Report of the CIB Expert Seminar on Building Non-Handicapping Environments,
Harare 1992
A review of current accessibility legislation in Kenya
Nicky Nzioki, Agnes Maganjo, Catherine Kariuki, University of Nairobi, Kenya
Contents
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to review the current accessibility
legislation on the built environment in Kenya and document the current situation
in the light of persons with disabilities. The paper will briefly
explain the various categories of disability.
In addressing disability and current legislation, the paper will embark
on a detailed description of government policies. In the light of the foregoing
information, various legislations will be discussed each in detail as they
affect the overall design of the built environment.
The paper will compile in its conclusion a list of feasible recommendations
which the government can consider in order to cater adequately for the disabled
person. In itemizing the recommendations, a distinction will be made of
those which can be tackled immediately, i.e. addition of a ramp to buildings
and those which require to be implemented over time and for those to be
included in new building designs.
In many parts of the world, the 1970's emerged as the decade of persons
with disabilities - when the disabled people in different parts of the world
started to band together and in a common voice demanded recognition for
their existence, their needs and their rights. (Falta 1976)
Among others, their agitation was based on familiar human rights principles
such as equal opportunities, non-discrimination, integration and normalization.
It was argued, and rightly so, that their lives were severely handicapped
by social, political, economic and physical barriers in society which not
only hampered their full participation in society but also reduced them
to objects of pity and welfare recipients and thus suffered segregation
and debasement.
Patricia Falta, for instance, argued that "whatever program received
by the handicapped has been in response to activist political pressure by
the handicapped themselves rather than a recognition of their valid rights".
She cited unwillingness, fears and disgust "nurtured by traditional
unfounded myths and unknowns" in the parts of the governments as the
main factors which have hindered them from giving people with disabilities
freedom to participate in development, the opportunity to develop their
abilities, express their individuality as well as economic and social freedom.
(Falta 1976) In very general terms, the needs facing disabled persons which
should be addressed can be divided into two main categories:
First and foremost is the need to be incorporated into the economic mainstream
as full and equal members of society. Thus shifting emphasis from merely
the physical strength or limitation to the brains.
Secondly, and of equal importance, is the need for governments to recognize
and address the needs of disabled people as equally important as those of
other members of society and hence form the basis of all planning and development
strategies.
In response to these unique needs facing people with disabilities, 1981
was designated as the United Nations' Year of the Disabled Persons with
the aim of sensitizing and directing the attention of the member states
to the plight of disabled people. In 1982, all member states unanimously
adopted the World Plan of Action aimed at making the physical environment
accessible to all including persons with various types of disabilities.
This was in recognition of the fact that the situation of the disabled persons
should, as Weiss puts it, "be improved mainly by the adaptation of
society and not necessarily through measures related to individuals. It
is therefore the built environment that ought to adapt to peoples' possibilities
of using it not the other way round". (Weiss 1984)
In order to achieve the above objectives, it is important to develop programs
and strategies that will eliminate all design barriers that tend to limit
the degree of integration and independence of those with disabilities. This
can, as may have been pointed out, be achieved through amending the Building
Codes and Regulations to incorporate accessibility in the design and construction
of the built environment and secondly, adopt the existing buildings to the
special needs of persons with disabilities. This, if achieved, will go a
long way in affording disabled persons an opportunity to integrate freely
with the rest of society. It has been noted by many and indeed by disabled
people themselves that "any attempts to segregate them into special
schools, special housing, special transport, etc. is interpreted as an evidence
of over-protection and patronizing of the society and indeed the worst oppression.
This is because, to people with disabilities, all these acts are a constant
reminder that they are different from the rest of society and this tends
to extend handicapism to those already vulnerable". (Thiberg 1984)
Following the 1982 UN Resolutions, many countries, especially in the developed
world, joined those which had already enacted access legislation.
