Inclusive Architecture

A. Wismadi
 14. Evaluation of Design
Cases

11. Inclusive Design and 12. Inclusive Design and

13. Guest Lecture:
Universal Design: Case Universal Design: Case
Working with Community
Studies Studies

10. Dria Manunggal

8. Human Dimension and 9. Inclusive Design and
Guest Lecture:
Physical Ability in Design Universal Design
Universal Design

5. Social responsibility in 6. Co-design for inclusive 7. Cost-effective design

4. Inclusive urbanism
inclusive design built environment for affordable housing

2. Utilitarian Approaches 3. Capability Approaches

1. Inclusive Planning and

Design Approaches
Outline
• Session 1: Basic philosophy of inclusive architecture
• Reason for inclusiveness
• Measuring Inclusiveness: Accessibility, Penetration, Affordability
• Evaluating Inclusive Policies: inclusion error and exclusion error
• Session 2: Measure for inclusive architecture
• Policy for inclusion: equitable policy, horizontal vs vertical equity
• Resource allocation: basic concept: Utilitarian vs Capability Approach
• Measurement of equity: comparison of marginal utility, total utility, and capability approach
• Session 3: Institutionalizing inclusive architecture:
• legal aspect: policy and regulation
• budgeting: resource allocation
• financial aspect: financial inclusion
• policy: horizontal vs vertical equity
• Session 4: Evaluating inclusive architecture
• Micro scale: design
• Mezzo scale: planning, master plan
• Macro scale: policy and regulatory framework
Why Inclusion?
• Moral reason: universal access
• Social reason: equitable service
• Economic reason: public service
• Financial reason: serving the bottom-of-pyramid
Moral reason:
universal access
Social reason:
equitable service
Economic reason:
public service
Financial reason:
serving the bottom-of-pyramid
Measuring Inclusiveness
Accessibility, Penetration, Affordability
Equity
• All segments in society must have equal access to appropriate, good
quality and safe infrastructure adapted to their needs (WHO, 2000).
• Often equity is not achieved. irregularities occur in terms of access
(availability, quality, price, size, and so on).
• Main problems behind inequity are: Political systems, institutional
problems and lack of affordability; (low-income groups are simply not
able to pay for good quality housing and facilities).
• Achieving equity, therefore, often implies public financing, cross-
subsidising or other methods to pay for infrastructure for the poor.
Access
• Currently, over a billion people lack access to clean water, around two
billion people lack access to proper sanitation, also two billion do not
have access to electricity and over half the world’s population has
never used a telephone in their lives.
• This lack of access can generally be caused by the complete absence
in a person’s neighbourhood of the physical infrastructure itself, or by
the fact that the services that are present are not accessible for
economical, cultural or political reasons.
Multiple dimensions of access

ACCESS

Availability Accessibility Affordability Acceptability

Physical (spatial) Economic Social

Adapted from Guagliardo (2004)

The access dimensions explained
Dimension Questions
 What types of services exist?
 Which organizations offer these services?
Availability  Is there enough skilled personnel?
 Do the offered products and services correspond with the needs of
poor people?
 Does the supplies suffice to cover the demand?
 What is the geographical distance between the services and the
Accessibility homes of the intended users?
 By what means of transport (if needed) can they be reached?
 How much time does it take?
 What are the direct and indirect costs (e.g. transport lost time etc.
) of the services and the products delivered through the services?
Affordability  Are these services affordable to people or are they excluded from
them for economic reasons?
 Are the services provided acceptable to the users?
Acceptability  Are there any social/cultural barriers that prevent users from
making use of the services?
Infrastructure access in different countries
• In Western Europe and the United States People typically have access
to four to six network connections: electricity, drinking water, gas,
sewerage, telecommunication, cable television.
• Currently also internet connectivity is common, e.g. Netherlands over
80% of households.
• In developing countries a wide range of different levels of
infrastructure service provision exists, using western-style networks,
often dating back to colonial times, but also more flexible forms of
provision.
Variation in physical access
• The coverage of public facilities and infrastructure services in
developing countries shows a very wide variation.
• This variation can be described in geographical terms at different
scales (national, regional, city wide, local area), but also in terms of
characteristics such as urban – rural, historical and socio-economic
development.
• If public facilities and infrastructure networks exist, their densities are
typically highest in central business districts, high-income areas and
formally planned and developed areas of cities. Informal areas often
rely on other forms of provision.
Evaluating Inclusive Policies
Evaluating Inclusive Policies
 Session 2:
Measure for inclusive
architecture
Contents
• Policy for inclusion:
• equitable policy, horizontal vs vertical equity
• Resource allocation: basic concept:
• Utilitarian vs Capability Approach
• Measurement of equity:
• comparison of marginal utility, total utility, and capability approach
What is infrastructure equity?
• Equity on impact distribution (cost and benefit) due to infrastructure
(incl. public facilities).
• Litman (2002) classified into 3 types of equity:
• Horizontal equity
• Vertical equity
• According to level of wealth (e.g. Income level)
• According to need and ability
Horizontal Equity
• Horizontal Equity refers to
impact distribution between
individual and groups who have
equal need and ability
• Equal groups share equal
resources and cost to obtain
equal service.
• What you get is what you paid!
• Public service policy should
avoid unequal treatment for
certain group (s)
Vertical Equity according to economic and
social welfare
• Social Equity refers to impact
distribution between individual and
group with different social statuses
• Infrastructure policy is considered
equitable if the priority goes to
vulnerable groups therefore it
compensate to inequity
• Progressive Policy
• Example:
• Support for affordable transport mode
• Pricing Policy for the poor
• Ensuring the poor group will not burden
the external cost (polution, risk of
accident, financial loss etc.)
Vertical Equity according to needs and ability
for mobility
• It refers to distribution impact
between individual and groups
who have different needs and
ability to mobility.
• Level of service should consider the
differences of needs and ability to
mobility due to aging, physical
disability, people who has driving
license etc.
• As the basis for implementing
universal design to facilitate difable
groups or groups with special
needs.
Review on the equity value of transport policy
and planning: the fact of inequitable policy
• Selected inappropriate performance indicators
• Indicated impact:
• Public transport for goods/freight disappear
• Public transport services get worst
• The nature of infrastructure as public good decrease
Strategies toward equity: some examples
• Horizontal Equity through planning and investment reforms
• Horizontal Equity with pricing strategy
• Vertical Equity according to level of economic welfare
• Vertical Equity according to level ability to mobility
Keadilan horisontal melalui reformasi
perencanaan dan investasi
• Prinsip dasar keadilan horisontal adalah pengalokasian sumber daya
secara merata untuk tiap kelompok, kecuali jika ada justifikasi
pemberian subsidi.
• Kriteria evaluasi harus diukur dengan alokasi per kapita dengan
justifikasi pada kepentingan khusus (difable atau kelompok miskin).
• Reformasi diperlukan untuk meluruskan penyimpangan prinsip
keadilan akibat keberpihakan pada satu kelompok tertentu (pengguna
kendaraan bermotor pribadi).
• Alokasi dana perencanaan dan investasi yang tidak seimbang untuk
kelompok yang tidak mampu (secara fisik atau ekonomi) harus
dirubah dengan alokasi yang lebih banyak untuk kelompok tertinggal.
Keadilan horisontal melalui Reformasi Harga
(pricing)
• Keadilan horisontal mensyaratkan harga yang dibeli setara dengan
keseluruhan biaya yang ditimbulkan untuk layanan diberikan jika tidak
ada intervensi subsidi.
• Saat ini pemilik kendaraan pribadi dikenai pembayaran yang terlalu
rendah karena biaya-biaya eksternal yang ditimbulkan oleh kendaraan
pribadi tidak dikenakan.
• Strategi ini dapat sekaligus mencapai keadilan vertikal apabila
diterapkan untuk mendukung penyediaan moda alternative,
meningkatkan keterjangkauan bagi si miskin dan memberikan
prioritas bagi barang dan jasa yang menyangkut hajat hidup orang
banyak.
Keadilan vertikal terhadap tingkat
kesejahteraan
• Strategi yang bisa dijalankan diantaranya adalah dengan membuat
struktur harga pelayanan yang berpihak pada kelompok yang tidak
mampu secara ekonomi, sosial dan fisik.
Keadilan vertikal terhadap tingkat
kemampuan
• Strategi penataan ruang juga dapat dilakukan untuk menghasilkan
lebih banyak akses dan tata guna lahan yang mendorong penggunaan
multi moda transport.
• Memberikan pilihan yang lebih banyak pada kelompok yang tidak
mampu.
Penutup
• Adanya kesenjangan kesejahteraan (welfare divide) di Indonesia harus
diantisipasi diantaranya dengan pembangunan yang berkeadilan.
• Reorientasi prinsip penyediaan infrastruktur dan layanan tranportasi
yang mengindahkan prinsip keadilan horisontal dan vertikal
diharapkan akan mampu menjamin pembangunan yang sustainable
dengan kondisi pendanaan yang terbatas.
Pro-poor Growth Policy Evaluation
Structure
• Background
• Problem on existing measures
• Introducing New Pro-poor Growth Measure
Background
• Policy objectives (equity, equality and poverty) and measure for
evaluation
• Problem on current measurement methods
• Overlooked properties measures for growth and non-poor-group
Equity, Equality, Poverty
• Equity: Following the 2006 World Bank(WB) report, Equity defined based on 2
principles:
• Equal opportunity. The outcome of a person’s life, in its many dimensions, should reflect
mostly his or her efforts and talents, not his or her background (endowment and process)
• Avoidance of absolute deprivation/poverty (people who are unable to command sufficient
resources to satisfy basic needs)
• Inequality
• Corresponds to the first item of Equity
• Relates to the distribution of income/wealth across a population
• It is important to provide measurement methods for evaluating policy objectives

36
Criteria for Equity Measures
Four criteria for good measurement:
1. Anonymity-permutations of incomes among people should not matter for inequality judgments.
2. Scale independence principle (Relative Income Principle)– only relative incomes shares matter.
3. Population independence principle- population size doesn’t matter, i.e.- all that matters are
proportions of the population that earn different levels of income.
4. Dalton principle– if one income distribution can be achieved from another by constructing a
sequence of regressive transfers, then the former distribution must be deemed more unequal
than the latter.

37
Curve distribution comparison

• Curves distribution pattern evaluation has been an important

analytical tool in studies of poverty and inequality.
• Available methods:
• Lorenz Curve
• CDF (Cumulative Distribution Function)
• Pen’s Parade
• TIP Curve
• Several problems to use existing methods have been investigated:
• Properties on non-poor (rich) group is overlooked
• Without evident on growth
Problem in Lorenz Curve 1:
Intersecting Curve
• The Lorenz curve has been an important analytical tool in studies of
income inequality.
• However, it is well known that intersecting Lorenz curves are not uncommon.
The Lorenz criterion can provide a ranking for only a minority of all possible
pairwise comparisons.
• Measurement issue for intersecting curves:
• misleading quantitative result (e.g. identical Gini Index for two different shape
of Lorenz Curves):

no intersecting intersecting ?
=
Problem in Lorenz Curve:
No information on level of prosperity
• Lorenz Curve from group of people below and above poverty level
may be identical

The POOR poverty line

The RICH

poverty line
CDF (Cumulative Distribution Functions)

• Poverty Incidence Curve (headcount rate of people under poverty

lines)
• Poverty Deficit Curve (total gap)
• The Poverty Severity Curve (measure for the poorest)
CDF Problem: overlooked the non-poor group and real value
issue

Headcount rate of people under poverty lines

(calculate incidence using a poverty line z)
Incidence

Deficit: A+C
The area beneath the poverty incidence curve
For distribution F(y) this is A + C at poverty line z1

A Severity:C
The area beneath the poverty deficit curve

C The PSC curve measures the P2 index of poverty.

For distribution F(y) this is C at poverty line z1

y income level
z the poverty line

(Demery, 2007)
TIP Curve
• The Three Is of Poverty Curve (Jenkins and Lambert 1997)
• Incidence Intensity Inequality
• Rank individuals from poorest to richest, cumulating their average
• poverty gaps: g( y i , z)  max z  y i ,0
 g(y i , z)   z  yi 
• or normalized gaps ( y i , z )     max  ,0 
 z   z 
• Plot the per capita cumulative gaps against cumulative population
share
TIP Curve problem :
overlooked the non-poor-group
• As we move from poorest
individuals upwards, the
per capita cumulative gap
increases
• When y is above z the TIP
curve is flat.
• If every poor person had
the same income, the TIP
curve would be linear
• If income unequal
amongst poor, the TIP
curve will be bowed
inwards
(Demery, 2007)

 Problem: analysis focuses only

for people below poverty line,
non-poor-group is overlooked
Pen’s Parade Jan Pen (1971)
• CDF with axes switched
• Rank individuals by income. Imagine their height is
proportional to their income
• Pen’s Parade is the plot of their height as they
parade before an observer – the parade taking 1
hour
• The observer is of average height
• What would the profile look like?
• A parade of dwarves and giants
• Using UK data Pen reckoned it would take 45 minutes for the
marchers to be the same height as the observer.
Pen’s Parade Problem: incompliance to good measurement
criteria

Problem: Incompliance to one of good

inequality measurement criteria: Scale
independence principle (Relative Income
Principle)– only relative incomes shares matter.
Normalized measurement is required!

(Demery, 2007)
Introducing New Measure:
W-Curve!
• Existing measure does not satisfy pro-poor growth policy evaluation, new
measure is required.
• Approach for developing W-Curve:
• Including properties of Equity (defined ‘floor’, Poverty Line, minimum line to provided
opportunity)
• Including non-poor (rich) group properties (prosperity)
• Intuitive and quantitative analysis (combining graphical and quantitative evaluation)
• Enable to compare two distribution curves
• Comprehensive measurement including (almost) all properties of pro-poor growth
measurement
Introducing New Measure:
W-Curve Properties

Inequality (E)
HIGH :~1
LOW :0

Degree of Prosperity (P)

Degree of Severity (S): P HIGH : ~ 90
HIGH : ~ 90 S LOW :0
LOW :0

Poverty Incidence (I)

HIGH : 100%
LOW : 0%

Poor Non-Poor
Step-by-step to build W-Curve Start

Estimate HH
Income*

Calculate Gap (-)

Set Poverty Line
and Surplus (+)

Calculate Absolute
Number of HH in
Value of Gap (-)
each village
and Surplus (+)
Share of Income (Y) Share of HH (X)

Total Deficit and Total Number of

Surplus HH in each village

Cumulative
find Plot
sort Distribution of Y=Y+minY W-Curve
min(y) (X,Y)
(X,Y)

find
find (y’) find (y’’)
1st (x’) calculate
on on last
where Gini Index
1st (x) (x)
y=0

Degree of
Degree of
Poverty Prosperity
Severity (S)= Inequality (E)
Incidence (I) (P)=
cot(y’/x’)
*: Income as example for explaining the measurement method cot(y’’/1-x’)
Resource Allocation