Universal Access in the Information Society https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-023-01077-9 LONG PAPER Universal and ecological design in media accessibility: finding common ground Irene Hermosa‑Ramírez1 Accepted: 22 November 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract This article cross-checks universal design and ecological design in the context of media accessibility (with an emphasis on audio description, captions, audio subtitling, sign language interpreting, touch tours), aiming to identify practices that adhere to both design approaches. Following a literature review, a theoretical commentary is presented. Therein, each of the seven universal design principles (Connell et al. in The principles of universal design, 1997. https://​proje​cts.​ncsu.​edu/​ design/​cud/​about_​ud/​udpri​ncipl​estext.​htm) is assessed in the light of ecological design. Three different outcomes are found when connecting universal design and ecological design principles: (1) certain universal design principles overlap with ecological design principles; (2) others are divergent with ecological design principles and (3) some are complementary, that is, they are unrelated but may be reconcilable. Universal design principles one and two (equitable use and flexibility in use) are harmonious with principles of ecological design in several ways. Principles three (simple and intuitive use), four (perceptible information) and seven (appropriate size and space) remain seemingly unrelated to ecological design principles, though they could be reconciled if certain changes were undertaken. Principles five (low physical effort) and six (appropri- ate size and space for approach and use) of universal design could be antagonistic with ecological design in some regards. Keywords Universal design · Ecological design · Design principles · Media accessibility 1 Introduction Firstly, in the context of media accessibility (MA), uni- versal design is a broadly applied paradigm, often alluding Universal design was first coined by architect Ronald Mace to the notion that accessible products benefit a vast array of [23] and is generally understood to be “the design of all users and not just the intended end users [38], in this case, products and environments to be usable by people of all people with sensory disabilities. Examples from the MA ages and abilities to the greatest extent possible” [5]. The literature often allude to the use of captions by foreign lan- principles of universal design were conceptualised at the guage learners and people in noisy environments, and, more Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State by recently, the wider use of audio description (AD) for its cog- Connell et al. [5]. Though subsequently adapted to different nitive and linguistic benefits [25]. However, such applica- domains and disciplines (see, for instance, universal design tions of universal design have received criticism because for learning [35] and universal design for ergonomics [30]), media access services shifting or broadening target to users the original seven principles have remained consistent and without impairments may risk a process of re-erasure by pri- widely deployed. They are: (1) equitable use, (2) flexibility oritising the needs of normative and able-bodied people [9]. in use, (3) simple and intuitive use, (4) perceptible informa- That is, captions can indeed be useful for language learners, tion, (5) tolerance for error, (6) low physical effort and (7) but the needs and requirements from their primary users appropriate size and space for approach and use. should prevail when producing them. Similar risks have been identified in a scenario where creative approaches to MA may compromise their ultimate access goal: “art over * Irene Hermosa‑Ramírez access” [10]. Irene.hermosa@uab.cat Secondly, universal design incorporates the idea that the product in question is to be created without the need 1 Department of Translation and Interpreting, Autonomous for adaptation or specialised design, that is, it is “born University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain 13 Vol.:(0123456789) Universal Access in the Information Society accessible” [32]. In this regard, several authors have fur- and 1970s) and has been utilised ever since as an umbrella ther discussed the fact that “conventional” [40] or “tradi- term. Sustainability also stems from the 1970s and is origi- tional” media access services—meaning “exclusive; neu- nally related to the capacity of the ecosystems to absorb the tral; non-auteur; third-party and post-hoc” [10]—are at odds environmental effects of human activities. As for “green”, with these principles. Particularly, Udo and Fels [41] and it became the “buzzword” of the 1980s [24]. Most recently, Romero-Fresco [36] acknowledge that “traditional” captions the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United and audio description (AD) are not examples of universal Nations in 2015 and, more precisely, goal 12 (Ensure sus- design because they are not created with the creative team. tainable consumption and production patterns), have mainly Following this logic, director-led [42] media access, inte- adapted the “sustainable” terminology. Nonetheless, for this grated media access [11] and accessible filmmaking [36] paper, “ecological design” will be employed (1) to make the would better fit the universal design paradigm. Moreover, most of its broadness in meaning and (2) because it is the Greco [13] points out that the uncritical application of uni- most frequently used term in the literature review. For our versal design to MA may overlook proactive, user-centred purposes, it refers to “any form of design that minimises and participatory approaches, which are increasingly advo- environmentally destructive impacts by integrating itself cated for in the scope of media access service provision (see with living processes”, and as “effective adaption to and [7]). Bearing these ideas in mind, the present article will integration with nature's processes” [43]. include commentary on traditional, integrated and partici- The first challenge in comparing ecological design prin- patory media access services and the application of both ciples with those of universal design is that, unlike the latter, universal design and ecological design principles therein. the set of principles of ecological design is not uniform: The present article is structured in two main parts: first, since the 1990s, there have been several proposals stem- the terminology and principles of ecological design are pre- ming from different areas. As a result, a literature review sented through a literature review. Second, each of the seven was necessary to identify principles that could be applica- universal design principles [5] is discussed in detail—in the ble to MA as well. To narrow down the search, “ecological context of MA—in relation to the principles of ecological design”, “green design” and “eco-design” + “principles” design from the literature review. In this sense, the article were searched in the Article title field within the Web of Sci- replicates the structure of Udo and Fel’s [41, 42] studies, ence and Scopus databases. The resulting publications were which question the adherence of television subtitles and AD, assessed, as well as the references from these publications. and traditional live AD to the principles of universal design, The literature review purposely leaves out certain pro- respectively. Our study reflects on how each of the universal posals that relate mostly to specific disciplines. This is the design principles adhere to, are complimentary to or diverge case of Krusche, Althaus, Gabriel and Weig-Krusche’s [21] from principles of ecological design, by seeking examples design principles for ecological building construction or from media access services. The ultimate aim of the article eco-architecture, Benyus’ [3] proposal of “biomimicry”, the is to fill a research gap on the intersection between universal biophilic design proposal [19] and Mitsch and Jorgensen’s design and ecological design in the scope of MA. Similar [28] principles for ecological engineering. A review of these theoretical proposals have been conducted in engineering proposals deriving from different disciplines is presented [29] and industrial design [44], from which this paper draws below (Table 1), in chronological order. This table largely inspiration. The precise research questions that guide this overlaps with the one presented by Apul [2] in her own lit- study are: How do universal design principles relate to those erature review. of ecological design? How to combine them in the scope of In her literature review, Apul [2] recognises three main MA? The conclusions of the article will circle back to this themes within the overall ecological design principles: question. human dimension, learning from nature (biomimicry) and incorporating nature. As explained in the coming sections, the human dimension will be the most “comparable” one 2 Literature review: principles of ecological, between universal design and ecological design, as “[s]ome green, sustainable or eco‑design? key words and ideas included within this theme are beauti- ful, creative, socially just, healthy, respectful, educational, Before introducing the steps followed for the literature value-driven, including stakeholders in the design process review, it is necessary to present a preliminary discussion on and meeting the needs of humans”. The “biomimicry” the terminology of ecological, green or sustainable design. dimensions—energy source, mass and energy flow, etc.— Before the turn of the century, Pauline Madge [24] already have thus far been less explored within the scope universal found a number of terminological nuances in this regard. In design and MA. historical terms, the “ecological” terminology dates back As an introductory note, the principles of ecological to the early days of the environmental movements (1960s design that more closely relate to universal design stem from 13 Universal Access in the Information Society Table 1  Ecological design principles (updated from Apul, 2010, 149–150) Authors Terminology Design principles McDonough and Braungar [26] Design for sustainability (1) Insist on rights of humanity and nature to co-exist in a healthy, supportive, diverse and sustainable condition (2) Recognise interdependence (3) Respect relationships between spirit and matter (4) Accept responsibility for consequences of design (5) Create safe objects of long-term value (6) Eliminate the concept of waste (7) Rely on natural energy flows (8) Understand the limitations of design (9) See constant improvement by the sharing of knowledge Bergen, Bolton and Fridley [4] Ecological design (1) Design consistent with ecological principles (originally, ecological (2) Design for site-specific context engineering) (3) Maintain the independence of design functional requirements (4) Design for efficiency in energy and information (5) Acknowledge the values and purposes that motivate design Anastas and Zimmerman [1] Green design (originally, (1) Designers need to strive to ensure that all material and energy inputs and green engineering) outputs are as inherently non-hazardous as possible (2) It is better to prevent waste than to treat or clean up waste after it is formed (3) Separation and purification operations should be designed to minimise energy consumption and materials use (4) Maximise mass, energy, space and time efficiency (5) “Output-pulled” versus “input-pushed” (6) Embedded entropy and complexity (7) Targeted durability, not immortality (8) Design for unnecessary capacity or capability (e.g. “one size fits all”) solu- tions should be considered a design flaw (9) Minimise material diversity (10) Integrate local material and energy flows (11) Design for commercial “afterlife” (12) Renewable rather than depleting Shu-Yang, Freedman and Cote [37] Ecological design (1) Meet the inherent needs of humans (2) Move towards resource sustainability (3) Maintain ecological integrity (4) Emulate natural ecosystems (5) Eliminate natural debt (6) Protect natural habitat (7) Increase environmental literacy McLennan [27] Sustainable design (1) Respect for the wisdom of natural systems: The Biomimicry principle (2) Respect for people: The human vitality principle (3) Respect for place: The ecosystem principles (4) Respect for the cycle of life: The “seven generations principle” (5) Respect for energy and natural resources: The conservation principles (6) Respect for process: The holistic thinking principle Van der Ryn and Cowan [43] Ecological design (1) Solutions grow from place (2) Ecological accounting informs design (3) Design with nature (4) Everyone is a designer (5) Make nature visible Hossain and Ahmad [17] Design for the environment (1) Ensure sustainability of resources (2) Ensure healthy inputs and outputs (3) Ensure minimal use of resources in production and transportation phases (4) Ensure minimal use of resources during use (5) Ensure appropriate durability of the product and components (6) Enable disassembly, separation and purification (7) Ensure appropriate training program for all stages of individuals in the value chain in order to enhance consciousness about environment 13 Universal Access in the Information Society the works of Shu-Yang et al. [37]—initially envisaged for fact that in traditional AD only visually impaired audience urban planning, industrial parks and networks, architecture members wear headphones in the cinema”. and products and Van der Ryn and Cowan’s [43] principles, The question here is how these conditions relate to eco- from the field of architecture. Taking into consideration all logical design. When cross-checking equitable use with eco- of the cited works in the literature review, the following logical principles, a near-exact match is found in Shu-Yang, sections focus on each of the principles of universal design Freedman and Cote‘s [37] principle one: “meet the inher- individually in an attempt to reconcile both visions in the ent needs of humans”; McLennan’s [27] second principle: context of MA. “Respect for people—The human vitality principle”, if the focus is placed on the appealing qualities of the product or service.2 More generally, this principle relates to the over- 3 Principle one: equitable use all “human dimension” theme distinguished by Apul [2] in her literature review of ecological design principles. This “The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse leads us to the conclusion that universal design is perfectly abilities” [5]. compatible with ecological design when it comes to the first As Udo and Fels [41, 42] also highlight in their articles, principle. the equitable use principle is perhaps the most prominent In practice, an additional argument that stems from uni- and “defining” principle in universal design. It is also one versal design which has been applied to accessible filmmak- that directly applies to MA. In this regard, audiovisual prod- ing [36] is that “born accessible” [32] products and services ucts, cultural events and art venues are to be enjoyed by require less resources in the long run, as such products do all. Additionally, the guidelines for the first principle indi- not need to be “amended” to suit the needs of users at a cate that segregation and stigmatisation of users are to be later stage. These resources are often cited to be monetary avoided,1 and that the design will be appealing to all users. or related to human resources, but they too involve natural Most relevant for our purposes, they highlight the need to resources. provide the same means for all users—either identical or equivalent. Though this has been a largely applicable notion in MA, even appearing in definitions of AD, the notion of 4 Principle two: flexibility in use providing an “equivalent” experience for people with dis- abilities has received some criticism [14, 20], as the medi- “The design accommodates a wide range of individual pref- calist implication is that an individual needs “fixing”. None- erence and abilities” [5]. theless, in the context of MA, the equitable use principle has The guidelines for the second principle highlight the need been advocated for in the switch from traditional post-hoc of providing a choice of methods to use the product or ser- access services, totally removed from the creative team, to vice. In MA, some frequent access service choices are sub- integrated access services [11] and participatory approaches titles and transcriptions of video and audio materials; audio [7]. Greco [12] reconciles both approaches in the concept introductions in replacement of printed programmes; AD or of poietic design, an approach where the “design process is touch tours instead of visual access to stage performances, a co-construction where makers and users, as well as other etc. Regarding the flexibility of these provisions, several agents, must work together”. authors have called into question access services that are An applied case study of MA products which are market- only offered on restricted dates, particularly in the context able to audiences with and without disabilities are “open” of the scenic arts. For instance, AD may only be offered in access services, which are delivered to the entire audience one or two sessions per run of a show. In this regard, tech- and not just the “intended” end users: open AD, open cap- nological developments such as semi-live pre-recorded AD tions and, most frequently, surtitles, among others. Recent and automatically cued AD may be able to enhance flex- examples in AD can be found in Thompson’s [39] blind- ibility in use as their implementation becomes widespread ness gain proposal, Dokumaci’s [8] stop-time as a rule of [16]. Udo and Fels [42] propose another alternative in this description and Lopez et al. [22] enhanced audio description sense, the “on-demand” approach to AD (or sign language project, which provided AD for all audience members and interpreting), where users are able to fix a date to attend a thus “removed the potential segregation generated by the performance. 1 One could, however, agree that certain access service provisions— 2 involving, for instance, the booking of a sign language interpreter or In this regard, it is unclear to what extent “open” access services AD for only one function—have traditionally limited the equitable meet the needs of audiences that are not their main target, or whether use principle, as explained further in Sect. 4, devoted to the flexibility “open” access services require fewer natural resources than tradi- in use principle. tional access services. 13 Universal Access in the Information Society In this regard, on-demand approaches and, above all, expectations and intuition. In this regard, AD and captions “reusable” access services meet several of the cited eco- are generally understood to be easy to use once activated, logical design principles: “move towards resource sustain- but, at times, it is the steps of activation and deactiva- ability” [37], “respect for energy and natural resources: tion that may be hindering [41]. In this regard, designers The conservation principle” [27], “ensure minimal use of should not only provide accessible products that are easy resources in production and transportation phases” [17] and to understand and use, but also ensure that users can find “maximize mass, energy, space and time efficiency” [1]. accessibility features easily. Considering this, the principle of flexibility does fit with Regarding the point about expectations and intuition, ecological design principles. very many recent studies in MA have purposefully been Another guideline from this principle which is particu- user-centred. These studies have focused on preferences larly relevant to media access services refers to the adapt- and opinions, as well as lexical and syntactical compre- ability to the user’s pace, in other words, personalisation hension, speed of delivery, etc. [6]. Increasingly, experi- and participatory approaches. In terms of personalisation, mental studies have taken a more central role in MA [14, Orero [33] outlines several features that can be personalised 34]. To the best of our knowledge, user-centred studies in in the scope