In countries such as Britain, United States of America, the Scandinavian
countries and some developing countries such as China, South Africa, etc.
efforts were made to create a barrier-free environment in response to the
international concern over the accessibility of disabled persons to the
built environment. A lot of successes have definitely been achieved towards
this end. For instance, on Wangfujing Street in Beijing, China, a very busy
shopping street, disabled people could not use the street despite the fact
that most commercial activities were concentrated there. Numerous obstructions
hampered accessibility by disabled people to the street:
- 47 per cent of persons with disabilities were blocked by entrance
steps
- 45 per cent by narrow corridors
- 40 per cent by impassable sidewalks
- 39 per cent by staircases
Seeing the state of affairs, the Municipal Council decided to eliminate
those architectural barriers by installing ramps in the entrances of selected
commercial and recreational stores with the surfaces of the ramps made of
durable, non-slip materials. In addition, lowered handrails were mounted
on both sides of the ramps and on one of the public toilets. Along the full
length of the street sidewalk curbs were remodelled into ramps thus creating
unobstructed passage for wheelchairs and crutch users as well as other pedestrians.
Audio instruction boards were installed to help the visually impaired find
their way along the street and Braille signs were put up at bus stops. (Bai
Demao 1987)
Another good example of accessibility legislation and efforts is the Lesotho
Paper on Accessibility which gives the technical details put into consideration
in building a barrier-free environment. This has and will form the basis
for other African countries contemplating Access Legislation. Despite success
in this regard, there are feelings that full understanding of disabled persons
and concrete progress to give them their full and rightful place has not
been fully achieved even in these countries.
In the African region, the problem is even more critical with few countries
having implemented the 1982 UN Resolution on Elimination of Design and Architectural
Barriers in the built environment. In Kenya, in particular, one would not
be exaggerating to say that "the built environment is designed by and
for the healthy young persons, not children, the elderly one, expectant
mothers and disabled". (Biswas 1988) In all the important legislations
dealing with the design and construction of the built environment, there
is direct and implied requirement that the built environment should accord
'a reasonable degree of safety and accessibility' to the public using it.
In interpreting the "reasonableness" of the design criteria, the
yardstick used is that of a non-disabled person, thus the safety and accessibility
for those with some physical or mental limitation of one kind or other being
completely omitted as will be observed below.
Before any attempt is made to review the existing Access Legislation in
Kenya, it is important to define what we mean when we talk of 'disabled'
persons and try to group them into specific categories with the premise
that their specific needs of access to the built environment depends on
the particular kind of disability. This is to avoid banding persons with
disabilities together under 'disabled persons' thus sacrificing and overlooking
their varied individual needs as far as facilitating their mobility is concerned.
For the purposes of this paper, disabled persons shall be taken to mean
those who, due to some physical, sensory, visual or mental impairment, experience
difficulties in using the built environment if the building is not oriented
to their needs. Their needs can be put into four main groups:
Persons with physical disabilities
This group includes all those persons without legs
or whose legs are not able to support their weight or whose legs need extra
support to support all the weight. This group is further divided into three
sub-groups. (John Hunt & Lesley Hoyer 1982)
Persons who spend most of the time lying down
These are people confined to beds by the nature of
their disability or as a result of a chronic illness. In their case, accessibility
to the built environment is irrelevant. Their needs could be said to include
a well-heated bedroom which offers a good view from the bed.
Wheelchair users
Wheelchair users require mobility building, offering
access, adequate space in all rooms, doorways and passages for wheelchair
circulation and handles, switches, windows and work surfaces at wheelchair
height.
The semi-ambulant and ambulant
The former are people who do not use wheelchairs and
are able to walk to a limited extent, in some cases only with the aid of
another person.
The latter, on the other hand, are persons who do not use wheelchairs and
walk with difficulties, in some cases only with the aid of another person.
These two groups of people can comfortably be accommodated in mobility buildings
with ramped access and wider doors.
In their research, John Hunt and Lesley Hoyes (1982) also found that age
was still an important factor in the incidence of not only physical disability
but also other types of disability such as sensory and mental disabilities.
