REVIEW OF CITY PARKS IN TERMS OF DISABLED RIGHTS

Öz

The creation and presentation of independent and individual spaces for disabled individuals is the most important step of social integration. The main purpose of this report is to investigate whether some city parks in Turkey are suitable or not for the use of disabled individuals. This descriptive research includes the perception of disabled individuals about the city parks in Hatay, Şanlıurfa and Gaziantep provinces. Individuals with disabilities assessed the structure of city parks, ease of use, ergonomics and basic needs with basic 22-questions. The questions focused on respondents' experiences with specific destinations and environmental barriers. 150 disabled individuals, 53 from Hatay, 53 from Şanlıurfa and 44 from Gaziantep, were included in the study. Participants; 29.3% were using wheelchairs, 34% were using electric wheelchairs, 30% were using crutches and 6.7% were not using assistive devices. As a result of the study, it was seen that the parks were not convenient and useful for the disabled individuals. Deficiencies in city parks can avoid evaluating and ensuring the leisure time activities, social compliance and exercise activities for disabled individuals. Thus, we think that these environments can maximize opportunities for leisure activities and social participation by individuals with lifelong disabilities.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• disability
• park use
• social participation
• health

ENGELLİ HAKLARI AÇISINDAN ŞEHİR PARKLARININ İNCELENMESİ

Öz

Engelliler için bağımsız ve bireysel alanların oluşturulması ve sunulması, sosyal entegrasyonun en önemli adımıdır. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkiye'deki bazı şehir parklarının engelli bireylerin kullanımına uygun olup olmadığını araştırmaktır. Bu tanımlayıcı araştırma, engelli bireylerin Hatay, Şanlıurfa ve Gaziantep illerindeki şehir parklarına yönelik algılarını içermektedir. Engelli bireyler, kent parklarının yapısını, kullanım kolaylığını, ergonomisini ve temel ihtiyaçlara ulaşılabilirliğini 22 temel soruyla değerlendirdiler. Sorular, yanıtlayanların belirli destinasyonlar ve çevresel engellerle ilgili deneyimlerine odaklanmıştır. Çalışmaya Hatay'dan 53, Şanlıurfalı 53 ve Gaziantep'ten 44 kişi olmak üzere 150 engelli birey dâhil edildi. Katılımcılar; % 29,3'ü tekerlekli sandalye, % 34'ü akülü tekerlekli sandalye, % 30'u koltuk değneği kullanırken, % 6,7'si yardımcı cihaz kullanmıyordu. Araştırma sonucunda parkların engelli bireyler için uygun ve kullanışlı olmadığı görüldü. Kent parklarındaki eksiklikler, engelli bireyler için boş zaman aktiviteleri, sosyal uygunluk ve egzersiz faaliyetlerinin değerlendirilmesini ve sağlanmasını engelleyebilir. Bu nedenle, bu ortamların engelli bireylerin kullanıma uygun olması yaşam boyu engelli bireylerin boş zaman etkinlikleri ve sosyal katılım fırsatlarını en üst düzeye çıkarabileceğini düşünüyoruz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• engellilik
• park kullanımı
• sosyal katılım
• sağlık

Kaynakça

1. Barbotte, E., Guillemin, F., & Chau, N. (2001). Prevalence of impairments, disabilities, handicaps and quality of life in the general population: a review of recent literature. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 79(11), 1047-55. PMID: 11731812.
2. Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (2005). Disability, work, and welfare: challenging the social exclusion of disabled people. Work, employment and society, 19(3), 527-545. doi: 10.1177/0950017005055669
3. Bates, P., & Davis, F. A. (2004). Social capital, social inclusion and services for people with learning disabilities. Disability & Society, 19(3), 195-207. doi: 10.1080/0968759042000204202
4. Bekci, B. (2012). The investigation of transportation axes with respect to accessibility for people having disabilities: the case of the Bartin city. Journal of Bartin Faculty of Forestry, 14(21), 26-36. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/39973
5. Bromley, R. D., Matthews, D. L., & Thomas, C. J. (2007). City centre accessibility for wheelchair users: The consumer perspective and the planning implications. Cities, 24(3), 229-241. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2007.01.009
6. Bulgan, G., & Göktaş, P. (2016). Comparison of X, Y And Z Generation About Accessibility of Disabled Tourism (Turkish). Journal of Economics and Management Research 5:24-49. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1355153
7. Butler, R., & Bowlby, S. (1997). Bodies and spaces: an exploration of disabled people's experiences of public space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15(4), 411-433. doi: 10.1068/d150411
8. Eşkil, Ö. Y. (2011). Study of Ankara urban banks in the context of outdoor design features for the disabled (Turkish). M.Sc. Thesis, Bartın University Institute of Science; 2011. https://acikerisim.bartin.edu.tr/handle/11772/119?show=full

