Article

Elusive Users: The Presence of Physically Disabled Users

within Architectural Design Processes
Marcus Tang Merit 1, * , Masashi Kajita 2 and Jonna Majgaard Krarup 1

1 Institute of Architecture, Urbanism and Landscape, Royal Danish Academy of Architecture,

Design and Conservation, 1435 Copenhagen, Denmark
2 Institute of Architecture and Design, Royal Danish Academy of Architecture, Design and Conservation,
1435 Copenhagen, Denmark
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: This paper is based on 8 months of sociological participatory fieldwork at the office of
Gottlieb Paludan Architects, following the design process of a new concourse area for Ny Ellebjerg
Station in Copenhagen, Denmark. The study aims to trace what presence users with physical
disabilities possessed during a design process in which they were not physically present or explicitly
involved. The study bases its findings on the visual material produced during the design process by
the employees of Gottlieb Paludan Architects as well as the thoughts and discussions of practitioners.
Drawing on actor-network theory, the study describes and analyses these human and non-human
actors as they constitute and contribute to the design process. The study finds that users with physical
disabilities were present within the design process through an implicit generalized presence and an
explicit required presence. Generalized presence refers to those instances where the architectural qualities
that were strived for in the project implicitly aligned with the needs of users with physical disabilities.
Required presence refers to those instances during the design process where accessibility demands
from client guidelines or building regulations played an important role.

Keywords: design processes; disability; user presence; actor-network theory; interdisciplinarity;

sociology; Copenhagen

Citation: Merit, M.T.; Kajita, M.;

Krarup, J.M. Elusive Users: The
Presence of Physically Disabled
1. Introduction
Users within Architectural Design There exists a wealth of literature pertaining to how the cities and urban spaces we
Processes. Architecture 2023, 3, 56–70. share can be designed to be socially sustainable and just. To name just a few examples of
https://doi.org/10.3390/ such “cities”, we have the feminist city [1], the restorative city [2], the open city [3], and the
architecture3010003 human -sized city [4]. This list could go on. One thing these and other such “cities” have in
Academic Editor: Tigran Haas
common is an attempt to influence designers and architects on how to best shape the urban
habitats of human beings. However, sustainability, be it social or otherwise, and other
Received: 21 November 2022 societal issues are not effortlessly translated into everyday architectural practice [5], despite
Revised: 21 December 2022 the effort that goes into researching and disseminating the ideal city. This means there
Accepted: 24 December 2022 exists a pragmatic gap in our understanding of how architects can best address varying
Published: 28 December 2022
societal challenges in a professional reality of multiple competing and intersecting interests.
The previous literature has worked towards filling this gap by exploring the dependencies
and relations of architecture [6], the architectural design process itself [7], and how to
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
involve users’ knowledge in design processes [8,9]. In relation to this, previous research
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. has emphasized the creative potential of inclusionary design practices when working with
This article is an open access article vulnerable groups [10,11]. These studies are particularly interested in what can and does
distributed under the terms and happen when architects collaborate with vulnerable groups. However, in the architectural
conditions of the Creative Commons project that forms the case of this study and, arguably, in many other architectural projects
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// in Denmark and other countries, such direct collaboration is not the norm.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ This article presents a participatory field study in Gottlieb Paludan Architects’ (GPA)
4.0/). design process of the concourse area of Ny Ellebjerg Station (NES) in Copenhagen. More

Architecture 2023, 3, 56–70. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture3010003 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/architecture

Architecture 2023, 3 57

specifically, it delivers an empirical exploration of what presence users with physical

disabilities have in the day-to-day work of practicing architects. Here, it is important
to mention that users with physical disabilities never had any direct presence through
user involvement or similar processes during the design process. Exploring why and
how such a group’s presence still matters to the design process is a central point to this
paper. In Denmark, 25% of the population suffers from mild (16%) or severe types of
physical disabilities (9%), which makes them significantly less able to use Danish public
transportation [12]. This should make the accessibility and inclusivity of public transport
an important social sustainability agenda; however, recent research indicates that this is not
currently the case. When questioned, few practicing Danish landscape architects tie social
sustainability to accessibility before being explicitly questioned if there is a link between the
two [13]. Furthermore, by drawing attention to users with physical disabilities, this article
emphasizes a particular group of users whose spatial experiences could be considered
phenomenologically distinct from the spatial experiences of “able-bodied” architects and
users [10,14]. Such a distinction has previously led disability theorists to criticize design
practices within architecture and other professions as “normate”, problematizing the lack
of insight gained from users with physical disabilities and the lack of design taking into
consideration the body and neurodiversity of human beings [15,16]. However, previous
normate critiques of architectural design processes lack empirical purchase in the daily
realities of practicing architects’ attempts at mediating numerable opposing interests into
the design of future spaces.
Therefore, the empirical case and analytical focus of this paper is to show an example
of how architects work with societal challenges with which they might have no intimate
knowledge but are nonetheless expected to help solve. Thus, this provides a window
of opportunity for studying the everyday work of architects to understand what type
of presence users with physical disabilities have within an architectural design process
and how this presence influences the decisions that architects make about their designs.
Therefore, this article asks the question: How are users with physical disabilities present in
architectural design processes through visual devices?
By devices, this study means the myriad forms of visual, textual, and physical materials
produced and distributed during architectural design processes. This is a broad category
that, among other things, refers to the numerous types of drawings, digital files, physical
models, material samples, site photographs, reports, 3D renderings, and virtual reality
models present during architectural design processes. Previous social scientific research has
extensively emphasized the importance and agency of these devices through their constant
circulation within architectural design processes [17–21]. It is, therefore, the argument of
this paper, based on empirical experiences and previous research, that devices form an
unavoidable element in the architectural design process and should figure as part of this
study’s central research question. Previous primarily social scientific research, despite its
necessarily cross-disciplinary emphasis in studying a different profession’s everyday work
routines, has, to a large degree, ignored what might be learned by introducing the visually
founded methods of architectural spatial analysis to the world of academic social scientific
analysis [22]. The limited research that does exist by social scientists attempting to breach
this methodological and disciplinary gap nonetheless proves the fruitfulness of challenging
the analytical conventions of both social science and architecture [23,24].
By drawing equal attention to the devices being produced by architects and to the
conversations architects have about and around devices, this study aims to provide findings
that can be understood by both architects and social scientists [25]. In order to achieve this
equality, this study draws upon actor-network theory (ANT), which provides a method-
ological framework for symmetrically describing and engaging with both human and
non-human actors within the design process [26]. By providing a symmetrical description
of both the architects and their devices, this study aspired to dispel the elusiveness that
can exist when social scientists and architects try to agree on how users might be present
within design processes.
 Architecture 2023, 3, FOR PEER REVIEW 3

description of both the architects and their devices, this study aspired to dispel the
Architecture 2023, 3 elusiveness that can exist when social scientists and architects try to agree on how users
58
might be present within design processes.