For instance, of the 1,446 disabled persons considered, 73 per cent were
aged 60 years and over. As far as these people are concerned, the services
provided should be based on the philosophy of enabling them through the
provision of comprehensive support system and orientation of buildings to
their needs. This provides a chance to retain an active and independent
lifestyle away from the former philosophy of building homes for care and
attention, which is not only expensive, but denies old persons an opportunity
to be independent and active.
In their conclusion, Hunt and Hoyes recommended avoidance of steps, provision
of wider doors and passages, and the location of switches, windows, work
surfaces, and sanitary facilities at a comfortable height. These would benefit
disabled people, pregnant women, children, and to a large extent make life
easier also for those who are still young.
Hearing impaired
These include those persons with varying degrees of
difficulty in hearing and communicating. Their needs, with regard to accessibility
to the built environment, primarily evolve around sound signals such as
fire alarms, sounds of falling objects, etc. Since their disability limits
them from hearing, very good visual indications should be included and planned
for in the design of projects to ensure their safety in buildings. Additionally,
some hearing problems are medically said to lead to imbalance of the body
and so ramps would be preferably to stairs in case of a person falling.
Handrails are an added advantage in such cases.
Visually impaired
These persons are limited in mobility by blindness.
Their safety and access is greatly improved by introduction of audio signals
in strategic places such as audio instructions in elevators. Also, Braille
signs should be put up at notice boards, bus stops and all other places
deemed necessary to facilitate their access to buildings. Sudden changes
in floor level, uneven staircases all hamper their mobility and indeed endanger
their lives.
Mentally impaired
Mental disability could be characterized by disorientation
in time and space, memory loss, confusion and functional mental illness,
among others. Among disabled persons, the mentally disabled suffer the greatest
social rejection and segregation, especially in severe cases where the disabled
person shouts at people, has poor personal hygiene, etc. As J. A. Muir Gray
notes, isolation given to those people "to say the least is brainwashing
and damaging to the victim", thus, compounding an otherwise moderate
problem. (Gray 1977)
Measures for improving access
Good and accessible design should therefore be flexible
enough to cater for all these varying and at times conflicting needs of
persons with disabilities. On the other hand, to group all the needs of
the individual into one bundle, 'disabled', tends to limit the flexibility
of design in combating the specialized needs of the different categories
of disabled people. The challenge to the design team and the legislatures
is to try as much as possible to incorporate all the needs into the design
with the least cost.
Although it is virtually impossible to increase the stock of buildings quickly
(especially housing) because of financial limitations, much can be done
to help people with disabilities in phases.
Short term measures
This can be achieved through adaptations of the already
existing buildings to orient them to the needs of persons with disabilities
as in Beijing (see above notes). Most importantly, countries which have
not drawn up Access Legislation can collect data analysis and enact legislation
for future construction.
Medium term measures
The issue here is to ensure that all licences issued
for the construction of public buildings are subject to those buildings
incorporating mobility standards in their design to meet the needs of persons
with disabilities.
The 1970-74 Development Plan recognized the vital role played by the welfare
services rendered to the disadvantaged as a prerequisite to greater economic
progress. The Plan asserted the fact that although "certain services
have no immediate economic implication, their neglect has severe effects
on the well-being of the whole society". (1970-74 Development Plan)
This was in recognition to the "truism that economic development cannot
be divorced from the social advancement of the society". (1970-74 Development
Plan)
In the above regard, disabled persons were singled out among others as a
priority group to be given special attention considering the limited resources
at the disposal of the government. This was to be achieved through the introduction
of rehabilitation centers where persons with disabilities would be trained
in various skills and rehabilitated to fit in the social stream.
The government recognized that the development of the disability community
was an asset to the nation rather than a liability. The same idea has been
reflected throughout the Five-Year Development Plans where the objective
has been to provide welfare services to persons with disabilities. Without
underscoring the important role played by welfare services, the complete
omission of accessibility to the built environment as a basic need in integrating
persons with disabilities into both the economic and social life of the
community is too obvious.
