skip to main content
research-article

Urban Accessibility as a Socio-Political Problem: A Multi-Stakeholder Analysis

Published:05 January 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Traditionally, urban accessibility is defined as the ease of reaching destinations. Studies on urban accessibility for pedestrians with mobility disabilities (e.g., wheelchair users) have primarily focused on understanding the challenges that the built environment imposes and how they overcome them. In this paper, we move beyond physical barriers and focus on socio-political challenges in the civic ecosystem that impedes accessible infrastructure development. Using a multi-stakeholder approach, we interviewed five primary stakeholder groups (N=25): (1) people with mobility disabilities, (2) caregivers, (3) accessibility advocates, (4) department officials, and (5) policymakers. We discussed their current accessibility assessment and decision-making practices. We identified the key needs and desires of each group, how they differed, and how they interacted with each other in the civic ecosystem to bring about change. We found that people, politics, and money were intrinsically tied to underfunded accessibility improvement projects "without continued support from the public and the political leadership, existing funding may also disappear. Using the insights from these interviews, we explore how may technology enhance our stakeholders" decision-making processes and facilitate accessible infrastructure development.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Rediet Abebe, Solon Barocas, Jon Kleinberg, Karen Levy, Manish Raghavan, and David G. Robinson. Roles for Computing in Social Change. In FAT* 2020 - Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 252--260. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372871Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Lauren C. Abercrombie, James F. Sallis, Terry L. Conway, Lawrence D. Frank, Brian E. Saelens, and James E. Chapman. 2008. Income and Racial Disparities in Access to Public Parks and Private Recreation Facilities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34, 1: 9--15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.09.030Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Isabelle Anguelovski, James J. T. Connolly, Laia Masip, and Hamil Pearsall. 2018. Assessing green gentrification in historically disenfranchised neighborhoods: a longitudinal and spatial analysis of Barcelona. Urban Geography 39, 3: 458--491. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.1349987Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Pablo Aragón, Claudia Flores-Saviaga, Adriana Alvarado Garcia, Christopher A. Le Dantec, and Jorge Saldivar. 2020. Civic Technologies: Research, Practice and Open Challenges. In CSCW 2020 Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Mariam Asad and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2015. Illegitimate civic participation: Supporting community activists on the ground. In CSCW 2015 - Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 1694--1703. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675156Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Mariam Asad and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2017. Tap the "Make this public" button: A design: Based inquiry into issue advocacy and digital civics. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, 6304--6316. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3026034Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Mariam Asad, Christopher A. Le Dantec, Becky Nielsen, and Kate Diedrick. 2017. Creating a Sociotechnical API: Designing City-Scale Community Engagement. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17, 2295--2306. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025963Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Yicheng Bai, Wenyan Jia, Hong Zhang, Zhi-Hong Mao, and Mingui Sun. 2014. Landmark-Based Indoor Positioning for Visually Impaired Individuals. International conference on signal processing proceedings. International Conference on Signal Processing 2014: 678--681. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOSP.2014.7015087Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Juan Pablo Bocarejo S. and Daniel Ricardo Oviedo H. 2012. Transport accessibility and social inequities: a tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments. Journal of Transport Geography 24: 142--154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.12.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Kirsten Boehner and Carl Disalvo. 2016. Data, design and civics: An exploratory study of civic tech. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, 2970--2981. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858326Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. N. Bolten, S. Mukherjee, V. Sipeeva, A. Tanweer, and A. Caspi. 2017. A pedestrian-centered data approach for equitable access to urban infrastructure environments. IBM Journal of Research and Development 61, 6: 101--1012. https://doi.org/10.1147/JRD.2017.2736279Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mark Bovens. 2007. Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework. European Law Journal 13, 4: 447--468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2: 77--101. Retrieved July 11, 2014 from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jane Campbell and Mike Oliver. 2013. Disability politics: Understanding our past, changing our future. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Soon Ae Chun, Stuart Shulman, Rodrigo Sandoval, and Eduard Hovy. 2010. Government 2.0: Making Connections between Citizens, Data and Government. Information Polity 15, 1,2: 1--9. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-2010-0205Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Richard L. Church and James R. Marston. 2003. Measuring Accessibility for People with a Disability. Geographical Analysis 35, 1: 83--96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.2003.tb01102.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Civil Rights Division United States Department of Justice. 1990. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Pub. L. No. 101--336, 104 Stat. 328. Retrieved September 14, 2017 from https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/thelaw/ada.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Colding, Barthel, and Sörqvist. 2019. Wicked Problems of Smart Cities. Smart Cities 2, 4: 512--521. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities2040031Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Eric Corbett and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2018. The problem of community engagement: Disentangling the practices of municipal government. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174148Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Clara Crivellaro, Rob Anderson, Daniel Lambton-Howard, Tom Nappey, Patrick Olivier, Vasilis Vlachokyriakos, Alexander Wilson, and Pete Wright. 2019. Infrastructuring public service transformation: Creating collaborative spaces between communities and institutions through HCI research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 26, 3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3310284Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. Q. Dalvi and K. M. Martin. 1976. The measurement of accessibility: Some preliminary results. Transportation 5, 1: 17--42. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165245Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2019. Infrastructures of Digital Civics: Transportation, Advocacy, and Mobile Computing.. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 169--184. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20725-0_8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Christopher A. Le Dantec, Mariam Asad, Aditi Misra, and Kari E. Watkins. 2015. Planning with Crowdsourced Data: Rhetoric and Representation in Transportation Planning. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW '15, 1717--1727. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675212Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Christopher A. Le Dantec, Kari E. Watkins, Russ Clark, and Elizabeth Mynatt. 2015. Cycle atlanta and OneBusAway: Driving innovation through the data ecosystems of civic computing. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 327--338. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21006-3_32Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Christopher A Le Dantec. 2014. Data-Based Civic Participation. In Second AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Kevin C. Desouza and Akshay Bhagwatwar. 2012. Citizen Apps to Solve Complex Urban Problems. Journal of Urban Technology 19, 3: 107--136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2012.673056Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Kevin C. Desouza and Akshay Bhagwatwar. 2014. Technology-Enabled Participatory Platforms for Civic Engagement: The Case of U.S. Cities. Journal of Urban Technology 21, 4: 25--50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2014.954898Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Talitha Dubow, Axelle Devaux, Christian Stolk, and Catriona Manville. 2017. Civic Engagement: How can digital technologies underpin citizen-powered democracy? RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/cf373Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ahmed El-Geneidy, David Levinson, Ehab Diab, Genevieve Boisjoly, David Verbich, and Charis Loong. 2016. The cost of equity: Assessing transit accessibility and social disparity using total travel cost. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 91: 302--316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.07.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Elizabeth Ellcessor. 2010. Bridging disibility divides: A critical history of web content accessibility through 2001. Information Communication and Society 13, 3: 289--308. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180903456546Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Rosemary D. F Bromley, David L. Matthews, and Colin J. Thomas. 2007. City centre accessibility for wheelchair users: The consumer perspective and the planning implications. Cities. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2007.01.009Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Jenille Fairbanks, Kenneth D. Plowman, and Brad L. Rawlins. 2007. Transparency in government communication. Journal of Public Affairs 7, 1: 23--37. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.245Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Navid Fallah, Ilias Apostolopoulos, Kostas Bekris, and Eelke Folmer. 2012. The user as a sensor: navigating users with visual impairments in indoor spaces using tactile landmarks. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '12, 425. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2207735Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Marcus Foth, Leonardo Parra Agudelo, and Robin Palleis. 2013. Digital soapboxes: towards an interaction design agenda for situated civic innovation. 725--728. https://doi.org/10.1145/2494091.2495995Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Lance Freeman. 2005. Displacement or Succession?: Residential Mobility in Gentrifying Neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Review 40, 4: 463--491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087404273341Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Jon E. Froehlich, Anke M. Brock, Anat Caspi, João Guerreiro, Kotaro Hara, Reuben Kirkham, Johannes Schöning, and Benjamin Tannert. 2019. Grand challenges in accessible maps. Interactions 26, 2: 78--81. https://doi.org/10.1145/3301657Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Jon E. Froehlich, Michael Saugstad, Manaswi Saha, and Matthew Johnson. 2020. Towards Mapping and Assessing Sidewalk Accessibility Across Socio- cultural and Geographic Contexts. In AVI Workshop on Data4Good - Designing for Diversity and Development (To Appear), 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Adriana Alvarado Garcia and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2018. Quotidian report: Grassroots data practices to address public safety. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274286Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Adriana Alvarado Garcia, Alyson L. Young, and Lynn Dombrowski. 2017. On making data actionable: How activists use imperfect data to foster social change for human rights violations in Mexico. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, CSCW: 1--19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134654Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Amin Gharebaghi, Mir-Abolfazl Mostafavi, Seyed Chavoshi, Geoffrey Edwards, and Patrick Fougeyrollas. 2018. The Role of Social Factors in the Accessibility of Urban Areas for People with Motor Disabilities. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 7, 4: 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7040131Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Amin Gharebaghi and Mir Abolfazl Mostafavi. 2016. A New Ontological Perspective For Integration Of Social And Physical Environments: Disability And Rehabilitation Context. ISPRS Annals of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences III-2: 137--142. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-III-2-137-2016Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Sucheta Ghoshal, Andrea Grimes Parker, Christopher A. Le Dantec, Carl Disalvo, Lilly Irani, and Amy Bruckman. 2019. Design and the Politics of Collaboration: A Grassroots Perspective. In Conference Companion Publication of the 2019 on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 468--473. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311957.3359438Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Ruth Glass. 1964. London?: aspects of change. MacGibbon & Kee, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Jonathan Glick. 2008. Gentrification and the Racialized Geography of Home Equity. Urban Affairs Review 44, 2: 280--295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087408316971Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. George Grier. 1978. Urban displacement?: a reconnaissance. Grier Partnership, Bethesda Md.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen. 2012. Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: an experiment. International Review of Administrative Sciences 78, 1: 50--73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852311429667Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Carl Grodach and Anastasia Loukaitou?Sideris. 2007. Cultural Development Strategies and Urban Revitalization: A Survey of US Cities. International Journal of Cultural Policy 13, 4: 349--370. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630701683235Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Sihui Guo, Ci Song, Tao Pei, Yaxi Liu, Ting Ma, Yunyan Du, Jie Chen, Zide Fan, Xianli Tang, Yong Peng, and Yanbin Wang. 2019. Accessibility to urban parks for elderly residents: Perspectives from mobile phone data. Landscape and Urban Planning 191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103642Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. H Hahn. 1986. Disability and the urban environment: a perspective on Los Angeles. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 4, 3: 273--288. https://doi.org/10.1068/d040273Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Harlan Hahn. 1985. Toward a politics of disability: Definitions, disciplines, and policies. The Social Science Journal. Retrieved from https://www.independentliving.org/docs4/hahn2.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Walter G. Hansen. 1959. How Accessibility Shapes Land Use. Journal of the American Planning Association 25, 2: 73--76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944365908978307Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Kotaro Hara, Christine Chan, and Jon E. Froehlich. 2016. The Design of Assistive Location-based Technologies for People with Ambulatory Disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '16, 1757--1768. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858315Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Kotaro Hara and Jon E. Froehlich. 2015. Characterizing and visualizing physical world accessibility at scale using crowdsourcing, computer vision, and machine learning. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing, 113: 13--21. https://doi.org/10.1145/2850440.2850442Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Kotaro Hara, Vicki Le, and Jon Froehlich. 2013. Combining crowdsourcing and google street view to identify street-level accessibility problems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '13, 631. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470744Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Mike Harding, Bran Knowles, Nigel Davies, and Mark Rouncefield. 2015. HCI, civic engagement & trust. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2833--2842. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702255Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. David Harvey. 2003. The Fetish of Technology: Causes and Consequences. Macalester International 13, 1: 7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Rob Imrie. 2000. Disabling Environments and the Geography of Access Policies and Practices. Disability and Society 15, 1: 5--24. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590025748Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Lyn Jongbloed and Anne Crichton. 1990. Difficulties in Shifting from Individualistic to Socio-political Policy regarding Disability in Canada. Disability, Handicap & Society 5, 1: 25--36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02674649066780021Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. US Department of Justice Civic Rights Division. Introduction to the ADA. Retrieved September 21, 2020 from https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. US Department of Justice. 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Retrieved December 19, 2019 from https://www.ada.gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Naveena Karusala, Jennifer Wilson, Phebe Vayanos, and Eric Rice. 2019. Street-Level Realities of Data Practices in Homeless Services Provision. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW: 1--23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359286Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Rob Kitchin and Robert Wilton. 2003. Disability activism and the politics of scale. The Canadian Geographer/Le G?ographe canadien 47, 2: 97--115. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-0064.00005Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Reinout Kleinhans, Maarten Van Ham, and Jennifer Evans-Cowley. 2015. Using Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Engagement and Self-Organization in Participatory Urban Planning and Neighbourhood Governance. Planning Practice and Research 30, 237--247. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1051320Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Helen Larkin, Danielle Hitch, Valerie Watchorn, and Susan Ang. 2015. Working with policy and regulatory factors to implement universal design in the built environment: The Australian experience. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 12, 7: 8157--8171. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120708157Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Daniela Antunes Lessa, Carlos Lobo, and Leandro Cardoso. 2019. Accessibility and urban mobility by bus in Belo Horizonte/Minas Gerais -- Brazil. Journal of Transport Geography 77: 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.04.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Arlene Mayerson. 1992. The History of ADA, a Movement Perspective. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://dredf.org/about-us/publications/the-history-of-the-ada/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Brian McInnis, Marta Poblet, Alissa Centivany, Karen Levy, Juho Kim, and Gilly Leshed. 2017. Crowdsourcing law and policy: A design-thinking approach to crowd-civic systems. In CSCW 2017 - Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 355--361. https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3022656Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. H. Filiz Alkan Meshur. 2013. Accessibility for people with disabilities in urban spaces: A case study of Ankara, Turkey. Archnet-IJAR 7, 2: 43--60. https://doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v7i2.154Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Allan R. Meyers, Jennifer J. Anderson, Donald R. Miller, Kathy Shipp, and Helen Hoenig. 2002. Barriers, facilitators, and access for wheelchair users: Substantive and methodologic lessons from a pilot study of environmental effects. Social Science and Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277--9536(01)00269-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Aditi Misra, Aaron Gooze, Kari Watkins, Mariam Asad, and Christopher A. Le Dantec. 2014. Crowdsourcing and Its Application to Transportation Data Collection and Management. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2414, 1: 1--8. https://doi.org/10.3141/2414-01Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. Iva Mrak, Tiziana Campisi, Giovanni Tesoriere, Antonino Canale, and Margareta Cindri?. 2019. The role of urban and social factors in the accessibility of urban areas for people with motor and visual disabilities. 160008. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5138076Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Michael J Muller. 2002. Participatory Design: The Third Space in HCI. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., USA, 1051--1068.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Matti Nelimarkka. 