Accessible Products for All: Promoting Universal Accessibility in Product Design

Research Stream: Symposium

Author: Luke McKenna, Undergraduate Product Design Student, BSc in Product Design and Innovation, Department of Design Innovation, Maynooth University

I believe there is a very common misconception of what product design really is. It is not so much ‘designing a product’, but rather it is ‘identifying a problem’ and ‘providing a solution’, generally through means of design. This discipline has been around since the birth of mankind, from the first people shaping primitive tools and designing fish traps, to forging armour and eventually making bicycles. Although design techniques and manufacturing methods are the best and most efficient they have ever been, there is a vital problem which has not yet been solved – establishing universal accessibility as a compulsory principle of modern product design.

The current prevailing ethos in the design and manufacturing world is still predominantly hostile to the core ideas of universal accessibility. Able-bodied, economically active and generally younger users are primarily considered when designing and manufacturing most modern products such as digital technologies, wearable devices, entertainment systems and so forth. Many private sector companies are reluctant to adopt additional accessibility specifications that they believe will increase the costs of product design, development, testing and manufacturing.

These profit-driven ideologies have not only obstructed the progression of universal accessibility in product design, but have also potentially withheld greater success from the companies themselves – Wouldn’t a company who designs and manufactures universally accessible products have potential to be incredibly successful?

Universally designed products receive increased use and enjoy greater levels of user satisfaction due to their accessible and simplistic nature, future-proof design, and broader appeal. With this in mind, why then would universally designed products be an off-putting concept for manufacturers?

Ronald Lawrence Mace (1942 – 1998) was an American product designer, architect, educator and consultant who coined the term ‘Universal Design’ (UD).

Mace defined it by saying, “Universal design is design that is usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.” After contracting polio as a child, Mace became a lifelong wheelchair user. As a person with a disability, Mace used his passion for architecture and product design alongside his tireless advocacy to push for legislative change in his native North Carolina, USA, and establish the first legal standards for accessible buildings and houses. He established the Center for Universal Design (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Center’), at the School of Design at North Carolina State University where we worked as a research professor.

The Center was said to be “a leading national and international resource for research and information on universal design in housing, products, and the built environment.”

As of now, the Center is not currently active due to lack of federal funding – this, unfortunately, is evidence of persistent disregard of UD in modern times.

Mace’s hard work and advocacy on UD eventually contributed to an international definition of the concept being enshrined within the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Convention), Article 2 on ‘Definitions’: Universal design” means the design of products, environments, programmes and services to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. “Universal design” shall not exclude assistive devices for particular groups of persons with disabilities where this is needed.

The European Commission’s Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021 – 2030 advocates “mainstreaming the Universal Design approach for better accessibility and provision of reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities into all actions.” This builds upon the Commission’s emphasis on promoting the ‘Design for All’ (DFA) approach to product design so that manufacturers will “design, develop and provide products, goods and services so that they can be accessed, understood and used by the widest range of users, including persons with disabilities”.

To make enabling and accessible products, it is a designer’s duty to alter traditional approaches to design methods that are disabling for older people and persons with disabilities. With a UD and DFA-oriented design process, not only would new production lines and systems be invented, but products already manufactured at scale would have necessary solutions applied to them, saving manufacturers from entirely new production requirements, and therefore costs.

There is no denying that this throws up some practical challenges for product designers.

However, with extensive research in service design, modern technologies, 3D CAD software, AI and a holistic DFA ethos, it is not only practical, but economical to provide a globalised society with a ubiquitous and comprehensive standard of UD for accessible products, devices, and services.

Abiding by UD also ‘future-proofs’ products and services as they can be designed to accommodate diversifying populations (ageing, disability and multicultural groups), evolving regulations (accessibility laws and guidelines), sustainability (adaptable, long-lasting materials and robust designs) and lifelong usability of products for people irrespective of their age and ability.

By generating the necessary political will and social advocacy, like Ronald Lawrence Mace, it is possible to develop new policies and legal standards for UD and DFA measures in product designs and related services, and set new high quality universal accessibility standards for the manufacturing industry at large.

At the start, I said that the purpose of a product designer is to identify a problem and provide a solution. The problem has been identified; it is now time for us to solve it. Striving for inclusivity, accessibility, usability, and for the good of all. The time for change in design has come. The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves.

Luke McKenna smiling with curly hair and wearing a black hoodie
Luke McKenna

Achieving Interoperability in Digitalised Healthcare in the European Union

Research Stream: Social Technologies

Author: Matthew McKenna, PhD Researcher at Maynooth University’s Assisting Living and Learning (ALL) Institute, Research Funded through the Science Foundation of Ireland (SFI) Centre for Research Training in Advanced Networks for Sustainable Societies (ADVANCE CRT)

In October 2021, MedTec Europe released a white paper in collaboration with the European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry (COCIR) titled, ‘Interoperability Standards in Digital Health: A White Paper from the Medical Technology Industry’. It defines interoperability in digital healthcare as “the ability of different information systems, devices and applications (systems) to access, exchange, integrate and cooperatively use data in a coordinated manner, within and across organisational, regional and national boundaries, to provide timely and seamless portability of information and optimise the health of individuals and populations globally”. It also underscores the fundamental importance of interoperability, stating that, “Lack of interoperability is widely acknowledged to be a critical barrier for the adoption and deployment of digital health technologies and for the digital transformation of healthcare”. To this end, interoperability in digital healthcare represents an indispensable systems component and critical necessity for the provision of modern healthcare in the European Union (EU).