Factors leading to this state of affairs can be speculation ranging from
lack of awareness on the side of government officials; traditional beliefs
that, at best, disabled people should be treated with sympathy and pity
and hence accord them welfare services on humanitarian grounds; lack of
enthusiasm and a looking down on those with disabilities with the old belief
that they are less human and hence no need to bother with them, etc. This,
as will be seen below, is reflected in the complete omission of accessibility
legislation in the various acts governing the construction industry. Such
acts as the Street Act, the Building Code, the Public Health Act, the Factory
Act etc. have some relevance in these areas. However, for the purposes of
this paper only the Building Code and the Public Health Act have been reviewed.
The others, though important, are completely silent on the issue of accessibility
and to review them will amount to repeating ourselves. Nevertheless, in
the event of Access Legislation in this country, all these acts and any
other related to accessibility of the individual should be redefined to
incorporate accessibility to disabled people.
Public Health Act
This Act is the overriding legal authority regarding
the local bylaws related to any matters that may be construed as affecting
the health of the public. The Act does not in itself define standards of
design and construction, but it requests and can require local authorities
(Municipal Councils, Urban and Area Councils) to make by-laws to define
those requirements. (Section 126A).
As in all other technical design issues the Act is completely quiet on issues
relating to accessibility to buildings by persons with disabilities.
The Building Code
Currently the detailed requirements for the erection
of buildings in Kenya are contained in the Local Government (Adoptive By-Laws)
Building Order 1968 (Generally referred to as Grade I By-Laws) and the Local
Government (Adoptive By-Laws) (Grade II) order, 1968. These two orders are
published by the Republic of Kenya in one volume under the title of Building
Code and are tantamount to a National Building Code, although it should
be noted that they are adoptive and not mandatory and any municipal council
may adopt them.
There is an apparent assumption by the Code that the degree of safety and
access specified caters for all persons with reasonable normal mobility.
Consequently, the safety and accessibility for those with some limitation
of one kind or other is completely omitted. It is not a surprise then that
specifications on sizes of door openings, corridors, stairs, etc., tend
to assume a young person with no disability. Ramps, for instance, are treated
very narrowly and not as focus for accessibility.
Codes are adoptive and not mandatory, this has a lot of weight when we are
dealing with enforcement of accessibility legislation.
Problems related to Building Codes and Standards responsive
to the safety needs of persons with disabilities can be grouped into five
distinct areas. These include general problems, problems of information
transfer, movement, protection, and search and rescue.
In the category of general problems, there is a lack of data in a form useful
in making code decisions that relates the disabilities associated with specific
disabilities to various building types and uses. There is no distinctive
data base on the actual experience of the disabled person in emergencies.
There is limited information on the abilities and disabilities of disabled
individuals in using building safeguards for the non-disabled. There is
a tendency in building code-making bodies to categorize all types of disability
together, impending efforts to resolve problems related to specific disabilities.
Among the information transfer problems, current modes of occupant notification
of initial threat to safety are ineffective for individuals with certain
disabilities, and similarly existing modes of occupant location of exits,
areas of refuge, and other safety feature are ineffective for individuals
with certain disabilities. Neither are disabled individuals provided with
information needed to evaluate personal risk in terms of their particular
disabilities and the safety measures of the buildings they use, nor do current
practices provide disabled individuals with means of obtaining assistance
during an emergency.
Among the movement problems, disabled individuals can have problems moving
from a threatening situation because they are obstructed by certain conditions
or elements that become barriers because of their specific disabilities.
These are conditions of elements which are not currently addressed in relevant
building code provisions and include floor coverings, grates, mats, hardware,
illumination signs, protruding objects, and level changes. The length of
time that it takes a disabled person to move away from a threatening situation
can be seen as a function of their particular disability. No current code
provisions take into account this type of time and distance information
on disabled persons. People with disabilities often cannot use conventional
exit systems. The use of stairs as emergency exits in multi-storey buildings
does not satisfy the exit needs of individuals with certain disabilities.
