Critical assessment of universal and inclusive design in Bangkok's parks reveals gaps in community engagement and emotional comfort.
This study aims to critically assesses the application and limitations of Universal Design (UD) and Inclusive Design (ID) in Bangkok’s public parks and proposes a context-sensitive framework to enhance urban inclusivity. While UD has contributed significantly to improving physical accessibility—through standardized features such as ramps, tactile paving, and clear circulation paths—it often fails to address emotional comfort, cultural representation, and participatory engagement. In contrast, ID emphasizes co-creation, contextual adaptability, and symbolic inclusion, offering a more holistic and equity-driven approach. Using a five-dimensional comparative framework—philosophy, function, spatial logic, user engagement, and evaluation—this research analyzes three major public parks: Benjakitti Forest Park, Chatuchak (Railway) Park, and Chulalongkorn Centenary Park. Each site was evaluated through narrative critique, dimension scoring, and radar diagram visualizations. The findings reveal that while all three parks exhibit strong UD characteristics, they lack alignment with ID principles, particularly in the areas of community engagement and emotional resonance. These typologies highlight a broader trend in Thai public space planning, wherein accessibility is interpreted narrowly as compliance rather than inclusion. The study concludes by proposing policy and design recommendations for embedding ID into future park development, positioning ID not only as a design approach but as a paradigm for spatial justice, belonging, and cultural sustainability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Selanon et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: