Malta: Fortress or Haven? Reasonable Way of Lowering the Barriers Dr Joseph Spiteri University of Malta 21-23 November 2007 1 Malta Background Information Malta 316km2 - Gozo 162km2 Located strategically almost at the centre of the Mediterranean Sea Colonized by: Phoenicians, Romans, Arabs, Normans, Knights of St. John, French and British Population 400 000 Tourist Arrivals c. 1 200 000 annually 21-23 November 2007 2 1
Tourism: A chain of activities Booking Transport (Airport Flight Airport) Transport within Island Accommodation Hotels Activities Cultural ( Indoor & Outdoor) Leisure (Restaurants, Beaches etc) 21-23 November 2007 3 Accessibility Issues in Tourism Demographics of visitors Demographics of inhabitants (internal tourism) Awareness of accessibility issues Diverse tourism ( Elderly wintering, language schools, conference tourism and so on) 21-23 November 2007 4 2
Accessibility Issues Booking the Holiday Infrastructure on the Island (Public & Private) Attitudes ( Key contacts with tourists) Equal Opportunities (Persons with Disability) Act 2000 - regarding buildings. 21-23 November 2007 5 Improving accessibility Time frames EU Regulation 1107/2006 - Short term. Public Infrastructure Medium to Long term Private Infrastructure Depending on owners / operators / managers strategies Large existing infrastructure stock 21-23 November 2007 6 3
Why do we need to tackle question of reasonableness? Legal provisions Accessibility is clearly defined technically in Guidelines but not Reasonableness. Many issues arise from architectural barriers within existing building stock. Making venues accessible. Required by users (Tourists, Operators, Conference organisers) Investment decisions 21-23 November 2007 7 Reasonableness as an improvement strategy Legislation calls for reasonable alterations to provide accessibility National policy is to tackle new build & major refurbishment as a priority Key elements ( Airport (EU Regulation 1107/2006), Major places of interest, key monuments (e.g. Hagar Qim) and beaches) 21-23 November 2007 8 4
Decision Framework & Intervention Strategies for Reasonable Access Joint research carried out by University of Leeds ( Prof Steven Male) and University of Malta (Dr Joseph Spiteri) EU FP6 Funded Research Project*. Decision Framework Degrees of Reasonableness Policy Approaches to Reasonable Access Policy Framework Intervention Strategies *SSPS-CT-2004-006623 Contract Number 006623: ReasonableAccess 21-23 November 2007 9 Decision Framework DECISION FRAMEWORK PROPERTY 2 ND MOST EXPENSIVE COST ON BALANCE SHEET MAKING CHOICES AMONGST COMPETITIVE ALTERNATIVES HERITAGE CATERING LEISURE INVESTMENT PROGRAMME ECONOMIC RATIONALE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS SERVICE DELIVERY MAJOR ASSETS -EXPENSIVE - DEGRADABLE OVER TIME SCARCE RESOURCES NEW MAINTAIN RENEW ENABLER = REASONABLENESS TEST OF REASONABLENESS 21-23 November 2007 10 5
Degree of Reasonableness Range of possible access solutions Possible improvements in access Reasonable 100% access for all optimum access to be as is Worst possible access Better access 21-23 November 2007 11 Definition of Terms 100% Access for All A situation that can never be achieved as requirements for different impairments will always conflict. Optimum Access The best possible level of access available in a given situation, regardless of building disruption or cost. Reasonable Access A position balancing optimum access against building disruption and cost without compromising use. The use of Aristotle s mean and the middle way 21-23 November 2007 12 6
Decision Framework Does the proposed access solutions discriminate i.e. provide unequal treatment by: Compromising or impeding users? Not offer ease of use such as appropriate distances? Send the wrong message i.e. are they undignified? If the answer to any one of the above is YES then redesign. If this is not possible consider the decision criteria below. 21-23 November 2007 13 Decision Framework Criteria for Building Use/Purpose/Function Existing or New Build Location Technical Considerations Size Type of Developer/Organisation Frequency of Use Safety Considerations Legislation Financial Considerations 21-23 November 2007 14 7
Stakeholders in decision Different stakeholders Different perspectives Different value systems Different aspirations Different modes of operation 21-23 November 2007 15 Who should decide reasonableness? Persons with Disability Facility owners / managers Tour operator Architect Lawyer Judge Arbitrator 21-23 November 2007 16 8
Establishment of Reasonableness Methodology Methodology to Extract Reasonableness Issues Involve all Stakeholders input Establish a forum to reach consensus Need for vehicle to address various aspects and contexts of reasonableness issues. 21-23 November 2007 17 Case Vignette Approach To extract reasonableness issues from real life cases To highlight principles grounded in reality Melting pot for diverse value systems in workshop environment To test existing policies / regulations / procedures Allows to evaluate solutions for robustness and reliability on replication 21-23 November 2007 18 9
Case Vignette Format 21-23 November 2007 19 Case study exemplar 21-23 November 2007 20 10
Decision framework tested in several workshops & Bajja San Gorg Live Project Decision framework tested on set of vignettes with additional information All relevant stakeholders participated fully Decision by consensus General conclusion that it is robust enough a framework to discriminate between what is and what is not reasonable. 21-23 November 2007 21 Bajja San Gorg 21-23 November 2007 22 11
Bajja San Gorg - Problems / Solutions Access across road to promenade reasonable to redesign Access to Beach from promenade decided that it was reasonable to have 2 out of 4 accessible Direct Access from bar to beach alternative access deemed reasonable Access to clinic near beach reasonable to make alterations 21-23 November 2007 23 THANK YOU 21-23 November 2007 24 12