Traditional elevator standards preclude the use of emergencies. Certain
configurations and sizes of corridors can create exit problems for disabled
persons. This is also a problem area for persons without disabilities. It
is important for both disabled and non-disabled people to be able to immediately
grasp a sense of direction when exiting a corridor in an emergency. The
size of door openings and opening factors such as hardware can create exit
problems for disabled individuals.
Certain disabilities may force individuals to seek safety within the building
rather than trying to exit. Current practices may not provide adequate safety
for these individuals. In providing areas of refuge from fire and smoke,
it is particularly important that the individuals expected to use such areas
have confidence in their safety.
Among search and rescue problems, it has been observed that in many building
types, emergency service personnel are limited in their ability to identify
the presence and location of disabled individuals in an emergency. Certain
conventional rescue techniques (e.g. the use of aerial ladders, some carrying
techniques) can pose problems in rescuing disabled individuals. Also the
location and type of emergency warning systems may hamper or preclude their
use by certain persons with disabilities.
In making general recommendations for building codes and standards for safety
and persons with disabilities, it must be pointed out that no means of escape
for disabled people should be either exclusive to them or of a character
that would not meet Building Code Standards for the general population.
If it is determined that different escape strategies for people with disabilities
would be beneficial for both disabled and non-disabled persons, these potential
escape strategies must be developed to fulfil all the requirements for acceptable
escape.
Building codes and standards for disabled people should be cost-sensitive
and should not impose undue burden on society's resources. These codes and
standards should be performance-based and readily amendable to take advantage
of technological and other advances in life. safety.
To be credible, building codes and building standards should be based on
adequate reliable data. At the same time, knowledge gaps should not be allowed
to unduly impede the development of useful codes and standards. They should
be developed as integral parts of general life provisions. There should
be no separate safety codes and standards for disabled people.
Normally, building codes and standards are most suited to controlling physical
elements of buildings and other aspects of the built environment. Educational
programs, management practices, and others are efficiently dealt with by
other means.
Efforts in access legislation in Kenya
So far the only literature available on this area
is the work of a Task Force Report for the Association of Professional Societies
in East Africa (1989). In its 140th meeting, the Council of the Association
of Professional Societies in East Africa set up a Task Force to look into
ways of enacting changes in Building Regulations in order to ensure accessibility
of physically disabled persons to all new buildings and those undergoing
major renovations and to which the public normally have rights of access.
Their objectives were:
- to examine the existing regulations in relation to accessibility by
physically disabled persons
- to formulate substantive proposals for presentation to the relevant
bodies in respect of enactment of changes to regulations thereof
- to identify relevant authorities and statutory bodies with a view
to lobbying them to enact the changes in question in order to ensure accessibility
by physically disabled persons to all new buildings
To achieve the said objectives, the Task Force set up to examine and study
at length the Lesotho Paper on Accessibility, and the Resolutions of the
International Year for the Disabled Persons.
Some of the major recommendations
The Task Force recommended that a new Section covering
ramps (sizes, construction, location, upkeep) be inserted into the Building
Code as is the case with stairways; that the following public institutions
be included in the Sixth Schedule as part of the Public Buildings: Banks,
Post Offices, Central and Local Government Buildings and all other buildings
to which the public has access. Finally, they recommended that the final
report of their work to be sent to the Ministry of Local Government and
Attorney General for effecting the changes/recommendations.
Conclusions
As can be seen from the recommendations of the Task
Forces, the Council tended to concentrate solely on the technical aspects
of design and even then the recommendations are general in nature and groups
all types of disabilities under one 'bundle'. More serious work needs to
have been carried out to determine the proportion of disabled people in
the total population by category and determine their access needs accordingly.
As Sven Thiberg (1984) puts it, disabled persons have to participate in
developing solutions to their problems and defining the criteria for the
evaluation of the same.