2. Data Collection and Ny Ellebjerg Station’s Future Concourse

2. Data Collection and Ny Ellebjerg Station’s Future Concourse
AsAsa atrain
trainstation,
station,NES NESservices
servicesboth bothnational
nationaland andregional
regionaltrain trainlines
linesfrom
fromthree
three
differentplatforms.
different platforms.Two Twoof of its
its platforms
platforms are are positioned
positioned at at street
street level
levelandandrun runparallel
parallelto
one another. The last platform is raised above ground,
to one another. The last platform is raised above ground, spanning across the tracks spanning across the tracksatat
ground level (see the top-left picture in Figure 1). To change
ground level (see the top-left picture in Figure 1). To change between platforms requires between platforms requires
several hundred metres of walking and the navigation of multiple flights of stairs oror
several hundred metres of walking and the navigation of multiple flights of stairs
elevators.Figure
elevators. Figure 1 shows
1 shows a set
a set of photos
of photos takentakenfromfrom different
different access access
points points
to thetostation
the station
and
and emphasizes
emphasizes the lackthe lack ofcoherency
of spatial spatial coherency
NES currently NESsuffers
currently
from.suffers
The new from. The new
concourse of
concourse of NES is planned to open in 2024, simultaneously
NES is planned to open in 2024, simultaneously with a new subterranean metro station with a new subterranean
metro station
currently undercurrently
construction under at construction at the site.there
the site. Furthermore, Furthermore,
are plansthere are plans
to expand NESto
expand NES with an additional train platform at street
with an additional train platform at street level to service national and European trainlevel to service national and
European train lines. With these additions to NES, and the significant
lines. With these additions to NES, and the significant urban development taking place on urban development
alltaking
sides place
of the on all sides
station, NESofis the station,toNES
projected become is projected to becomebusiest
one of Denmark’s one ofstations
Denmark’s
by
busiest
2040. As stations
such, NES by will
2040. As such,
serve as anNES will serve
important as an
station forimportant
commuters station for commuters
to change between
to change
national, between
regional, andnational, regional,
local public transitandlineslocal public transit The
in Copenhagen. lineskeyin challenge
Copenhagen. The
for the
key challenge for the concourse project is, therefore, to design
concourse project is, therefore, to design a coherent space between the many means of a coherent space between
the many
public means of connected
transportation public transportation
to NES. As the connected
concourse, to in
NES.the As the needs
future, concourse, in the
to connect
tofuture,
variousneeds
urban todevelopment
connect to various urban development
areas placed on both sides areas of the placed
rail trackson both sides of of
and because the
railspatial
the tracksconstraints
and because of theof urban
the spatial constraints
area, the concourse of isthe urban to
planned area, the concourse
be constructed 5 mis
planned
below to level.
street be constructed 5 m below
This also allows street
for the level. This
concourse also allows
to easily connectfor tothe
the concourse
new metroto
easily something
station, connect toofthe new metro
particular station,to something
importance the Copenhagen of particular
Metro, which importance
serves as tothe
the
primary client for
Copenhagen the concourse
Metro, which serves project.
as the primary client for the concourse project.

Figure 1. Images of the NES site in February 2021.

Figure 1. Images of the NES site in February 2021.

Thedevelopment
The developmentofofNES
NEShashasundergone
undergoneseveral
severaliterations,
iterations,beginning
beginningasasearly
early2016
2016
with an earlier study conducted by GPA of how a future station might look. The scale ofof
with an earlier study conducted by GPA of how a future station might look. The scale
theurban
the urbandevelopment
developmenttaking
takingplace
placearound
aroundNES
NESand
andthe
thefuture
futureplans
plansfor
forthe
thestation
stationitself
itself
make this project too complicated to describe in its entirety in this study. It is nonetheless
important to grasp that the development of the NES concourse is just one of many phases
of future development planned, with varying degrees of certainty, for the station. Some
of these plans involve the expansion of the station to include two new entrances and a
Architecture 2023, 3 59

potential over-site development, to pay for some of the costs related to the subterranean
metro station. Contractually, these plans were kept out of the job that GPA was hired
to do by the Copenhagen Metro. Naturally, the future intentions for the surrounding
area nonetheless did influence the discussions and decisions made throughout the design
process at GPA. It is furthermore important to explain that the Copenhagen Metro is acting
as the sole client for the concourse project and that the overall project management is
contracted to a large external architectural, engineering, and consultancy company. Here,
the Copenhagen Metro also represents the interests of other public organizations such as
the municipality of Copenhagen and the Danish State Railways, with whom they will share
the finished concourse space. As a company, GPA has extensive experience with these
external actors from previous projects. In addition, some of the architects working at GPA
are former employees of the Copenhagen Metro. This resulted in a friendly and at times
informal collaborative process throughout most of the project.
The study into the concourse’s architectural design process is based on 8 months of
participatory fieldwork at Gottlieb Paludan Architects (GPA), starting September 2020 and
ending May 2021. During this time, fieldwork was conducted through a full-time physical
presence at the office of GPA, apart from the roughly 3 months when COVID-19 caused
the team involved with NES to work from home, in which case the fieldwork was limited
to the online meetings taking place as part of the design process. This study follows the
project during three “stages”, which are referred to as conceptual design (primarily focused
around ideation), preliminary design (primarily focused around the geometry of stairs,
escalators, elevators, and other elements), and detailed design (primarily focused on light-
ing and materials). The data collected from this fieldwork are comprised of some 34 pages
of field notes corresponding to 35 audio-recorded meetings and various non-recorded
meetings that took place around the office. A catalogue of devices was also produced,
resulting in 47 entries by devices, with corresponding descriptions and notes. The field
notes, recordings, and device catalogue were all time stamped and continuously linked
to each other to form a coherent empirical material. To gain unmediated access to the
design process while work was taking place [27] this study employed participatory ethno-
graphic fieldwork. This method has the significant methodological benefit of overcoming
potential dissimilarities between rhetoric and action [28], while also allowing researchers
to make note of how such dissimilarities manifest themselves. In accordance with this
study’s interdisciplinary intentions, visual and textual empirical data are granted equal
attention in order to provide a valid representation of the architectural design practice.
Methodologically and analytically, this means the empirical data, in the form of the visual
and physical materials used throughout the architectural design process (i.e., devices), are
granted equal epistemological value to comments and conversations (i.e., field notes and
audio recordings).