9. Graham, B. C., Keys, C. B., McMahon, S. D., & Brubacher, M. R. (2014). Transportation challenges for urban students with disabilities: Parent perspectives. Journal of Prevention & İntervention in the Community, 42 (1), 45-57. doi: 10.1080/10852352.2014.855058
10. Güngör, S., Demir, M., & Polat, A. T. (2016). A Research on accessibilty of Urban Parks by disabled users. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 6(12), 578-94.
11. Harris, F., Yang, H. Y., & Sanford, J. (2015). Physical environmental barriers to community mobility in older and younger wheelchair users. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 31(1), 42-51. doi: 10.1097/TGR.0000000000000043
12. Imrie, R., & Thomas, H. (2008). The interrelationships between environment and disability. Local Environment, 13(6), 477-483. doi: 10.1080/13549830802259748
13. Kitchin, R., & Law, R. (2001). The socio-spatial construction of (in) accessible public toilets. Urban studies, 38(2), 287-298. doi: 10.1080/00420980124395.
14. Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). Persons with disabilities as an unrecognized health disparity population. American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198-S206. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302182.
15. Lawson, H. A. (Ed.). (2018). Redesigning physical education: An equity agenda in which every child matters. Routledge. ISBN: 9780367896218
16. Lemaire, E. D., O'Neill, P. A., Desrosiers, M. M., & Robertson, D. G. (2010). Wheelchair ramp navigation in snow and ice-grit conditions. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 91(10), 1516-1523. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.07.215
17. Nary, D., Froehlich, A. K., & White, G. (2000). Accessibility of fitness facilities for persons with physical disabilities using wheelchairs. Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, 6(1), 87-98. doi: 10.1310/B9FH-7X8B-HUBR-3RHN
18. Özdingiş, N. (2007). A Research on The Evaluation of Accessibility of The Urban Parks in Istanbul By The Physically Handicapped People (Turkish). Master of Science, Institute of Science. University of Bahçeşehir. http://acikerisim.bahcesehir.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/1007/071510.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
19. Perry, M. A., Devan, H., Fitzgerald, H., Han, K., Liu, L. T., & Rouse, J. (2018). Accessibility and usability of parks and playgrounds. Disability and Health Journal, 11(2), 221-229. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.08.011.
20. Rimmer, J. H., & Marques, A. C. (2012). Physical activity for people with disabilities. The Lancet, 380(9838), 193-195. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61028-9
21. Rimmer, J. H., Padalabalanarayanan, S., Malone, L. A., & Mehta, T. (2017). Fitness facilities still lack accessibility for people with disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 10(2), 214-221.doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2016.12.011
22. Sanmargaraja, S., & Wee, S. T. (2015). Challenges faced by the disabled people while travelling in the Malaysian National Parks. Facilities, 3(4), 46-51.
23. Shumway‐Cook, A., Patla, A., Stewart, A., Ferrucci, L., Ciol, M. A., & Guralnik, J. M. (2003). Environmental components of mobility disability in community‐living older persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51(3), 393-398. doi: 0.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51114.x
24. Skinner, M. W., Yantzi, N. M., & Rosenberg, M. W. (2009). Neither rain nor hail nor sleet nor snow: Provider perspectives on the challenges of weather for home and community care. Social Science & Medicine, 68(4), 682-688.doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.11.022
25. Smith, E. M., Sakakibara, B. M., & Miller, W. C. (2016). A review of factors influencing participation in social and community activities for wheelchair users. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(5), 361-374. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2014.989420
26. Ståhl, A., Carlsson, G., Hovbrandt, P., & Iwarsson, S. (2008). “Let’s go for a walk!”: identification and prioritisation of accessibility and safety measures involving elderly people in a residential area. European Journal of Ageing, 5(3), 265-273. doi: 10.1007/s10433-008-0091-7
27. Uçar, A., Şemşit, S., & Negiz, N. (2017). Smart City Implementations In The EU And Reflections In Turkey (Turkish). Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences, 22, 1785-98. https://iibfdergi.sdu.edu.tr/assets/uploads/sites/352/files/yil-2017-cilt-22-sayi-kayfor15-yazi19-30122017.pdf
28. Van Hecke, L., Deforche, B., Van Dyck, D., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Veitch, J., & Van Cauwenberg, J. (2016). Social and physical environmental factors influencing adolescents’ physical activity in urban public open spaces: A qualitative study using walk-along interviews. PloS one, 11(5), e0155686. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155686
29. Wee, J. Y. M. (2008). Factors affecting activities and participation in persons with disabilities-informing models and measures. PhD Thesis. Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 2008. https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/1242/Wee_Joy_YM_200710_MSC.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
30. Yılmaz, T., Gökçe, D., Șavklı, F., & Çeșmecİ, S. (2012). A study on young disabled people's use of common areas in the university campuses example of Olbia Culture Center in Akdeniz University. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 9(3), 1-10. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/178355