreting these results, as they are likely to be less representative of residents of England compared to previous years.

The figure below presents the average trips per adult (aged 16+) per year by mobility status and main mode, with some findings on the data bulleted below.

• The chart indicates that an adult with no mobility difficulties would drive their car twice as many times as an adult with a mobility difficulty. This suggests the presence of other factors which impact the likelihood of disabled people driving.
• Those with no mobility difficulties will take over seven times as many trips by rail compared to those with mobility difficulties, suggesting that the inequality is most apparent for those travelling by rail.
• Those with no mobility difficulties make 11% more trips using ‘other’ modes compared to those with a mobility difficulty. This could both highlight the greater variety of modes on offer to those with no mobility difficulties, but also the general trend suggesting that those with mobility difficulties tend to undertake fewer trips per year than those without.

Chart 33 presents the average trips per adult (aged 16+) per year by mobility status & trip purpose.

• The most common journey purpose for all adults (regardless of mobility) is shopping. While the average numbers of shopping trips per year are reasonably comparable, adults with no mobility difficulty take 17% more shopping trips each year.
• Interestingly, adults with a mobility difficulty undertake 16% more trips for ‘personal business’ every year, compared to adults without.
• The greatest disparities are found for the following purposes: ‘other including just walk’ and ‘commuting’.

·???????Adults with no mobility difficulties take almost three times as many trips for ‘other’ journey purposes (including just walk) than adults with a mobility difficulty. Given the well-known benefits to going outside and getting fresh air for both physical and mental wellbeing, this is a concerning statistic.

In terms of commuting, the data shows that those with no mobility difficulties take almost five times as many trips to commute every year compared to those with mobility difficulties. There are a variety of factors at play behind these figures. For example, the increased propensity for businesses to allow employees to work from home has reduced the necessity to commute to work, which could benefit employees with mobility difficulties in particular. Equally, we could look at the disability employment gap, which was 28.4% during Q2 2021. This indicates that the gap between commuting trips taken by disabled and non-disabled adults is significantly greater than the employment gap between disabled and non-disabled adults. Further data would be useful here to establish the working patterns of those with mobility difficulties, as well as their perspectives on their current employment. While the ability for some to work from home has clear benefits, it could be easy for such people to become isolated from their colleagues. Further research could establish how many people would like to travel to work more, and what more could be done to improve accessibility for those with mobility difficulties.

The data above paints the picture that experiences of transport for disabled people are not equal to non-disabled people, and while some progress has been made in recent years there is much more to be done to reach an equitable transport system.

Advocating disability equality

Advocacy for disability equality can be done in a variety of ways. Disability Rights UK (the UK’s leading organisation led by, run by, and working for Disabled people) have published a report called ‘Doing Transport Differently’, which is a guide on how to access public transport for those with lived experience of disability or health conditions. The report provides an overview of the main modes of public transport, highlighting recent progress that has been made for disabled passengers.

Contributor Sir Bert Massie CBE highlights that despite recent progress, the missing piece tends to be that some disabled people have insufficient information on what is available, and therefore lack the confidence to use it. The guide is therefore an attempt to liberate potential passengers to travel on public transport.

Wheels for Wellbeing (WfW) advocate for disability equality by striving towards a world where people of all abilities can access the physical, emotional, practical, and social benefits of cycling. WfW’s latest survey report sought views from disabled cyclists, which directly fed into their latest campaign to ensure that cycling can be accessed by all. Their report calls for:

• a universal rollout of fully accessible cycle infrastructure,
• a rapid implementation of policies to make cycling affordable for disabled people,
• an increased range of safe and supportive cycling environments,
• the formal recognition of cycles as mobility aids,
• and actions to tackle prejudice, hostility and hate crime towards disabled people.

Transport for London (TFL) are currently running a campaign to advocate for passengers with disabilities that are not necessarily visible, to remind passengers to think the needs of others. This has predominantly been run using posters across TFL underground and rail stations across London.

From an urban design aspect, some projects we are involved with at Markides Associates are working to consider and improve accessibility for disabled people and remove barriers.

Recent work on the redevelopment of a major town centre site in Catford involved the design of a new public space which increases pedestrian permeability and connectivity through the development site, and improves accessibility for disabled users by providing a clear defensible traffic-free route.

At Battersea we have worked closely with the wider design team for some time to ensure circulation between the various levels across the masterplan is inclusive and supported by sufficient lift capacity, whilst in the City of London, we are working to ensure the journey and user experience for users with accessible bikes is identical to that of any standard bike user. Some recent projects have also had the benefit of undergoing an Inclusive Design Review, for which we’ve used external consultants to ensure our designs are accessible for all.

When designing for disabilities, we also recognise the virtues of the added value these elements provide to non-disabled users. A good example of this is when considering pedestrian circulation through the inclusion of lifts: while the means of vertical circulation provide a critical form of circulation for disabled users, it can be beneficial for all users, be that parents with young children or people carrying heavy luggage.

Inclusive designs provide a benefit to all, so as development planners we must be receptive to opportunities to promote progressive, inclusive designs, with the social model of disability at the heart of our thinking.