Accessibility Not Considered

Amsterdam. In public transport, there weren’t any designated staff to help people with mobility aids or take care of them throughout the rides, since they can get a little wobbly. For

“P1,” it was not always very easy while using transport. “P1” also mentions the limitations of walking around the UNESCO canals. While the municipality has been able to expand

walking paths around the city, the walking paths around the canals in the center are very narrow, and the structures in this area have barely changed. While people who have no disabilities might be able to walk around the canal rings without any issues, for someone who struggles with mobility, navigating these streets can be very difficult.

UNESCO-protected buildings. “P3,” a program manager for the province of Noord-Holland and protection of UNESCO Heritage in Amsterdam, also builds onto these accessibility

challenges directly from the designated areas. It is difficult to modify the monuments because there is always a possibility that the monuments will get damaged, and won’t be able to be restored. Sometimes, this is the reason why accessible features have not been added to these protected places, even if there are people that want to add them, and plans to do so. Also, there are plenty of challenges to ensuring accessibility within these contexts, since, as “P3”

explained, accessibility is not enforced by the province itself, but by organisations and private actors.

“That's not our task as site holder for the World Heritage.”

Because of this uniform accessibility is not guaranteed, and sometimes no accessibility occurs at all. This is not exclusive to the province though, as it was mentioned by a couple of participants who worked with multiple parties on a daily basis. Since there are many interests and there is always the necessity to protect the heritage as much as possible, accessibility is sometimes not considered, enforced, or created. The goal for those who work in conservation, with heritage, and with culture, is mainly to protect all heritage and its authenticity, so future generations are able to enjoy it. But can future generations enjoy these sites, if they are not accessible for people with disabilities? The question remains.

Sometimes, accessibility is just simply not considered. No thoughts to make a place more accessible have taken place, nor are there any initiatives, or regard for people with

disabilities. “P7,” a project manager for a research institute in Amsterdam that aims to understand the city's challenges, and then find solutions for them, told me that, while they

had been working there, there hadn’t been any projects directly focused on or related to people with disabilities or accessibility. At the time I had spoken with “P3,” the province had no plans for making accessible education for the UNESCO Heritage site they were in charge of. They also had not started any direct initiative or project to create a more accessible Heritage, since it is not their direct responsibility. “P2” described a moment when they went to visit an art exhibit in the Netherlands, which was quite interactive and beautiful, but it was limiting to mobility aid users because the elevators were closed for the purposes of the installation. During the same exhibit, “P2” described that they weren’t sure “whether you could go there with a wheelchair, for example. I don't think so,” since the spaces were so dark. This occurrence is not uncommon, as “P2” explains: “I see that happens a lot, that spaces are rebuilt and that it is often difficult for disabled people.” Exhibits are created to display beautiful art, but the thought of making them accessible seems to turn into no consideration of accessibility at all.

Lack of accessibility and lack of enforcement of accessibility can be looked at together since they can happen simultaneously. To put it simply, lack of accessibility is that there were no accessible features found, while lack of enforcement is the little regard for ensuring

accessibility within the context of the people’s job settings and personal experiences. “P4”

recounts a time when they were a recurrent customer at a restaurant. While they were using crutches at the time, they were not informed that there was an accessible toilet in the

restaurant until after two months of constant visits. In the accessible toilet, there were no soap or hand towels, and “P4” complained multiple times to the restaurant owner, who did nothing each time. After getting frustrated over such a small fix that was not addressed by the owner,

“P4” attempted to talk to the owner one last time, so that he would address the issue of no soap and no hand towels in the accessible bathroom. His response:

“I don’t have time for you. [...] Dry your hands on toilet paper.”

No attempts at becoming more accessible were done by this restaurant owner. There was no accessibility and no attempts at trying to ensure that the space was more accessible. As mentioned before, accessibility is often left up to the discretion of private owners. While there are policies in place to ensure accessibility, in practice, it is not evenly distributed.