Access is easy. Access to inclusivity is much more elusive.

Whilst the design of buildings is moving toward universal accessibility, our inability to provide inclusive environments is much harder to solve.

Accessible and inclusive design. So many projects purport to achieve these aims and it was the topic of a presentation I gave at this year’s National Sports and Physical Activity Convention in Melbourne. The genesis was the completion of several projects in Western Sydney that had the aim of increasing community engagement in sport and physical activity including the development of bespoke amenity for people with a disability. The latter, the Blacktown Disability Sports Centre, is nearing completion and funded by the NSW Office of Sport with accessible design a key focus.

Facilities can be accessible by meeting and, in some cases surpassing, all relevant building code requirements. The built form is inspected by an access consultant and principal certifier to ensure what was built reflects the design and legislative requirements. Despite this check and balance, facilities often fall short of being inclusive. Conversely, older buildings or those which had a lesser focus on enhancing accessibility through their design can become places where inclusivity is part of their DNA. Accessibility and inclusivity are not mutually exclusive.

If we think about sport and community facilities there are elements which, although not specific to code, developers may include in pursuit of the highest standards of accessibility. Aquatic centres are providing more accessible bathrooms than are required by the building code and positioning these in the general changing village. The benefit is that although designed for people with a disability they can be used by everyone, removing physical barriers between how patrons with different needs experience the same ammenity. A good example of universal design, although perhaps not necessarily, inclusion.

Sporting facilities more generally are moving to provision unisex toilet and changing areas, enhancing their ability to cater for the growth in women’s and girls’ sports. Previously, boys would have been able to use facilities designed for girls because of the universality of toilet cubicles. The approach allowed facilities to cater for more content (training and competition) amongst boys compared to girls, inadvertently supporting inequalities in provision. The changing facilities at Oriam, Scotland’s national performance centre were designed so that they could be used by multiple female or multiple male teams depending on the event being hosted in the indoor sports hall. Despite this and before I give myself a metaphorical pat on the back, we did have to install cubicle partitions in the showers post completion and change some of the doors which were too heavy for some of our wheelchair users. This was an oversight in the design phase and a function of a project team with limited knowledge of what the different user groups who would access the facility preferred. The project team was about as homogenous as you could get and had multiple blind spots that we didn’t know existed.

Newer facilities are providing changing tables and feeding rooms in male and female toilet facilities providing greater flexibility and equality in the undertaking of familial responsibilities. A positive step and one that is not part of any accessibility code that I am aware of. Venues are incorporating more accessible seating and designing innovative solutions for how visually impaired or deaf fans can interact with the event. I watched a clip recently of a new device being used at AFL games that allows blind fans to follow the action around the field using a tablet. These are all positive steps in enhancing the accessibility of facilities.

Being inclusive, however, is a different matter. It relates to how facilities are operated, the attitude of staff to accommodating those with different needs and at the organisational level, having greater diversity within boards, management, and staff structures. This is why facilities can be inclusive without necessarily being accessible. Let me give you an example. There is a bar in Sydney called York Lane located behind Wynyard station. The bar is small and situated down a couple of steps presenting a problem for those in a wheelchair or with mobility issues. Once inside however the environment that has been created by its owner, Dieter, is about as welcoming and inclusive as you can imagine. Far more so, if I may offer, than other facilities that have won awards for their accessible design. Of course, the beer helps.

If you arrive at a venue which you have chosen because of its accessible amenities but have a poor experience with staff, it cannot be described as inclusive. You may have needed some extra assistance getting into the venue, finding your seat, or accessing the bathroom. If these requests were handled by staff in a curse, dismissive or generally ‘this isn’t in my job’ attitude, you are unlikely to want to return, no matter how good the built form is. The same is true of aquatic centres that provision hoist access to their pools to be more accessible. If the staff tasked with providing access to this piece of equipment cannot deal sensitively with the needs of those using it, inclusivity will remain elusive.

I gave an example in my talk of how, when working in professional sport, we didn’t do enough to cultivate an inclusive environment for players arriving from overseas. Some could not speak English and in most cases, the club made insufficient efforts to assist. At times, and I include myself in this, we didn’t even recognise it was a problem. Players born locally and with a good grasp of the language and cultural norms had a significant advantage in terms of assimilating and settling in. My experiences of this was 20 years ago (scary) however I wonder how much has changed? What are sports doing on the ground to make those from different cultures and backgrounds feel welcome in their programmes and facilities. I don’t know the answer, nor do I know how to improve inclusivity if it is a problem. Governmental and strategic initiatives have their place, I am sure, however at the local level facility operators, clubs and volunteers can take steps to understand what the barriers to participation are among groups in their community who are underrepresented. This often starts with a simple question and a willingness to be curious. For those familiar with Ted Lasso, BBQ sauce! We cannot wait to be guided by government and must take some local responsibility.

I am making the assumption here that organisations do in fact want to be more inclusive. There is a thought-provoking section in Malcom Gladwell’s most recent book, ‘revenge of the tipping point’, that suggests organisations pursue inclusivity only to a level in which underrepresented groups remain, well, underrepresented. This is worth considering. Sport, like so many organisations is keen to highlight how those from underrepresented groups or different cultural backgrounds are involved in their programmes. This, I assume, is to show the success of initiatives that promote inclusivity. It does not however speak to the experience of the individual. If we find ourselves in a group where there is a lack of social support from others with similar cultural refence points, will we enjoy being there? Statistics have a habit of hiding the lived experience of those that make up the numbers. Until underrepresented groups become represented it will be hard for them to shape policy, change attitudes and drive agendas. If they cannot do this in a meaningful way, can we ever attest to being inclusive?