To date however, the digitalisation of healthcare in the EU has encountered a complex web of bureaucratic, social and legal challenges due to a fragmented digital health technology market and poor inter-agency cooperation resulting from insufficient interoperability between structures and stakeholders on a national and international level. This has greatly slowed the pace at which potential benefits of digital technology can be translated into tangible improvements in healthcare and quality of life for people in the EU. The European Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission’) has arguably been slow to take decisive measures to enhance cross-sectoral coordination by reforming regulatory frameworks governing digital healthcare technologies. As such, data sharing, procurement and administration of digital technologies in the care environment has been governed by customary national laws of individual EU member states. Discordant legal rules and standards across the EU limit the ability of businesses developing and marketing digital health technologies such as robots and connected devices and services to operate effectively in the single market. Deficits of strategic cross-sectoral interoperability in the digitalisation of healthcare infrastructure and a lack of interagency communication and cooperation has discernibly contributed to the longevity of traditional, non-digital and wardship models of care provision, particularly for vulnerable individuals including older people and persons with disabilities.

Perhaps understandably, the Commission has approached the emergence of digital health technologies with a significant degree of apparent caution. In the absence of measures to promote wide-scale uniformity in procurement and implementation processes for connected devices and services in the care environment, the cohesive integration of these modern capabilities represents a slow and costly challenge for a siloed and fragmented European healthcare sector. In its approach to digital health technology, the Commission has assumed an unhurried and deliberate process of supporting research initiatives funded through programmes such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. The logical reasoning here is to assess, trial and identify examples of best practice in digitalisation within the care sector through the professional utility and implementation of digital technologies by clinicians and care workers. In this way, a trial-and-error process through practice and research can be established, with the experiences of the carer playing an important role in determining the practical challenges of ensuring effective implementation of digital health technologies in the care environment.

The digital healthcare technology industry in the EU is splintered and disorganised, even within the context of the single market. The following Commission Communication document from April 2018 titled ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Enabling the Digital Transformation of Health and Care in the Digital Single Market; Empowering Citizens and Building a Healthier Society’, announced the following strategic initiatives:

To date, the uptake of digital solutions for health and care remains slow and varies greatly across Member States and regions. Further action at EU level is crucial to accelerate the meaningful use of digital solutions in public health and healthcare in Europe. In its mid-term review on the implementation of the Digital Single Market (DSM) 2014 – 2019 strategy the Commission set out its intention to take further action in three areas:

  1. citizens’ secure access to their health data, including across borders, enabling citizens to access their health data across the EU;
  2. personalised medicine through shared European data infrastructure, allowing researchers and other professionals to pool resources (data, expertise, computing processing and storage capacities) across the EU;
  3. citizen empowerment with digital tools for user feedback and person-centred care using digital tools to empower people to look after their health, stimulate prevention and enable feedback and interaction between users and healthcare providers” (European Commission, 2018).

To this end, in 2022, the Commission put forward a proposal for a regulatory framework for the sharing of health data within the EU called the ‘European Health Data Space’ (EHDS) (European Union, 2022). According to the Commission, it will function as “a common EU data space for health data that empowers individuals and fosters a single market for electronic health records”. Further to this, “in 2024, the European Parliament and Council reached a political agreement on the Commission Proposal for the EHDS”. The EHDS is an important pillar in the construction of the European Health Union which aims to create a more unified, harmonised and effective healthcare system throughout the EU and to ensure the availability of medical supplies. These measures also address significant aspects of the three areas outlined above in the 2018 Commission Communication on the Digital Transformation of Health and Care.

In April 2024, the Interoperable Europe Act entered into force in the EU, representing an important step towards the harmonisation of “key” public services as part of the broader Digital Decade strategy. However, extending broader strategic digital interoperability across healthcare systems in the EU arguably requires dedicated and sector-specific legislative overhaul. Interoperable digitalised systems that empower caregiver engagement with stakeholders in policymaking and identification of good practice is necessary to facilitate smooth delivery of high standards in modern care. Digitalised interoperable healthcare systems with seamless transmission of patient health data, alongside appropriately scalable, cost-effective and rapid procurement mechanisms in the implementation of digital technology for effective service provision can maximise the efficiency and expertise of an invaluable care workforce.

Although certain long-anticipated initiatives are underway to harmonise digital healthcare systems in the EU through enhanced interoperability and an easing of some inhibitory regulatory barriers to the smooth functioning of health technology companies in the single market, change is happening at an often-lethargic pace. Unfortunately, this puts an unwelcome delay on the latent potential benefits that could be felt by carers and patients at an individual level given the current state of digitalised technological innovation. Furthermore, carers note that interoperability and scalability challenges often become apparent when trialling digital technologies in the care environment. As such, the involvement of healthcare workers in the creation of policy and best practice for the interoperable digitalisation of the care environment is critically important. Caregiver engagement mechanisms in Commission policymaking and communication with industry represent essential components in the development of digital interoperability frameworks that function smoothly and effectively, delivering versatile person-centred digitalised healthcare at an EU-wide level.

Skip to content