of AD: narratives, sound tracks, reproduction MA have not yet considered ecological principles and sus- rate and language. This personalisation shift would, indeed, tainability within their research topics or processes. The make the “one size fits all” approach to media access inva- present special issue will hopefully serve as a stepping lid. Granted their many benefits, if personalisation efforts stone towards this aim. are cross-checked with ecological design principles, some Circling back to our original questions, on the one hand, discrepancies arise. Though personalisation can meet the simplicity and ease of use are not prevalent notions in eco- “design for site-specific context” principle [4], there is the logical design principles. On the other hand, simple designs argument to be made that personalisation may also be more do tend to be less resource-intensive. Here, we propose an resource intensive. analogy between a necessary wariness towards “art over In terms of participatory approaches, however, univer- access” [10] with one towards “sustainability over access”. sal design and ecological design principles may very well find common ground. The growing practice of including the users’ input in the design of MA products and services connects with ecological design principle “everyone is a 6 Principle four: perceptible information designer” [43]: “The design communicates necessary information effec- “Ecological design suggests a deeply participatory tively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the process in which technical disciplinary languages and user's sensory abilities” [5]. barriers are exchanged for a shared understanding of The guidelines of the forth principle can be applied to the design problem. Ecological design changes the old MA quite literally, particularly, “[u]se different modes (pic- rules about what counts for knowledge and who counts torial, verbal, tactile) for redundant presentation of essential as knower”. information”; “[m]aximize "legibility" of essential informa- Taking into consideration all of the mentioned factors, tion” (…); [p]rovide compatibility with a variety of tech- flexibility in use mostly adheres to ecological design princi- niques or devices used by people with sensory limitation ples, though personalisation efforts in the future should take [5].This principle somewhat overlaps with the guidelines of resource consumption into consideration during the design “flexibility in use”, especially when it comes to the differ- of the product. ent methods of use, and the discussion of personalisation in Sect. 4 is also relevant here. In the context of MA, Udo and Fels [42] recognise that it is the director’s responsibility (or 5 Principle three: simple and intuitive use the creative team’s, or that of the designers of a product or service) to “decide the method and style of that communica- “Use of design is easy to understand, regardless of user's tion”. This is not only the vision advocated for in director-led experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concen- accessibility, but also in accessible filmmaking [36] and in tration level” [5]. integrated accessibility [11]. Importantly for the purposes of MA, guidelines of the The perceptible information principle does not, however, simple and intuitive use principle recommend that the appear to be clearly related to any of the ecological design design eliminates unnecessary complexity, accommodates principles from the literature review. This does not mean that diverse ranges of literacy and language skills, introduces the principle is irreconcilable with ecological design. For information by importance and is consistent with user’ instance, we may come up with complimentary guidelines: 13 Universal Access in the Information Society Use different modes (pictorial, verbal, tactile) for In terms of the low physical effort and appropriate size redundant presentation of essential information pri- and space for approach principles, it is worth clarifying that oritising the most sustainable option. AD, captions, audio introductions and audio subtitles are to follow standards and recommendations for comfort, com- Or prehension and, again, ease of use. In our case, low physical Provide compatibility with a variety of techniques or effort and, more specifically, low cognitive effort and thus devices used by people with sensory limitation prior- reduced cognitive fatigue can be linked to appropriate size itising the most sustainable option. and number of words per minute in captions, good qual- ity post-production mixing for AD or programmes in easy The most sustainable option here would entail “eliminat- language. Furthermore, physical settings (such as theatre ing the concept of waste”, “relying on natural energy flows” venues, cultural heritage sites and natural parks) do require a [26] and “design for efficiency in energy and information” guaranteed level of physical comfort [41], as does the place- [4], that is, biomimicry themes in ecological design [2]. It ment of sign language interpreters in live events, and the is true that, at face value, using different modes to present hardware that is utilised to activate and follow access ser- information or increasing personalisation options inher- vices. Though with a slightly differently nuance in meaning, ently requires more resources. However, the principle of “efficiency” is a keyword here that may help us reconcile perceptible information does not need to be opposed to eco- universal design with ecological design: “design for effi- logical design principles: they can work together and they ciency in energy and information” [4]. Yet again, it is worth can be combined, as demonstrated by the two above cited clarifying that this ecological design principle does not refer guidelines. exactly to the same notion of that of universal design. As for the seventh and last principle—appropriate size and space—we feel compelled to cite the expanding practice 7 Principles five, six and seven: of personalisation in media access services yet again. This tolerance for error, low physical principle may be applicable to the choice of changing the effort and appropriate size and space size, position and colour of captions and the option to alter for approach and use the reproduction rate of AD, just to name a few. Nonethe- less, and as a final remark regarding the last set of universal “The design minimises hazards and the adverse conse- design principles, the ultimate responsibility in terms of sus- quences of accidental or unintended actions” [5]. tainable practices should not be a burden placed on people “The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, with with disabilities and other beneficiaries of universal design. a minimum of fatigue” [5]. All in all, and considering the convergences and discrep- “Appropriate size and space for approach, reach, manipu- ancies between universal and ecological design, a proposal lation and use regardless of body size, posture or mobility” of possible applications merging both visions in MA could [5]. involve: Principles five, six and seven are grouped together (1) a “respectful” design that meets the “inherent needs of because they are the most far removed from typical media users” [37] in the form of participatory approaches [7], also access services, as Udo and Fels [41] and [36] also recognise alluding to the ecological design principle that “everyone is that they were envisioned with a different type of accessibil- a designer” [43]; ity in mind. In general terms, we find a dichotomy between (2) “born accessible” [32] products and services (inte- the fifth and sixth principles and a common understanding of grated AD [11], accessible filmmaking [36]) that also antici- the “natural design” [43], which may not be the most tolerant pate production or design strategies that consume the least for error or it may be physically demanding. possible amount of natural resources; In terms of tolerance for error, misunderstandings and (3) “reusable” access services, such translation templates errors of miscommunication in AD and captions [41] are to for AD [18] or semi-live pre-recorded and automatically be avoided by hiring trained professionals and by gathering cued AD [16]; and consecutively applying feedback from users. Though not (4) the incorporation of the addenda “prioritising the most envisioned for MA and, again, seemingly unrelated to this sustainable option”, “aiming for the most efficient option in field, we do find two examples from the ecological design terms of energy and information” [4] and “maximising mass, principles that could evoke tolerance for error: “Designers energy, space and time efficiency” [1] to universal design need to strive to ensure that all material and energy inputs guidelines whenever possible, as exemplified in the fourth and outputs are as inherently non-hazardous as possible” [1] principle of universal design; and “Create safe objects of long-term value” [26]. However, (5) a degree of caution to avoid prioritising “sustainabil- this parallel is certainly not evident. ity over access” whenever ecological design principles are 13 Universal Access in the Information Society applied. For example, providing AD in a live event does con- research group (2021SGR00077). The authors have no financial or sume more resources than not offering the service at all, but proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article. sustainability should not come at the expense of accessibility Declarations service users. The suggestion here is for audiovisual produc- tion companies, cultural venues, heritage sites, etc. to reduce Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. their carbon footprint elsewhere, in an effort to respect the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 8 Conclusions provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are The present theoretical contribution serves as an exploration included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in of a “universal ecological design” paradigm in the scope of the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not MA. Its conclusions point to two universal design principles permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will (one and two) closely overlapping with principles of ecologi- need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a cal design, while others (three, four and seven) seemingly copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. remain unrelated. The unrelated nature of the perceptible information principle and ecological design, for instance, could be settled by merging guidelines or creating comple- References mentary ones. Lastly, principles five and six of universal design could be antagonistic with ecological design, though 1. PT Anastas JB Zimmerman 2003 Design through the 12 princi- ples of green engineering Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 5 94A 101A this poses an opportunity for development and further reflec- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​es032​373g tion from proponents of both designs. 2. D Apul 2010 Ecological design principles and their implications A shared feature of universal design and ecological design on water infrastructure engineering J. Green Build. 5 3 147 164 that we hope sticks in MA and beyond is that of “prevention https://​doi.​org/​10.​3992/​jgb.5.​3.​147 3. J Benyus 1997 Biomimicry: innovations inspired by nature Harp- instead of treatment”. This overarching principle is fostered erCollins New York by the involvement of end users in MA designs, as advocated 4. SD Bergen SM Bolton JL Fridley 2001 Design principles for eco- for in participatory approaches to media access services [7]. logical engineering Ecol. Eng. 18 201 210 https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/​ An aspect which has not been discussed thoroughly in S0925-​8574(01)​00078-7 5. Connell, B.R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., San- this article, but that would deserve further attention, are ford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., Vanderheiden, G. G.: The princi- the implications of one particular principle of ecological ples of universal design (1997). https://​proje​cts.​ncsu.​edu/​design/​ design in relation to universal design: “design for unneces- cud/​about_​ud/​udpri​ncipl​estext.​htm sary capacity or capability (e.g. “one size fits all”) solutions 6. E Giovanni Di 2018 Audio description and reception-centred research E Giovanni Di Y Gambier Eds Reception Studies and should be considered a design flaw” [1]. The ecological Audiovisual Translation John Benjamins Amsterdam & Philadel- impact of personalisation in MA could be a subject of con- phia 225 250 cern in our field going forward. Another possible avenue of 7. E Giovanni Di 2018 Participatory accessibility: Creating audio research that may well be worth exploring is the testing of description with blind and non-blind children J. Audiovisual Transl. 1 1 155 169 https://​doi.​org/​10.​47476/​jat.​v1i1.​50 sustainable MA services with users. 8. Dokumaci, A.: Disability as method: interventions in the habitus Ultimately, this study has found five possible applications of ableism through media-creation. Disability Stud. Quart. 38(3), of a “universal ecological design” in MA. Among them, (2018) ecological practices in MA could include “upcycling” (for 9. Ellcessor, E.: Blurred lines: Accessibility, disability, and defini- tional limitations. First Monday, 20(9), (2015) instance, reusing time-codes when producing an AD in sev- 10. L Fryer 2018 The independent audio describer is dead: Long live eral languages) [31] and translating template AD files [18]. audio description! J. Audiovisual Transl. 1 1 170 186 https://​doi.​ In keeping with a critical lens, the burden of minimising the org/​10.​47476/​jat.​v1i1.​52 use of natural resources should, however, never be placed 11. L Fryer A Cavallo 2021 Integrated Access in Live Performance Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon New York on people with disabilities and, generally, on the quality of 12. GM Greco 2019 Accessibility studies: abuses, misuses and the media access services. method of poietic design C Stephanidis Eds HCII 2019 Springer Cham 15 27 13. GM Greco 2019 Towards a pedagogy of accessibility: The need Author contributions This is a single-authored paper. for critical learning spaces in media accessibility education and training Linguistica Antverpiensia New Ser. Themes Transl. Stud. Funding Open Access Funding provided by Universitat Autonoma 18 23 46 https://​doi.​org/​10.​52034/​lanst​ts.​v18i0.​518 de Barcelona. This work was supported by the TransMedia Catalonia 13 Universal Access in the Information Society 14. GM Greco 2022 The question of accessibility C Taylor E Perego 32. Orero, P.: Born accessible: beyond raising awareness. Position Eds The Routledge handbook of Audio Description Routledge paper (2020). https://​ddd.​uab.​cat/​pub/​estud​is/​2020/​222130/​Pol- Abingdon and New York 13 26 icy_​Paper_​final.​pdf 15. GM Greco A Jankowska A Szarkowska 2022 Addressing meth- 33. P Orero 2022 Audio description personalisation C Taylor E Perego odological issues in experimental research in audiovisual transla- Eds The Routledge Handbook of Audio Description Routledge tion Transl. Spaces 11 1 1 11 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1075/​ts.