Disabled people are to be considered as the experts of their own lives and
as experts to be included in the design, planning and execution of the built
environment. The immediate need therefore is to arouse the enthusiasm of
people with disabilities and expose them to their rights in the built environment.
They should be encouraged to organize themselves not just for welfare services
but as a pressure group to initiate, execute and implement their own policies.
The tendency in Kenya has been for disabled people to organize themselves
into societies which form a good forum for charitable aid rather than an
active force for more tangible developmental strategies. Maybe the starting
point is for disabled persons to accept themselves to be accepted by society.
Of importance too, in any attempt to enact Access Legislation is the need
to determine and establish political and social awareness and enthusiasm
towards Access Legislation. This, as has been noted elsewhere, tends to
be the basis of success or failure in Access Legislation. (Falta 1976).
Creation of political public and professional awareness to the plight of
disabled people is mandatory in any attempt to change the current order
of building design. To do this there is need to train and incorporate the
following disciplines in the design stage of all buildings, behavior scientists,
doctors, estate managers, social workers and developers. This would involve
a review of current syllabus in schools for many disciplines. The Law Reform
Commission would also benefit from the inclusion of some of the above disciplines.
Training in architecture and related fields should be geared towards mobility
design as a long term tool in creating barrier-free environment. Various
campaigns by community organizations, non-governmental organizations and
welfare agencies would go a long way in sensitizing the needs of persons
with disabilities.
Another important area that must be reckoned with in a bid to create barrier-free
environment is the need for an enforcement body. In places such as the United
States where Access Legislation has been in operation for a longer period
of time, enforcement is quoted as one of the factors determining success
or failure. For instance, when the legislation was introduced voluntary
compliance was found not to work possibly because of the extra cost involved.
Consequently, the need to create an enforceable act, violation of which
would be punishable, was imperative. (DeJong, G. & Lifchez, R 1983)
In Kenya as has been clearly shown, a wide research gap exists and nationwide
research should be carried out to ascertain the number of persons with disabilities
and more importantly interpret those needs into design process. This way
it will be possible to develop comprehensive standards/codes for accessibility
legislation. One way of doing this is to make certain conditions through
legislation for developers. This would involve putting constraints on them
to develop a certain proportion of their development for special needs.
The constraints could also come through their financiers.
References
Falta, Patricia, Housing and People, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1976.
Thiberg, Sven, in Report of the International Expert Seminar Building Concept
for the Handicapped, CIB W84 Building Non-Handicapping Environments, Stockholm,
April 1984.
Weiss, Hanne, in Report of the International Expert Seminar Building Concept
for the Handicapped, CIB W84 Building Non-Handicapping Environments, Stockholm,
April 1984.
Bai, Demao, in Report of the 2nd International Expert Seminar on Building
Non-Handicapping Environment: Renewal of Inner Cities, CIB W84 Building
Non-Handicapping Environments, Prague, October 1987.
Biswas, Ramesh Kumar, in Report of the 3rd International Expert Seminar
on Building Non-Handicapping Environments: Accessibility Issues in Developing
Countries, CIB W84 Building Non-Handicapping Environments, Tokyo, September
1988.
Hunt, John & Hoyes, Lesley, in The Journal of the Institute of Housing,
Vol. 16, No. 4, 1982.
Gray, J. A. Muir, in The Journal of the Institute of Housing, Vol. 13, No.
3, 1977.
Republic of Kenya (1970); National Development Plan 1970-74, Nairobi, Government
Printer.
The Public Health Act, Government Printers, Nairobi.
Local Government Building Order of 1968.
Council of the Association of Professional Societies in East Africa (1989);
A Task Force Report on Building Regulations for the Physically Handicapped.
DeJong, G. & Lifchez, R. "Physical Disability & Public Policy"
in Scientific American, June 1983, Vol. 248, No 6.
Harare
CIB Report Contents | About
CIB