3. Devices, Users’ Presence, and Actor-Network Theory

3.1. Why Devices Matter
Much research on design processes has traditionally privileged accounts that lend
primacy to either social, cognitive, technical, historical, or organizational explanations [29].
This has made theorists comment on the presence of agential cuts in research, referring to
the theoretically imposed limitations on who or what is granted agency [30]. Cuts such as
these have led to discussions about whether the object or subject should take precedence in
their explanative capabilities, which in turn would challenge this study’s argument that
devices and architects should be granted equal attention in the study of design processes.
Pragmatist theorists have pointed out that such discussions mistake the premise of agency
by asking with whom agency lies, rather than acknowledging the equal presence of both
human and non-human actors. Their point is that it is the researcher, not the empirical
world, who methodologically and theoretically cuts what is engaged with as an actor [31].
This emphasizes the importance of making it transparent how devices matter and how
devices come to matter, both from a theoretical perspective and as an explicit analytical
Architecture 2023, 3 60

goal for this study. To specify this, Noortje Marres, albeit in the context of politics and
publics, states that we should examine “how material entities become invested with specific
capacities ( . . . ) in particular settings and at certain times” [32]. This is not an argument
for a relativistic understanding, in which devices are merely objects through which subjects
manifest their agency. Indeed, Marres states that it is not enough to see how materials enter
into situations, as we should focus our attentions on “how the material form of participation
is actively accomplished with the aid of devices” [32]. Once constructed, devices become
imbricated, as layers of meaning are overlapped unto them over time by other actors, with
this process itself being tied to what agency the device affords other actors through its
physical and visual characteristics [33]. While the affordance of a device can be summarized
as the breadth of actions made available to actors by the device [34], it is implausible to
describe the wealth of empirically observed actions tied to it [35]. This directs the attention
of this study to the continual imbrication of devices, as these are constructed by architects
and subsequently enter into the continually expanding network of actors surrounding
any architectural project [36]. Architects shape and are shaped by the devices introduced
throughout design processes.

3.2. Tracking Actors in the Design Process

Methodologically, this requires the introduction of a framework through which to
track the construction and usage of devices in architectural design processes, as these take
on myriad roles in everyday work, while simultaneously not forgetting about the architects
amid these processes. In other words, we must follow the actors, whoever or whatever
they might be, as these constitute and maintain the network that is the architectural design
process and subject of this study [37]. When devices are referenced throughout this study,
it is, therefore, not important to think of this visual material in terms of a singular image
or several images merged into a PDF presentation; what matters is whether the image or
the presentation as a device enacts influence upon other actors in the network. This is an
empirical question to be answered through data gathering and subsequent analysis, not
a question about making an agential cut to limit what type of visual material constitutes
devices worth mentioning. What matters is sticking to the empirical data presented by
following the design process, as they are constituted by the attachments and interactions
between architects and devices [38]. Therefore, the design process forms a heterogeneous
network of entities that are deigned important precisely because, and only insofar as, they
enact influence on other entities in the design process [39].
While this principle of symmetry applies a highly empiricist notion of the studied
actor-network, it is wrong to assume this means that this study or ANT in general can
assume an atheoretical stance, or, indeed, that ANT provides a platform for unbiased
observations [40]. Here, it is important to recall that due to theoretical, pragmatic, or
thematic constraints imposed on studies by researchers or external actors, agential cuts,
and, as such, limits to how far researchers can trace the network, are always present. To
this end, the research question of this study provides an example of such agential cuts, as
this study is explicitly interested in tracing the presence of physically disabled users. This
directly influences which parts of the network are described here and which are omitted.
However, following the principles of actor-network theory, it is important to leave it up to
the actors to describe how the design process unfolds within the “scale” of this research
question as “( . . . ) scale is what actors achieve by scaling, spacing, and contextualizing
each other through the transportation in some specific vehicles of some specific traces” [37].
Therefore, if we are to trust Albena Yaneva when they state that “reality is exported from
architectural practices not in the form of big theories, visions, manifestos, but rather in the
shape of scale models, renderings, videos and drawings” [36], this study needs to represent
the studied network through the visual means and language of the network. Only then can
the study answer its research question truthfully, as it produces well-constructed arguments
in a language that holds sway both from the perspective of architects and researchers [26].
Architecture 2023, 3 61

3.3. Presence of Physically Disabled Users

This leads to the central concern of this study, and the validity of any conclusions that
are drawn here. How, after all, can we discuss the presence of a particular group of users in
a design process with which they have no direct physical involvement? Here, a key tenet
of ANT is that it provides no presupposed theoretical definition of such a presence, as this
is exactly what is studied by tracing the relations between actors within the network [41].
In other words, ANT allows for an analysis focused on precisely how physically disabled
users are constructed as an actor in the network [42]. Indeed, by drawing inspiration
from the theory that attempts to explain the presence of physically disabled users in
architectural design processes, “supposedly neutral” design often privileges a particular
average understanding of the body [43]. Furthermore, as Yaneva points out, the work of
design and architecture is of societal importance, in that it constructs particular realities of
which other variations are possible [36]. Based on the above sections, this ties the presence
of users in the design process to the agency, affordances, and the attachments of devices. For
the study to describe the presence of users with physical disabilities, this makes following
the architects as they construct and make use of different types of devices during the design
process important.

4. Analysis
To identify the presence of users with physical disabilities within the design process
of the NES concourse, the empirical data went through three analytical steps. These were
(1) scouring field notes and recorded conversations for relevant mentions regarding users
and their presence within the project. This was accomplished while (2) looking through the
catalogued devices, to locate devices that were mentioned during such conversations and to
identify devices through which users with a disability were implicitly or explicitly present.
Finally, these two steps were combined in (3) a timeline to draw links between field notes,
devices, and the research notes made during steps (1) and (2). This visualization of the
design process, as perceived through the lens of a particular academic research question,
granted significant analytical clarity. Just as importantly, it allowed the preliminary findings
and direction of the analysis to become more accessible for feedback from practitioners
at GPA and researchers at the Royal Danish Academy. For illustrative purposes, Figure 2
shows a segment of this final step in the analysis.
The third step of the analysis segmented the field notes into two categories. This
categorization was based on steps 1 and 2 of the analysis process, which showed that
users with a disability, while never physically involved with the design process, did have
an explicit presence at GPA. This presence was primarily related to the multiple rules
and regulations surrounding Danish and European accessibility legislation about public
transportation. To explore how a group of users could have such a particular presence
within the design process, step 3 of the analysis process split the Y-axis into two rows.
This visually coded the field notes according to whether users with physical disabilities
were (A) implicitly or explicitly referred to in conversations or present in devices without
referencing obligatory rules or regulation and (B) whether such a presence was tied to
the mediation and/or implementation of rules or regulations within the design. For
ease of reference, the following analysis will refer to these as the (A) generalized presence
and (B) required presence of users with physical disabilities in the design process of the
NES concourse.