​00030.​int Abingdon & New York 407 419 16. I Hermosa-Ramírez 2020 Delivery approaches in audio descrip- 34. P Orero S Doherty JL Kruger A Matamala J Pedersen E Perego P tion for the scenic arts Parallèles 32 2 17 31 https://​doi.​org/​10.​ Romero Fresco S Rovira-Esteva O Soler-Vilageliu A Szarkowska 17462/​para.​2020.​02.​02 2018 Conducting experimental research in audiovisual translation 17. Hossain, M. S. J., Ahmad, N.: Green design principles and trends (AVT): A position paper J. Special. Transl. 30 105 126 of using them among Bangladeshi consumer goods manufacturers. 35. K Rao MW Ok BR Bryant 2014 A review of research on univer- In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and sal design educational models Remed. Spec. Educ. 35 3 153 166 Engineering Management (2011). IEEE, Singapore, pp. 467–471. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​07419​32513​518980 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​IEEM.​2011.​61179​61 36. P Romero-Fresco 2013 Accessible filmmaking: Joining the dots 18. A Jankowska M Milc L Fryer 2017 Translating audio description between audiovisual translation, accessibility and filmmaking J. scripts… into English SKASE. J. Transl. Interpret. 10 2 2 16 Special. Transl. 20 2 201 223 19. SR Kellert 2018 Nature by Design: The Practice of Biophilic 37. F Shu-Yang B Freedman R Cote 2004 Principles and practice of Design Yale University Press Yale ecological design Environ. Rev. 12 2 97 112 https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 20. G Kleege 2016 Audio description described: Current standards, 1139/​a04-​005 future innovations, larger implications Representations 135 1 89 38. MF Story JL Mueller RL Mace 1998 The Universal Design File: 101 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1525/​rep.​2016.​135.1.​89 Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities North Carolina 21. Krusche, P., Althaus, D., Gabriel, I., Weig-Krusche, M.: Ökolo- State University Raleigh, NC gisches Bauen. Bauverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden & Berlin (1982) 39. H Thompson 2017 Reviewing blindness in French fic- 22. M Lopez G Kearney K Hofstädter 2021 Enhancing audio descrip- tion, 1789–2013 Palgrave, London. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1057/​ tion: Inclusive cinematic experiences through sound design J. 978-1-​137-​43511-8 Audiovisual Transl. 4 1 157 182 https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.4​ 7476/j​ at.v​ 4i1.​ 40. JP Udo D Fels 2009 Suit the action to the word, the word to the 2021.​154 action: an unconventional approach to describing Shakespeare's 23. R Mace 1985 Universal design, barrier free environments for eve- Hamlet J. Visual Impair. Blind. 103 3 78 183 https://​doi.​org/​10.​ ryone Design. West 33 1 147 152 1177/​01454​82X09​10300​307 24. P Madge 1997 Ecological design: a new critique Des. Issues 13 2 41. JP Udo DI Fels 2010 The rogue poster-children of universal 44 54 https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​15117​30 design: closed captioning and audio description J. Eng. Des. 21 25. Mazur, I.: Audio description: Concepts, theories and research 2–3 207 221 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09544​82090​33106​91 approaches. In: Bogucki, L., Deckert, M. (Eds.), The Palgrave 42. JP Udo DI Fels 2010 Universal design on stage: live audio descrip- Handbook of Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility tion for theatrical performances Perspectives 18 3 189 203 https://​ (pp. 227–247). Springer, Cham (2020). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09076​76X.​2010.​485683 978-3-​030-​42105-2_​12 43. S Ryn Van der S Cowan 2007 Ecological Design, 10th Anniver- 26. W McDonough M Braungart 1992 The Hannover Principles: sary Island Press Washington, DC Design for Sustainability The World’s Fair Germany 44. Xin, Z., Mei, Y., Chenglong, W., Lirong, W.: Study of sustainable 27. JF McLennan 2004 The Philosophy of Sustainable Design Eco- factors in universal design. In: IEEE 10th International Confer- tone Publishing Kansas City, MO ence on Computer-Aided Industrial Design & Conceptual Design, 28. WJ Mitsch SE Jorgensen 2004 Ecological Engineering and Eco- pp. 1412–1415 (2009). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​CAIDCD.​2009.​ system Restoration Wiley Hoboken, NJ 53749​50 29. D Nieusma 2004 Alternative design scholarship: Working toward appropriate design Des. Issues 20 3 13 24 Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to 30. N Olguntürk H Demirkan 2009 Ergonomics and universal design jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. in interior architecture education J. Facul. Architect. 26 2 123 138 https://​doi.​org/​10.​4305/​METU.​JFA.​2009.2.7 31. Oncins, E.: Upcycling audio description: Towards a more sustain- able model. In: Conference presentation. ARSAD: 8th Advanced Research Seminar on Audio Description, Barcelona (2021) 13