Views on Universal Design and Disabilities among Norwegian Experts on Universal Design of Ict

Achieving inclusive eSocieties has prompted a focus on universally designed ICT-solutions. In order to ensure aims and legislations are interpreted in a similar manner, there should be a general consensus on universal design and disability definitions in the professional field. This paper investigates views on disability and universal design in Norwegian expert communities on universal design of ICT through survey research, including which users receive attention. Domain experts are asked on their models (interpretations) of disability, which marginalized user groups they focus on in their work and how they understand “universal design” and related terms. The findings indicate that terminology related to universal design is used differently in the sample. The field “universal design of ICT” is also interpreted in various ways. Further, there seems to be an acquiesce response to most disability views, with rightbased disability views being dominant. Unexpectedly, the charity model is also common, as is the social adapted model. The survey measure opposing views related to who should be in charge of assessing a person’s need for treatment and assistance: a divergence is indicated between those agreeing with the expert model (professional intervention assessment) versus the empowering model (individual intervention control) with a moderate highly significant negative correlation. Another interesting finding is that three out of the four user groups reported as the most excluded from the Norwegian eSociety receive quite infrequent attention from experts, with median values for receiving focus in “sometimes” or “seldom” categories. The paper contributes with insights into the existing varying interpretations of disability and universal design definitions among Norwegian domain experts, and discusses how different interpretations may affect how inclusion work is implemented. The paper also points out possibly neglected user groups in current practices. Future studies will continue investigations nationally and internationally; particularly on exploring disability focuses.