2019. A Review of Research on Participation in Democratic Decision-Making Presented at SIGCHI Conferences. Toward an Improved Trading Zone Between Political Science and HCI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW: 1--29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359241Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Kathe Newman and Philip Ashton. 2004. Neoliberal Urban Policy and New Paths of Neighborhood Change in the American Inner City. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 36, 7: 1151--1172. https://doi.org/10.1068/a36229Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Patrick Olivier and Peter Wright. 2015. Digital civics: Taking a local turn. Interactions 22, 61--63. https://doi.org/10.1145/2776885Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Horst W.J. Rittel and Melvin M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 2: 155--169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Manaswi Saha, Alexander J. Fiannaca, Melanie Kneisel, Edward Cutrell, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2019. Closing the Gap: Designing for the Last-Few-Meters Wayfinding Problem for People with Visual Impairments. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility - ASSETS '19, 222--235. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353776Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Manaswi Saha, Michael Saugstad, Hanuma Teja Maddali, Aileen Zeng, Ryan Holland, Steven Bower, Aditya Dash, Sage Chen, Anthony Li, Kotaro Hara, and Jon Froehlich. 2019. Project Sidewalk: A Web-based Crowdsourcing Tool for Collecting Sidewalk Accessibility Data At Scale. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '19, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300292Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Jorge Saldivar, Cristhian Parra, Marcelo Alcaraz, Rebeca Arteta, and Luca Cernuzzi. 2018. Civic Technology for Social Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: CSCW: An International Journal 27, 3-6: 1215--1253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-018-9311-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Kelly Shigeno, Sergio Borger, Diego Gallo, Ricardo Herrmann, Mateus Molinaro, Carlos Cardonha, Fernando Koch, and Priscilla Avegliano. 2013. Citizen sensing for collaborative construction of accessibility maps. In W4A 2013 - International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, 1. https://doi.org/10.1145/2461121.2461153Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Lisa Stafford and Claudia Baldwin. 2018. Planning Walkable Neighborhoods: Are We Overlooking Diversity in Abilities and Ages? Journal of Planning Literature 33, 1: 17--30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412217704649Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. Kentaro Toyama. 2015. Geek Heresy: Rescuing Social Change from the Cult of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Katherine VanHoose and Federico Savini. 2017. The social capital of urban activism. City 21, 3-4: 293--311. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2017.1325207Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  84. Raquel Velho. 2019. Transport accessibility for wheelchair users: A qualitative analysis of inclusion and health. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology 8, 2: 103--115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2018.04.005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. Anthony J Viera, Joanne M Garrett, and others. 2005. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37, 5: 360--363. Retrieved from http://www.stfm.org/FamilyMedicine/Vol37Issue5/Viera360Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. Vasilis Vlachokyriakos, Clara Crivellaro, Christopher A. Le Dantec, Eric Gordon, Pete Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2016. Digital civics: Citizen empowerment with and through technology. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, 1096--1099. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2886436Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. Amy Voida, Lynn Dombrowski, Gillian R. Hayes, and Melissa Mazmanian. 2014. Shared values/conflicting logics: working around e-government systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3583--3592. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  88. Martin Wachs and T. Gordon Kumagai. 1973. Physical accessibility as a social indicator. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 7, 5: 437--456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0121(73)90041--4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. Lingjing Wang, Cheng Qian, Philipp Kats, Constantine Kontokosta, and Stanislav Sobolevsky. 2017. Structure of 311 service requests as a signature of urban location. PLoS ONE 12, 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186314Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Sacoby Wilson, Malo Hutson, and Mahasin Mujahid. 2008. How Planning and Zoning Contribute to Inequitable Development, Neighborhood Health, and Environmental Injustice. Environmental Justice 1, 4: 211--216. https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2008.0506Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  91. Sacoby M. Wilson, Christopher D. Heaney, John Cooper, and Omega Wilson. 2008. Built Environment Issues in Unserved and Underserved African-American Neighborhoods in North Carolina. Environmental Justice 1, 2: 63--72. https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2008.0509Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  92. Miriam Zuk, Ariel H. Bierbaum, Karen Chapple, Karolina Gorska, and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. 