4.1. Generalized Presence

During the fieldwork, several different types of devices were created by GPA and
registered in the catalogue. These included, but were not limited to, plan drawings, section
drawings, flow models, physical models, CAD renderings, axonometric projections, and
hand-drawn sketches. In their construction and application throughout the design process,
these devices served several different purposes. This meant some devices were, e.g.,
consciously constructed only to communicate spatial solutions for external collaborators
Architecture 2023, 3 62

or to explore ideas internally at GPA. Furthermore, some devices saw several iterations
or re-emerged at later stages in the design process, whereas others only saw one iteration.
Fully describing and tracing the emergence, iterations, and agency of the entire design
process is beyond this study, as a specific agential cut has been introduced in the form of
structuring a research question. In accordance with this analytically imposed limitation
to how the networked design process is described, one interesting purpose of the devices
deployed at GPA was their attempts at studying how users in general might experience
and use the concourse space. This is the reason for referring to this as generalized presence;
in such circumstances, users with a disability were present within the design process, to
the degree to which their needs overlapped with those qualities generally sought after
when designing the NES concourse. This generalized presence was the most common of the
two types of presence that this study found users with physical disabilities to have during
Architecture 2023, 3, FOR PEER REVIEW
the design process. Moreover, the generalized presence was primarily implicit devices and7
conversations that seldomly led to explicit references to users with physical disabilities.

Figure
Figure 2. 2. Step
Step 3 of
3 of theanalysis,
the analysis,asasvisualized
visualizedthrough
throughaatimeline.
timeline. A
A indicates
indicates field notes associated
associated
with
with generalized
generalized presence.
presence. BB indicatesfield
indicates fieldnotes
notesassociated
associatedwith
withrequired
requiredpresence.
presence.

An The third step

example of the
of this, analysis
from a groupsegmented
of devicesthecreated
field notes
earlyinto two“conceptual
in the categories. This cat-
design”
egorization
phase, was based
is presented on steps
in Figure 3. The1 priority
and 2 ofofthe analysis
these process,
devices was towhich showed
understand thethat users
position
andwith a disability,
shape while never
of the escalators, physically
elevators, involved with
and staircases the design
that needed process,access
to provide did have an
to and
explicit presence at GPA. This presence was primarily related to
through the concourse area. As exemplified by Figure 3, these devices were particularly the multiple rules and
regulations
iterative, surrounding
as several positions Danish and European
and shapes were tried accessibility legislation
out. With this intention about publicseveral
in mind, trans-
portation.
simple To explore
“eye-height” 3Dhow a group of
perspectives users
were could(see
created have such
the a particular
bottom two images presence within
in Figure 3)
tothe design
study the process,
implicationsstep 3ofof different
the analysis process and
staircases splitathe Y-axis into
potential rooftwoforrows. This visu-
the concourse.
Inally
thiscoded the field
way, some noteswere
devices according to whether
constructed users with
to explicitly physical
provide thedisabilities
architects withwere the
(A)
implicitly
average or explicitly
height of a user’s referred to in conversations
perspective of the concourse or present
from thein devices
surroundingwithout referenc-
area. These
ing obligatory
devices were then rules or regulation
presented and (B) whether
and discussed amongstsuch a presence
the team working wason tied
thetoproject
the media-
and
tionon
went and/or implementation
to influence how the of rules or regulations
architects perceived the within
space.theIn
design. For ease of reference,
one conversation, this led
onethearchitect
following analysis will
to conclude; “we refer
foundto these as the
out that you(A)didgeneralized
not see thepresence and (B)
concourse, required
or have an
presence ofofusers
impression with
it, from physical
eye height,disabilities
due to the in the designofprocess
dominance the otherof elements
the NES concourse.
of the space”.
In turn, this went on to influence the effort put into making the underground concourse
4.1. Generalized
visibly distinct atPresence
street level from a distance.
During the fieldwork, several different types of devices were created by GPA and
registered in the catalogue. These included, but were not limited to, plan drawings, sec-
tion drawings, flow models, physical models, CAD renderings, axonometric projections,
and hand-drawn sketches. In their construction and application throughout the design
 with the average height of a user’s perspective of the concourse from the surrounding
area. These devices were then presented and discussed amongst the team working on the
project and went on to influence how the architects perceived the space. In one conversa-
tion, this led one architect to conclude; “we found out that you did not see the concourse,
Architecture 2023, 3
or have an impression of it, from eye height, due to the dominance of the other elements 63
of the space”. In turn, this went on to influence the effort put into making the underground
concourse visibly distinct at street level from a distance.

Figure
Figure 3. 3.Geometrical
Geometrical studies
studies ofof the
the NES
NES concourse.
concourse.

Tightly
Tightly connected
connected to to
thethe knowledge
knowledge generated
generated by by thethe studies
studies exemplified
exemplified in Figure
in Figure 3,
3, design
the the designprocessprocess sawconstruction
saw the the constructionof severalof several flow studies.
flow studies. The intention
The intention of the
of the flow
flow studies
studies was to was to understand
understand how users howwould
users would
navigate navigate
the space theand
space and to identify
to identify potential po-
tential bottlenecks.
bottlenecks. This wasThis done was done
using using software
software that standardized
that standardized all usersalltousers to fit awithin
fit within few
a few
set set characteristics
characteristics such as suchtravelasspeed
travelandspeed and a square
a square metre requirement
metre requirement per user. perThisuser.
This resulted
resulted in the
in the heat heatshown
maps maps shown
in Figurein Figure
4, where 4, where green indicates
green indicates unimpededunimpededcommuter com-
muter
traffic and traffic and red bottleneck
red indicates indicates bottleneck
areas where areas
peoplewhere wouldpeople
feel would
squeezed feeltogether.
squeezed Theto-
gether. The
advantage of advantage
such flow modelsof such wasflowthat
modelstheywas that provided
quickly they quickly veryprovided very legible
legible indications
ofindications
potential flaws in the geometrical
of potential flaws in thelayout of NES,
geometrical which
layout ofalso
NES, made
which themalsoessential
made them to
the client at
essential toproject
the clientmeetings.
at project Inmeetings.
the flow models,
In the flow green indicates
models, greenareas whereareas
indicates therewhere
are
nothere
issues arewith the flow,
no issues with and
thered indicates
flow, and red increased
indicatescongestion. In Figure 4,In
increased congestion. theFigure
image4,on the
Architecture 2023, 3, FOR PEER REVIEW 9
the left is a flow study of GPA’s revision of the design for NES,
image on the left is a flow study of GPA’s revision of the design for NES, while the image while the image on the
right
on theis aright
flowisstudy
a flow of study
an older version
of an older of the design
version of thepresented by the client.
design presented by theThe slight
client. The
differences in these two
slight differences images
in these twomade
images onemade
architectone comment: “I’m a little
architect comment: “I’mannoyed
a littleIannoyed
cannot
show
I cannota mapshow thata is
map completely green for our
that is completely green project
for our( . . project
. ). All of these
(…). Alldifferences are very
of these differences
small”.
are veryDue to the
small”. Due simplification of the space
to the simplification of the that the that
space flowthe models achieved,
flow models there was
achieved, therea
reluctance amongst
was a reluctance the architects
amongst at GPA at
the architects toGPArely solely
to relyon the information
solely provided
on the information by the
provided
flow
by themodels. Instead,Instead,
flow models. a new flow a new model
flowwasmodeloftenwas constructed to test outtonew
often constructed test geometrical
out new ge-
layouts, before returning to devices more akin to those
ometrical layouts, before returning to devices more akin to those of Figure 3. Thisof Figure 3. This meant thatmeant
flow
models were used as a communicatory tool to convince the
that flow models were used as a communicatory tool to convince the client of the quality client of the quality of the
design
of the decisions made bymade
design decisions GPAby and GPAto stress
and to test design
stress testdecisions based onbased
design decisions the use onoftheother
use
types
of otherof devices.
types of devices.

Figure 4. Flow models predicting experienced density for pedestrians. Left is GPA’s design pro-
Figure 4. Flow models predicting experienced density for pedestrians. Left is GPA’s design proposal,
posal, and right is the preliminary design proposal by the client.
and right is the preliminary design proposal by the client.
Another reason for the reluctance that the architects showed about the flow models
Another reason for the reluctance that the architects showed about the flow models
was the waythe
was the way thesoftware
softwarehomogenized
homogenizedusers
userstotobe
becompletely
completelyidentical.
identical.At
Ataaseparate
separate
instance, while gathered around a table discussing these flow models and how they
worked, one architect remarked on the unnuanced nature of a device based on the un-
likely scenario of a future “where everybody is fit”. The flow studies, despite their im-
portance within the design process, were, therefore, not expected by the architects to ad-
equately represent the diversity of the users that would make use of the future NES con-
Architecture 2023, 3 64

instance, while gathered around a table discussing these flow models and how they worked,
one architect remarked on the unnuanced nature of a device based on the unlikely scenario
of a future “where everybody is fit”. The flow studies, despite their importance within the
design process, were, therefore, not expected by the architects to adequately represent the
diversity of the users that would make use of the future NES concourse. A critique such
as this emphasizes that user diversity was an issue that the design process at GPA took
seriously; however, it did not spur the architects to adjust the software to represent people
needing more space or moving at a slower pace. Despite this, conversations surrounding
the flow models showed that the concourse’s ability to cater to a diverse user group was
important for the architectural quality that GPA sought to deliver. Nonetheless, it was only
during discussions tied to flow models that the architects took issue with the diversity of
user representation.
As the final example of this section, Figure 5 shows two of the many renderings
produced during the “detailed design” phase. Here, the lighting of the future concourse is
studied in relation to the possibility of cladding the wall and floor of the concourse with
red bricks. These renderings were constructed because it is important for information to be
well-lit and accessible, while lighting also plays a big role in how the wayfinding of the
concourse will function at night and during the dark Danish winter months. One of the
ways in which GPA went about ensuring this was to study the lighting conditions of the
concourse at different times of day, with the intent being that information boards should
be placed in a well-lit section of the concourse not blocking the main flow of commuters.
To this end, devices such as Figure 5 were produced to emphasize how the lighting of the
concourse might be handled. In the conversations that occurred surrounding such devices,
the spatial experience of the station’s future users was central. In a conversation about
the lighting of the concourse, one architect referred to the ability to quickly identify routes
in and out of the concourse by stating “you feel safe because you can read it”. What is
interesting from this conversation is that the discussions referred implicitly and explicitly
to achieving wayfinding and good lighting as markers of generalized architectural quality.
Architecture 2023, 3, FOR PEER REVIEW
Therefore, these qualities were not consciously ascribed to benefit any one type of user10
more or less than any other types of users.

Figure 5. Renderings showing evening light conditions of the concourse.

Figure 5. Renderings showing evening light conditions of the concourse.

Thisexemplifies
This exemplifies howhow architects
architects at GPA
at GPA would
would construct
construct devices
devices and and let themselves
let themselves be
be persuaded about the benefits or disadvantages of certain design
persuaded about the benefits or disadvantages of certain design decisions based on decisions based
theseon
these devices.
devices. Moreover,
Moreover, it is an itexample
is an example of the generalized
of the generalized presencepresence
of usersof with
usersphysical
with physical
dis-
disabilities
abilities withinwithin the design
the design process,process,
as the as the devices
devices and conversations
and conversations in mostin most circum-
circumstances
stances defaulted
defaulted to conceptualizing
to conceptualizing and depicting
and depicting “average”“average” able-bodied
able-bodied users. Itusers.
shows It shows
how
howwith
users usersphysical
with physical disabilities
disabilities were rarely
were rarely given
given an an explicit
explicit presence
presence withinwithin
devices devices
and
and never
never had devices
had devices constructed
constructed based onbased
theiron their perceptions
perceptions of space.ofWhat
space.isWhat is interest-
interesting, for
ing, for the purposes of this study, is that this influences the affordances of
the purposes of this study, is that this influences the affordances of the architectural devices,the architec-
astural
theydevices, as they are
are specifically basedspecifically based on the
on the perspective of perspective
an “average” of and
an “average”
able-bodied anduser.
able-
bodied user. In summary, this indicates that the generalized presence of users with physical
disabilities was tied to the overall architectural qualities of the project. While this general-
ized presence remained primarily implicit within the design process, the architects at GPA
did, at times, show an awareness of differences in bodily fitness and explicitly tied such
“diversity” to the quality of the final design. However, this did not translate into the con-
Architecture 2023, 3 65

In summary, this indicates that the generalized presence of users with physical disabilities
was tied to the overall architectural qualities of the project. While this generalized presence
remained primarily implicit within the design process, the architects at GPA did, at times,
show an awareness of differences in bodily fitness and explicitly tied such “diversity” to
the quality of the final design. However, this did not translate into the construction of
devices that afforded an explicit representation of users with physical disabilities.

