Universal Accessibility to Persons with Disabilities: A Policy and Practice

The study examines the accessibility of infrastructure for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) in government buildings within the City Hall Complex of General Santos City, Philippines. Guided by Universal Design principles and legal mandates such as Batas Pambansa Bilang. 344 (BP 344), Republic Act Number. 7277 (RA 7277), and the United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD); it measured the extent of compliance of LGU Buildings with the national accessibility standards. Using a descriptive survey method and an evaluative checklist, the research assessed key features such as ramps, pathways, elevators, entrances, and restrooms across 36 government buildings. Results show partial compliance, with varying levels of accessibility among facilities. The findings highlight gaps in the implementation and the need for infrastructure upgrades. This study emphasizes the importance of inclusive public infrastructure in ensuring equal access for PWDs and recommend stronger policy enforcement to support disability-inclusive development in General Santos City.

Policy-makers around the world currently engage in establishing policies to protect the rights of persons with disabilities yet it remains a mere policy in most states and territories globally.

1. Aberson, C. L., & Haag, S. C. (2003). Beliefs about affirmative action and diversity and their relationship to support for hiring policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3, 121–138. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. American National Standards Institute. (1961). American National Standard Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to, and Usable by, the Physically Handicapped (ANSI A117.1–1961). ANSI. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. American National Standards Institute. (1961). ANSI A117.1 accessible and usable buildings and facilities. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. American Psychological Association. (2003). Barbara Grutter, petitioner, v. Lee Bollinger, et al., respondents, and Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher, petitioners, v. Lee Bollinger, et al., respondents: Brief amicus curiae of the American Psychological Association in support of respondents. Washington, DC: Author. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (1990). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Ankney, R. N., & Procopio, D. A. (2003). Corporate culture, minority hiring, and newspaper coverage of affirmative action. Howard Journal of Communications, 14, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, Pub. L. 90–480, 82 Stat. 718 (1968) (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. § 4151 et seq.). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Arriola, K. R. J., & Cole, E. R. (2001). Framing the affirmative action debate: Attitudes toward outgroup members and white identity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 2462–2483. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Arthur, W., Doverspike, D., & Fuentes, R. (1992). Recipients’ affective responses to affirmative action interventions: A cross-cultural perspective. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 10, 229–243. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ayres, I., & Brooks, R. (2005). Does affirmative action reduce the number of Black lawyers? Stanford Law Review. (In press). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Batas Pambansa Bilang 344. (1982). An Act to Enhance the Mobility of Disabled Persons by Requiring Certain Buildings, Institutions, Establishments and Public Utilities to Install Facilities and Other Devices. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Bednar, M. J. (Ed.). (1977). Barrier free environments (Community Development Series No. 33). Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Branscombe, N. R., Doosje, B., & McGarty, C. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of collective guilt. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups (pp. 49–66). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., Riezenstein, R. M., Pugh, S. D., Callahan, J. D., et al. (1997). Beyond good intentions: The next steps toward racial equality in the American workplace. Academy of Management Executive, 11, 59–72. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Bromley, D. B., Matthews, H., & Thomas, G. (2007). City spaces, children’s places: Young people’s participation in the redevelopment of inner-city environments. Children’s Geographies, 5(3), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733280701445938 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Building and Construction Authority. (2019). Code on accessibility in the built environment 2019. https://www1.bca.gov.sg [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Campbell, J., & Oliver, M. (1996). Disability politics: Understanding our past, changing our future (1st ed.). London, UK: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. G., & Stone, A. M. (1992). Physical access and accessibility. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. CBM International. (2022). Disability inclusion in Nigeria: Country brief. https://www.cbm.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Center for Universal Design. (1997). The principles of universal design. North Carolina State University. https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. China Disabled Persons’ Federation. (2021). National policies on persons with disabilities in China. http://www.cdpf.org.cn [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Clarke, P. J., Ailshire, J. A., Nieuwenhuijsen, E. R., & de Kleijn de Vrankrijker, M. W. (2011). Participation among adults with disability: The role of the urban environment. Social Science & Medicine, 72(10), 1674–1684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, art. 2. (2008). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Dallas, C., & Sprong, M. (2015). Universal design in higher education: Addressing physical and instructional accessibility. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28(2), 123–136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Dallas, S., & Sprong, J. (2015). Universal design in architecture. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 28(2). Nordic Journal of Architectural Research. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Dallas, S., & Sprong, J. (2015). Universal design in architecture. McGraw Hill [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Dawson, M. C. (2000). Slowly coming to grips with the effects of the American racial order on American policy preferences. In D. O. Sears, J. Sidanius, & L. Bobo (Eds.), Racialized politics: The debate about racism in America (pp. 344–357). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. DeBono, K. G., & Snyder, M. (1995). Acting on one’s attitudes: The role of a history in choosing situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(6), 629–636. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Department of Education. (2009). DepEd Order No. 72, s. 2009: Inclusive education as a strategy for increasing participation rate of children. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2009/07/06/do-72-s-2009-inclusive-education-as-a-strategy-for-increasing-participation-rate-of-children/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Department of Social Welfare and Development. (2023). Programs and services for persons with disabilities. https://www.dswd.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. European Commission. (2021). Union of equality: Strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021–2030. https://ec.europa.eu [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Evcil, A. (2009). Accessibility for wheelchair users: A study on access to urban public spaces in Istanbul. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(11), 1183–1191. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Evcil, A. N. (2009). Wheelchair accessibility to public buildings in Istanbul. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 4(2), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483100802543247 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. General Santos City Ordinance No. 47, s. 2022. (2022). Adopting the provisions of Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 and intensifying accessibility efforts in General Santos City. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Goldsmith, S. (2007). Designing for the disabled: The new paradigm (2nd rev. ed.). RIBA Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Government of Japan. (2016). Act on the elimination of discrimination against persons with disabilities. https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Hamzat, T. K., & Dada, O. G. (2005). Wheelchair accessibility of public buildings in Ibadan, Nigeria. Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering and Science, 2(1), 29–43 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Holmes-Siedle, J. (1996). Barrier-free design: A manual for building designers and managers. Butterworth-Heinemann. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Human Rights Watch. (2022). Indonesia: Disability rights and barriers to inclusion. https://www.hrw.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. ILO Convention No. 102. (1952). Social security (minimum standards) convention. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. ILO Recommendation No. 202. (2012). Social protection floors recommendation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Imrie, R. (2012). Universalism, universal design and equitable access to the built environment. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(10), 873–882. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.624250 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. International Code Council. (2018). International Building Code. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IBC2018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. International Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (2006). General Comment No. 19: The right to social security (art. 9). CESCR. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. International Institute on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (2018). World social situation 2018: Social protection and inclusion. [UN report]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. International Labour Organization. (2012). Recommendation concerning national floors of social protection (No. 202) (paragraph 12). Geneva: International Labour Organization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Korea Legislation Research Institute. (2020). Act on the prohibition of discrimination against persons with disabilities, remedy against infringement of their rights. https://elaw.klri.re.kr [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Lid, I. M., & Solvang, P. K. (2016). (Dis)ability and the experience of accessibility in the urban environment. Alter – European Journal of Disability Research, 10(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2015.11.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Mace, R. (1998). Universal design in housing. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. McGuire, W. J. (2014). Universal design in education: Applying persuasion and access strategies. In International Journal of Educational Accessibility, 10(1), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Office. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved June 15, 2025, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/office [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. National Assembly of Nigeria. (2019). Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act. https://nass.gov.ng [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. National Plan of Action for Persons With Disabilities (2007–2012) Department of Social Welfare Malaysia. (2007). National plan of action for persons with disabilities 2007–2012. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. National Policy for Persons With Disabilities Department of Social Welfare Malaysia. (2007). National policy for persons with disabilities 2007. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. National Social Policy Department of Social Welfare Malaysia. (2003). National social policy. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. National Welfare Policy Department of Social Welfare Malaysia. (1990). National welfare policy. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Oxford University Press. (2020). Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Persons With Disabilities Act 2008 (Act 685) Attorney General’s Chambers, Malaysia. (2008). Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 (Act 685). Government of Malaysia [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Philippine Government. (1983). Batas Pambansa Blg. 344 – Accessibility Law. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Philippine Statistics Authority. (2020). 2020 census of population and housing (2020 CPH). https://psa.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Republic Act No. 10070. (2010). Creating Persons With Disabilities Affairs Office in the provinces, cities, and municipalities. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Republic Act No. 10524. (2013). Expanding positions reserved for persons with disabilities. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Republic Act No. 10754. (2016). Expanding the rights and privileges of persons with disabilities. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Republic Act No. 7277. (1992). An Act Providing for the Rehabilitation, Self Development, Self Reliance of Disabled Persons and Their Integration into the Mainstream of Society. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Republic Act No. 9442. (2007). Expanding the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons and other purposes. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Scully, J. L. (2008). [Assuming the reference refers to Scully’s contributions on the social model; if it’s a chapter or standalone work, adjust accordingly] In T. Shakespeare & N. Watson (Eds.), The social model of disability: Research and practice (pp. xx–xx). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. (Please confirm page numbers and editor details if this is a chapter in an edited volume.) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London, UK: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (1997). Defending the social model. Disability & Society, 12(2), 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Soltani, S. H. K., Sham, M., Awang, M., & Yaman, R. (2012). Accessibility for disabled in public transportation terminal. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.066 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Steinfeld, E., & Maisel, J. (2012). Universal design: Creating inclusive environments. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Thomas, C. (2004). Developing the social relational in the social model of disability: A theoretical agenda. In C. Barnes & G. Mercer (Eds.), Implementing the social model of disability: Theory and research (pp. xx–xx). Leeds, UK: The Disability Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. U.S. Access Board. (2010). Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines. https://www.access-board.gov [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). A guide to disability rights laws.https://www.ada.gov [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. UN World Health Organization & World Bank. (2011). World report on disability. WHO Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Inclusive Social Development. (2018). Report on the world social situation 2018: Promoting inclusion through social protection. United Nations. https://desapublications.un.org/publications/report-world-social-situation-2018-promoting-inclusion-through-social-protection. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. World Health Organization. (2008). Guidelines on the provision of manual wheelchairs in less-resourced settings. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241547482 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. World Health Organization. (2022). Global report on health equity for persons with disabilities. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240063600 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Zeff, S. A. (2012). The evolution of accessibility standards: From architecture to instruction. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 25(3), 220–230. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• A Decadal Overview of Welfare Schemes in Telangana (2014–2024)
• Ubuntu and the Missed Development Goals in the Global South: Rethinking MDGs and SDGs through an African Philosophical Lens
• Exploring the Factors of Obesity: Insights from Johor State Civil Servants
• Navigating the Nexus: Challenges Faced by Part-Time Postgraduate Government Employees in Malaysia
• The Lived Experiences of Skilled Filipino Women Immigrants in Denmark