2018. Gentrification, Displacement, and the Role of Public Investment. Journal of Planning Literature 33, 1: 31--44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412217716439Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  93. The New Urban Agenda - Habitat III. Retrieved May 10, 2020 from http://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. Public Rights-of-Way - United States Access Board. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/streets-sidewalks/public-rights-of-wayGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. Chapter 5"Model Sidewalks - United States Access Board. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/streets-sidewalks/public-rights-of-way/guidance-and-research/accessible-public-rights-of-way-planning-and-design-for-alterations/chapter-5-model-sidewalksGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. Proposed Rights-of-Way Guidelines - United States Access Board. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/streets-sidewalks/public-rights-of-way/proposed-rights-of-way-guidelinesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. Part II of II: Best Practices Design Guide - Sidewalk - Publications - Bicycle and Pedestrian Program | US FHWA. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalk2/sidewalks204.cfmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Architectural Barriers Act - United States Access Board. Retrieved December 2, 2019 from https://www.access-board.gov/the-board/laws/architectural-barriers-act-abaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Denver agrees to install curb ramps to comply with federal rules -- The Denver Post. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.denverpost.com/2016/03/15/denver-agrees-to-install-curb-ramps-to-comply-with-federal-rules/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  100. Settlement: Seattle to build thousands of sidewalk curb ramps over next 18 years | The Seattle Times. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/settlement-seattle-to-build-thousands-of-sidewalk-curb-ramps-over-next-18-years/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Curb Ramp Construction | City of Columbus. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.columbus.gov/publicservice/Design-and-Construction/document-library/Curb-Ramp-Construction/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  102. Increasing Accessibility City by City -- Curb Ramps | CREEC. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://creeclaw.org/increasing-accessibility-city-by-city-curb-ramps/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  103. 3 Cities Taking On ADA Compliant Curb Ramps | Tekway High Performance ADA Tiles by StrongGo. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://www.stronggo.com/blog/3-cities-taking-ada-compliant-curb-rampsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  104. ADA Lawsuits Target Poorly Maintained Sidewalks - CityLab. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/08/crumbling-sidewalks-become-a-legal-battleground/567562/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  105. Opinion | New York Has a Great Subway, if You're Not in a Wheelchair - The New York Times. Retrieved December 5, 2019 from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/opinion/new-york-has-a-great-subway-if-youre-not-in-a-wheelchair.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  106. Los Angeles ADA Settlement: Willits v. City of Los Angeles. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from http://www.losangelesadasettlement.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  107. Willits v. City of LA Sidewalk Settlement Announced | Office of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://www.lamayor.org/willits-v-city-la-sidewalk-settlement-announcedGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  108. Lan Remme V. City of Seattle and State of Washington / 2013 ? Keith Kessler. Retrieved November 7, 2019 from https://www.keithkesslerlaw.com/cases/2018/8/28/lan-remme-v-city-of-seattle-and-state-of-washington-2013Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  109. Sidewalk Repair Program - Transportation | seattle.gov. Retrieved December 20, 2019 from https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/maintenance-and-paving/sidewalk-repair-programGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  110. DDOT Guidelines for Comprehensive Transportation Review (CTR) Requirements | ddot. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://ddot.dc.gov/publication/ddot-guidelines-comprehensive-transportation-review-ctr-requirementsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  111. pathVu | Pedestrians. Retrieved February 17, 2020 from http://www.pathvu.com/solutions_byrole_pedestriansGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  112. Beyond Tech: Policymaking in a Digital Age - Code for America Blog - Medium. Retrieved January 10, 2020 from https://medium.com/code-for-america/beyond-tech-policymaking-in-a-digital-age-2776b9a17b69Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  113. The Right Way to Make Cities Smart - The Atlantic. Retrieved November 23, 2019 from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/05/the-right-way-to-make-cities-smart/370900/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  114. Cory Booker calls for tech-empowered open democracy | Pando. Retrieved January 11, 2020 from https://pando.com/2013/03/10/cory-booker-calls-for-tech-empowered-open-democracy/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  115. What Is 311? Retrieved November 24, 2019 from https://www.govtech.com/dc/articles/What-is-311.