4.2. Required Presence

Devices that explicitly sought to represent users with physical disabilities and afford
spatial analysis founded on this user groups’ particular needs were created and circulated
during the design process. However, such devices were based on making sure the design
adhered to rules and regulations concerning accessibility. Required presence refers to those
situations in the design process where architects sought to understand and integrate
various regulatory demands for accessibility within the design of the concourse. Rules and
regulations regarding accessibility were an important topic during meetings, alongside
numerous other topics that also needed to be solved during the design process. Indeed,
users in wheelchairs and users with visual impairments were mentioned regularly during
the design process, in relation to what demands various requirements enforced on the
design of the concourse. An example of how rules and regulations regarding accessibility
for users with physical disabilities impacted the design process can be observed within the
design of the concourse floor.
The placement of the concourse five metres below street level and the roofless dug
out space of the concourse mean that the floor of the NES concourse would be observable
by commuters and passersby from an elevated position. In addition to being the single
largest surface that the architects at GPA were expected to design, this meant the floor of
the NES concourse was emphasized as an element of significant aesthetic and architectural
importance. This led to the construction of several iterations of devices meant to visualize
and test different designs for the floor. At the same time, the design of the floor needed to
incorporate tactile guidelines between all entrances and exits within the concourse. This
led to the creation of devices that integrated tactile guidelines within the design of the floor
in such a way that these guidelines also provided meaningful wayfinding for users with
visual impairments. Figure 6 shows one of the plan drawings in which such guidelines
were included. Here, a guideline is depicted with a grey line running orthogonally to the
stairs and elevators, leading to the station’s various platforms on the right-hand side of
the concourse. This allowed the architects at GPA to analyse how the guideline might
influence the look of the concourse floor, while also attempting to place tactile guidelines
to form logical and direct connections between the platforms and the various entrances to
the concourse.
Another example of how accessibility requirements enter the design process through
architectural devices can be observed in the “material studies” carried out at GPA. Here,
Figure 7 shows part of a document put together during the “preliminary design” phase.
The top part of Figure 7 shows different wall claddings from other Copenhagen metro
stations, and the bottom page shows various types of tactile and visual guidelines from
other Danish stations and metro stations. The purpose of this document was to evaluate
the aesthetic value, ease of maintenance, cost, and general appropriateness of the materials
that would clad the NES concourse’s surfaces. Furthermore, as a set of references, the
document was constructed to gather what materials were already in use at other Danish
train and metro stations in one place. The addition of European train lines to NES meant
that the station had to adhere to both Danish and European accessibility regulations in
addition to the rules set up by the Danish State Railways (DSB). In turn, this necessitated
the introduction of various tactile guidelines and contrast colours to the concourse, which
were, therefore, also included as a material to be studied and referenced in the document.
This device afforded the evaluation of the many different materials to be used in the future
 design of the floor in such a way that these guidelines also provided meaningful wayfind-
ing for users with visual impairments. Figure 6 shows one of the plan drawings in which
such guidelines were included. Here, a guideline is depicted with a grey line running or-
Architecture 2023, 3 thogonally to the stairs and elevators, leading to the station’s various platforms on 66the
right-hand side of the concourse. This allowed the architects at GPA to analyse how the
guideline might influence the look of the concourse floor, while also attempting to place
tactile
NES guidelines
concourse, to form
including logical
those withand direct
various connectionsthat
requirements between the being
mandated platforms and the
introduced
various
into entrances to the concourse.
the design.

Architecture 2023, 3, FOR PEER REVIEW 12

Figure 6. Floor plan of the NES concourse with tactile guidelines.
Figure 6. Floor plan of the NES concourse with tactile guidelines.
Another example of how accessibility requirements enter the design process through
architectural devices can be observed in the “material studies” carried out at GPA. Here,
Figure 7 shows part of a document put together during the “preliminary design” phase.
The top part of Figure 7 shows different wall claddings from other Copenhagen metro
stations, and the bottom page shows various types of tactile and visual guidelines from
other Danish stations and metro stations. The purpose of this document was to evaluate
the aesthetic value, ease of maintenance, cost, and general appropriateness of the materi-
als that would clad the NES concourse’s surfaces. Furthermore, as a set of references, the
document was constructed to gather what materials were already in use at other Danish
train and metro stations in one place. The addition of European train lines to NES meant
that the station had to adhere to both Danish and European accessibility regulations in
addition to the rules set up by the Danish State Railways (DSB). In turn, this necessitated
the introduction of various tactile guidelines and contrast colours to the concourse, which
were, therefore, also included as a material to be studied and referenced in the document.
This device afforded the evaluation of the many different materials to be used in the future
NES concourse, including those with various requirements that mandated being intro-
duced into the design.

Figure 7. Material studies of existing visual and tactile guidelines at other Danish stations and
Figure 7. Material studies of existing visual and tactile guidelines at other Danish stations and
metro stations.
metro stations.
These two examples show how regulations were introduced and analysed within the
design process, and they exemplify the required presence of users with physical disabilities
within the design process. In such instances, the purpose of devices was centred around
mitigating the design challenges posed by the mandatory introduction of, e.g., tactile
Architecture 2023, 3 67

These two examples show how regulations were introduced and analysed within the
design process, and they exemplify the required presence of users with physical disabilities
within the design process. In such instances, the purpose of devices was centred around
mitigating the design challenges posed by the mandatory introduction of, e.g., tactile
guidelines for the future concourse space. In the discussions surrounding such devices,
users with physical disabilities gained an explicit presence in the conversation, though
always because of, or in response too, specific spatial requirements imposed on the design.
This, on the one hand, meant that users with physical disabilities were explicitly and
extensively discussed at some occasions, but, on the other hand, such discussions were
always founded in how to most easily adapt requirements into the proposed design for the
NES concourse.

5. Conclusions and Discussion

By presenting an analysis that attempts to symmetrically describe how architects
construct and make use of various visual devices, this study attempts to alleviate the
elusiveness that might exist between social scientists and architects about the presence of
users with physical disabilities in architectural design processes.
The design process of Ny Ellebjerg Station by Gottlieb Paludan Architects shows
several examples of how users with physical disabilities are present through visual devices
in an architectural design process. Analytically, these examples have been gathered into
those representing a generalized presence and those representing a required presence by users
with physical disabilities. This study finds that while users with physical disabilities did
have an explicit required presence within the design process, this was tied to the design of
the NES concourse needing to fulfill various rules and regulations. On the other hand,
an implicit generalized presence by users with physical disabilities can also be identified
within GPA’s overall efforts to achieve architectural quality. As a finding, this is important
because it provides a pragmatic and empirically founded case study of how users with
physical disabilities, when not integrated through user involvement or similar activities,
gain a presence within architectural design processes. This emphasizes the limitation and
specificity with which such users become present in architectural design processes through
visual devices.
Referencing this study’s earlier discussions about the importance of devices and their
agency in the architectural design process, this raises questions about how architects per-
ceive the spatial experiences and needs of users with physical disabilities. Specifically, the
degree to which devices reproducing the required presence of users with physical disabilities
end up also reproducing a perception of such users as “others” should be questioned. As
the examples from this study have shown, this required presence leads to discussions about
the maintenance of architectural quality despite rules and regulations. In other words, it
becomes a job of adhering to requirements with as few concessions as possible for the archi-
tectural vision [44]. If this is the case, a normate critique of architectural design processes
is both warranted ethically and empirically. In the case of the design process of the NES
concourse at GPA, such normate critiques are met when the generalized presence challenges
the dominance of the required presence. One instance of this was presented in relation to the
flow studies of Figure 4—but this is not a frequent occurrence, and it seldomly comes up
explicitly in conversations.

Implications and Limitations

It is thought-provoking that the diversity of human bodily abilities is not explicitly
present in the spatial analysis afforded by devices in architectural design processes. This is
especially true for large public infrastructure projects such as NES, which are supposed to
be to the benefit of all citizens of and visitors to Copenhagen. This perhaps indicates that
architects need to include new types of devices within their networked design processes, in
order to grant a meaningful presence to users with physical disabilities. Such an argument
is a return to the normate critique of design practices that was previously described within
Architecture 2023, 3 68

this paper. It is possible to indicate that such new devices should be able to explicitly tie
accessibility to other matters of architectural quality. This could help architects become
more acutely aware of when and how they inadvertently produce normate designs. At
the same time, this could train architects to perceive the spaces that they design from the
perspective of human beings with significantly different bodily experiences than themselves.
Engaging with how such devices might be constructed and integrated into architectural
design practices provides an important avenue for future cross-disciplinary pragmatic and
empirically founded research.
What such devices might look like is, however, beyond the analysis of this study. Such
devices would need to be tested through a methodological and theoretical framework
different from ANT. The limitation of conducting pragmatic research of architectural design
process is that studies such as this quickly lose their validity and empirical footing, if they
attempt to go beyond a descriptive and deconstructivist analysis.
This study can, therefore, describe how the generalized and required presence of users
with physical disabilities creates a gap in such users’ representation in architectural design
processes. This study cannot conclude what the architectural devices that might fill this
gap could look like.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.T.M.; methodology, M.T.M.; formal analysis, M.T.M.;

investigation, M.T.M.; resources, M.T.M.; data curation, M.T.M.; writing—original draft, M.T.M.;
writing—review and editing, M.T.M., M.K. and J.M.K.; visualization, M.T.M.; supervision, M.K. and
J.M.K.; project administration, M.T.M.; funding acquisition, M.T.M., M.K. and J.M.K. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Bevica Foundation and the Innovation Fund Denmark
(0153-00044B).
Informed Consent Statement: All architects participating in the NES project at Gottlieb Paludan
Architects, as well as external stakeholders present at meetings, were made aware of the intentions
and presence of the researcher. Informed consent was also signed and collected from all architects
participating in the NES project at Gottlieb Paludan Architects. Furthermore, an email was sent out
by Gottlieb Paludan Architects to the external partners in the NES project, including the client and
project manager organizations, describing the intentions of the research project and the type of data
that would be collected.
Data Availability Statement: Due to the sensitive nature of the data of this project, which include
both company secrets and potentially infringing GDPR information about individuals, the data are
only available through specific requests.
Acknowledgments: We would like to acknowledge the Bevica Foundation for providing the fund-
ing as well as Gottlieb Paludan Architects for granting the access to their office that made this
research possible.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Kern, L. Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-Made World; Verso: London, UK, 2020; ISBN 978-1-78873-981-8.
2. Roe, J.; McCay, L. Restorative Cities: Urban Design for Mental Health and Wellbeing; Bloomsbury Visual Arts: London, UK; New
York, NY, USA, 2021; ISBN 978-1-350-11287-2.
3. Sennett, R. Building and Dwelling: Ethics for the City; Allen Lane, an Imprint of Penguin Books; Penguin Books: London, UK, 2018;
ISBN 978-0-7139-9875-7.
4. Gehl, J. Byer for Mennesker; Bogværket: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2010; ISBN 978-87-92420-11-4.
5. Schroeder, T. Giving Meaning to the Concept of Sustainability in Architectural Design Practices: Setting Out the Analytical
Framework of Translation. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1710. [CrossRef]
6. Till, J. Architecture Depends; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013; ISBN 978-0-262-51878-9.
7. Yaneva, A. Scaling Up and Down: Extraction Trials in Architectural Design. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2005, 35, 867–894. [CrossRef]
8. Annemans, M.; Audenhove, C.; Vermolen, H.; Heylighen, A. How to Introduce Experiential User Data: The Use of Information in
Architects’ Design Process; Design Research Society & Umeå Institute of Design: Umeå, Sweden, 2014.
9. Annemans, M.; Heylighen, A. Productive Interactions to Exchange Knowledge in Healthcare Building Design. Build. Res. Inf.
2021, 49, 281–293. [CrossRef]
Architecture 2023, 3 69

10. Boys, J. Doing Disability Differently: An Alternative Handbook on Architecture, Dis/Ability and Designing for Everyday Life; Routledge:
London, UK, 2014; ISBN 978-0-415-82495-8.
11. Hamarat, Y.; Schelings, C.; Elsen, C. Participation: A Disciplinary Border for Architectural Research and Practice. Architecture
2022, 2, 711–723. [CrossRef]
12. Amilon, A.; Østergaard, S.V.; Olsen, R.F. Mennesker Med Handicap: Hverdagsliv og Levevilkår 2020; VIVE-Det Nationale Forsknings-
og Analysecenter for Velfærd: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2021; ISBN 978-87-7119-977-2.
13. Gramkow, M.C.; Merit, M.T.; Stigsdotter, U.K. A Qualitative Study on How Danish Landscape Architectural Firms Understand
and Work with Accessibility. Archnet-IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res. 2022, 16, 536–553. [CrossRef]
14. Imrie, R. Responding to the Design Needs of Disabled People. J. Urban Des. 2000, 5, 199–219. [CrossRef]
15. Hamraie, A. Universal Design Research as a New Materialist Practice. Disabil. Stud. Q. 2012, 32, 1–23. [CrossRef]
16. Hendren, S. What Can a Body Do? How We Meet the Built World; Riverhead Books: New York, NY, USA, 2020; ISBN 978-0-7352-2000-3.
17. Figueiredo, S.M. Imaging Buildings and Building Images: From De Kiefhoek to Hageneiland and Beyond. Archit. Res. Q. 2011, 15,
35–46. [CrossRef]
18. Houdart, S. Copying, Cutting and Pasting Social Spheres: Computer Designers’ Participation in Architectural Projects. Sci.
Technol. Stud. 2008, 21, 47–63. [CrossRef]
19. Latour, B.; Yaneva, A. “Give Me a Gun and I Will Make All Buildings Move”: An Ant’s View of Architecture. In Explorations in
Architecture: Teaching, Design, Research; Birkhäuser: Bassel, Switzerland, 2008; pp. 80–89.
20. Melhuish, C.; Degen, M.; Rose, G. “The Real Modernity That Is Here”: Understanding the Role of Digital Visualisations in the
Production of a New Urban Imaginary at Msheireb Downtown, Doha: The Real Modernity That Is Here. City Soc. 2016, 28,
222–245. [CrossRef]
21. Degen, M.; Melhuish, C.; Rose, G. Producing Place Atmospheres Digitally: Architecture, Digital Visualisation Practices and the
Experience Economy. J. Consum. Cult. 2017, 17, 3–24. [CrossRef]
22. Heynen, H. Space as Receptor, Instrument or Stage: Notes on the Interaction Between Spatial and Social Constellations. Int. Plan.
Stud. 2013, 18, 342–357. [CrossRef]
23. Jensen, O.B. Designing Mobilities; Art and Urbanism Series; Aalborg University Press: Aalborg, Denmark, 2014; ISBN 978-87-7112-098-1.
24. Stender, M. Towards an Architectural Anthropology—What Architects Can Learn from Anthropology and Vice Versa. Archit.
Theory Rev. 2017, 21, 27–43. [CrossRef]
25. Latour, B. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA,
2013; ISBN 978-0-674-72499-0.
26. Justesen, L. Actor-Network Theory as Analytical Approach. In Qualitative Analysis; Eight Approaches for the Social, Sciences;
Järvinen, M., Mik-Meyer, N., Eds.; SAGE Publishing: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2020; pp. 327–344. ISBN 978-1-5264-6525-2.
27. Fangen, K. Deltagende Observasjon; Fagbokforlaget: Bergen, Norway, 2004; ISBN 82-7674-584-9.
28. Eliasoph, N.; Lichterman, P. Culture in Interaction. Am. J. Sociol. 2003, 108, 735–794. [CrossRef]
29. Storni, C. Unpacking Design Practices: The Notion of Thing in the Making of Artifacts. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2012, 37, 88–123.
[CrossRef]
30. Barad, K. Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. Signs J. Women Cult. 2003, 28,
801–831. [CrossRef]
31. Schultze, U.; van den Heuvel, G.; Niemimaa, M. Enacting Accountability in IS Research after the Sociomaterial Turn(Ing). J. Assoc.
Inf. Syst. 2020, 21, 811–835. [CrossRef]
32. Marres, N. Material Participation: Technology, the Environment, and Everyday Publics; Paperback Edition; Palgrave Macmillan: New
York, NY, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1-137-48073-6.
33. Leonardi, P.M. When Flexible Routines Meet Flexible Technologies: Affordance, Constraint, and the Imbrication of Human and
Material Agencies. MIS Q. 2011, 35, 147. [CrossRef]
34. Jensen, O.B. Of ‘Other’ Materialities: Why (Mobilities) Design Is Central to the Future of Mobilities Research. Mobilities 2016, 11,
587–597. [CrossRef]
35. Yaneva, A.; Heaphy, L. Urban Controversies and the Making of the Social. Archit. Res. Q. 2012, 16, 29–36. [CrossRef]
36. Yaneva, A. Five Ways to Make Architecture Political: An Introduction to the Politics of Design Practice; Bloomsbury Visual Arts: London,
UK, 2018; ISBN 978-1-350-08971-6.
37. Latour, B. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory; Clarendon Lectures in Management Studies; Oxford
University Press: Oxford, UK, 2007; ISBN 978-0-19-925605-1.
38. Kurokawa, M.; Schweber, L.; Hughes, W. Client Engagement and Building Design: The View from Actor–Network Theory. Build.
Res. Inf. 2017, 45, 910–925. [CrossRef]
39. Yaneva, A. Making the Social Hold: Towards an Actor-Network Theory of Design. Des. Cult. 2009, 1, 273–288. [CrossRef]
40. Venturini, T. Diving in Magma: How to Explore Controversies with Actor-Network Theory. Public Underst. Sci. 2010, 19, 258–273.
[CrossRef]
41. Demant, J.; Ravn, S. Actor-Network Theory and Qualitative Interviews. In Qualitative Analysis: Eight Approaches for the Social
Sciences; Järvinen, M., Mik-Meyer, N., Eds.; SAGE Publishing: Thousand Oaks, CA, US, 2020; ISBN 978-1-5264-6525-2.
42. Demant, J. When Alcohol Acts: An Actor-Network Approach to Teenagers, Alcohol and Parties. Body Soc. 2009, 15, 25–46.
[CrossRef]
Architecture 2023, 3 70

43. Hamraie, A. Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal Design. Disabil. Stud. Q. 2013, 33, 1–33.
[CrossRef]
44. Andersson, J.E. Improved Swedish Accessibility Hindered by a Housing Imbroglio. Nord. Arkit. Nord. J. Archit. Res. 2016, 28,
9–32.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.