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  116. SeeClickFix | 311 Request and Work Management Software. Retrieved March 21, 2018 from https://en.seeclickfix.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  117. Street Bump. Retrieved March 22, 2018 from http://www.streetbump.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  118. Find It, Fix It - Service Request Mobile App - Customer Service Bureau | seattle.gov. Retrieved November 24, 2019 from https://www.seattle.gov/customer-service-bureau/find-it-fix-it-mobile-appGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  119. MRSC - City and Town Forms of Government. Retrieved March 19, 2020 from http://mrsc.org/Home/Explore-Topics/Legal/General-Government/City-and-Town-Forms-of-Government.aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  120. Neighborhood walk-throughs help Rome officials witness problems firsthand - News - Uticaod - Utica, NY. Retrieved March 6, 2020 from https://www.uticaod.com/news/20160720/neighborhood-walk-throughs-help-rome-officials-witness-problems-firsthandGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  121. Data Collection App | Collector for ArcGIS - Capture Field Data. Retrieved August 9, 2019 from https://www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/collector-for-arcgis/overviewGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  122. Cyclomedia. Retrieved May 31, 2020 from https://www.cyclomedia.com/usGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  123. Service Requests (311) - Datasets - US City Open Data Census. Retrieved November 24, 2019 from http://us-city.census.okfn.org/dataset/service-requestsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  124. How Civic Technology Can Help Stop a Pandemic | Foreign Affairs. Retrieved May 14, 2020 from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/2020-03--20/how-civic-technology-can-help-stop-pandemic?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_cta&utm_campaign=cta_share_buttonsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  125. Property Owners? Responsibilities - Transportation | seattle.gov. Retrieved May 14, 2020 from https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/maintenance-and-paving/property-owners-responsibilitiesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  126. NYC DOT - New York City Administrative Code Sidewalk Rules. Retrieved May 14, 2020 from https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/19-152.shtmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  127. Sidewalk Repair | ddot. Retrieved February 14, 2020 from https://ddot.dc.gov/node/544192Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  128. Shovel Your Sidewalk | ddot. Retrieved May 14, 2020 from https://ddot.dc.gov/page/shovel-your-sidewalkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  129. Lawmakers approve 'block the box' bill allowing Seattle to ticket drivers for blocking crosswalks, bus lanes | Q13 FOX News. Retrieved May 18, 2020 from https://q13fox.com/2020/03/10/lawmakers-approve-block-the-box-bill-allowing-seattle-to-ticket-drivers-for-blocking-crosswalks-bus-lanes/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  130. Don't Block the Box Bill Passes State Legislature | The Urbanist. Retrieved May 18, 2020 from https://www.theurbanist.org/2020/03/09/dont-block-the-box-bill-passes-state-legislature/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  131. How Mesa is Using Data to Guide CARES Relief -- CitiesSpeak. Retrieved April 30, 2020 from https://citiesspeak.org/2020/04/27/how-mesa-is-using-data-to-guide-cares-relief/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  132. Technology Is Not the Answer - The Atlantic. Retrieved April 1, 2020 from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/03/technology-is-not-the-answer/73065/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  133. How Congress turns citizens? voices into data points. Retrieved May 8, 2020 from https://theconversation.com/how-congress-turns-citizens-voices-into-data-points-120869Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  134. Rock Spring and White Flint 2 Design Guidelines | Montgomery Planning. Retrieved May 16, 2020 from https://montgomeryplanning.org/planning/communities/area-2/rock-spring-and-white-flint-2-design-guidelines/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  135. Chapter 4: Ramps and Curb Ramps - United States Access Board. Retrieved May 14, 2020 from https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-4-ramps-and-curb-rampsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  136. 2019. Delivery-driven Policy, Policy designed for the digital age. Retrieved from http://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/codeforamerica-cms1/documents/delivery-driven-policy-code-for-america.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Urban Accessibility as a Socio-Political Problem: A Multi-Stakeholder Analysis

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
      Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 4, Issue CSCW3
      CSCW
      December 2020
      1825 pages
      EISSN:2573-0142
      DOI:10.1145/3446568
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 January 2021
      Published in pacmhci Volume 4, Issue CSCW3

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader